ALL MEMBERS ! Please fill out those proxy forms..!!

[samrutherford]

@Trevor Harvey

Vereeniging, FAVV

She's welcome to post a denial here if it's not true...

[jollyrog]

Sam,

As you were there - what was the reasoning for her not to fly solo? She could have?

[Alan Kilbride]

Why has there not been an opportunity for someone to speak against the motion at the AGM?
I am certain there will be speakers for both motions.
It's an ambush and I hate it that my association is being used in this way.
There are so many members who disappear off into the wild blue yonder, almost potless in a 60 year old aircraft. Self maintained. Not a bare metal strip and rebuild, but on a whim and a prayer year after year. Without a camera plane, Logistics manager, Sponsorship, Transport to and from hotels, yet don't advertise it as an adventure, but just a few days away.
I'm not knocking the modern LAA aircraft, just trying to give a point of view that I don't believe Tracey did anything remotely astounding. A 35 hour student could have done it with the support team she had.

[samrutherford]

@Jolly Rog

That's really a question for her to answer. My best guess is a lack of confidence, doubly unfortunate as she was (and is) competent to do it solo.



@Alan Kilbride

Actually, in point of order, anyone (no flying experience whatsoever) could have done it (there was an instructor in the front seat).

[cirrusvfr]

TCT did not deserve the award in the first place....... Nothing has changed ,she does not deserve it now.
So , No Mr Chairman I won't be following your advice and I cannot support either Motion.

[Petertweed]

To me, the decision to make an award is the award committee's.
If someone has been deceptive in getting an award, it is up to that committee to withdraw / rescind it, based on the criteria for that award.
The Chair of the committee has said he is still happy the award was made, despite (what he says) has been a deception.
Therefore, to me, by asking to remove the award based on merit, should involve a vote of no confidence in the awards committee rather than the individual.

However that wasn't the motion that removed the award.
If someone does something heinous, potentially unrelated to the reason the award was given, then a group can also remove an award.
Picking a random example, English jockey Lester Piggott was stripped of an OBE after he was jailed in 1987 for tax fraud. He had held the award since 1975. He won over 5,300 races and was champion jockey 11 times before retiring at the end of the 1985 season to become a racehorse trainer. His OBE was in relation to horse racing - not financial stuff.
The motion in 2015 was (essentially) that the award should be removed as letting her keep it brought the LAA into disrepute (or some such thing).

So the question is nothing to do with the merit of the flight, it's to do with whether TCT has been bad enough generally to have the award taken away. That isn't a matter of blunt facts, but a personal judgement. Is implying, or explicitly overstating her own achievements enough to tip the balance, saying her character isn't good enough to remain an award recipient?

So to David Mole's motion. Have a think objectively. Are TCT's "crimes" of essentially blowing her own trumpet a bit too much at times, enough to keep the award removed? Has she made up for it through promoting a great cause and getting people interested in aviation who may not otherwise be? Is forgiveness a thing in aviation?

To me it doesn't matter whether she deserved the award or not. We, the members, don't check the finer details of every award that is given. We have a committee to do that for us. The question is whether her character is suitable to hold an award at all, and I don't think what she has done (and she seems to be her own worst enemy at times with all the lawyer letters, and she doesn't seem to be the best listener) is that bad. No-one has got hurt. No crimes have been committed.
As someone earlier said - she spoke well at the LAA rally. She has apologised (albeit - not particularly fully or contritely publicly) for not always acknowledging her team and not checking her website & promotional material. She has tirelessly promoted GA all over the world, reaching demographics that I know I will never reach.
The question should be - has she done enough since the award was rescinded, to allow it to be re-instated.

[Paul Catanach]

Are TCT's "crimes" of essentially blowing her own trumpet a bit too much at times, enough to keep the award removed? ..........She has apologised (albeit - not particularly fully or contritely publicly) for not always acknowledging her team and not checking her website & promotional material.

Peter.

I think you are being extremely generous here although I agree wholeheartedly with the suggestion that we should all step back and try to take a view. Having done that I still see the suggestion that this was down to lack of oversight as (at best) an enormous understatement. Not on your behalf but from those who would have us believe this tosh.

This wasn’t a one-off or as Miss Curtis-Taylor’s website designer recently and belatedly told us a case of ‘Ooops, how did that get there?’. This was drawn out over months and years. Suggestions from people within her own team that she should put the record straight were ignored. Only when pressure in the form of evidence was made public did the story begin to change. And change again.

Even now, in the face of considerable evidence, Miss Curtis-Taylor cannot bring herself to do the right thing and that for me is the rub. There has been no genuine apology or taking of responsibility, just ducking and weaving.

You ask if there is such a thing as forgiveness in aviation. You bet there is, it's called a just culture and is designed to forgive honest mistakes and errors. Until the article in the Times a week ago and now these motions I thought the person concerned had moved on and I was genuinely pleased about that. It seems I was wrong.

Are we looking at an ambassador for light aviation? Someone going out of their way for little or no personal gain? Or someone hoping to remove a blemish in advance of the release of a film? Because in my opinion this has nothing at all to do with a person's love of the LAA or spreading the word on behalf of GA. It's a commercial venture. Are we going to reinstate the award just to boost box-office takings?

