BrissyPilot,

I hope you wont mind me clarifying to others that you are not just a 'Day VFR' professional pilot either.

Your job is flying a twin-turboprop 70 seat airliner in and out of major airports and country strips by day and night. You already have the dream career of thousands of cvd pilots in Europe who are restricted to Day VFR and No Passenger Carrying!

As a young adult in the Europe I felt bitterly disappointed having my intended career robbed from me when I got those first results. Everything I ever remember since birth was in preparation for a flying career. There was only one path for me but the gate was locked.

What was not clear to me until decades later was that I had suffered unjust discrimination by an bureaucratic, unscientific bunch of self-proclaimed experts. But what is important there is that unjust discrimination is ILLEGAL in just about every country.

When the next Australian appeal is won - all aviation colour vision testing in Australia will be redundant. This will be a strong precedent for legal action in the rest of the world. The rest of the world will be made to follow by legal action funded by us and any organisation that will support us. This will be done. (join the cvdpa).

Hey everyone!
Just thought I'd drop in and say that the CAA have now deemed me colour safe!
They averaged my results from their test (got an average (3 tests) of 12.86 proton) and the result I got at city university (10.93 one go). My final score is 11.81 which is under the 12 threshold!
I was worried if they'd average using each individual result but it would appear they averaged against an average...either way, I can't complain, I've passed!

Belated happy new year to all!

hey matt1991

I glad you got your restriction lifted, i not sure what to do myself, deutan score 7.44, not done any other runs, either at gatwick or city, really cant take anymone negativity from CAA, how was your experience at city!! really doing my head in, all this Sh**

Well I haven't even started training yet haha! I just needed to find out before I took the next step!

My experience at City was great! I think it really might be worth your while to go - I took breaks after every 2-3 clips and the screen they used was a new flatscreen monitor (I can't say whether that made any difference...but I passed at City with a difference of 1.75 between the score i got at CAA...) aswell as this, you use a chinrest to hold your head steady (once again, not sure if this made any difference). Another good thing is if you don't pass at City you don't have to tell the CAA about your result and add to the pesky averaging technique! So all in all, I wish I had never gone to the CAA for my 1st test!

yeah im thinking of going to city, how much did they charge, and was it one charge for all sessions or per session..

how far is the university from the major airports!!

It cost me £125 plus vat (£150) for all these tests :
Ishihara colour vision test (1-25 plates of 38-plate test), American Optical Company (H.R.R) Plates (2nd Edition), CAD, Farnsworth D15 Test, City University Test, 2nd Edition, Nagel anomaloscope, Holmes Wright Lantern (type A) and the Holmes Wright Lantern (type B).

Location wise, I'm not too sure...I got the train down from Manchester and then a tube to Angel and its a 5-10 minute walk from there...

sorry mate, what i meant was when doing cad, did you do one run, or a few runs, just because the cad as i might have said before has a fast and long version, i guessing that if you pass on the first run that's it, or they only make addition runs when averaging out scores, and how many they would allow for the fee you payed, stupid question probably but one i would ask :ok:

Ahhh, I understand. At City I did one run lasting rougly 10-15 minutes. I wasn't given a choice...whereas at CAA Gatwick I did the fast CAD (2 minute screening...apparently its done for people who panic when reading the Ishihara plates and make errors who are actually colour normal...that's how it was explained to me). Then if you fail that you do a full CAD and either pass, fail or get borderline. If you get borderline (as I did) you have to repeat the full CAD 2 more times and then they average your result.

I'm not sure whether you could ask to do more runs at City, I suppose it wouldn't hurt to ask if you wanted to do a few in one session...the woman who conducted it was nice and friendly.

Collective Colour Vision Thread 4
 

Ok thanks for the feedback

Hi Scottish.CPL, You can redo the CAD test at city how many times you`d like. In fact I did mine 4 times.

hey can you tell me about your experience and your results on cad, ie how many plates you failed, and your average results, you can PM me if you like

Looking through my files just now I saw a welcome note thatDr. Arthur Pape MBBS (CPL(A) MECIR) wrote for welcoming visitors to the CVDPA website.
I dont think we used it in the website so I am pasting it here.

