CVD pilots can fly – it's official.

"and therefore never send to know for whom the bells tolls; it tolls for thee."  John Donne.

Avmed have gone to ground in recent times; there are disturbing rumours which float up to the surface from time to time.  DAME deserting the ship, some of the tales of administrative over-kill, pointless testing, increasing expense and Avmed overruling ‘sound’ judgement of not only experienced medical practice, but that of ‘expert’ specialist practice.  This flies in the face of the USA revaluation of medical standards.

My tote book shows short odds for the CAD test being used eventually as the only acceptable means to reduce the number of CVD pilot applications, and the general push being towards a zero tolerance policy.  Enjoy the licence while you have it, OST has his very own opinion (on several matters) CVD being one.

I’d love to be very wrong, delighted; but the auguries are not good.  Hope lays with Fawcett – he hammered CASA into a cocked hat on NVG – with defence now off the table, perhaps he can, once again, turn the tables on the narrow, untenable views currently cherished.  We shall see.

Fingers crossed eh?...... Angel

Pilot Medical certification - Point of difference US v Oz.

Rehash of Sandy's excellent post off CASA meets the Press (note No 7. in bold): 

(11-13-2015, 07:25 PM)Sandy Reith Wrote:  If anyone actually has been taken in by this latest CASA soft soap, “The advisory panel will meet formally as required and at other times I expect its members to be in close contact with the CASA taskforce as work progresses.’’....well pity help us.
Surely it can be seen for what it is, just a softening, until the industry is so worn out that further resistance will be feeble and futile.

As far as I an concerned it would be traitorous to get on board with this travesty of "industry consultation".

Gentlemen and ladies all the recommendations, reports, submissions, and talkfests have been done. "Cautiously welcomed by industry"??????? Never seen more rubbish, if this is even slightly true then please you extraordinary and gullible optimists, all two or three of you, if you really exist, please, please do not be taken and led by hand into the mire of obfuscation, ego stroking platitudes, soothing words and the half truths all designed to stretch time and perpetuate the supremacy, status and salaries of CASA.  

We must resist and demand real reform now. Aviation businesses are going down the drain, your fellow aviator Aussies are trying to make ends meet while staring down both barrels. This is no joke, no cooperation, no more talking, no more kow towing, no more smarmy smiles and handshakes. Enough is enough. The Mad Hatter's tea party is over. If you are not quite convinced see what they tried to do to the late Mr Green, what they have done to Dom James and John Quadrio. Tips of iceberg.

Non negotiable reforms before any, stress any, cooperation:-
1. Delete reference to flight "privileges" from the rules. Free people have a right to fly.
2. Amend the Act to include the health of the industry, safety cannot improve without a growing and healthy industry.
3. Allow individual instructors to teach without our super expensive Air Operators Certificate, as in US 70% taught this way.
4. Allow LAMEs to maintain aircraft without Certificate of Approval, like US.
5. Remove the strict liability provisions from the regulations and most of the criminal law to be migrated to civil law.
6. Simplify the rules like FAA or NZ.
7.  No more AVMED for PPLs, car driving standard is proven just as safe.

Remember how quickly the immigration rules were changed when the pilots went on strike? Hawke said bring in pilots from other countries, mainly the US, they were here in days. These pilots were trained as above point point 3.

Certainly makes good common sense to me - Bring it ON! Wink

However the reality is Sandy's point 1 to 7 are just pipe dreams here in Oz while aviation safety regulation/administration remain under the control of the toxic, archaic, sociopathic culture of the Iron Ring.

Point 7 'Point of Difference.    

The following is pinched off the UP Shy

GregP -
Quote:[Image: icon8.gif] CASA Medical Incompetence

A couple of weeks ago i did my Class2 renewal; with all the requested ophthalmology and endocrinology reports together with a positive report from my GP with excellent pathology plus a positive report from my DAME (who then reissued my med cert).

Weeks later, some clerk at CASA writes to me for additional info from the ophthalmologist (a specialist in private practice certified by CASA itself) after he's certified my as having faultless vision and good general ophthalmic health. Not satisfied with that, the idiots now want even more form that specialist who has now reported positively again regarding my vision and ophthalmic health.

Not satisfied with that nonsense, the idiots then write to tell me i must undergo a cardiac stress test (notwithstanding that i had one a few months ago with perfect results). When i rang the idiots today to remind them that a CASA doctor wrote to me a bit over year ago to say that i would have to do another stress test only if the DAME scored me as greater that 15. But when i reminded the clerk that the DAME rated me a few weeks ago as exactly 15, the idiot clerk at the other end said that the CASA doctor shouldn't have written to me stipulating the +15 score!

Clearly, my medcert (assuming i ever see another one!) will not be effective for anything like 2 years. And the cost will have beaten me by then anyway!

Is one to assume that the (mere) clerks at CASA have greater authority than CASA's own in-house doctors? What disgraceful nonsense .. thank heavens we're not at war because the staff work of these cretins is utterly dreadful.

Eyrie -
Quote:The joke here is that aviation medicals have NOTHING to do with aviation safety.

Our friends in the US look like getting them severely downgraded for private pilots. I looked into that a couple of years ago and since the early 1970s there have been at least 3 large scale studies of the efficacy of aviation medicals. There is a natural control group of private glider and hot air balloon pilots who self certify in the US (and in Australia for glider pilots - not sure about balloons, it has been a long time since I was peripherally involved with hot air balloons. The results were that there was ZERO evidence that medical causes were a serious cause of accidents(well under 1% of them) and the self certifying group had a slightly lower incidence of them.

Before some idiot goes on about how gliding is less stressful medically - it isn't. Try flying solo for up to 8 to 10 hours or more, no autopilot, in turbulence and pulling around 1.4 g for a significant part of the time, with the sun beating into the cockpit.

So we've run that experiment and the results are clear.

As for endangering others on the ground, can anyone here recall when a private pilot or glider pilot injured or killed an innocent third party on the ground in Australia due to any cause?

I know of two accidents, one a fatality (photographer standing on top of a car had his head knocked off - I'm sure you can all draw your own conclusions about flying so that your wingtip is within 2 meters of an obstacle on the ground), involving gliders overseas. Medical certification would not have helped in those.

That pretty much takes care of the "endangering others" bs.

So we are left with protection of other airspace users and a case can certainly be made out that being able to see properly is a good idea although the ATSB seems keen on telling everybody to forget that as it doesn't work. Well it definitely won't work if you don't look.

Now consider the case when you drive a car. The chance of killing or injuring an innocent pedestrian, another road user or someone just minding his own business in his house (cars and trucks seem to impact houses in Australia every week or two it seems) due to a medical problem such as sudden incapacitation for any reason must be much higher. Let alone fools who text or use the cellphone while driving.

Not much medical certification there. In Queensland they don't even do eye tests any more to my optometrist's disgust as he gets people in who he finds to be legally blind, who drove there. A few years ago there was a case where a female diabetic passed out at the wheel on the Sunshine Coast Motorway, crossed the median and went head on into a car coming the other way, killing a small child in the other car. Went free. She was a GP who should have known better and been held to it.

As for this drivel "As a medical student, I can see the benefits of this, if someone turns up in emergency alone, unconscious, you can look up their medical history with may assist with a quicker diagnosis of the problem, and therefore quicker treatment, and potentially save their life."

Unless they have ID in their wallet or purse, how do you know who they are? If they do they should have a little card in the wallet that describes any dangerous or bothersome medical condition. FFS given the propensity to cover your skin in ink that is in vogue they could even get a small discreet tattoo.

Creampuff -
Quote:Well said, E.

AVMED's recent decision-making is one of the starkest examples of decision-making that is not based on objective evidence or objective risk. It is based primarily on AVMED's messianic belief that they are carrying the primary burden of aviation safety because, according to the erstwhile PMO, a pilot’s licence goes on forever, but it is the medical certificate which enables the person to use the licence. All of the other so-called specialists and experts can have their opinions, but it is ultimately AVMED who bear the terrible burden of allowing a pilot to fly. And if that burden has been imposed on AVMED, it must surely follow that AVMED knows better that everyone else.

