Colour Blindness (merged)
I don't want to be the best pilot in the world - Just the oldest
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Here and there
Posts: 1,013
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Glom,
Not a single incident that I am aware of.
As far as the vehicle licencing issue was concerned, the old chestnut of not being able to correctly identify an airfield signal light was always trotted out. Well in over 20 years regular and 4 years reserve service I recall only once having to drive on an airfield and get a clearance to cross a runway. Guess what though, I had a radio with me to talk to the ground controller.
Not a single incident that I am aware of.
As far as the vehicle licencing issue was concerned, the old chestnut of not being able to correctly identify an airfield signal light was always trotted out. Well in over 20 years regular and 4 years reserve service I recall only once having to drive on an airfield and get a clearance to cross a runway. Guess what though, I had a radio with me to talk to the ground controller.
I don't want to be the best pilot in the world - Just the oldest
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Here and there
Posts: 1,013
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Glom,
Not a single incident that I am aware of.
As far as the vehicle licencing issue was concerned, the old chestnut of not being able to correctly identify an airfield signal light was always trotted out. Well in over 20 years regular and 4 years reserve service I recall only once having to drive on an airfield and get a clearance to cross a runway. Guess what though, I had a radio with me to talk to the ground controller.
Not a single incident that I am aware of.
As far as the vehicle licencing issue was concerned, the old chestnut of not being able to correctly identify an airfield signal light was always trotted out. Well in over 20 years regular and 4 years reserve service I recall only once having to drive on an airfield and get a clearance to cross a runway. Guess what though, I had a radio with me to talk to the ground controller.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How do they justify adding a restriction based on nothing? Did they just decide one day, "Hmm, we'd better restrict those genetic freaks from these duties, even though there's no evidence that they're a hazard."
Come on, that's a flagrant disregard for human rights!
I read Dr. Pape's article. In parts, he sounded like he was suggesting some conspiracy against colour defectives. Growing evidence seems to suggest that he's onto something. What? Are we a threat to their genetic integrity? Those of us who've been through those tests no how much they seem care. You can tell they just want to say, "What are you doing here? Get out of my site you vile, impure creature!"
Come on, that's a flagrant disregard for human rights!
I read Dr. Pape's article. In parts, he sounded like he was suggesting some conspiracy against colour defectives. Growing evidence seems to suggest that he's onto something. What? Are we a threat to their genetic integrity? Those of us who've been through those tests no how much they seem care. You can tell they just want to say, "What are you doing here? Get out of my site you vile, impure creature!"
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How do they justify adding a restriction based on nothing? Did they just decide one day, "Hmm, we'd better restrict those genetic freaks from these duties, even though there's no evidence that they're a hazard."
Come on, that's a flagrant disregard for human rights!
I read Dr. Pape's article. In parts, he sounded like he was suggesting some conspiracy against colour defectives. Growing evidence seems to suggest that he's onto something. What? Are we a threat to their genetic integrity? Those of us who've been through those tests no how much they seem care. You can tell they just want to say, "What are you doing here? Get out of my site you vile, impure creature!"
Come on, that's a flagrant disregard for human rights!
I read Dr. Pape's article. In parts, he sounded like he was suggesting some conspiracy against colour defectives. Growing evidence seems to suggest that he's onto something. What? Are we a threat to their genetic integrity? Those of us who've been through those tests no how much they seem care. You can tell they just want to say, "What are you doing here? Get out of my site you vile, impure creature!"
Join Date: May 2002
Location: West Sussex, UK
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmm..
Just got home,got a message from city university.
I did some tests with them before,they have asked me back for more research.The young lady who left the message has advised this is to do with correlation between colour vision and genetics.Sounds fun!!
So,will pop upto London next week and see what its all about.I`ll also see what we have regarding the results so far with the dossier they were going to hand the CAA.
Just got home,got a message from city university.
I did some tests with them before,they have asked me back for more research.The young lady who left the message has advised this is to do with correlation between colour vision and genetics.Sounds fun!!