QUOTE

I would like to personally welcome you all as subscribers to the CVDPA. By subscribing, you have made a commitment to ensuring that the CVDPA achieves the articles in its mission statement.
As a subscriber, you are at the business end of the CVDPA. You can expect to be kept informed and you should expect to be asked to contribute to the growth and effectiveness of it.
The task ahead of us is huge, and the bureaucracies and professional groups who promote and protect the Aviation Colour Perception Standard (ACPS) are powerful and fully funded by taxation revenue. Their arguments may be weak, but their funding is huge. Therein lies our greatest dilemma.
We have had great successes in Australia, as is more than fully explained in the website articles, but we should never be complacent. There are many promoters and protectors of the ACPS even in the Australian CASA who would dearly love to see the AAT outcomes reversed. Despite those successes, the job is incomplete and will stay so until the control tower signal gun test is thrown out. The history of how this test has come about in Australia can be talked about at another time. The challenge to it will rely on the fact that the control tower signal gun has no relevance to modern aviation practice and the testing of CVD pilots cannot be masqueraded as anything other than just another colour vision test.
Three highly experienced pilots, each with thousands of hours of unblemished flying records and each with exemplary reports from their superiors and peers have taken on the challenge of fighting an appeal to have the control tower signal gun test thrown out. They have already spent tens of thousands of dollars and expect to pay at least another $100,000 by the time the process is concluded.
A dedicated group of New Zealand pilots is preparing a legal challenge to the NZ CAAs version of the ACPS. They are growing in support and stature. We need to give them as much as we can.
In the USA, CVD pilots face the prospects of being collectively punished by the FAA on the strength of recommendations made to it by the NTSB in the aftermath of the Fedex Flight 1478 crash in Tallahassee in 2002. We have sufficient evidence to put a strong case that it was the PAPI itself that failed to perform. Details of that will be discussed in future postings on the website. Further, whilst the USA was for decades the Mecca for CVD pilots, the ACPS there is no more rational than anywhere else. There is a great deal of work needs doing for CVD pilots in the USA.
Dont even talk about Europe! Whats going on there is totally insane. The CVD pilot there is treated worse than a leper, figuratively speaking.
Yes, the task ahead is daunting. But is it impossible? I think not.
We have shown in Australia that the ACPS is vulnerable. It is based on bad logic and bad science. The CVDPA philosophy is the same no matter what country you look at. There may be wide variation in implementation, but the thesis behind it is universal, and that thesis is weak. The theoretical basis of a challenge to the ACPS is mature and ready to withstand any scrutiny in any country. What we lack is financial muscle. To fight the fight takes a lot of money. We need thousands of people to subscribe. We need many sponsors and benefactors. How can all this happen?
I estimate that in Australia there are about 800,000 CVD people. In the UK its in the order of a couple of million. The same and more for the USA. Add to that the many millions when all the continents are included. Lets just assume that perhaps 0.1 percent of those millions have any wish to be a pilot. Really, I have no idea, but I do know there is a huge potential target out there that just might want to challenge the ACPS. With just a small contribution from each one of those millions, we could have an amazing financial capacity to make the world take us seriously, and by that I mean fight legal challenges.
The first challenge I put to each subscriber is to become pro-active in promoting the CVDPA and telling as many pilots, flying schools, airlines, pilot unions, friends, mothers and fathers and whoever else you think might just be able to help. In our first three days we have had hundreds of hits on the web, we have raised nearly four thousand dollars in cash, and I am certainly happy about the initial response. Now lets all make sure that we build the momentum. We must do this or we will become just another bunch of tyre kickers, moaners, whoa-is-me victims.
I cant express how happy I am to get to this point in the struggle I started in 1977, when I asked the Department of Aviation examiner of airmen who had just failed me on the Farnsworth Lantern What relevance is all this colour vision stuff anyway?î. His reply has rung in my ears a million times in the 35 years since then: 'I dont really know. I think its BS, and maybe you can do something about it, being a Doctor and all that'

END QUOTE

This is an interesting development for the European situation.

