I have followed this story for quite a while and am stunned that The Times, which I have always considered to be a purveyor of truth, can print such a supportive article when quotes straight from Tracey Curtis-Taylor are completely at odds with what she tries to portray. This is nothing to do with the 'old boy network' (whatever that is) or male jealousy or any other sexist excuse. It is simply to do with the claim of a pilot that she did something she didn't!
I can only assume that the author was not aware of the evidence when he wrote the article. Were I that journalist, I would be on the phone tomorrow asking for some answers about
two so-called 'slips of the tongue', a presentation slide and a presented certificate, all featuring the lady in question and all purporting to a
solo flight - not to mention numerous press releases mentioning solo flight over an extended period of time, none of which were rebutted.
In a court of law, her premise would be laughed out.
With reference to her claims of sexism, the next thing we'll hear is that her self-titled name Bird-in-a-Biplane was chosen not in the colloquial sense but as an interpretation of a swooping, soaring Jonathan Livingstone Seagull persona.
This, from her own website in 2014 but deleted when questions started to be asked. Paragraph 4 refers:
https://web.archive.org/web/20150204...om/operations/