So,will pop upto London next week and see what its all about.I`ll also see what we have regarding the results so far with the dossier they were going to hand the CAA.
Last edited by ETOPS773; 6th Dec 2003 at 05:35.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: West Sussex, UK
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmm..
Just got home,got a message from city university.
I did some tests with them before,they have asked me back for more research.The young lady who left the message has advised this is to do with correlation between colour vision and genetics.Sounds fun!!
So,will pop upto London next week and see what its all about.I`ll also see what we have regarding the results so far with the dossier they were going to hand the CAA.
Just got home,got a message from city university.
I did some tests with them before,they have asked me back for more research.The young lady who left the message has advised this is to do with correlation between colour vision and genetics.Sounds fun!!
So,will pop upto London next week and see what its all about.I`ll also see what we have regarding the results so far with the dossier they were going to hand the CAA.
Last edited by ETOPS773; 6th Dec 2003 at 05:35.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: ireland
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Glom
Here are some links
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/query.asp
http://amelia.db.erau.edu/gen/am.htm
The first link is The US accident database.
The second link is to Embry Riddle University library.
In the US the FAA and I believe its Predecessor The CAA(USA) have operated a waiver system for colour defective pilots.
It has been called different things over the years
first it was called a waiver, and then later called a Statement of Demonstrated ability, SODA.
about two years ago they removed the requirement for a waiver altogether.
Basically what it all boils down to is if you can pass the signal light gun test at an airfield they will issue you with a letter of evidence, this is good for all subsequent medicals of any class for life.
Current estimates put the number of colour defective pilots with FAA medicals in the region of 10000.
Slightly less than 1/3 of the total number of pilots licensed by the UK CAA
If you Search the accident database in the link above
use the Following settings, Set the date in the first field to 1/1/62
This is the earliest record in the data base.
Don't Forget that Our american cousins spell Colour, Color if you know what I mean.
What you will Find if you search the Database for color vision is about 8 or so accidents stretching back to 1962.
None of the accident reports cite defective color vision as a cause or factor in the accident.
The reason that the search throws up these reports is invaribly that in the medial notes it was recorded that the pilot had a waiver or SODA for color vision.
The other link contains all the aeromedical research reports conducted by the FAA. You will find a lot of useful info here although it is a bit of a trawl to get through it.
Regards
DOH
Here are some links
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/query.asp
http://amelia.db.erau.edu/gen/am.htm
The first link is The US accident database.
The second link is to Embry Riddle University library.
In the US the FAA and I believe its Predecessor The CAA(USA) have operated a waiver system for colour defective pilots.
It has been called different things over the years
first it was called a waiver, and then later called a Statement of Demonstrated ability, SODA.
about two years ago they removed the requirement for a waiver altogether.
Basically what it all boils down to is if you can pass the signal light gun test at an airfield they will issue you with a letter of evidence, this is good for all subsequent medicals of any class for life.
Current estimates put the number of colour defective pilots with FAA medicals in the region of 10000.
Slightly less than 1/3 of the total number of pilots licensed by the UK CAA
If you Search the accident database in the link above
use the Following settings, Set the date in the first field to 1/1/62
This is the earliest record in the data base.
Don't Forget that Our american cousins spell Colour, Color if you know what I mean.
What you will Find if you search the Database for color vision is about 8 or so accidents stretching back to 1962.
None of the accident reports cite defective color vision as a cause or factor in the accident.
The reason that the search throws up these reports is invaribly that in the medial notes it was recorded that the pilot had a waiver or SODA for color vision.
The other link contains all the aeromedical research reports conducted by the FAA. You will find a lot of useful info here although it is a bit of a trawl to get through it.
Regards
DOH
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: ireland
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Glom
Here are some links
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/query.asp
http://amelia.db.erau.edu/gen/am.htm
The first link is The US accident database.
The second link is to Embry Riddle University library.
In the US the FAA and I believe its Predecessor The CAA(USA) have operated a waiver system for colour defective pilots.
It has been called different things over the years
first it was called a waiver, and then later called a Statement of Demonstrated ability, SODA.
about two years ago they removed the requirement for a waiver altogether.