Amazingly, the pilots who have been allowed to fly for decades without NAA medical certificates have not caused carnage as a consequence of their sudden incapacitation. Amazingly, the pilots who do have NAA medical certificates suffer the same rate of sudden incapacity as the general population.

The current regime has little grasp on what causes the substantial risks to aviation safety, or how to mitigate them. If they did have that grasp, they'd realise they're a sideshow. They'd also realise that, as has been pointed out by people like Dr Liddell who do know, that all AVMED is now doing is encouraging pilots to take the risk of telling their DAME and AVMED as little as possible and not seeking medical advice about something that may turn out to be serious if not treated.

Unfortunately, AVMED has been allowed to get out of control and nobody with the power to get them back under control particularly cares.

Okay now reflect on the following courtesy of AOPA (US) Wink :

Quote:Aviation groups urge passage of medical reform

17 groups sign letter to key Senate committee

November 17, 2015
By Elizabeth A Tennyson

Seventeen aviation groups have sent a joint letter to leaders of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, urging them to pass third class medical reform and other measures designed to protect general aviation pilots.

In the Nov. 16 letter, AOPA and others urged the committee to adopt the Manchin Amendment to the Pilot’s Bill of Rights 2 (PBR2), which is scheduled to be considered by the committee later in the week. Other amendments to PBR2 will also be considered at that time.

Noting that third class medical reform is a pivotal issue for the future of general aviation, the aviation groups told the committee that the “FAA’s medical certification system has evolved into an onerous and costly one. The FAA recognized that fact more than 10 years ago when it created the Sport Pilot standard of medical certification.”

The letter went on to note that proposed third class medical reforms could save pilots more than $20 million each year and save the FAA approximately $2.5 million each year.

“We have never been closer to achieving meaningful third class medical reform, and this letter is indicative of the widespread support this measure enjoys in the general aviation community,” said AOPA President Mark Baker. “Pilots want and need relief from the outdated and unreasonably burdensome third class medical process, and this legislation would allow hundreds of thousands of pilots to fly safely while saving them, and the FAA, both time and money.”

In addition to promoting third class medical reforms, the Manchin Amendment includes reforms to the FAA’s Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) program, which ensures pilots receive critical safety information as part of their preflight preparation, and provides protections to volunteer pilots who fly in the public interest.

The letter supporting the amendment was signed by AOPA and the Academy of Model Aeronautics, Allied Pilots Association, Commemorative Air Force, Experimental Aircraft Association, Flying Dentists Association, Flying Physicians Association, General Aviation Manufacturers Association, Helicopter Association International, International Council of Air Shows, National Agricultural Aviation Association, National Association of State Aviation Officials, National Air Transportation Association, National Business Aviation Association, NetJets Association of Shared Aircraft Pilots, Recreational Aviation Foundation, and Southwest Airlines Pilots’ Association.

The Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation has set Nov. 18 as the date to move S. 571, better known as PBR2. The legislation, which was sponsored by Sens. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), and John Boozman (R-Ark.), boasts 69 bipartisan cosponsors in the Senate.

It would allow hundreds of thousands of pilots who have held a valid third class medical, either regular or special issuance, over the past 10 years to fly without needing to get another FAA medical exam. It would apply to pilots flying VFR or IFR in aircraft weighing up to 6,000 pounds and carrying up to five passengers at altitudes below 18,000 feet and speeds up to 250 knots.

For pilots whose medical certificate lapsed more than 10 years ago and those who have never held a medical certificate, a one-time medical certification will be required. Once a pilot has been medically certified once, either through the regular or special-issuance processes, he or she will also be able to fly indefinitely without needing to go through the FAA medical certification process again. Pilots with certain medical factors, including some cardiac, psychological, or neurological conditions, will have to get a special issuance medical one time only. For more information, visit AOPA’s frequently asked questions regarding third class medical reform.

[Image: elizabethtennyson.png?h=75&mw=50&w=50]

Elizabeth A Tennyson | Senior Director of Communications, AOPA
AOPA Senior Director of Communications Elizabeth Tennyson is an instrument-rated private pilot who first joined AOPA in 1998.
MTF...P2 Tongue

The sad truth of Skidmore's reform - HERE -

Too cranky to comment..... Angry

(11-26-2015, 06:05 AM)kharon Wrote:  The sad truth of Skidmore's reform - HERE -


Quote:[Image: icon14.gif] Red Green Protanope

Hi Arthur,

Long time no see,

the old ugly issue rears its head again.

You will remember me I came to visit way back in 80s holding a fresh CLASS 3 DAYLIGHT Rating with 50Hours IF and NO NIGHT as I failed to meet ICAO requirements.

My old green licence on PAGE XIII stated:-

The holder of the licence is not permitted to pilot aircraft'
1/. At Night
2/. within CTA unless fitted with VHF radio
as he fails to meet the medical colour perception standards specified by ICAO.

I remember how you intervened on my behalf back in March 1990 when I was given permission and more importantly my instructor was given permission to train me "to the minimum amount necessary" to land at night.

So on 18th March 1990 I did Night Circuits for an hour then next night consolidated them and got STAMP in LG stating FIRST SOLO IN TYPE

this occurred at 3120 hours total time and 3000 PIC and 320 IF logged.

I put 15 hours of NIGHT in at that time.

Section CAO 47.3

A few weeks later I did two cross countries of 100 miles to remote areas and qualified for but never obtained the NVFR rating.

So I flew under the provisions of the CIR SE/A NGT IFR

And did the mandatory three landings and 1 hour or so each six months, and then TVASIS approaches and PAPI and now new LED lighting.

Never missed the runway and never came close to another aircraft at night.

Never had a lantern flashed at me from a tower at night or by day.

I have landed at BKSY, YPAD and YMMB at night and countless long distance cross countries and outback ever since..

Well here we are 2016

My old green licence on PAGE XIII has stamps all over the page stating "RESTRICTIONS LIFTED"

And on next page.

"SUPERSEDED" which refers to flight at night.

I now have 30 command IR renewals all restrictions lifted and 5000+hours PIC, Canadian and FAA licences 2 years in ARCTIC ALASKA (where there is no such thing as NGT VFR) and about 800 night IFR hours no NVMC rating and still alive.

My current new licence states amongst other things Holder of licence does not fully meet ICAO Convention Chapter 6 requirements.

My FAA licence makes no mention.

My Canadian requires the Aussie lic to be carried and all limitations from that licence apply.

My PIR FPAs deemed down from my CIRSEA back in 2004 granted me NGT and VISCIRCLING amongst the other 10 or so approvals for SE SIDS and IDS.

So what went wrong with the system and why now?
Maybe I should present myself to Canberra DAMEs again?
A do the demonstration flights in CTA zone again picking out all the planes in the night sky and landing on the runway not the road?

Even managed to use the runway at Merrill Field AK at night some 300m adjacent and to left of Spenard Street which runs right through centre of Anchorage AK.
[Image: 00161.jpg?v=NTFSVA]

And thanks by the way..

CP -

Quote:I think you should ground yourself immediately.

You don't comprehend the risk you pose to the safety of air navigation. The new regime in Avmed do comprehend the risk, because of all the "evidence" they've collected from those experts who make money out of the CAD test.

Too cranky to comment..... Angry

[Image: RAeSFellow_MarkSkidmore_Safeskies.jpg]

And in one foul swoop Oliver Skidmore-twist, RAAF AVM ret,  shows his true colours & allegiance - UFB!

[Image: TDCB-1.jpg]

[Image: BwrAfC7CEAArDjh.jpg]

Disgusting, obscene breach of industry trust & close to the final nail in the Forsyth review coffin - UFB!  Dodgy 

MTF..P2 Angry


I may have got the wrong end of the stick here, but I hear whisperings of a serious class action with full ‘union’ support is heading toward CASA, mostly to do with matters medical – CVD in particular.

Any of the CVD fraternity heard similar whispers?

(12-19-2015, 06:03 AM)kharon Wrote:  I may have got the wrong end of the stick here, but I hear whisperings of a serious class action with full ‘union’ support is heading toward CASA, mostly to do with matters medical – CVD in particular.

Any of the CVD fraternity heard similar whispers?