I think we also need to look at the big picture (not the upcoming film ). As one who has witnessed Miss Curtis-Taylor’s after dinner speaking do we want to be seen to endorse a pilot who in a carefree manner admits to flying without the appropriate charts, busting controlled airspace, overflying a prohibited area and low-flying over a city? Someone who, when berated for said behaviour by an air traffic controller said ”Y’know what? Fine. Do it. It’s gonna be embarrassing. Not only embarrassing for me but for you if you really want to make an international incident of it”. Is that the sort of thing we want to support?

Or ‘navigating the old fashioned way’ with 2xGPS and an iPad plus the same in the other (rarely empty) seat and follows the so-called chase plane? As others have already written there’s nothing worthy in that.

[jangiolini]

I have to agree with Paul that TCT has not really apologised and that her main focus is to get the award reinstated! I also believe that she has been economical with the truth and that as Paul pointed out she broke many rules and is a poor ambassador for aviation with her disregard for rules and regulation (by her own admission)!! Its not even a great feat of navigation as she used GPS etc and a chase plane and a second very experienced pilot. If she had been SOLO and used map and compass that may have been impressive!! I have 300 hours flying time and would love to have completed the flight with all the support etc. I am certain I could do it as could most of my hangar colleagues who on there own flew their home builds (Technam, Alpi Pioneer and Europa) across the North Sea to the Artic circle with no support no logistical planners and guess what they never busted any air space they never flew too low they probably did use GPS they also got back in one piece. They are more deserving of the award.
The award committee I am sure awarded the trophy in good faith with the information provided at the time so no slight on them. With all the shenanigans that were eventually uncovered it was correct rescinding the award as to be honest she met very few if any of the criteria for its award!

[Paul Catanach]

The award committee I am sure awarded the trophy in good faith with the information provided at the time so no slight on them. With all the shenanigans that were eventually uncovered it was correct rescinding the award as to be honest she met very few if any of the criteria for its award!

My apologies for posting again but that cannot be said often enough, absolutely no blame attaches to the awards committee. We should not only remember that but remind everyone else. Frequently.

[L21-B]

TCT's award was rightfully rescinded by the voting membership of the LAA once the true facts of this glorified paid for jolly were known, the whole event was just a series of lies and deceit that even now she cannot apologise for.

Would TCT and Ewald like to explain why they both logged P1 in the NTSB report over the Winslow crash if she was supposed to be flying solo and alone in an open cockpit biplane.

Here is the link to the NTSB report.

https://dms.ntsb.gov/public/59000-59499 ... 594566.pdf

I will be voting by proxy as unfortunately I am unable to attend the AGM, my vote will be the same as 2016 because nothing has changed since that AGM except more lies and deceit.

[PaulSS]

absolutely no blame attaches to the awards committee

I agree there's no blame but I do question their judgement.

Clearly they were taken in by the jazz and glitter exuded by Tracey's PR team and, at the time, were led down the same garden path as the rest of the public in believing that she did commit the feats of aviation solo. No one can blame them for that as, at the time, she had covered her tracks quite well.

However, just the tiniest bit of due diligence would have revealed the veritable plethora of GPS navigation devices installed in her aircraft and the operations support team that made it all happen. Had they done that then I hope they would not have awarded her any bauble with 'navigation' mentioned in its declaration. Quite simply, her whole claim to any feat of navigation was a complete sham as even the least able pilot on the planet can follow a line that says 'go this way'.

That she did it in an immaculately restored aircraft, trailed by an engineering support team and someone to help her when she got things wrong makes her feat even less impressive but I suppose the wool covering those events was firmly in place before the Awards Committee's eyes were allowed to see what she really (didn't) do.

I assume by having aviation-related Royalty stand alongside her and tell everyone what a marvellous job she'd done she managed to further dazzle some members of the Committee but, hopefully, lessons have been learned and future judgement of merit will realise that all that glitters is certainly not gold.

[samrutherford]

I do not believe that the awards committee would have given the award had they known at the time it was not solo. They have themselves clarified that they believed it had been solo, and described the situation as a "deception".

I believe that that there must have been somebody more deserving of the award (who had actually done what they said they had done).

Having lawyers write multiple threatening letters to both the LAA and individuals in it (whilst falsely describing them as vindictive and mysognistic), in an effort to sell a new film, is not right.

The whitewash, spin and lies continue unabated (changing statements, changing wikipedia pages, refusing to answer the difficult questions), and will only get worse if the decision is reversed.

1-6. For.
7. Against.
8. Against.

If you want an award/prize/certificate/recognition etc. - you have to have actually done what you said you had done. Anything else is called cheating.

[Petertweed]

As per the award committee chair Anthony Hopkins: https://services.lightaircraftassociati ... 020#p23020

The question is - if the award committee knew that it was a group flight, would they have still have made the award. Anthony said at the previous AGM that despite any deception, they could have. There were no nominations from others and they thought the flight worthy. I'm sure they would love others to give up their own time to join the awards committee.

Do you think other previous winners didn't have GPS?

[samrutherford]

I think other winners had done what they said they had done.

[Chris Martyr]

To me, the decision to make an award is the award committee's.
If someone has been deceptive in getting an award, it is up to that committee to withdraw / rescind it,

Somebody was rather deceptive in accepting that award . Very deceptive .

A gentleman from the awards committee advised people on this very forum to bring it up at the 2016 AGM. It was brought up and I seconded the motion , it was voted through by the majority despite an attempt to 'by-pass' the proxy voters . Democracy Robert Mugabe style !
Your last suggestion Peter , that it should be re-instated on good conduct is surely made in jest.