LivingInMEM

The Navy doesn't have the ACS or AFMSA who think they are saving the Air Force one elimination at a time.

KC10 FATboy

I believe the reason that the FALANT test it not authorized is because of its simplicity and it is antiquated. According to the net, it is really hard to find. Also, from what I can tell, it only tests colors red, green, and white. When I went to Brooks, the Air Force seemed more worried about other colors rather than the typical red/green issue due to the numerous colors now being used in EFIS instruments.

Regardless, a former naval officer's color deficiency was casual in an aircraft accident (FedEx 727 accident). Interestingly enough, he could pass the FALANT test but failed the PIP tests.

LivingInMEM

The Capt and SO didn't have color vision issues, but they didn't see the low indications either (I recognize that the SO has other duties). I'd say that fatigue was the more likely culprit. Just because he had color deficient characteristics doesn't mean they were causal. Notice that the Dr that ran the Brooks ophthalmologic branch is the same person that wrote the report for the FedEx mishap. Of course he is going to give opinion that the color defect was causal, that's his mission in the USAF.

The FALANT does only test for red, green, and white; that's no mistake because those are the colors required for aviation. That's all they test for when they do a light gun signal test. Eventually, they'll be able to test for all kinds of medical deficiencies, should they eliminate aviation candidates for all of them?

LivingInMEM

The multi-colors thing in EFIS is overkill, also. Every EFIS uses different colors for different information, they don't use varying hues of the same color for different information. As long as someone can distinguish between magenta and red, etc; who cares if the way they see magenta is the same way that you see magenta? That's why they have functional evaluations for those that do require waivers. The engineers and human factors folks design the displays to be usable with the current standards.

Civilian aircraft have been using multi-color EFIS for as long or longer than USAF aircraft, but the FAA has seen no reason to change their color vision requirements and there has been no spike in color vision related mishaps.

bunk22

The new test is the OPTEC 900, a modern version of the FALANT and supposedly more stringent. I've taken both and couldn't tell a difference. The test measures color perception and apparently is appropriate for aviation. If there were a number of mishaps directly related to this issue, the light test would be gone no doubt. The Navy has demonstrated its effectiveness over the years. Keep it simple. Now, the NTSB report below does not agree with me, how can that be...with all medical experience I'm certainly one of those who wouldn't be flying without the FALANT though I've passed some PIP tests and have taken several more including a light test where you match the colors and it gives you readout on a scale that tells you exactly how color defiecient you are (I was very mild, within AF standards I believe if one were already in as I think one has to have no defects to enter). Of course I've also flown to the carrier during the day, night, airfields day/night, night form, etc, never having an issue.....knock on wood.

bunk22

The co-pilot on FEDEX Flight 1487 did have a SODA issued for failing the PIP test, missed 4 of 14 plates. But due to his Naval operational experience, he was granted an authorization. The post mishap medical testing of his color vision, done by the Air Force, determined that he had a severe color deficiency and that the FALANT, according to them, allows many with greater than a mild color defeciency to pass. The mishap report, through the USAF Opthomology Branch cited the one known Navy mishap were an F-4J was lost in 1980 during a night form, as the pilot misinterpretated the navigation lights and punched out as he thought a collision was imminent.

The Air Force believes that the FALANT/OPTEC 900 allows a certain percentage of those with medium to sever color defeciences and this could be a danerous issue. The Air Force also believes, according the report, that even PIP tests don't accurately reflect a person's color perception and thus more advanced testing is required. The Navy, as far as I know, doesn't follow this line of thinking or they accept the risk as the F-4J mishap is the only one that I know where defective color vision was the direct cause of a mishap. The FAA allows the light test, the Navy as well. .

All this info comes from the mishap report, good read if you have the time:

http://www.ntsb.gov/publictn/2004/AAR0402.pdf

KC10 FATboy

I agree with your comments. Fatigue is definitely an issue here. Your eyesight goes to hell and back when you're fatigued.

And I find your comments about who did the testing and who wrote the report very intriguing. Why didn't the FAA do independent testing and analysis of the data?

All I know is that when I went to Brooks, they tested our eyes for some crazy stuff. Luckily I passed.

bunk22

Didn't know that about the Dr writing the FedEx mishap portion, which makes sense as to his conclusion. In the Navy, they haven't changed policy as there has never been an issue with the test causing problems.

LivingInMEM

Unfortunately, I have had several discussions with this doctor, which is how I found out he wrote the response. He is proud of that work and he refused to even consider that fatigue may have been a factor. All it takes is one personal discussion to realize that he has no scientific or empirical evidence to back up the current drive to screen out pilots for such trivial abnormalities (he told me himself that the new USAF color vision test will eliminate an additional 10% of pilots that passed the old color vision test and he was proud to predict that one guy who "slipped by" and made it to the F-22 was certain to wash out because of the deficiency - it didn't happen). He can't point out a single USAF mishap that was caused by the old tests, but they found it necessary to develop new tests that eliminate an additional 10%. When I asked him what factors he considered important for a fighter pilot, he mentioned color vision first then a few tertiary characteristics. He didn't even mention acuity, line of sight rate detection, the ability to determine aspect angles, etc. I asked him if he had even ridden in a fighter backseat - nope. In recent dealings with them (as a supervisor who interacts with them), I have seen some very sophomoric data used to justify their decisions (to include surveys of the opinions of non-medially trained uninformed crewmembers). Luckily, I was able to get some decisions turned over, but it wasn't easy.

KC10 FATboy

Did Alpa challenge the findings? I think I already know the answer to that ...