If you thought you'd heard the last of this extraordinary gentleman think again.... !

Having lost his Cub G-KIRK in somewhat dubious circumstances in the Caribbean last year he's wasted no time in acquiring its successor which was regd as G-KURK on 9th January

You all be careful out there now.........

Does he still have a pilot's licence? I thought that the CAA had withdrawn it?

No they had to return it to him. He is fully legal and ready to fly.:ok:

This is the most recent post on his website, so I suspect that the good doctor isn't back in the air quite yet....

Can HRH Prince Charles Help My Loss of Pilot's Licence? - Kirk's Blog (http://kirkflyingvet.com/blogs/kirks_blog/archive/2009/01/02/can-hrh-prince-charles-help.aspx)

His website is always an 'interesting' read :mad:

Holy cow. I always thought he was an odd ball, but having read his website, the man is certifiable.

It's the old question as to what the difference is between madness and eccentricity; in my experience, it is generally money. If you have money and behave strangely, you are deemed to be eccentric. If you are potless and behave strangely, you're probably thought to be mad.

I notice from G-INFO that G-KURK is registered to Genevieve Kirk, nr Cardiff. A relation, perhaps?

His long suffering wife Kirsty.

I'm sorry, but I can't help admiring the guy :) He's quite mad of course, but we need characters like this in the world, or would be very dull indeed! I've met him at a couple of PFA (ok LAA) rallies, and whilst friendly at one was pretty rude at the other, so I can't say I actually like him. Good luck to him though! :ok:

SS

Good luck on him!

Ps he obviously reads this page as its linked from his site above!;)

2 comments from his web site :

1. Bringing his restored plane back :

"Her rescue from France required the avoidance of airfields due to Maurice being rather light on paperwork. She crossed the Channel in fog on route to Biggin Hill, landing on the former's nearby golf course instead of the airfield ‘over the fence', which had ‘too much snow on the runway'."

2. Engine problems :

"In 1997 in a howling winter gale and off to a party, Maurice experienced his 12th engine failure having to dive her from 400ft, perpendicular to the ground, to achieve a 180 turn into a 40 mph tail wind. The wheels touched just ten yards from a thorn hedge into which Tim his brother and he had to extricate themselves with great difficulty before she might burst into flames. She didn't. With just a bent undercarriage and holes in the fuselage from horses eating the fabric she was soon airborne again.".

I don't need to add anything......


LF

A man out of his time, he should have been flying in 1928 not 2008. His approach was perfectly normal then.

He should be getting a Heritage Lottery grant to support his adventures:E

He should be getting a Heritage Lottery grant to support his adventures


I think a straitjacket would be more appropriate......

I'm sorry, but I can't help admiring the guy He's quite mad of course, but we need characters like this in the world, or would be very dull indeed! I've met him at a couple of PFA (ok LAA) rallies, and whilst friendly at one was pretty rude at the other, so I can't say I actually like him. Good luck to him though!

SS

Shortstripper

I have to agree with you. In our heavely regulated and disapproving society society we needs characters to buck the system a little.

Mad! replace that for non conformist. Stick your head out of the trenches and expect to be shot at as anyone who is different is mad.

Now who was that pilot who used to loop a commander twin, engine out with a glass on the coming and land off the loop. Was he mad too? oh yes the FAA got rid of him too.

And yes there was the young student who flew a cessna under Russian radar and landed in Red Square.........

Pace

You can't compare Bob Hoover to Maurice Kirk.

One is a genius and the other a bloody idiot.

I'm all for mavericks and unconventional people, but he is bonkers and frankly a danger to anyone who happens to be near any aircraft he is flying.

If he only risked his own safety, then fine. Off you go. I couldn't give two hoots if he killed himself by doing something stupid, but the things he does could easily wipe someone else out and that isn't on.

This isn't 1921.

You can't compare Bob Hoover to Maurice Kirk.

SayAgainSlowly.

I was not comparing Bob Hoover to Maurice Kirk but I think some in the FAA did ?

Any comparison was that they were both people who stood out for different reasons and some dont like that.

The FAA decided that Bob Hoover was mentally unfit to fly when he demonstrated that he could fly like most of us so called "able" pilots could never dream too. The Australians thought otherwise and issued him a medical.


One is a genius I thought geniuses where supposed to be the closest to madness? Funny world!

Pace

And yes there was the young student who flew a cessna under Russian radar and landed in Red Square

If that's the German bloke I'm thinking of, he was convicted of stabbing a woman about ten years ago.