I haven't heard that particular whispering, but I do understand the CVDPA folk are still actively working hard behind the scenes, including discussions with each of the pilots associations (AFAP, AIPA, VIPA & AOPA).  Apparently there was a letter that recently went off to CAsA highlighting the contradictions in the evidence that the CAD test's inventor (Prof John Barbur) gave in the O'Brien appeal versus CAsA's continued defence of it as a test that 'simulates an operational situation' for the purposes of CASR 67.150 (6)©.

eg. CAsA's evidence to Senate Estimates committee in Feb 2014 - HERE:
"CASA considers the creation of new aviation specific tests (such as the CAD test) are better suited than the previously used practical tests for detecting colour vision deficiency due to their direct relevance to aviation specific tasks and aviation safety concepts."

vs. Prof Barbur's evidence in the O'Brien appeal (as highlighted in Dr Pape's recent ASAM presentation) - HERE:
"...that does not make the CAD an operational test."
"...not intended in anyway to use direct information on operational tasks"
"...The CAD system wasn't designed specifically for aviation. It was designed for assessing colour vision."
"...which is based on findings of camouflage studies some 25 years ago, the CAD is an extremely good colour vision test and that's as far as we go."

And just in case anyone needs a reminder of what the test looks like:

Apparently, according to CAsA, "modern cockpit instrumentation and operational circumstances are similar to the simulation presented by the CAD..."   Perhaps I'm missing something?? Confused

In other news, there was recently an Aussie delegation that traveled to Wellington a few weeks ago to present to a NZ CAA panel examining the Kiwi colour vision standards.  Dr Arthur Pape was unwell and unable to attend, however other presenters included Dr Rob Liddell, A/Prof Geoff Stuart (expert witness in O'Brien appeal), Prof Boris Crasini (expert witness in O'Brien, Denison & Pape appeals), Ryan Brookes (NZ Defence Force) & John O'Brien himself.  Each gave evidence supporting the need for practical operational assessments.  Their arguments were supported by many other external submissions to the panel including NZ ALPA and the NZ GA Advocacy Group - HERE.

While the outcome is not yet known, the 'vibe' was reportedly positive and we await the panel's recommendations hopefully early next year.

The NZ Defence Force Defence Technology Agency also recently published a report which is well worth a read.  It is certainly one of the most well thought out, peer reviewed, evidence based papers published on the topic in many years and also comprehensively refutes many other claims about the validity of the CAD test.

Colour Vision Requirements for Aircrew

Happy reading!

You Guy's are awesome ?

Sorry don't know where the "?" came from

Thanks for the update Brissy, much appreciated and good to hear that not all doors and windows are barred. Even better that ‘you guys’ are still trying to drag the ancient’s into the modern world.

I will try to track down the whispers, there is another fairly persistent one which shifts the argument to all medical madness – seems it’s all becoming borderline lunacy and the heavy brigade are fed up with it. All smoke in the wind at the moment, lets hope there is a fire somewhere.

Bill – I thought that a fair question; the CVD fraternity are awesome, there would only be a handful of anal retentive fossils to deny that. Pity the CASA boss just happens to be one.

Aye well,

Pssst Dodgy  - Proof of CVD partially incapacitating a First Officer?

The following was hidden - Confused - on page 4 & 5 of a recently released ATSB research report titled - Pilot incapacitation occurrences 2010–2014:
Quote:Eyesight issues

During take-off from Sydney, the first officer on a Boeing 737 noticed an abnormality in their visual field which reduced their ability to read instruments easily. The first officer notified the captain about the visual abnormality. They did not experience any other symptoms nor was the first officer incapacitated. After an examination by a flight attendant who was previously a nurse, the first officer’s vision began to return to normal. The flight attendant recommended the first officer seek further medical examination as a precaution. The captain then decided to return to Sydney for the first officer to undergo further medical examination.

During the return, the first officer was able to continue their duties and continually updated the captain on their condition (ATSB occurrence 201312951).
But don't worry I am sure the diligent crew at CASA AvMed will not have missed the indicators of a possible threat of a 30'000+ foot death plunge through the illegal manipulation of the controls by an unidentified CVD inflicted pilot - Big Grin
By the by here is more on that report by Binger from the Oz:
Quote:Chicken rolls and lasers putpilots out of action

  • Mitchell Bingemann
  • The Australian
  • February 19, 2016 12:00AM
[Image: mitchell_bingemann.png]

[Image: fab21ebf95f9c78eabb3d63161ce5bcc?width=650]Pilots warn that the use of lasers puts planes at risk.

Laser strikes and gastrointestinal illnesses are the two most common incidents to incapacitate pilots during flights, according to research from the Australian Transport Safety Bureau.

Some 113 instances of flight crew incapacitation were reported to the ATSB from 2010 to 2014, an average of nearly 23 per year. This translates to about 29 incapacitation incidents per million departures (or one incident about every 34,000 flights).

In the majority of the cases reported, the incapacitation was severe enough for the pilot to be removed from duty for the remainder of the flight, the ATSB said. But with multi-pilot crews in high-capacity operations, the incident usually had minimal effect on the flight.

The report found that while pilot incapacitation could occur in any operation type, some 75 per cent of incidents occurred in high-capacity operations.

According to ATSB, about half of all reported incapacitations were caused by gastrointestinal illnesses, such as food poisoning or gastroenteritis, while 13 per cent were attributed to laser strikers.

In its report, the ATSB pointed to several examples of pilot incapacitation, including one where a second officer of an Airbus A380 on a flight to Dubai ate a chicken roll that “did not sit well”.

“Approximately eight hours after departure, the second officer was affected by severe diarrhoea and could no longer continue with their duties on the flight deck. They self-medicated with anti-diarrhoea treatment and after two hours, the second officer’s condition improved and they advised they felt better,” the report said. “As a precaution, the second officer did not continue with duties for the rest of the flight as they were still pale and lacked energy.”

The ATSB said the practice of ensuring pilots eat different meals before and during a flight was an effective tool in preventing pilots on the same flight becoming ill at the same time.

The issue of laser strikes was also found to be a major issue for pilots, with the ATSB encouraging all instances of laser strikes be reported to police and the Office of Transport Security.

The danger of laser strikes was put under the spotlight this week when a Virgin Atlantic flight from London to New York carrying more than 260 people was forced to turn back when the co-pilot was struck by laser light during takeoff.

In Australia — where use of lasers in the vicinity of aircraft is illegal — some 1316 laser strikes on high-capacity transport operations were reported between 2010 and 2014. However, only 11 strikes during this period resulted in pilot incapacitation.


Oh no, the ATSB have effectively sealed the fate of the humble chicken roll on the flight deck, expect Skates & his cronies at CASA LSD to make it a strict liability offence to consume or even fondle a chicken roll while on duty... Big Grin

MTF...P2 Tongue  

The trick is not to put your greasy thumb on your glasses.  Pilots learned this early in the old school, when a hamburger and a roll your own smoke was considered living high on the hog, between loads...... Big Grin.... Big Grin... Wink

Latest CVDPA update sent to members and supporters this week...

Colour Vision Update - March 2016

Quote:Dear Friends and Supporters,
Undoubtedly many of you are probably wondering what’s been happening since our last update in July 2015.  Firstly, we apologise for the lack of communication since this time, however we wish to assure you that there has still been activity occurring behind the scenes.  We trust that this newsletter serves as an update to inform you of recent events.  More importantly, we hope that it encourages you to get involved as we need your help to reinvigorate our campaign and bring an end to the unjust discrimination that CVD pilots continue to endure.