It is no secret that EASA Pat-MED is a derivation of JAR FCL-3 and that this was widely developed by the UK. The UK led the committee that developed EASA Part-MED and also developed the CAD, a massively flawed test which has NOT been adopted as an approved test under EU Regulation 1178/2011 but which is still used by the UK CAA. To my mind the UK is without doubt the driving force behind the ACPS.

Apart from the direct financial gain from the implementation of the CAD there is indirect financial gain in other areas, which I have personal knowledge of but cannot mention here.

Regardless of whether you think the CAD is a good thing or not and those who have tried it and passed will probably have different ideas to those who have failed, it must also be remembered that a driving force behind the funding for the development of the CAD is now the ICAO Chief of Aviation Medicine, a former CAA Chief Medical Officer.

Therefore, the UK would appear to have vested interests in maintaining the ACPS and also pressing for world wide adoption of the CAD.

The UK has been very careful of its wording of disability discrimination laws (no doubt under the influence of certain parties) and it could be a challenge to include CVD within the meaning of a 'disability' under the Disability Discrimination Act 2005 or the Equality Act 2010. However, during an orchestrated effort a few years back, a (very expensive) meeting with Counsel in London (ironically a few hundred metres from CAA HQ) it was stated that the case was not without merit and that there were a number of avenues that could be explored, including sex and even genetic discrimination.

However, EU discrimination law is not so discriminatory (paradox!) and the following is an excerpt from the EU parliament:

Parliamentary questions
3 May 2012 E-003105/2012

Answer given by Mr Dalli on behalf of the Commission

The Commission is aware of the discomfort and social constraints faced by people with colour blindness. Colour blindness is a handicap, which is affecting about 10 % of the male population. There is no treatment or cure available for colour blindness.

The diagnosis of the disability is routine (Ishihara Test) and belongs to normal childhood physical examinations. The management of healthcare systems is the responsibility of Member States and the Commission does not have any competence to act in this field.

The Commission is addressing disabilities, which also covers colour blindness, in its European Disability Strategy 2010-2020(1). It stresses that persons with disabilities have the right to participate fully and equally in society and in the economy. Denial of equal opportunities is a breach of human rights.

In addition, the issue of colour blindness is addressed in the Information Providers Guide(2), designed for everyone who develops and publishes material on European Union websites. The rules set out in the Guide aim at ensuring a coherent and user-friendly service to users. It is freely available on Europa in English and is a living document which is regularly updated.

The Commission is not considering taking further actions beyond the initiatives set out above.

(1)
European Disability Strategy 2010-2020 - Justice
(2)
Information Providers Guide - European commission

Some EU countries have adopted a far greater inclusive policy towards disability and these countries could very well treat CVD as a specific disability in itself.

My first thought would be that one or more of these countries are identified, then Class One medicals are applied for in those countries, bringing legal action for disability discrimination against any national aviation authority refusing to issue the medical on the basis of CVD. EU Regulation 1178/2011 does not have precedence over other national laws and you only have to remove one card from the tower to bring the whole deck down.

BUT, a big but...have no illusions, you can expect nothing but an uphill struggle - as was made abundantly clear to me personally through the thinnest of veils by a top dog at the CAA several years ago (I won't say who but rest assured a VERY senior person), they have a lot more money and power than us and can drag on a case to the point of bankruptcy. I think the same could be expected of most EU countries, in some of which money talks and corruption is rife.

A lot more digging to do but it's a start............... and now to bed!!

:)

Fletcher CAM lantern
 

Hi guys,

I'm a CVD student pilot with VCL limitation. Next week I have an appointment for a Fletcher CAM lantern test. Could anybody who have experience with this test give me some advice please? I know that it should be almost the same as the old Holmes-Wright (white looks like yellow, green is pale, almost white, etc.) but are there any differences?

Thanks!