Basically what it all boils down to is if you can pass the signal light gun test at an airfield they will issue you with a letter of evidence, this is good for all subsequent medicals of any class for life.
Current estimates put the number of colour defective pilots with FAA medicals in the region of 10000.
Slightly less than 1/3 of the total number of pilots licensed by the UK CAA
If you Search the accident database in the link above
use the Following settings, Set the date in the first field to 1/1/62
This is the earliest record in the data base.
Don't Forget that Our american cousins spell Colour, Color if you know what I mean.
What you will Find if you search the Database for color vision is about 8 or so accidents stretching back to 1962.
None of the accident reports cite defective color vision as a cause or factor in the accident.
The reason that the search throws up these reports is invaribly that in the medial notes it was recorded that the pilot had a waiver or SODA for color vision.
The other link contains all the aeromedical research reports conducted by the FAA. You will find a lot of useful info here although it is a bit of a trawl to get through it.
Regards
DOH
Here are some links
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/query.asp
http://amelia.db.erau.edu/gen/am.htm
The first link is The US accident database.
The second link is to Embry Riddle University library.
In the US the FAA and I believe its Predecessor The CAA(USA) have operated a waiver system for colour defective pilots.
It has been called different things over the years
first it was called a waiver, and then later called a Statement of Demonstrated ability, SODA.
about two years ago they removed the requirement for a waiver altogether.
Basically what it all boils down to is if you can pass the signal light gun test at an airfield they will issue you with a letter of evidence, this is good for all subsequent medicals of any class for life.
Current estimates put the number of colour defective pilots with FAA medicals in the region of 10000.
Slightly less than 1/3 of the total number of pilots licensed by the UK CAA
If you Search the accident database in the link above
use the Following settings, Set the date in the first field to 1/1/62
This is the earliest record in the data base.
Don't Forget that Our american cousins spell Colour, Color if you know what I mean.
What you will Find if you search the Database for color vision is about 8 or so accidents stretching back to 1962.
None of the accident reports cite defective color vision as a cause or factor in the accident.
The reason that the search throws up these reports is invaribly that in the medial notes it was recorded that the pilot had a waiver or SODA for color vision.
The other link contains all the aeromedical research reports conducted by the FAA. You will find a lot of useful info here although it is a bit of a trawl to get through it.
Regards
DOH
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cool stuff, DOH. When I did the search, I got seventeen returns.
A few were due to seriously adverse conditions, like flying over fires and mountainous terrain. Others were pilots irresponsibly flying at night in bad weather or general bad weather problems. A couple were due to crappy landings, once clearance had been given. Some of them weren't even involving colour defectives. The entries came up because it was written in the report that their colour vision was fine and hence the key word was in there.
None of those accidents were said to be a result in whole or in part due to defective colour vision.
A few were due to seriously adverse conditions, like flying over fires and mountainous terrain. Others were pilots irresponsibly flying at night in bad weather or general bad weather problems. A couple were due to crappy landings, once clearance had been given. Some of them weren't even involving colour defectives. The entries came up because it was written in the report that their colour vision was fine and hence the key word was in there.
None of those accidents were said to be a result in whole or in part due to defective colour vision.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cool stuff, DOH. When I did the search, I got seventeen returns.
A few were due to seriously adverse conditions, like flying over fires and mountainous terrain. Others were pilots irresponsibly flying at night in bad weather or general bad weather problems. A couple were due to crappy landings, once clearance had been given. Some of them weren't even involving colour defectives. The entries came up because it was written in the report that their colour vision was fine and hence the key word was in there.
None of those accidents were said to be a result in whole or in part due to defective colour vision.
A few were due to seriously adverse conditions, like flying over fires and mountainous terrain. Others were pilots irresponsibly flying at night in bad weather or general bad weather problems. A couple were due to crappy landings, once clearance had been given. Some of them weren't even involving colour defectives. The entries came up because it was written in the report that their colour vision was fine and hence the key word was in there.