Dr Arthur Pape
As some of you are aware, Arthur’s health has been rapidly declining over past few months due to an aggressive lung disease.  Unfortunately, the condition has been so severe that he has had to stop work as a GP and DAME and he is now on 24 hour oxygen and requires an urgent lung transplant.  The good news is that after extensive testing, he has made it onto the official transplant list and he is now awaiting a compatible donor organ before a transplant can occur.  Please keep Arthur and his family in your thoughts and prayers during this difficult time.
Arthur has devoted well over 30 years of his life for pursuing rights for CVD pilots and without his efforts, many would not be in aviation careers today.  His infectious enthusiasm for the cause and his endless pursuit for ensuring regulations are evidence based continues to be the driving force behind CVDPA’s efforts as we progress into the future.
In fact, despite his declining health, Arthur delivered his most recent presentation in September 2015 to the Australasian Society of Aerospace Medicine held in Adelaide.  In this presentation, he once again delivered an irrefutable argument to show how CASA’s use of the CAD test as a test that “simulates an operational situation” (as required by the regulations) is both illegal and discriminatory.  A video copy of this presentation is available below:

Quote:CASA CVD Update
You may recall in the last update we flagged the possibility of a Federal Court challenge against CASA’s continued refusal to implement a lawful, operationally based test to satisfy the requirements of CASR 67.150 [6][c].  Since that time, CASA has continued to require applicants who fail the first two level tests (Ishihara and Farnsworth) to sit the CAD test for the purposes of compliance with sub-regulation [6][c].  Anyone who has undertaken this test will know that it does not remotely simulate any operational situation encountered in an aircraft and is therefore not compliant with the regulations.
The fact that it does not simulate an operational situation was conceded under oath by the inventor of the test, Professor John Barbur, during the O’Brien vs CASA Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) hearings in 2014.  Moreover, the tribunal in this matter determined that the CAD test “did not reveal any significant new or relevant information” about Mr O’Brien’s CVD condition and they subsequently placed greater weight on his operational experience as a pilot in determining that it was appropriate for his ATPL restriction to be lifted.
Despite these findings, CASA still continue to require new CVD pilot applicants to sit the CAD test and those who fail it are being restricted to Day VFR only, or in some cases are having the issue of a Class 1 medical refused entirely.  This practice goes completely against a 25+ year safety case and ignores the findings of three independent tribunals.
Over the past few months, we have attempted to constructively engage with CASA in our ongoing efforts to come to a rational, lawful and evidence based outcome.  This engagement includes the correspondence below (click hyperlink):

Holding Redlich (law firm) to CASA

     2.   CASA response to Holding Redlich

     3.   CVDPA to CASA CEO Mark Skidmore

     4.   CASA CEO Mark Skidmore to CVDPA

It is important to emphasise that the comments and proposals that CVDPA outlined in letter #3 to CASA were collectively endorsed by Australia’s four major pilot associations – Australian Federation of Air Pilots (AFAP), Virgin Independent Pilots Association (VIPA), Australian & International Pilots Association (AIPA) and the Aircraft Owners & Pilots Association (AOPA).  Together, these organisations represent thousands of professional and recreational pilots across Australia, including many with a CVD.
Today we received a disappointing, but somewhat predictable response from CASA CEO Mark Skidmore (letter #4).  It is quite clear from Mr Skidmore’s reply that CASA has no intention of considering any rational, lawful or evidence based alternative for the purposes of compliance with the regulations.  Unfortunately, Mr Skidmore also refused to acknowledge our request for a further meeting to consult with us on these issues prior to making the decision he outlined in his letter.
It seems plainly obvious that CASA do not care about objective evidence or objective risk and subsequently the only viable way forward from here is a further legal challenge in the Federal Court against their unlawful use of the CAD test. 

Further Demonstrable CASA Inconsistencies

To further highlight the inconsistencies in CASA’s approach, another of our members lodged an application with the Administrative Appeals Tirbunal to seek to have his own ATPL restrictions removed.  This pilot’s application to the AAT was in response to the tribunal’s findings in the O’Brien v CASA matter. He is an experienced B737 First Officer working for a major airline with many years of incident free flying experience under his belt, supported by excellent results throughout his training and checking history.
Despite several years of CASA’s refusal to remove his ATPL restriction, it is clear that when legal pressure was applied and the pilot commenced proceedings at the AAT, CASA backed down as they were unwilling to risk a fourth embarrassing loss at the AAT.  This particular matter progressed as far as a mediation conference, at which point CASA agreed to allow the pilot the ability to use his ATPL privileges, meaning that he may also now progress to the role of Captain in the future.
What this result appears to suggest is that CASA lack both evidence and conviction to support their own decisions, particularly with regards to denying experienced pilots the opportunity to exercise ATPL privileges.  It also reinforces the fact that they are selectively targeting new aspiring CVD pilots by issuing them with medical restrictions which essentially deny them the same opportunities to enter into the industry.
CASA’s inconsistent handling of new pilot applicants versus existing experienced pilots further demonstrates that this is not a safety issue as they claim, but is a political issue motivated by prejudice.

New Zealand Colour Vision Review

The interests of CVD pilots were proudly represented in November when a group of independent experts travelled to Wellington to present to a Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) panel reviewing the NZ colour vision testing procedures and policies.  The panel’s task was to review all the information and to deliver a report to the CAA Director with recommendations on a proposed way forward.
The presentations to the panel provided an invaluable opportunity for experts to speak directly to the panel members and to allow them to ask questions.  The primary objective was to encourage the implementation of an operational test conducted either in an aircraft or flight simulator so that CVD pilots have an opportunity to demonstrate they can perform their duties safely and can pursue careers in aviation.

Speakers included:

  • Tim Woods – Colour Vision Aviators (NZ) Administrator
  • Capt Phillip Maguire – Meeting Facilitator
  • Capt John O’Brien – CVDPA Director
  • Dr Robert Liddell – former CASA Director of Aviation Medicine
  • Associate Professor Geoff Stuart – Monash University Accident Research Centre
  • Dr Boris Crasini – Ret’d Professor of Psychology – Deakin University
  • Ryan Brookes – Director (Applied Vehicle Systems) – NZ Defence Technology Agency
A special thanks must go to Tim Woods and Phillip Maguire for their efforts in bringing all these experts together in what was a culmination of many years of work to get to this point.  The presenters complimented each other by discussing the evidence through their own individual area of expertise and we are confident a positive impact was made on the day.
We still await an outcome from this process (expected within the next 1 – 2 months) and will provide an update as soon as further information comes to hand.
Additionally, Ryan Brookes also recently published a comprehensive paper which is well worth a read.  It analyses the evidence and raises further questions about the suitability of current clinical test regimes.  The report is available via the below hyperlink:

Colour Vision Requirements for Aircrew  - DTA Report 405

The Future – Your Help Needed
Now more than ever, we need the support of members to get involved and to help reinvigorate our campaign.  For the last few years, the day to day management of CVDPA has been looked after by Arthur Pape and John O’Brien, all on a voluntary basis.  Particularly with Arthur’s ill health in recent times, we need your assistance in a variety of areas to help share the workload and to help us develop strategies on progressing our campaign successfully into the future.

So, what areas do we need assistance with?

  • Strategy and planning
  • Management experience
  • Marketing our message
  • Advertising
  • Political lobbying
  • Fundraising / crowdfunding
  • Legal advice
  • Finance and book keeping
  • Assistance with website reinvigoration and updates
  • Membership newsletters and communication
  • Responding to general emails and website enquiries
  • Social media including Facebook, Twitter and YouTube
As you can see, there’s lots to do.  Understandably we all live busy lives, but if any member has a particular area of expertise that you believe could be of assistance in helping us manage any of the above areas, we would love to hear from you.  Many hands makes light work and ideally we would like to form a working committee so that responsibilities can be delegated.  Please email if you are able to contribute.

Additionally, please be reminded that CVDPA members are able to access a Members Only Forum through our website.  This forum provides a convenient means for us to discuss ideas and suggestions openly with likeminded individuals.  To log-in, you will require your user name and password and you are then able to contribute to discussions (anonymously if desired).  If you have any difficulties logging on, please email
With several million colour defective persons across the world, including Australia, our potential audience is huge.  CVDPA has approximately 200 members, so we clearly have a lot of work to do.  If we had 1000 members prepared to contribute $1000 each, we would have one million dollars – enough to fund some serious legal challenges!  The evidence is very much on our side, but without funding we are unable to take the challenge right up to CASA or other authorities. Without the funding to mount a challenge in the Federal Court, this project is virtually doomed. CASA will respond to our demands only when we are prepared to back up with a serious legal challenge.

