Girl Flyday
Did I miss something? How did the 'Extra' incident at last year's PFA Rally come into all this?
If you think this thread is only about the Adams dispute then, yes, you have missed something. That is only one issue raised by some in support of their wider criticisms.
Alleged untrue explanations by office-holders: I've read posts about the Extras incident (and the aftermath) in the PFA BB by people who appeared to hold office in the PFA which, to my knowledge, were at best inaccurate. (I accept they may have been misled about the facts and posted their views in good faith.)
Alleged stifling of criticism: I've read attempts by certain individuals to stifle any criticism of the EC or particular office-holders - not only criticism of Moody but other issues..
Alleged damage to the reputation of the PFA: In my opinion Moody's behaviour damaged the reputation of the PFA much more than discussion of the Adams dispute here. I suspect few people outside the PFA know about that, but Moody's conduct was widely criticised amongst aviators generally and in other threads on Pprune at the time.
I know all the facts of the 'Extra incident, including: what happened, how it happened, who said what and when, Moody's conduct on the Saturday evening and in the following week when he pestered the CAA to investigate his complaint. I have read the witness statements made by
all those involved, and considered the ATC exchanges before the Extras did their practice display. I don't know what you've seen, but you certainly haven't seen all the documents I've seen.
the whole thing was indeed 'unfortunate' I agree. (I'd have used a stonger word.)
"and left everyone concerned with no option other than to try to cover their own backs." You've fallen for the story put about by some in the PFA in an attempt to justify Moody's actions. Perhaps you missed what I said in my previous post? Moody reported the incident to the CAA on the following Monday. The CAA noted his complaint but didn't consider an investigation was necessary. He wouldn't accept that answer and pressed on until they had no option but to investigate his complaint.
Whether or not the pilots were deserving of criticism is, as you say, a matter of opinion. However, what happened after they landed is a matter of fact, not opinion.
Since you were there and heard everything, I challenge you to deny that Moody lost his self-control and was swearing at people who disagreed with him, that he walked off in a fit of pique, that he claimed the controller (a licensed ATC'er) was unprofessional because he dind't think the pilots had done anything worth reporting and refused to be bullied into reporting them, that Moody refused to work on the Sunday saying he couldn't work with 'unprofessional' people.
I realise you may not know that he then embarked upon his campaign the following week in an atempt to justify his petulant over-reaction.
The PFA version (as given to members on the PFA BB) is that Moody reported the incident to the CAA purely to protect the PFA's position and left it to the CAA to take any action they thought necessary.
That is simply not true: He persisted until he found someone in the CAA prepared to investigate his complaint.
The eventual result?
After months of investigation, the pilots were cautioned by the CAA and that was the end of the matter - but, by that time, they'd lost the rest of their display season because their Display Authorisations were suspended pending the investigation of Moody's complaint.
Having looked at all the witness statements from an independent perspective, and applying considerable experience gained over many years involvement in aviation cases and disputes, it would be fair to say I found myself 100% in what you describe as the "ATC and 'display' guys camps" and formed a very low opinion of Moody, or 'Steve' as your refer to him.
Independent?
I'd never met any of the parties involved until this incident. (I was aware of the pilots' fine reputations, but only discovered later that they had respectively been awarded an MBE and OBE for services to aviation.)
NB: My criticism is not of the PFA in general. It's limited to Moody's conduct and to those in the PFA who were party to closing ranks and covering up his behaviour by misinforming members about what he actually did.
eg The 'protecting the PFA' story. Denying he lost his temper when others said he was over-reacting. Denying he accused the controller of being unprofessional. Denying that he refused to return on the Sunday leaving the PFA to find someone else to step into the breach.
My comments are not meant as a criticism of the PFA as an association.
Tudor Owen