None of those accidents were said to be a result in whole or in part due to defective colour vision.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Uk
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
mm colours
Well people finally somebody who said it all!
It is so Fuc..ng frustrating that they dont WANT to understand your point.
We know exactley what we see! I am from holland and the optometrist said the same things to me. You pay a lot of money to do that test and the dont give you the results! The say o too many errors, Goodbye. Find something else!
And you can explain all the evidence you've got! but that doesnt do ****! Sorry rules they say!
Well who made that rules so we can give them the evidence!
The only way to wake them up is to let them see that we can be safe pilots too!
But HOW DO WE DO THAT.
You can say to them: we never had an accident due to colour weakness, but that is not enough.
If that worked we would be in the air right now.
I think the only thing to do is to wait for a new test or a medical solution. The 1st thing is possible the 2nd thing is nearly ompossible in the near future. You can find everything on the internet these days but not a cure for colour weakness.
We all must bomb the JAA FAA CASA and all the other aviation administration with letters that contains evidence!
If one person does that they will throw that letter into the dustbin but if we all do that maybe they will take the time to a letter and to investigate it!
But why should they?
1. they earn enough money to people like us because we try several tests.
2. there are too many pilots than jobs so give them one good reason??
3. investigation costs money.
4. To become a pilot is a dream!! We worked our whole life for it. optometrists can not understand how important it is to us.
In the past it was prohibited to fly with glasses and now you can fly a Jet if you are almost blind!!
If people may fly with glasses why cant we??
With a little bit of improvement to the special glasses(for colourvision) we can deal with our ''problem'' just like people with a bad vision range.
If they are safe so can we! And I believe we dont need those glasses because we know what we see. When I drive to my work I can see Schiphol(EHAM) a kilometer away from me and I can indentify the tower, runway aircraft lights without problems.
They judge you to compare you with colour normals but that is not the right method to judge this!
If they test you the first coloured dots are easy(the way you can see the lights from the aircraft). At the end of the test the intensivity of the light changes and from a few feet away it can be difficult to separate them. If the red dot is almost yellow and the green is almost yellow/green colour normals are able to separate them without big trouble.
For us it can be more difficult but in a real flight you do not need to separate lights with a wavelength so close to each other.!!
It is RED or GREEN and not yellowgreen--yellowred!!
Not one of us has got problems with traffic lights! why dont we need to do a colourvision test for a driving lisence??? You have got the responsibility of other people in traffic! I think the reason is because the red wavelength is totally different than the green wavelength so easy to separate for everybody.
I understand that a bit of colourvision is important and that is why they need to investigate this with colournormals and colour defectives in a real airplane!
Let them both do a few tests and compare the parts where colourvision is important! I want to bet that the results are equal!
Dont ask a pilot: well what colour is that little sentence in the CRT He can read and that is not relevant!!! LET the pilot deal with the situation and look how he is handling the test!
And than you can do your judgement.
Maybe if a pilot is really colourblind it can give problems but the test requirements are way to high now.
If a pilot can separate the VASI/PAPI from a certain distance it must be acceptable!
I am trying to earn my medical 1 for 2 years now and I cant find a
A way to succeed. Maybe England is an option.
I am tired and a little bit irritaded right now so I stop now.
Suggestions are always available and lets support eachother!
Good luckt to all
CDV pilots
greetz KRIZZI
It is so Fuc..ng frustrating that they dont WANT to understand your point.
We know exactley what we see! I am from holland and the optometrist said the same things to me. You pay a lot of money to do that test and the dont give you the results! The say o too many errors, Goodbye. Find something else!
And you can explain all the evidence you've got! but that doesnt do ****! Sorry rules they say!
Well who made that rules so we can give them the evidence!
The only way to wake them up is to let them see that we can be safe pilots too!
But HOW DO WE DO THAT.
You can say to them: we never had an accident due to colour weakness, but that is not enough.
If that worked we would be in the air right now.
I think the only thing to do is to wait for a new test or a medical solution. The 1st thing is possible the 2nd thing is nearly ompossible in the near future. You can find everything on the internet these days but not a cure for colour weakness.