Donations can continue to be made via our website:

Your Support - Donations
Please consider what you can do to help us bring an end to this discrimination once and for all.  We’re all in this together and we need your support!
Thanks for the update BrisP.  Much appreciated. "K"

Overdue CVD rock on Oliver's chook-house shed:  cc Senator David Fawcett Junior Minister for Aviation in waiting Rolleyes

Noticed the UP permanently stuck CVD 'Empire strikes back' thread has some recent entries from a ZAZ, that IMO are worthy of regurgitating/agitating... Big Grin  :

Quote:Better late than never

Posted by gaunty 

"..Close friend had a brill career in the RANR.

Retired with a brass hat.

As a younger Lt, passed the Navy unrestricted navigators "license" which Authorised him to navigate an RN ship worldwide and enter berth and leave any port without pilot or tug assistance That is a very high level of skill.

Decided with my encouragement to get a Private Pilot license. Failed medical due to color blindness.

So he can operate an Australian Naval ship anywhere in the world but was proscribed from flying.

Didn't persist and gave up the idea as too hard.."

Hi hope you read this..

In 1961 I flunked the Airforce Medical and lost a career in Aviation Electronics.
DIagnosis Red Green protanope.

IN 1970s onwards worked in Electronics and communications until 2015 wiring up 50 pair colour coded cables et al.

In 1980 passed pilots medical failed lantern test and was issued with Class Three DAY Rating only to fly IFR rules, by day in grey cloud but never at night.

Reason given may misidentifying green red Nav lights of an approaching aircraft.

In comes Arthur in 1984 or 85 and as a result of a million dollar law suit, CASA stamped my licence restrictions lifted and I was permitted to fly by night IFR only.

I don't have a night rating but I was required to do ten hours of circuits in 1980s to qualify for a SOLO NIGHT stamp in my logbook.

Previous to that it was not lawful for me to be instructed to fly at night, which was downgraded to allowed instruction for the minimum time necessary to become proficient at night landing.

Now in 2016. with 30 IFR renewals under my belt and 5000 hours of flight time in four owned aircraft still alive and kicking.

The only endorsement if fails ICAO standard can't fly internationally.

I hold US air men's and Canadian PPL. Limits are the OZ licence which is a misnomer as it says can't fly in those countries.

Now I see over past 3 years the colour issue has come out to bite our bums.

The only issue in modern flying that IMO effects night colour deficient pilots are the red/white PAPI approach lights which I can clearly see don't display as effectively to a protanope in that out at ten miles on an ARNAV straight in the white shows the red is dull and missing until you get inside 5 miles. But then so do mast lights this is the criteria described to me years ago, watch out for the obstacle clearance red lights you will see them closer in like a one eyed monacledpilot, true story...

It looks like as a Class 2 holder my dame may shove that book in front again along with phone book, so I will need to wear vision corrective rose coloured glasses to correct all my deficiencies, and along with my aircraft engine which goes into condition next year I might have to fly by day only again in IFR and attempt to provide for an alternate within day flying time on my destination, already need a radio alternate anyway as I am only RNP2 TSO129 equipped, ahhh postively gero plane gero radios and gero pilot...will go RA on a drivers licence..

Tread your own path..

Originally Posted by northernlights1 [/url]

hello all

I moved to Australia some time ago. never had a chance to fly previously because where i was from medical was extremely strict. having colour deficiency meant i had zero chance of being able to fly.

Presently I'm starting my PPL after finally saving enough money. I'm getting a class 1 medical to see how far i can go in Australia in regards to having a career in Aviation. Obviously i failed the Ishihara test and have been referred to a DAME for a farnsworth lantern test. Any tips and any idea where will i go from here if i fail the farnsworth lantern test?


Yes day IFR like I got issued in 1987 Class three day rating only
Not to fly at night must carry radio in control zone as fails iCal standards.
Or something akin to that.

Unless you get restriction lifted like I did in past and flew happy career of some thousands of hours day and night.

Soon to be restricted again I guess as I have not done an online medical renwal yet having just missed the start up date.

And they will shove that book in front again, and if lantern test is nil and void I will be right back where I started in 1986 day VFR with no night rating but thousands IFR hours, go figure. And good luck, get a lawyer...

Originally Posted by dubbleyew eight 

I worked with two colour vision deficient electrical engineers.

I also taught in my controls systems engineering course about designing to overcome colour vision deficits. (i have history on this)

one day the managing director hauled me into his office for a please explain, this colour vision nonsense that you teach blah blah blah.

colour vision deficit was not permitted among electrical engineers he opined.

close your eyes and think a moment. name the two most inherently talented engineers we have on staff, I asked.

after some thinking he gave me two names.

I agreed and then told him that both were colour vision deficit.

there was a bit of an explosion after that but it got him nowhere.

colour vision deficit people are needlessly discriminated against.
none in my direct personal experience have ever had an intellectual deficit.

on my airfield I have noticed a number of better than average pilots.
of those better than average pilots 5 of them are red - green colour blind.

surely it is high time for the rusted on senility in ICAO, the FAA and CASA to really address the only problem ever identified for CVD pilots.


white and amber colours would remove the problems (if indeed they exist) completely.

if you don't fix this CASA you definitely are totally incompetent.

PAPI yes it is an issue for some PROTANOPES

They may need to be aware on a ten mile straight in as used in ARNAV Runway approaches that to a red green protanope the RED / WHITE 2+2 lights don't look like that they look WHITE and NOTHING.

At five miles WHITE and ORANGY MIX

So so long as you know the configuration you can fly the slope.

The old VASIS were nevr an issue you flew 16 bright WHITES.

To guys like me in piston single don't need PAPI to land at night, in fact they are a bright nuisance.

The issue with a protanope flying night as described to me is their red desensitivity.
You get closer to the red before its bright enough to see.

Well known and accepted fact on people who have dispensation to fly at night.

And everyone will be different in sensitivity to some degree which can be assessed using the tests coming up in the medical school. I am told the test won't ground us but it will be on record as to how bad we are.

Because precedence has been set already in my case in the air NIGHT DAY since 1980 so I would win a VCAT hearing based in just producing my log book dated back 30 years of IFR renewals and 1000 night hours in three countries and 5000 hours flight time PIC. But this is not about me I fought the original battle way back with Arthur's help got night restriction lifted.. They might choose not to bother with me but newbies seem to have serious challenges ahead if they wish to fly commercially by night and are Color deficient.

ADSB roll out and turning off the na AIDS has also produced a back handed impediment right back to where it all started for me at least in 1987 With an IFR day rating, could never guarantee to provide for an alternate due bad weather within daylight flying time of planned destination unless you left really early in afternoon.

Well my plane is TSO129 RNAV GNSS equipped so I require an alternate with a RADIO AID, and they are thin on the ground between Melbourne and Adelaide so if the rules revert the alternates for day IFR will be out of range.. Well into night so only way to fly is to drive a car...2 cents,

YPJT - A mate of mine had a good one on one conversation with Dr Liddell at a safety seminar back in about 1996 or 97 where he advised that his restriction to day pvt VFR would now be lifted. As he recalls at the time, the Dr said something like the main reason they were restricting colour defective pilots from gaining ATPL was the concern of becoming visual close to the MDA / DA and having to transition straight onto the PAPIs.

The pilot has no trouble picking up the PAPIs at 5NM by day or night and has even done so with an FOI on board who was unaware of his condition.

cogwheel - When transition from IMC to VMC at the the minimum, how many pilots look to the PAPI/VASIS for approach slope guidance?

In the case of at least one applicant this was pushed by the then PMO, and later successfully argued that it was not an issue at the MNM, as the established stabilised profile would be continued to the runway.

YPJT - G'day Cogwheel, I guess they had to come up with something to keep the CVDs in their place and that was the best they could do.
MTF...P2 Tongue

Bravo Arthur; JO & all CVD Pilots -  Finally a win for sanity & common sense... Wink

Courtesy the CVDPA:
Quote:View this email in your browser

[Image: CVDPA_Email_Signature_v1.jpg]
NZ CAA Panel Rejects
CVD Restrictions

July 2016

Dear Friends and Supporters,

[Image: caa_logo.png] You may recall in our last update, we discussed how an independent panel commissioned by the New Zealand Civil Aviation Authority (NZ CAA) was examining the current NZ CVD restrictions and proposed future options.