Collective Colour Vision Thread 4
 

Well I know that the fletcher cam lantern in not a n approved lantern and I don't think CAA will allow it since the cad came in.

Scottish.CPL, thank you for your reply!
I did some research and found that Fletcher CAM is actually a replacement for the Holmes-Wright lantern test:
"It uses all the stimulus sizes, colours and intensities specified by the Holmes-Wright A and B lanterns,..."

So it is a new version of H-W, therefore it should be acceptable to CAA UK. But that's only my opinion.

Farnsworth Lantern Test (FALANT) in India?
 

Hello Guys,

Nice to be posting a thread.
I'm a wannabe pilot planning to do CPL in Canada. I'm from India. I have this Red-Green color deficiency disability. I have tried Ishihara Test and failed. I saw these Farnsworth lantern test pics in internet and saw that I can differentiate color with this test.
Is there any place in India where I can do this test?

Thank You

Australian CVD career opportunities?
 

Hey everyone, I've been on this site for a while but this is my first post.
I have a few questions that I'd really appreciate to have answered.

Firstly, I'm an Australian currently in my last year of high school (Yr 12). My dream goal is to fly in an airline (might be a little too optimistic).
By mid-high school I began to see that colourblindness would prevent me from flying in an airline (can't get Class 1 Medical, can't fly at night, can't obtain ATPL). I formed an idea of all this sometime last year. I almost gave up on flying and chose engineering instead.

However, I just found out about the whole thing with Arthur Pape through a friend of mine today, and I'm really surprised that I had not seen it earlier. My view before that was Australia was one of the strictest countries in regards to CVD, with the US being easiest (with SODAs and similar) but now my view is completely flipped around, and I feel like I have hope again.

I'm sorry if this is too long but if there are any other CVD pilots flying professionally it would be great to have some advice.

1. I looked at the CASA website again, it appears that I can obtain a Class 1 Medical but with restrictions, but I can obtain a PPL and a CPL, but not an ATPL. It appears that I can still pass an alternate test to obtain an ATPL. What I'm wondering is how many attemps can I make at it? For example the farnsworth or the light gun test. If I fail them as well without retry, would that mean the end of everything?

1.1 Are there any other tests besides Ishihara, Farnsworth Lantern and Light gun that I can do?

2. I don't understand this one much. Would a charter airline require ATPL (small aircraft) as it is RPT.

3. What career opportunities can I look at with just a CPL? (Besides FI) For example, are there any cargo operators I can try to look at, that only require CPL? (Melbourne/Victoria area)

4. If I obtain a PPL and CPL licence, would they be almost identical (in terms of what I can do) to unrestricted licences? For example, flying at night.

5. Would it be suitable to enter the industry through a university (or TAFE) such as RMIT? They have a course that gives a PPL, CPL and a frozen ATPL (however useful that will be). I may be able to work as an Instructor with them for a few months/years to build up hours, but will I be able to get another job with a cargo/charter airline with just a CPL or would I require additional training (like IFR, night rating) that is not possible for a CVD person?

6. Can I go for a medical (or just vision) test before I have an ARN? I would like to know before I apply for the university courses. But seeing that I can get a CPL anyway, should I be very concerned about it?


I apologise for having many questions, but I am apprehensive at this stage as flying as all I've ever wanted to do. As with the last year of high school, the pressure is on and I don't want to be working towards something only to be told at the end that I can't do it.
I'm looking toward aviation for a serious career, and not for leisure.

I will appreciate every answer.

OM-TOM,

The UK CAA will NOT accept any colour vision tests other than their very own, self-sponsored CAD Test, even though the CAD is not approved by EASA.

(This is the same UK CAA that claims it cannot operate outside the requirements of EU Regulation 1178/2011 and its Acceptable Means of Compliance..........mmmm........).

Apart from that, even though the Fletcher CAM may be a replacement for the Homes-Wright, the UK CAA would NOT accept it, simply because it is not on the list, as published in the AMC (see below).

Bad news but try another EASA member state.