We all must bomb the JAA FAA CASA and all the other aviation administration with letters that contains evidence!
If one person does that they will throw that letter into the dustbin but if we all do that maybe they will take the time to a letter and to investigate it!
But why should they?
1. they earn enough money to people like us because we try several tests.
2. there are too many pilots than jobs so give them one good reason??
3. investigation costs money.
4. To become a pilot is a dream!! We worked our whole life for it. optometrists can not understand how important it is to us.
In the past it was prohibited to fly with glasses and now you can fly a Jet if you are almost blind!!
If people may fly with glasses why cant we??
With a little bit of improvement to the special glasses(for colourvision) we can deal with our ''problem'' just like people with a bad vision range.
If they are safe so can we! And I believe we dont need those glasses because we know what we see. When I drive to my work I can see Schiphol(EHAM) a kilometer away from me and I can indentify the tower, runway aircraft lights without problems.
They judge you to compare you with colour normals but that is not the right method to judge this!
If they test you the first coloured dots are easy(the way you can see the lights from the aircraft). At the end of the test the intensivity of the light changes and from a few feet away it can be difficult to separate them. If the red dot is almost yellow and the green is almost yellow/green colour normals are able to separate them without big trouble.
For us it can be more difficult but in a real flight you do not need to separate lights with a wavelength so close to each other.!!
It is RED or GREEN and not yellowgreen--yellowred!!
Not one of us has got problems with traffic lights! why dont we need to do a colourvision test for a driving lisence??? You have got the responsibility of other people in traffic! I think the reason is because the red wavelength is totally different than the green wavelength so easy to separate for everybody.
I understand that a bit of colourvision is important and that is why they need to investigate this with colournormals and colour defectives in a real airplane!
Let them both do a few tests and compare the parts where colourvision is important! I want to bet that the results are equal!
Dont ask a pilot: well what colour is that little sentence in the CRT He can read and that is not relevant!!! LET the pilot deal with the situation and look how he is handling the test!
And than you can do your judgement.
Maybe if a pilot is really colourblind it can give problems but the test requirements are way to high now.
If a pilot can separate the VASI/PAPI from a certain distance it must be acceptable!
I am trying to earn my medical 1 for 2 years now and I cant find a
A way to succeed. Maybe England is an option.
I am tired and a little bit irritaded right now so I stop now.
Suggestions are always available and lets support eachother!
Good luckt to all
CDV pilots
greetz KRIZZI
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Uk
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
mm colours
Well people finally somebody who said it all!
It is so Fuc..ng frustrating that they dont WANT to understand your point.
We know exactley what we see! I am from holland and the optometrist said the same things to me. You pay a lot of money to do that test and the dont give you the results! The say o too many errors, Goodbye. Find something else!
And you can explain all the evidence you've got! but that doesnt do ****! Sorry rules they say!
Well who made that rules so we can give them the evidence!
The only way to wake them up is to let them see that we can be safe pilots too!
But HOW DO WE DO THAT.
You can say to them: we never had an accident due to colour weakness, but that is not enough.
If that worked we would be in the air right now.
I think the only thing to do is to wait for a new test or a medical solution. The 1st thing is possible the 2nd thing is nearly ompossible in the near future. You can find everything on the internet these days but not a cure for colour weakness.
We all must bomb the JAA FAA CASA and all the other aviation administration with letters that contains evidence!
If one person does that they will throw that letter into the dustbin but if we all do that maybe they will take the time to a letter and to investigate it!
But why should they?
1. they earn enough money to people like us because we try several tests.
2. there are too many pilots than jobs so give them one good reason??
3. investigation costs money.
4. To become a pilot is a dream!! We worked our whole life for it. optometrists can not understand how important it is to us.
In the past it was prohibited to fly with glasses and now you can fly a Jet if you are almost blind!!
If people may fly with glasses why cant we??
With a little bit of improvement to the special glasses(for colourvision) we can deal with our ''problem'' just like people with a bad vision range.