In November 2015, several experts representing CVDPA and our affiliate NZ organisation, Colour Vision Aviators, presented oral submissions to the panel in Wellington.

The panel yesterday released it's long awaited report and in doing so, overwhelmingly rejected NZ's current colour vision restrictions which are seen as among the most harsh in the world.

Importantly, the panel recommended a three tier testing regime be introduced, which includes practical flight testing.

"There is no strong link between the office-based examination of CVD and real world realities. Under the proposed GD, the assessment of interferes with or likely to interfere with is ascertained from office-based assessments only. This assessment cannot be made from office-based tests only and can only be determined by an in-flight practical test. While both aviation medicine and flight operations specialists will need to be involved in the development of protocols for in-flight testing, only a flight examiner or flight instructor will be in a position to assess the ability of a pilot with a CVD condition to operate an aircraft safely. Thus the effect that a CVD condition will have on the ability of a pilot to safely exercise the privileges of a licence is a flight operations issue, not a medical issue."

The panel's review represents the most comprehensive examination of CVD standards that has ever been undertaken in NZ and the full 87 page report is accessible via the NZ CAA website link below:

Report of the Colour Vision Deficiency General Direction Assessment Panel

The CAA website advises that the report will next be provided to the CAA Principal Medical Officer who will be offered the opportunity to review it and provide advice to the Director on its content. Given existing commitments, it is likely that no decisions will be made regarding the report or the associated proposed General Direction until late November 2016.

Dr Arthur Pape
[Image: d322d90f-e97d-47cd-9393-721d45591e12.jpg]
We are pleased to advise that Arthur successfully underwent a double lung transplant several months ago on Easter Sunday.  This followed a period of
rapidly declining health as a result of an aggressive lung disease.  After almost a month in hospital and a further 3 months of rehabilitation he is now back fitter and healthier than he has been in a long time and is looking forward to once again getting more involved in the colour vision battle in the coming months.  Thank you to all members and supporters for keeping him in your thoughts and prayers.

[b]Meeting with Chairman of the CASA Board - Jeff Boyd

[Image: 34c97958-ff53-44af-950f-d85f0392982b.jpg]

At a recent aviation rally held in Tamworth, a CVDPA member highlighted the discrimination of CASA's 2014 colour vision policy changes to the Chairman of the CASA Board, Mr Jeff Boyd.

Mr Boyd subsequently met with several representatives from CVDPA on the 25th May in Sydney.  This meeting was highly productive with Mr Boyd being receptive and empathising with the various issues that we raised.  He promised to investigate and follow up with us further.

With the Australian federal election now out of the way, we hope to once again raise the CVD issues at a political level and will continue applying pressure on CASA
Big Grin Big Grin - Now can someone please get this printed - HERE - and placed on Oliver & the PMO's desk ASAP; if they choose to ignore that and keep their heads up their bums, then they really will have a case to answer... Dodgy  

MTF...P2 Tongue

First class result.

Bravissimo! CVDPA.  Hard work, persistence, logic and irrefutable evidence sometimes registers with reasonable people.  Clearly it worked with the independent panel; they are to be commended, as are all who participated.  Now there is another long wait; but, there is hope.  I like the phrasing the NZ CAA use -

"The CAA website advises that the report will next be provided to the CAA Principal Medical Officer who will be offered the opportunity to review it and provide advice to the Director on its content."

Bravissimo! NZ CAA.  It is most refreshing to see the NZ regulator demonstrating a ‘fair and reasonable’ approach to the subject.   The commissioning of an independent panel to obtain an unbiased, objective report for consideration is the commendable working of a leading, world class administration; no matter the result.  Well done NZ (again).

There is little need to draw attention to our own sorry state; the very fact that OST even mentioned appealing an AAAT decision and the current shenanigans of the Avmed department are well known; this report would only be 'an opinion' to them. It is no wonder we can’t win at rugby; too busy posturing, plotting and talking the talk – the Kiwi’s (bless ‘em) just get on with it and play the game.  Shame Australia, shame on you.

Best news last – well done Arthur.  The good news of your recovery and well being will cheer many.  Stay well mate.

Great way to start the day Toot (happy) toot.

Great news indeed!

It's worth noting that although this was an 'independent' panel, there were significant concerns raised at the outset about the actual independence of the panel, which consisted of:

-  CAA General Manager General Aviation (Panel Chair)
-  External senior industry Flight Examiner with experience in airline and general aviation operations
-  External Medical Examiner
-  External optometry and vision science specialist with experience in colour vision matters
-  CAA Chief Legal Counsel

The external optometry expert holds the only CAD test which is currently available in NZ, which was of significance because the proposed GD recommended the introduction of this test into the NZ system.

Under the terms of reference, the role of the panel was to reach a consensus and provide the CAA Director with recommendations on the appropriateness or otherwise of the proposed directions.

Despite the obvious concerns about perceived bias from the panel, they still managed to come up with a consensus which thoroughly rejected the current NZ CVD restrictions (of which CASA has been attempting to re-align with) and recommended practical flight testing be introduced. In that respect, they are to be congratulated on taking an objective look at the available evidence.

The panel's comments about the NZ PMO Dr Dougal Watson are also worth mentioning:

Quote:15. Central to the proposed GD is the concept of aeromedical significance. Civil Aviation Rule (CAR) Part 67 defines aeromedical significance as: a medical condition is of aeromedical significance if, having regard to any relevant general direction, it interferes or is likely to interfere with the safe exercise of the privileges or the safe performance of the duties to which the relevant medical certificate relates. While there is no issue with aeromedical significance being used as a standard, it would appear that there is little in the way of guidance for determining what exactly, in terms of a flight operation, is significant in relation to CVD. In answer to a question regarding the reasoning behind the flight restrictions for a pilot who is CVD, the PMO answered that the “restrictions are historical”. This is a key issue for the Panel’s deliberations particularly in relation to the risk posed by a pilot with CVD, the different operational environments pilots operate in, and who should be determining restrictions to which a pilot is to operate.

16. The PMO also commented that he thought practical flight tests are unreliable. In the Panel’s opinion a flight examination has the same status as a medical examination in ensuring that a pilot is not a threat to the public and renewing their privilege to fly.

Given Dr Watson's past unethical and fraudulent presentations on the topic of CVD, the CAA Director has a fairly clear choice to make over the next few months...

Moved here for obvious reasons. The CVD saga of broken promises and stagnation well and truly put the matter in the hall of shame. No doubt in the next generation of pilots the issue will be redundant as prospective pilots with CVD are simply ruled out of holding a medical. Problem solved. Another disgraceful episode consigned to the basement.

Courtesy CVDPA today... Wink

Quote:[Image: CVDPA_Email_Signature_v1.jpg]

CVDPA Update
May 2017

Dear Friends and Supporters,
We write to you with a comprehensive and long overdue update.  Please be assured that despite the lack of public announcements, there has been much activity behind the scenes.  The hard work is continuing as we seek to bring an end to the unjust discrimination that CVD pilots continue to endure.
We are pleased to advise that after his successful double lung transplant last year, Dr Arthur Pape is back to full health and wishes to thank everyone for all the messages of support that he received during the difficult period which almost cost him his life.  Arthur is now well and truly back, feeling re-energised and remains as committed as ever to continuing the battle which has been a part of his life for the best part of four decades.