Also, to be exact, he wasn't flying under the radar--he was in fact tracked most of the way, but they decided not to shoot him down. Oh, and he didn't land in the Red Square either, but a block or so away from it. :8

He came through Kerikeri NZ, some 80 nm sth. of the Northenmost tip of NZ. Got some fuel cans filled, then flew up to a private field ( not a landing field, just a field ) near the top and left the fuel. On the day of his departure to AUS via Norfolk, Lord Howe etc. he cleared Customs and Imm. at Kerikeri, officially departed NZ, then flew up to his field, topped up his tanks, and then really left NZ - having illegally 'entered' once more.

I don't think eccentric is the right description, a word beginning with C ( take you pick - I can immediately think of 4) comes to mind.

PACE/ LH2

The German who flew the 172 to Russia was Mathias Rust. Details of the exploit here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathias_Rust)

Genius maybe close to madness maybe, but Maurice Kirk crosses that line and keeps on marching!

How the FAA treated Bob Hoover was nothing short of disgusting. I saw him at Avalon after the Aussies allowed him to fly. Spectacular. I wish I had 1/10th of his skill.

Somehow guys it makes me laugh when I read the comments you make about Maurice, let us not forget Maurice was the 'real winner' of the London to Sydney Air Race.... how many of you would have the balls to fly a 1943 65hp Cub from Biggin Hill to Sydney, ok so he didn't physically win, but he was the intrepid aviator.... C'mon for the guys in the Barons & Aerostars they were just on a 'rich boys outing'

One of the' rich boys' paid Maurice's entry fee of $50,000 so he obviously looked upon Maurice with quite a high regard.

Maurice will never personally be beaten by the CAA but legally he might if you get my drift :ugh:

I know little of Maurice but from his web site he is clearly a colourful character.

I doubt he has done anything to endanger others in his Cub. In fact I find it difficult to imagine how a Cub could do much endangering.

Flying a Cub in all weathers and over the distances undertaken by Maurice in themselves demonstrates Maurice is an exceptional pilot.

His brushes with the authorities are either an enduring testimony to a man that feels pilloried by past events or a determination on the part of the authorities to vindicate themselves. I have absolutely no idea which fits the facts.

I do however believe the world would be a very much duller place without Maurice, whether he makes us laugh or cry, don’t we all follow his exploits with a little envy and a wry smile?

Gents like this usually come into their own when e.g. new continents need discovering, oceans need crossing for the first time by plane, moons need landing on, etc, etc.

At other times (and generally right upto the point where they achieve any of the above) they are looked upon as being a bit barmy by the rest of us.

Whatever else he may be, he certainly seems to be one of those fearless risk takers that are supposed to populate the thin end of the wedge that is society's progress.

Definitely 80 years too late though. Or maybe 40 years too early!

Ok, so where does he gets the money for his exploits?

sas

Why do you have such a poor opinion of the chap?
I know Maurice personally and a better aviator you won't find frankly, and he could teach us all a thing or two.

I accept that he is unconventional, but that is no reason to ridicule the man. If you have some personal experience of him being 'bonkers and frankly a danger to anyone who happens to be near any aircraft he is flying' then tell us, otherwise try not to be rude about a fellow aviator.

Maurice Kirk is simply standing up for what he believes in, and to that end we should all salute him!

Keep going Maurice, I hope it's not too long 'til our paths cross again.

The Winco

I have to say that he does come across in his blogs as totally barking crackerdog.

I don't know the fella and he might be right as ninepence, I've always watched his exploits with a mixture of amusement, awe and even a little envy but he writes as though he's completely bonkers.

Marmite springs to mind when it comes to a discussion about this man. Some love him, and others hate him.

On the topic of Bob Hoover - now he really is a GIFTED pilot. I too would love to own a tenth of his skills. A born natural, and yes, what the FAA did to him was unforgiveable!!!

Last time I saw Maurice Kirk was on route to Farnborough in his replica WWI pusher biplane..think it was a DH2? Formated on him for about ten mins, and it felt like travelling back in time. Sitting up front in his leather helmet, scarf flying in the wind, hand on the working gun fitted to the nose. The sound of the massive radial engine turning an equally massive prop, clearly heard over the purr of my Limbach. Apparently the engine came loose on the return trip and he made a safe landing into an impossibly small field.
Yes I admit, I wish I had a bit of Maurice's crazyness.