If they are safe so can we! And I believe we dont need those glasses because we know what we see. When I drive to my work I can see Schiphol(EHAM) a kilometer away from me and I can indentify the tower, runway aircraft lights without problems.
They judge you to compare you with colour normals but that is not the right method to judge this!
If they test you the first coloured dots are easy(the way you can see the lights from the aircraft). At the end of the test the intensivity of the light changes and from a few feet away it can be difficult to separate them. If the red dot is almost yellow and the green is almost yellow/green colour normals are able to separate them without big trouble.
For us it can be more difficult but in a real flight you do not need to separate lights with a wavelength so close to each other.!!
It is RED or GREEN and not yellowgreen--yellowred!!
Not one of us has got problems with traffic lights! why dont we need to do a colourvision test for a driving lisence??? You have got the responsibility of other people in traffic! I think the reason is because the red wavelength is totally different than the green wavelength so easy to separate for everybody.
I understand that a bit of colourvision is important and that is why they need to investigate this with colournormals and colour defectives in a real airplane!
Let them both do a few tests and compare the parts where colourvision is important! I want to bet that the results are equal!
Dont ask a pilot: well what colour is that little sentence in the CRT He can read and that is not relevant!!! LET the pilot deal with the situation and look how he is handling the test!
And than you can do your judgement.
Maybe if a pilot is really colourblind it can give problems but the test requirements are way to high now.
If a pilot can separate the VASI/PAPI from a certain distance it must be acceptable!
I am trying to earn my medical 1 for 2 years now and I cant find a
A way to succeed. Maybe England is an option.
I am tired and a little bit irritaded right now so I stop now.
Suggestions are always available and lets support eachother!
Good luckt to all
CDV pilots
greetz KRIZZI
It is so Fuc..ng frustrating that they dont WANT to understand your point.
We know exactley what we see! I am from holland and the optometrist said the same things to me. You pay a lot of money to do that test and the dont give you the results! The say o too many errors, Goodbye. Find something else!
And you can explain all the evidence you've got! but that doesnt do ****! Sorry rules they say!
Well who made that rules so we can give them the evidence!
The only way to wake them up is to let them see that we can be safe pilots too!
But HOW DO WE DO THAT.
You can say to them: we never had an accident due to colour weakness, but that is not enough.
If that worked we would be in the air right now.
I think the only thing to do is to wait for a new test or a medical solution. The 1st thing is possible the 2nd thing is nearly ompossible in the near future. You can find everything on the internet these days but not a cure for colour weakness.
We all must bomb the JAA FAA CASA and all the other aviation administration with letters that contains evidence!
If one person does that they will throw that letter into the dustbin but if we all do that maybe they will take the time to a letter and to investigate it!
But why should they?
1. they earn enough money to people like us because we try several tests.
2. there are too many pilots than jobs so give them one good reason??
3. investigation costs money.
4. To become a pilot is a dream!! We worked our whole life for it. optometrists can not understand how important it is to us.
In the past it was prohibited to fly with glasses and now you can fly a Jet if you are almost blind!!
If people may fly with glasses why cant we??
With a little bit of improvement to the special glasses(for colourvision) we can deal with our ''problem'' just like people with a bad vision range.
If they are safe so can we! And I believe we dont need those glasses because we know what we see. When I drive to my work I can see Schiphol(EHAM) a kilometer away from me and I can indentify the tower, runway aircraft lights without problems.
They judge you to compare you with colour normals but that is not the right method to judge this!
If they test you the first coloured dots are easy(the way you can see the lights from the aircraft). At the end of the test the intensivity of the light changes and from a few feet away it can be difficult to separate them. If the red dot is almost yellow and the green is almost yellow/green colour normals are able to separate them without big trouble.
For us it can be more difficult but in a real flight you do not need to separate lights with a wavelength so close to each other.!!
It is RED or GREEN and not yellowgreen--yellowred!!
Not one of us has got problems with traffic lights! why dont we need to do a colourvision test for a driving lisence??? You have got the responsibility of other people in traffic! I think the reason is because the red wavelength is totally different than the green wavelength so easy to separate for everybody.