:)

AMC1 MED B.075 Colour vision
(a) At revalidation, colour vision should be tested on clinical indication.
(b) The Ishihara test (24 plate version) is considered passed if the first 15 plates, presented in a random order, are identified without error.
(c) Those failing the Ishihara test should be examined either by:
(1) anomaloscopy (Nagel or equivalent). This test is considered passed if the colour match is trichromatic and the matching range is 4 scale units or less; or by
(2) lantern testing with a Spectrolux, Beynes or Holmes-Wright lantern. This test is considered passed if the applicant passes without error a test with accepted lanterns.

Hi bt95,

The first thing I'd recommend you do is to join the CVDPA. You are quite correct, thanks to the efforts of Arthur Pape almost 25 years ago you can now have an aviation career in Australia. It wasn't always like that though and his victories at the AAT did not come easily. It was only through lots of hard work, dedication and many dollars that we are as fortunate as we are now.

As you've no doubt read through these forums, things are heating up again in Australia with another legal challenge now well underway at the AAT with the aim being to finish the job started all those years ago and to prove once and for all that CVD's do not pose a safety risk. We can then use this experience to put pressure on ICAO and the rest of the world to bring about further changes globally. All this can only be done though through people joining the CVDPA and becoming actively involved.

To answer your questions:

1. You can achieve any licence you want in Australia. I've held an actual ATPL now for 8 years, however as I've failed all colour vision tests, I may not exercise the privileges of that licence. If you fail the tests, your class 1 medical will be issued with a restriction 'not valid for ATPL operations'. However, that will not stop you from exercising full PPL/CPL privileges day or night, VFR or IFR. If you pass any of the tests, you are granted a full unrestricted medical. However, you will normally only be granted one shot at each test.

1.1. Besides the Ishihara & Farnsworth Tests, the other two options are the control tower signal gun test and the practical lantern test (conducted at the Victorian College of Optometry). The latter test is designed to simulate a PAPI, however it is nothing like the real thing at all. It is simply a modified Farnsworth Test. I fly PAPI's all the time with no issue whatsoever, yet I failed this test miserably.

2. ATPL is not necessarily related to RPT. Basically an ATPL is required to be pilot-in-command of a multi-crew aircraft. A CPL is required to be pilot-in-command of a single pilot aircraft (or co-pilot in a multi-crew aircraft).

3. There are still plenty of career opportunities as a CPL holder. eg. general aviation charter/instructing, freight in single pilot aircraft, RFDS etc. You can still also use CPL privileges to become a co-pilot in a multi-crew aircraft (including jets), you will just be prevented from becoming a Captain. This is the situation I and many others in Australia currently find ourselves in. We are flying for airlines as First Officers, each of us with many thousands of hours experience, however are discriminated against from becoming Captains.

4. Flying using PPL/CPL licence, you can exercise full privileges, even if you fail all colour vision testing. You can fly at night and IFR with no problems or restrictions whatsoever. Similarly, flying as an airline co-pilot using CPL privliges, you can undertake exactly the same duties as colour normal colleagues.

5. Definitely doing a uni degree is an option - I won't go into the pros and cons of it here as it is not relevant and there are plently of other posts on these forums which examine this issue. Almost all charter jobs and definitely airline jobs require night & IFR ratings etc, but remember you can still do all that even if you fail colour vision testing.

6. I'm not sure about the requirements these days, with ARN's. I'd imagine you probably need one though before you can go for your medical. I wouldn't be too concerned anyway, as you can still exercise full CPL privileges regardless of how you perform on the colour vision tests. If you pass the tests, you just get the extra bonus of being granted ATPL privileges so that you can one day become a Captain.... but that will still be a long way off and hopefully through people supporting CVDPA we can change all that in the future anyway.

Hopefully that answers all your questions! Feel free to send me a PM if you would like.

Good luck with Year 12 and don't listen to anyone who tells you that being a CVD means you can't fly. As you'll soon learn, it doesn't make any difference at all - our challenge is to get that message out there and to hold these beaurocrats around the world and their irrational decision making to account.