Just like Winco I know Maurice personally and it is correct that Maurice is an exceptionally skillful pilot and I would personally not shudder one iota if I was in any aircraft with him and the doo doo hit the fan !!

Maurice is without question a strange soul but we do need guys like him in aviation, I sense envy by quite a few because you neither have the skills or the bottle to do what he has completed.

Due to Maurice's well publicised flight to Aussie, there is a new flight rule that can be used whenever flying over deserts :cool:

I flew from Jeddah to Bahrain and it is mainly sand covered ground and on my flightplan I tried to put VFR so I could stay within sight of the ground...the Flightplan officer told me that I could put BCL instead as due to Maurice creating the BCL classification, that was the lowest known VFR rules available !!!!

Winco, don't get me wrong. I find Mr Kirk interesting and I do have a fair bit of respect for anyone who is willing to take on authorities when they feel hard done by.

However, some of the things he has done are far beyond what I would call even romotely sensible aerial practice. I'm sure he's a good stick and rudder man, in fact given some of the scrapes he's been in, I'm sure of it.

I can be a bit of a fuddy duddy when it comes to things in the air and whilst I admire his spirit. I find his activities deeply troubling from a safety perspective. I suppose my outlook is just more "modern" than his.

I suppose my outlook is just more "modern" than his.And laced with a great deal more commonsense and respect too SAS.

my mate brought a yak 12 off mr kirk,, do he not lose his licenses for being drunk in charge of an aircaft??

I can be a bit of a fuddy duddy when it comes to things in the air and whilst I admire his spirit. I find his activities deeply troubling from a safety perspective. I suppose my outlook is just more "modern" than his.

SayAgainSlowly

One of my best friends if not my best friend is old enough to be my Dad. He is 75 years old and last year completed 32 ferries from the states in singles and aircraft you and I wouldnt take 10 miles.

I have flown with him a lot over the years and frankly dont know how he goes 10 miles never mind the USA to the UK and beyond so slap hazard is his flying.

Each ferry he does I imagine will be his last but every time he arrives back.

he has a twinkle in his eye and a love of aviation and enthusiasm which most 20 year olds dont have.

When I told him that he was going to end up as a hole in the sea he told me that both his parents had died with dimentia in their eighties and if a hole in the sea is the way he is going to go so be it. I cannot argue against him because when I am 75 I would love to have a quarter of what he has.

I love and admire the guy to bits as most people his age watch the TV and complain of their aches and pains not him.

We need characters in life, people who buck normality, people who dont fit.
Far from being mad they have a truer picture of our mad lives and get on with their own sane lives in their own special way.

So when I read a post headed Maurice Kirk rides again it touches a chord with me and I think "good on you". Never met the bloke dont know him but have met some like him.

Pace

sas

The problem that Maurice has, is that we have become in this country, too willing to simply role over and accept new, unwarranted, unneccesary stupid and pointless rules and regulations frankly. Maurice is one of those few people who just asks the question why?

Now I do accept that he is somewhat unconventional in his ways, but you would agree I'm sure. that 'conventional' complaining is useless in the vast majority of cases, hence his approach to life and authority.

You claim that some of the things he has done 'are far beyond what I would call even romotely sensible aerial practice' but please, you must elaborate on that and give us examples. I genuingly know of no such activities frankly, and unless you can substantiate your claims, you shouldn't castigate the man.

I wish there were more Kirks around in this country to stand up for things:D, it would be a damned sight better I think!

Winco

I agree totally about the population rolling over and taking it in a painful manner, the problem is that Maurice Kirk, whilst being "colourful character" does things for his own end rather than the common good.

He was a drinking partner of Ollie Reed I believe, which is a bit cool to be frank so I'll forgive him a lot, but not things like assualting a teenage girl in 1995 or getting done for drink driving or etc.etc.

He always has an excuse for his "antics" but frankly I just don't believe him. One or two incidents I could understand, but multiple incidents over many years...........Nah, you're alright.

I'm sure he's a very interesting chap to talk to, but I worked in a mental institution once and know how someone can be totally normal one second and then screaming like a banshee the next whilst trying to kill whoever is close by. Scary stuff and I wouldn't want any of them flying an aircraft near me.

sas,

I'm afraid that your comments have now plumbed even greater depths!

To suggest for a second that a current pilot has some sort of mental instability is quite outrageous. Do you think he's skipping his CAA medical each year? Or are suggesting that the docs are not doing their jobs?