I understand that a bit of colourvision is important and that is why they need to investigate this with colournormals and colour defectives in a real airplane!
Let them both do a few tests and compare the parts where colourvision is important! I want to bet that the results are equal!
Dont ask a pilot: well what colour is that little sentence in the CRT He can read and that is not relevant!!! LET the pilot deal with the situation and look how he is handling the test!
And than you can do your judgement.
Maybe if a pilot is really colourblind it can give problems but the test requirements are way to high now.
If a pilot can separate the VASI/PAPI from a certain distance it must be acceptable!
I am trying to earn my medical 1 for 2 years now and I cant find a
A way to succeed. Maybe England is an option.
I am tired and a little bit irritaded right now so I stop now.
Suggestions are always available and lets support eachother!
Good luckt to all
CDV pilots
greetz KRIZZI
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Uk
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SODA
By the way! Can anobody tell me if it is possible to do a SODA test in europe. It is not allowed for JAA but legal for FAA and I want to do the test but is it really nessecery to do that in US.
Thanks and greetings
chris
Thanks and greetings
chris
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Uk
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SODA
By the way! Can anobody tell me if it is possible to do a SODA test in europe. It is not allowed for JAA but legal for FAA and I want to do the test but is it really nessecery to do that in US.
Thanks and greetings
chris
Thanks and greetings
chris
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All interested parties, I have just come across this story that might be worth watching.
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/...home-headlines
http://www.sptimes.com/2003/12/26/St...nquiry_f.shtml
Questions:
To watch....
1.What the FAA decide to blame this crash on?
2.How they account for the other 'normal' guys stories of what happened?
3.What the outcomes and recommendations of any findings are?
G
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/...home-headlines
http://www.sptimes.com/2003/12/26/St...nquiry_f.shtml
Questions:
To watch....
1.What the FAA decide to blame this crash on?
2.How they account for the other 'normal' guys stories of what happened?
3.What the outcomes and recommendations of any findings are?
G
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All interested parties, I have just come across this story that might be worth watching.
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/...home-headlines
http://www.sptimes.com/2003/12/26/St...nquiry_f.shtml
Questions:
To watch....
1.What the FAA decide to blame this crash on?
2.How they account for the other 'normal' guys stories of what happened?
3.What the outcomes and recommendations of any findings are?
G
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/...home-headlines
http://www.sptimes.com/2003/12/26/St...nquiry_f.shtml
Questions:
To watch....
1.What the FAA decide to blame this crash on?
2.How they account for the other 'normal' guys stories of what happened?
3.What the outcomes and recommendations of any findings are?
G
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Uk
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
mm interesting piece.
I dont think it is a pilot error. I cant understand why the NTSB think it could be a pilot error.
I am not telling this because I am cdv myself, but because ''normal'' people haven't got any clue what cdv people really see. People often think I am almost blind or that I can only see black and white and that irritates me.
If you read the piece you can conclude that there where 3 pilots.
If 3 pilots say that there were not (4) red lights visible, why should they doubt about that. The other 2 flightmembers were not colour defective.
if there were 3 red 1 green all pilots must notice the difference and if you see 4 red lights the non colour defevtive pilots must notice that, but they tell the same story as the pilot with a waiver test.
This is an easy way to blame an accident but the facts show other things
greetings
I dont think it is a pilot error. I cant understand why the NTSB think it could be a pilot error.
I am not telling this because I am cdv myself, but because ''normal'' people haven't got any clue what cdv people really see. People often think I am almost blind or that I can only see black and white and that irritates me.
If you read the piece you can conclude that there where 3 pilots.
If 3 pilots say that there were not (4) red lights visible, why should they doubt about that. The other 2 flightmembers were not colour defective.
if there were 3 red 1 green all pilots must notice the difference and if you see 4 red lights the non colour defevtive pilots must notice that, but they tell the same story as the pilot with a waiver test.
This is an easy way to blame an accident but the facts show other things
greetings