GT is an embarrassment to the aviation fraternity.
But GT is not a member of our fraternity. This little statement by
Capn Rex Havoc quite possibly reveals why so many here have a problem with him.
You think it's rubbish, that many of us pilots can do a better job than GT? Pull yuh head out, please.
Chocks Away, no, I don't think it rubbish at all, but I said nothing of the sort.
What I said was rubbish was the following statement from
allthecoolnamesarego. The statement is such a gross exaggeration that it should be considered
rubbish. You seem to have difficulty with reading, so I will bold the words that indicate gross exaggeration:
I could find a dozen professional pilots tomorrow, who could do a better job than GT in every area of the media.
I take it you're pretty happy with Anthony Klan's article then?
Arm, I haven't read his article and had not heard of him before. Please could you post a link to his article. My defence is of GT, whose articles I have been reading for many years.
About Klan, however, I would say what I would say about any journalist covering aviation: he is a journalist, not an aviation insider. It is not reasonable to expect from a journalist the same knowledge and insight as you could from an insider. Remember the constraints these guys are bound to (e.g deadlines). Everybody here seems to forget those.
Thanks for those examples,
allthecoolnamesarego, but you appear to be blissfully ignorant of the constraints GT has to work to.
"This is what happened"
"We are in a spin"
I went to this link, but the first thing I saw on the page was the statement "This is what may have happened". Note the word
may. The presence of that word means that everything following is opinion. There was no need for me to actually watch the video. GT would have just been doing exactly what his media masters were paying him for.
GT is just the messenger. People here don't seem to understand that, and want to shoot him.
"Debris is ABSOLUTELY aircraft wreckage"
I did look at that video. Remember those constraints I keep referring to? One of them is that you must get information from other sources, and there can be big variations in the accuracy and consistency of that information. GT would not have been in the ocean himself, personally inspecting those wreckage pieces.
Remember that he is speaking to the camera, and answers must be instantaneous and brief. When doing his research, he may have heard a range of views on that wreckage, but there is no time, on camera, to go over that. He must distil hours of phone calls and discussion down into one 5 second answer.
To have said "absolutely" suggests to me that this was the consensus view of those he questioned about it. Keep in mind that nobody has yet proven him wrong on this. Some of that debris may actually have been from MH370. The fact that the recovered debris was not from MH370 does not mean that *some* of the sighted debris was not from the accident!
He used the word
can't when he should have used the word
shouldn't. Is that your gripe on this one?
Reporter: "Did the pilot make the right decision to climb.?
GT: "Oh absolutely, he would have been trying to get over this Thunder cell"
Not the answer I would have given, but you must remember that GT must give instant and brief answers if he wants to keep his job. After such interviews, he probably goes back over some of his statements and answers and wishes he said things differently. If you were in his shoes, you too would probably say things that, on reflection, you wished you had said differently.
One answer that GT must be very careful about giving is the "
we just don't know ... we must wait for the completion of the investigation and publication of the final report". For us in the aviation fraternity, that would be the correct answer most of the time, but for GT, that answer is poison. He must avoid it if he wants to continue being asked to make media appearances!
I am not convinced by those examples. There was nothing there that I would not have expected to see or hear from somebody in his position.