New Zealand Update
 [Image: caa_logo.png]

Following the release of the New Zealand Civil Aviation Authority (NZ CAA) panel report last year which overwhelmingly rejected the legacy medical restrictions imposed and recommended that practical testing be introduced, work has continued to progress.
In March, the NZ CAA Director Graeme Harris convened a meeting of industry stakeholders in Wellington.  CVA and CVDPA representatives were in attendance including Tim Woods, Capt. Philip Maguire and Capt. John O’Brien.  Various other general aviation, airline and defence force representatives were also in attendance.
In opening the meeting, the Director advised that he and the CAA board had largely accepted the recommendations of the panel and agreed that the competency of a CVD pilot needs to be assessed in an operational context, not a medical one.  Encouragingly, he also made it clear that he wanted to see the CAA fully consult with the industry in resolving this issue.
With this mandate, the objective of the industry stakeholder forum was to challenge the legacy policies, procedures and CVD medical restrictions.  The Director also advised that he did not want to see a standalone CVD flight test, but rather for an assessment to be made as part of the existing regime of CAA flight tests, including night, IFR, CPL and ATPL.
In the discussion that ensued, the industry representatives agreed that the current restrictions were superfluous and should be removed entirely.  For example, restricting a pilot to daytime or VFR conditions only was deemed unnecessary, as a pilot is not allowed to fly at night or under the IFR anyway unless they have passed the relevant CAA flight test and continue to maintain proficiency in exercising the privileges of that rating.
The forum agreed that competency in an operational environment is the single most important outcome that a CVD pilot must be able to demonstrate.  There was some discussion about whether a note should be added to the pilot’s medical certificate requiring them to advise their instructor, examiner, other crew members and employer of their CVD condition.
The next step in the process (which is currently underway) is for the CAA to rewrite the General Direction (GD) after taking into account the recommendations of the forum.  It is expected that this document will be published shortly and will be open for a short period of further public consultation.  Given that the industry representatives and the CAA already appear to be on the same page, we are not expecting any major obstacles from this process.
Following this, we should then expect to see a major change to CAA CVD policy in the second half of this year which will pave the way for NZ CVD pilots to reach their full career potential.  This should also have positive implications for Australian CVD pilots who may wish to fly in New Zealand under the provisions of the Trans-Tasman Mutual Recognition Act (TTMRA).
CVDPA remains cautiously optimistic that a good outcome is just around the corner and congratulates the CAA Director on his commitment to date towards getting this issue resolved.

CVDPA Meeting with Acting CASA Director and CEO Shane Carmody
[Image: 86aacb56-be6c-4f87-8d1e-fcdfb80cb8b7.jpg]

In March, Dr Arthur Pape, Capt. John O’Brien, Capt. Philip Maguire and Australian Federation of Air Pilots (AFAP) representative Joseph Wheeler met in Canberra with the Acting CASA Director and CEO, Shane Carmody to discuss CASA’s ongoing handling of the CVD matter.

Mr Carmody was only appointed into this position late last year following the sudden resignation of the previous Director, Mark Skidmore.
We delivered a presentation to Mr Carmody educating him on the various issues and in particular highlighting the draconian changes which took place in 2014 which now deny new CVD pilot applicants any meaningful career within the industry.  In particular, we highlighted how we remain firmly of the view that CASA’s continued use of the CAD test is illegal as it does not comply with CASR 67.150 (6)© which requires a test that “simulates an operational situation.”
A copy of this presentation is available below:

“Aviation Colour Vision Standards – a CVD Pilot’s Perspective”
Mr Carmody was also briefed by us on the recent developments in New Zealand and on the likely new policies that they will soon be adopting.  He indicated that he had “learnt a lot” from our presentation and subsequent discussion with him and that he intended to go away and review some of the information which we had provided him with the intention of taking a fresh look at the issues with an open mind.  He has also agreed to meet with us for further discussions in early August.  We will keep members updated with the outcome of this next meeting.
Please see below letter from CVDPA which was sent to Mr Carmody as a follow up to our recent meeting:
CVDPA Letter to Shane Carmody – 10-04-17

Submission to CASA Medical Certification Standards Discussion Paper
[Image: d3ae5b9a-0068-46b4-8c01-a13e4f2ff2e9.jpg]
In late 2016, CASA published a medical certification standards discussion paper calling for submissions on a variety of AvMed related issues, including colour vision.
The CVDPA lodged a comprehensive submission to this discussion paper outlining our position, our concerns and our recommendations for an expedient resolution to this matter.  Our submission included several attachments supporting our arguments.  A copy of our full submission is available via the below link:
CVDPA Submission to AvMed Discussion Paper
In addition, CASA have recently published several other submissions (where permission has been granted by the author) on their website via the below link:
Responses to the Discussion Paper – Medical Certification Standards
There are many good submissions worth reading which highlight and provide examples of the dysfunction that exists within the CASA AvMed department, which remains in urgent need of a complete overhaul.
It is expected that once CASA have completed an initial review into the submissions, a more detailed response/report will be provided.  We are advised that a working group will then be formed, including industry representatives, to consider the report and develop a strategy around aviation medicals in the future.  This process is expected to take several months.

Senate Estimates Hearings - 23 May 2017
Senator David Fawcett has once again shown that he will not let the CVD issue rest, with further questioning of Acting CASA Director Shane Carmody during today's Senate Estimates hearings.  He asks for an update on CASA's position following the recent developments in New Zealand and the response is mildly encouraging.

[Image: 0807f6db-dedf-450c-81f1-a069d0bc0a97.jpg]

CVDPA Seeks Legal Advice on Future Federal Court Challenge
Whilst we would prefer that a positive outcome to CVD matters in Australia will be achieved through one (or some) of the mechanisms discussed above, we do remain somewhat cautious and sceptical due to the past track record of CASA.
It is our hope that Mr Carmody will prove us wrong over the coming months and that he will work with his counterpart in New Zealand towards getting a rational and just outcome so that our two nations can become world leaders on this subject.
However, as a back-up measure, CVDPA recently sought some preliminary legal advice from a major law firm and barrister regarding the possibility of a future legal challenge in the Federal Court in the event that our negotiations with CASA fail.  Unlike the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT), the Federal Court has far greater powers and may determine if a particular law is being applied correctly.
In our case, we would likely be specifically focusing on CASA’s use of the CAD test for the purposes of simulating an operational situation as required by CASR 67.150 (6)©.  It is self-evident to any reasonable person that this test does not simulate anything, let alone an operational situation which would be encountered in an aviation environment.  It is merely another clinical colour vision test that in no way determines the ability of a CVD pilot to be able to demonstrate competency and operate safely.
Although these discussions are still in the preliminary stage, we will provide further updates to members if and when we elect to progress this matter further.

Your Support
Thanks to all members for your continued support and patience as we continue to work on getting these matters resolved.  We recognise that it is a frustratingly slow battle, but unfortunately that is one of the realities when faced with government bureaucracies.
At this time, we would also ask that members consider what additional financial support they may be able to offer.  Our funds are becoming depleted and require a top-up so that we can continue to maintain the momentum and reinvigorate our campaign.  All contributions, large or small, are greatly appreciated and go directly into the CVDPA trust account.  Funds are needed to cover the costs associated with travel expenses, as well as for a website revamp and of course, for possible future legal expenses should our negotiations with CASA be unsuccessful.
[Image: 1.1.jpg]Any donations can be made via Paypal or direct deposit via the link on our website below:
We look forward to your continued support in achieving the changes that are justifiably worthy of this effort.

Feel free to contact either of us should you have any questions.

Kind Regards,

Dr Arthur Pape
M:  +61 (4)12 522 394

Capt. John O'Brien
M:  +61 (4)03 704 750

[Image: color-facebook-96.png]
[Image: color-twitter-96.png]
[Image: color-link-96.png]
[Image: color-youtube-96.png]
[Image: color-forwardtofriend-96.png]
Well done Arthur & JO choc frogs all round, plus a key for the Tim Tam cupboard for Senator Fawcett... Wink

MTF...P2 Big Grin

Update: CVDPA 19 Sept 2017. - Wink

Quote:[Image: CVDPA_Email_Signature_v1.jpg]

Positive Developments on CVD

Dear Friends and Supporters,
As reported in the previous update, much work on the CVD front has been occurring behind the scenes.  As you will read below, this is beginning to result in some positive and encouraging developments.

New Zealand CAA publishes amended Colour Vision General Direction
 [Image: caa_logo.png]

Last week the New Zealand Civil Aviation Authority released its long awaited amendment to the proposed Impaired Colour Vision General Direction (GD).

A GD is a notice issued by the New Zealand Director of Civil Aviation to specify the requirements of aviation medicine related matters for applicants of a medical certificate.  A GD is issued after consultation with interested parties.