OK, I admit I didn't know about the DD or the assault, but you stated that he does things that 'are far beyond what I would call even romotely sensible aerial practice' and yet you still wont tell us one incident, why is that?

I would suggest that you retract the comment about mental institutions. It's totally unwarranted and uncalled for. Infact is shameful Sir.

I would suggest that you retract the comment about mental institutions. It's totally unwarranted and uncalled for. Infact is shameful

Not entirely sure about the "unwarranted and uncalled for" bit: I understand Mr. Kirk had been interned for a while in one such institution in the U.S. not long ago (last year?) At least, that is what he claims in his blog. :uhoh:

But what I'd like to know, if you would forgive my insistence, is how does the man finance his flying adventures? Is that from his vet practice? Is he old money? Sponsorships? :confused:

Not that I care one way or the other about him--I'm just curious about the financial aspect.

It makes me chuckle how Maurice Kirk seems to polarize people. Personally I find his spirit of adventure and total disregard for the nanny state refreshing and amusing. For to long we have been herded by the do-gooders like lemmings into little pockets of acceptance. We are surround by electrified fences of rules and scared into obeying them, frozen into inactivity like a rabbit caught in the headlights of a car.

Maurice is like the lemming that discovered his own mind and made an escape. I admire his spirit and determination. Yes he may appear to be as mad as rat, but so what?

All I really see from the detractors is jealousy and fear of the institution.

It makes me chuckle how Maurice Kirk seems to polarize people. Personally I find his spirit of adventure and total disregard for the nanny state refreshing and amusing. For to long we have been herded by the do-gooders like lemmings into little pockets of acceptance. We are surround by electrified fences of rules and scared into obeying them, frozen into inactivity like a rabbit caught in the headlights of a car.

Maurice is like the lemming that discovered his own mind and made an escape. I admire his spirit and determination. Yes he may appear to be as mad as rat, but so what?


What Bose sums up here are my sentiments too. I have never met Maurice Kirk or know much about him or what attrocities he has done or not done away from aviation. My comments are more directed at Characters in aviation those that buck our very grey system and add a bit of colour.

We have turned into such a regulated, big brother society, always pointing the finger and always so judgemental over anything which bucks that system that we need something or someone to once in a while shake it a little.

Pace

As I mention. I admire his stance and character upto a point, but on many occasions Mr. Kirk has gone so far beyond "normal" behaviour that frankly it defies belief.

Shall I post all the deatils of the numerous convictions that Mr. Kirk has, or the rulings by his professional peers that led to him being booted out of the Veterinary profession? Very, very unsavoury reading.

He is a nutter. Pure and simple. His actions in my unqualified eyes are those of an unstable personality. In fact I mention Mr Kirk to a psychologist friend of mine and even she used the phrase "loony tune".

If he'd like to sue me for my opinion, then fine. Given his record in court cases, even Ian Hislop would have no trouble in finally winning one.

If you think that an aviation medical exam is a good test of someones mental health, then you need to see a shrink!

If you want an aviation reason for why I think he's an idiot, how about being imprisoned for 6 months for being drunk whilst flying?
Attacking an engineer who'd worked on his aircraft after being presented with a bill (something I'm sure many have thought about, but not acted upon!!) and then threatening him and his family so that they had to live with armed police protection. All of these he was convicted for.
Then there's assaulting policemen and then another conviction for ABH when he threw someone down some stairs.

Colourful..........Not really. I'd call that being a thug and and an idiot.

SAS

I have never met Maurice Kirk or know much about him or what attrocities he has done or not done away from aviation. My comments are more directed at Characters in aviation those that buck our very grey system and add a bit of colour.

I stress the points I made above

Pace

I've never met Hitler, but I'm sure he wasn't a very nice man. He could also be described as "colourful".

I get your point Pace, but if we were all "Kirks" then society would be well and truly knackered. Whilst we are too compliant, there is a big difference between sticking up for your beliefs and opinions and being a nutcase thug.

Have any of Maurice Kirk's actions been of any benefit to anyone else? Not that I've seen, all it's done is to force more regulation and more restrictions that aren't necessary and have negative effects on all of us.

But what I'd like to know, if you would forgive my insistence, is how does the man finance his flying adventures?

Why is that relevant to the original post? Why should anyone question the means by which airworthy men achieve their dreams? Just because he doesn't arrive in a high viz jacket with his granny in a PA28 in which he owns half an elevator - he cast out to the dark side of the moon.