A copy of this proposed amended GD is available via the following link:


The GD outlines a testing process including colour vision screening (Ishihara) and secondary testing (several options including Holmes Wright Lantern, Farnsworth and CAD test).  A pass in any of these tests entitles the applicant to an unrestricted class 1 or 2 medical certificate.

The significant difference with the amended GD is that if an applicant elects not to undertake secondary testing (or if they fail this testing), then they will be entitled to a medical certificate subject to only one restriction:

"Not valid for flight in the vicinity of a controlled aerodrome unless the aircraft is in radio contact with aerodrome control."

While this single restriction is arguably nonsense with modern day technologies, it has been included to satisfy the lawyers in case of the very rare possibility of a CVD pilot having to rely on signal gun lights as the only means of communication in the event of a total radio failure.

Importantly, there are no other proposed operational restrictions, which means that a CVD pilot would be entitled to progress their career to the fullest extent in New Zealand, including at CPL, ATPL, night and IFR levels.  These proposed changes are summarised in the GD as follows:

"The GD also updates the restrictions that are applied to those who fail initial screening and then either fail, or elect to not undertake, secondary screening. Restrictions against the carriage of passengers (class 1), night flying (class 1 and 2) and instrument flying (class 1 and 2) are removed. The body of clinical and empirical evidence considered by the CAA during the development of this GD supports the removal of these restrictions.

Such was the significance of material considered in the development of this GD, the CAA established a Colour Vision Deficiency GD Assessment Panel comprising specialists in aviation medicine, vision science, general aviation, airline operations, regulatory oversight and law. The panel considered written and verbal submissions from various international contributors and experts, empirical evidence and clinical research relating to colour vision deficiency in pilots. Noting that current clinical test methods and restrictions result in significant limitations for some applicants who would be able to operate unrestricted in some other jurisdictions, the panel produced a report recommending the adoption of a practical demonstration of competency as well as alternative secondary screening tests, such that these individuals may demonstrate their competency. These recommendations were accepted by the Director with the exception of the practical flight.

Rather than requiring a one-time flight test to assess individuals for the effect of their colour vision deficiency on all aspects of flying, pilots will instead progress through the standard programme of training and flight testing, applicable to the privileges they seek. They will then be required to further repeatedly demonstrate competency during subsequent renewals of their privileges alongside all other pilots. Evidence indicates that such practical assessments are an appropriate means for pilots with colour vision deficiency to demonstrate their ongoing ability to perform the tasks required of their particular piloting role."

What happens next?  Your help is needed!

[Image: 7d301800-581a-4cb1-a72e-1a63eb1257b2.png]This proposed GD is open for a period of public consultation for just over 5 weeks.

Provided there are no major obstacles or issues arising as a result of this process, the GD will then be implemented into policy.  This will in turn make New Zealand the new world leader in certifying CVD pilots to fly and will arguably lead to flow on influences around the world.

It is vital that all CVD pilots and anyone else with an interest in this topic have their say as part of the CAA's consultation process so that we are not outnumbered by any opposing responses.  It has been confirmed that all interested parties can be part of this process, whether residing in New Zealand, Australia or any other country internationally.

The final page of the GD contains a response sheet which can be used as a template for submitting feedback.  For your assistance, a pre-populated response sheet is also provided via the link below (you only need to add your name, address, phone number, email and if applicable, CAA client number):


Please take 5 minutes to show your support and acceptance of this GD without change.

Responses must be emailed to and are due by 26 October 2017.

Your assistance in participating in this consultation process is appreciated and will help to ensure that the many years of hard work to get to this point do not go to waste.  Feel free to pass this response sheet onto others who may not have received this email.

CVDPA Follow Up Meeting with CASA Director and CEO Shane Carmody
[Image: 86aacb56-be6c-4f87-8d1e-fcdfb80cb8b7.jpg] 
In early August, CVDPA held a second follow up meeting with the CASA Director in Canberra to further discuss CVD matters.

Without publicising specific details at this stage, we can report that these discussions were encouraging and a welcome change compared to the rhetoric and opposition we have experienced from the two former CASA Directors.

These discussions with Mr Carmody remain ongoing and we hope to report further positive news in the coming months.  The outcome of the GD process in New Zealand will likely be influential and so it is vital that Australian CVD pilots take the time to participate in the consultation process referred to above in order to show your support for change.

Well done John O'Brien, Arthur Pape & the CVDPA, well done indeed! Big Grin  

MTF...P2 Tongue

CAANZ show how it's done in the real world -  Big Grin 

Kind of a delayed footnote to the previous post but again well done to the CVDPA and fellow professional pilots across the dutch  Wink 

Via Oz Aviation:
written by Denise McNabb May 15, 2019

[Image: F-WLXV-A35K-YSSY-4899.jpg]The flight deck of the Airbus A350-1000. (Airbus)
Restrictive rules placed on New Zealand’s colour vision deficient (CVD) pilots will end from 31 May 2019, ending six years of campaigning by pilots and the aviation industry.

The new rules will enable pilots with impaired colour vision to demonstrate competency through assessments and flight tests if they fail colour vision tests, whereas to date restrictions were placed on their medical certificate based on visual screening tests.

New Zealand Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) director Graeme Harris said the changes represented a shift in operational policy towards these pilots in that they could operate aircraft safely in spite of their colour vision deficiency (CVD).

“There is evidence that the majority of colour vision deficient pilots pose no greater safety risk than their normally sighted colleagues, as long as they are tested, and pass an appropriate assessment,” Harris said.

The new approach would align closely with that adopted by the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).

CVD is a condition where individuals are unable to distinguish differences between certain colours. It is commonly inherited and affects about eight per cent of men and 0.5 per cent of women.

Under the new rules, pilots with CVD can apply to undertake a new operational colour vision assessment (OCVA) and, if successful, have restrictions removed on their Class 1 and Class 2 medical certificates.

The new approach would include both a medical assessment and practical competency assessment in a three-stage process.
Pilots with the mildest form of CVD, as assessed by clinical testing, would be eligible for unrestricted medical certification in New Zealand.

Those with more severe CVD will still be able to fly with restrictions on their medical certificate that prevents them operating to and from controlled aerodromes without a radio, flying at night or carrying passengers on air operations.

The last two restrictions could be removed by passing a practical operational flight assessment.

The restriction of flying to an aerodrome without a radio cannot be removed because, without a radio, the control tower may use colour light signals to communicate with aircraft in an emergency and misinterpretation due to CVD could constitute a safety risk, the CAA said.

Pilots with CVD would be urged to take the new assessment from qualified instructors part way through their training when they had experience in piloting aircraft. They would have a choice of daytime or day and night assessment.

The CAA said the practical assessment would involve an experienced instructor examiner who would look at the individual’s ability and skills to recognise navigational charts, maps, cockpit instruments and terrain when they are in the air.

“In all cases the objective is not to name colours but rather, to correctly interpret the meaning of information conveyed by charts, instruments or lights, or to assess terrain conditions or obstructions,” the CAA said.

“The assessment is not a check of aviation knowledge or flying ability; for example, the use of keys, notes and glossaries on maps, charts and plates is permitted.”

The move was expected to help ease a pilot shortage. It would also end a situation where Australian pilots, who operated under a similar regime being introduced in New Zealand, could fly in and out of New Zealand airspace, unimpeded by regulatory restrictions.

And from the CVDPA FB page:

Quote:Colour Vision Defective Pilots Association (
April 15 ·

We are thrilled to advise that after over 5 years of hard work and intense lobbying, the NZ CAA last week officially signed off on a new colour vision general direction (GD). This GD will be in effect from 1st June at which point NZ CVD pilots will be able to undertake an operational colour vision assessment (OCVA) flight in order to remove restrictions from their medical certificate. Once passed, candidates are able to fly at all levels, including CPL/ATPL/Night/IFR. This is a tremendous outcome and we congratulate the NZ CAA on showing leadership on this issue.

[Image: 57663174_415294389286742_337540582144475...e=5D66F505]

CAA NZ link - see HERE 

Quote:[Image: D6u-FhxUwAEUchZ.jpg]

[Image: D6u_-OMVUAAciY8.jpg]
GREEN WITH ENVY! - Again can we please adopt the New Zealand CAA -  Huh
MTF...P2   Tongue

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)