The Kirks are an important family in Aviation. Many remarks here are simply twisted and bastardized assumption. He could be at far worse than following his dreams. How many died dreaming with their slippers and pipe?

Irish

But what I'd like to know, if you would forgive my insistence, is how does the man finance his flying adventures?

Why is that relevant to the original post?

It is not relevant. I just don't want to start a thread named "How does M. Kirk fund his flying?", that's all.

Why should anyone question the means by which airworthy men achieve their dreams?

I don't know, and how is that relevant to my question? If I wanted to question him or anyone else I would have plainly said so. What I said instead, I don't give a shit about the guy one way or the other.

Now, while one doesn't need to be particularly rich to fly once around the word, assuming one has sufficient disposable income and the inclination to spend it that way, he seems to have been around quite a bit and I would simply like to know if he is a man of means or he does it all on a shoestring, or what.

I would simply like to know if he is a man of means or he does it all on a shoestring, or what.

Think there's a big clue in his "Flying Vet" slogan. Have a look at his website/photos and your question would be adequately answered. A Policeman wouldn't ask a question like you did. If you really want to know his financial particulars I'll give you his contact details.....

And I though aviation trancended all....

:sad:

Ask a simple question and here comes one of Mr. Kirk's patients trying to second guess you. Oh well, it takes all sorts. :rolleyes:

Err, you might have missed the fact that Maurice Kirk is no longer a vet. He was struck off a number of years ago.

How he affords his flying? Dunno, don't care.

The Kirks are an important family in Aviation. Many remarks here are simply twisted and bastardized assumption. He could be at far worse than following his dreams. How many died dreaming with their slippers and pipe?

I've followed my dreams all through my career and done OK. However, I have never been prosecuted, convicted of any crime or attacked anyone. Let alone flown drunk, been expelled from a professional body or been charged with "disgraceful conduct", let alone charged and convicted of dumping clinical waste on public grounds.

You don't need to be an aggressive and volatile individual to pursue your dreams, especially in aviation. The best pilots are those who can calmly and rationally deal with problems or ensure they don't get in the muck in the first place. Being a good "stick and rudder" individual does not necessarily make you a good pilot. There is more to it than just handling skill.

"A superior pilot is one who uses their superior intellect to ensure that they never have to use their superior skill" Does that sound like the aforementioned Mr. Kirk? Does it heck.

SAS, I apologise in advance for the blue touch paper I am about to ignite......

But the more I read of your postings the more I think you are a bigot who judges people by your own set of clearly defined rules. Rules that are rigid and immovable. Your dogged pursuit of Mathews on another thread and the same here about Kirk.

Why can't you live a little, Kirk is eccentric and god knows how many other tags that can be applied to him, but he has never hurt you, he has certainly never hurt me and I personally think he brings a little colour to a world that has become black and white.

I have also followed my dreams in everything I have done and have been pretty successful. That does not mean I judge everyone by my own standards, I am pragmatic enough to understood that it takes variety to make the world turn......

Try and loosen up a little mate and see the world for it's variety and vibrance.

Some of you seem to want to put the spirit of 1920 & 30's aviation and Mr Kirk in the same box.

The exploits of Birt Hinkler come to mind He left the UK , just arived in Australia and untill he arived almost no one had any idea about the flight, no publicity, no fuss & no drama.

Mr Kirk on the other hand is a very lucky man, to still be with us with a that number of engine failures and crashed under his belt but surely this can't all be down to mechanical bad luck?

One of the above aviators is a skilled, assesed risk well and navigates superbly, the other blunders around wrecking aircraft and endangering himself and all those who find themselfs near him, I will let you decide who is who!

Bose, you can think what you like.

I do have a very strong set of morals and values, but I have never expected anyone else to follow them. I couldn't give two hoots about what others do as long as they aren't hurting anyone else. Variety is the spice of life afterall and if you took your head out your a*se you'd probably realise that the one thing I am not is a bigot.

I'm laughing about it really as I'm the least bigoted person you'll ever meet, unless you turn out to be a liar, theif or nasty person.

In the case of the aforementiontioned Mattews, well come on. You don't find the idea of someone ripping people off over the pretence that you are helping serious and terminally ill children distateful?

I generally live and let live about most things, but there are certain lines you don't cross in a decent society. I don't like thugs, bullies, arsonists, criminals or con men.

How does that make me a bigot? You want to be thankful that people do think like me and are willing to stand up and say that something isn't right. If we all took your attitude then we'd have anarchy and chaos.

Just because something doesn't affect you personally, doesn't mean you should pretend it didn't happen, or that you shouldn't care.

Kirk is not just a "harmless eccentric" if you actually read up on his history, you'd realise he is far from harmless.

I prefer not to start vendettas against people based on my own moral code. If that means I have my head stuck up my arse then so be it. I don't pretend that things don't happen or not care, but unlike you I am not a caped crusader. I am also prepared to live a little and realise that there are far worse things going on in the world than those that seem to attract your wrath.

I am sure you have led a perfect and sin free life and that allows you to judge others with a clear conscience. I bet you even have a little basket full of 'first stones' ready to throw. But alas the rest of the world is not quite so lucky.

While there are eccentrics out there, breaking the mold and bucking the system then it brings a smile to my face. So what if he has a colorful background, it seems to me that he has been dealt with by society in the past. Maybe not to your standards as you would want him stoned in the square but nonetheless it is in the past. Some of us don't dwell on the past....

I think it best we leave it at that or we will fall out.

Again this is where I differ slightly. I am all for eccentrics and "system buckers". My own outlook is not so conventional. I too generally have grin on my face when I hear that someone has taken on a big corporation or the government on a matter of principle and won. I'm all for people sticking up for themselves and rolling over when faced with a monolithic corporate steamroller.

Of course I am not an angel, but I have never cheated, attacked or neglegently endangered anyone. Nor am I reckless (though having seen me on a motorbike you might disagree!). I do know to how to have fun and I would never dream that more regulation is a good thing, when it so obviously isn't.

I'm all for the population of this country becoming a bit more politicised and less willing to be lied to by politicians and generally taken advantage of by people with differing agendas from what they say they have.

Your outlook of Kirk is romantiscised and mainly comes from the publicity he has generated himself. Look a bit deeper into his past and you'll start to get a very different picture. Has he served his debt to society? Well, yes.
Does that mean he's now a picture of sweetness and light? Maybe, but unlikely.

Here's a thought.

If someone was a convicted paedophile and was released prison after serving their time. Would you be happy to have them living next door to you? Especially if you had young kids of your own?

If not, then why? They served their debt, therefore must be allowed the benefit of societies grace and allowed to get on with their lives.

If you aren't happy with that, then there are double standards being displayed. You may make the argument that it is in their nature and therefore they can never be truly "safe".
Being a bully and a thug is also hard wired into people's personality and whilst people can change, they generally don't, they just hide it away better.

I didn't mean for this to turn into a Kirk bashing thread, but since I've been asked to justify my thoughts I have.

You may have a differing opinion of Kirk and that is fine, but make sure you have access to all the information before closing your mind.

My mind is not closed. Yours clearly is. I am not prepared to judge him either way. You clearly are. I don't romanticize anything, but I do find his antics amusing, you clearly consider him on par with a child molester. Your call.

Enough said.

I have better things to do this morning than argue with you, like fly a float plane that is parked in my back garden to get some fuel at Browns and then somewhere nice for brunch on the lake.

No the child molester comment is just to provoke thought. There is no comparison to be drawn from that.

Any hoo as you say, beter things to do than worry about this. I'm off to blow some small fluffy creatures to bits so I can have a tasty dinner. I'd prefer to go flying though..............

I wondered how long before the debate, which was interesting, would turn to a ding-dong between posters. Sad.

I've met Maurice Kirk. I'm sure most of us have. I admire his determination to stand up for his rights - he perceives that "they" are out to get him. From what he writes, I can see why he thinks that. Whether or not "they" really are, I don't know.

But he's not "a bit eccentric" like most of us on here. He's extremely eccentric, and more than a little self-centred.

I have a very dear, highly respected antique friend who flew Spitfires in WW2, and all kinds of stuff thereafter. He told me of an "occasion" at a PFA Rally many years ago. Mr Kirk was taxying his aircraft for takeoff, and there was a group of people in the way. K just kept going, as if to taxy straight into the group. My friend ran alongside, reached in, switched off the mags and removed the key before anyone was hurt. He reckons the the aircraft was by then less than ten feet from the group of people. Whether he would have stopped or not, isn't certain. My friend said he wished at the time he were still in his former "employ" because he would have impounded K's pilots licence there and then.

A highly skilled pilot he may well be - I have no idea about that.