Got it in one, Virtually There, I'd sue too if someone defamed me by calling me GT.

Compylot wrote:

But wait a minute last year he also wrote:

So which is it Compylot?

Do you think that an industry "expert" should at least have some relevant industry experience and perhaps a modicum of technical knowledge to which their title alludes, or are you just trying to raise your perceived online profile by claiming some moral high ground by way of a sanctimonious rant.

The latter.
He thinks he's one of the 'men'.
He's got a bit of growing up to do, I'm afraid.

Virtually there, a most appropriate username for an avid flight simmer. How's those bali fly ins going for you?

Just don't forget the park brake now :)

Without wishing to drift the thread, you can't really have a discussion about dodgy aviation enthusiasts trying to pass themselves off as "experts" without also giving a dishonourable mention to the aviation journalist with the appropriate initials B.S.

Given the nature of journalism these days B.S. Should be in the running for an OBE for "services to cutting and pasting" and passing other people's articles off as his own work.

He was harmless enough back when he was merely comparing inflight meals and seat pitch, but since the tragedies of AF447 and MH370, he now thinks that he has the prowess to explain aircraft systems to his eclectic mix of ignorant followers. Unfortunately his view of systems, airline procedures, aerodynamics etc as explained by him are based not on science or manuals, but on what seems right in his head. :rolleyes:

At least B.S tries to get it right. It's also opinion and a blog vs fact/news.

I thoroughly enjoy Ben Sandilands. He's one of the good guys.

These days virtually every one of his aviation stories is written in the tone of faux outrage. Try telling him that his take on how something works is technically wrong and he has an absolute meltdown about how you are standing in the way of his one man crusade and he won't be silenced, blah blah ignorant blah.

It's amazing that in over 40 years of aviation "journalism" he clearly hasn't been interested in actually picking up a manual or at least having a credible contact in the industry to verify the validity of his many innocuous rages.

psycho joe,


It is the media that refer to GT as an "expert" - not GT. I think you will find that GT considers himself a journalist, specialising in aviation.


It is the media that put the "expert" label on him. If more people here understood this there might be a bit more acceptance of him.

Congrats, Green Gobbler, you get today's "Bloody Idiot Award". :ok:

If you knew how to use the search function - which clearly you don't - you could very easily get an idea of who I am (and others posting here are) through post history.

But you're obviously not that clever, are you? Or perhaps you're just lazy and prefer to cast aspersions rather than back your claims with evidence.

Reds under the beds and GTs on the PCs - what else will the bored pruners think of? :rolleyes:

FGD

Clicking your heels together and repeatedly trotting out a line, wishing that it were true doesn't make it so.

GT is always careful to be conspicuously quiet about his credentials or the lack thereof. Call it lying by omission, most reputable interviewees will start with a brief overview of their credentials.

As in:

"Thanks koshie. As a former assistant to the manager who oversaw the committee who outsourced the decision to order glossy fax paper for the QANTAS head office, my opinion is blah blah blah."

Perhaps I was being a bit harsh. That wasn't a bad effort, TGG. :p

If you think anyone here doesn't believe FGD135 and GT aren't the same person, you've got rocks in your head. So parade around your empty pool room, holding all your trophies, and blaming the network for calling you an expert.

Anyway, back to the real world...

Recently some no-name website called airlineratings.com, decided to name Qantas as the world's safest airline.

World's Safest Airlines for 2015

Then, if you go to this link...

Airline Ratings

It shows Geoffrey Thomas as Editor-In-Chief of this Company.

If you then go to this link...

https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/...ill-never-fly-

It shows GT claiming Qantas is the safest airline in the world. He even refers to airlineratings.com (the very site where he happens to be chief editor) in his new article.

In the depths of the disclaimers of the airlineratings.com website, it also says about use of information by airlineratings.com and... Get this.... West Australian Newspapers (where he frequently appears).

What could be going on here?

There's a reason why some of us live the dream, and others write about those living the dream. Cleverness has everything to do with it.

You were not being harsh, you just didn't get it - straight away anyway :p

Oh, I got it. But being the combative arena that pprune is, my first reaction was obviously to jump on the defensive.

I'm not going to get into a pissing match, but suffice it to say, there's no rule in life that says you can't do both ;)

EDIT: For the record, I'm no great fan of GT. But I am a very firm believer in free speech. The sock-puppet game of "Spot the GT" is both disingenuous and tedious. The fact that many criticising the media about it's lack of aviation nous display a vast lack of reciprocal knowledge strikes me at the very least as ironic.

I found my copy of Flightpaths and it still had the letter from Geoff dixon telling us all what a wonderful book it was. I am still intrigued FGD, what about the book moved you to write:

From what I can tell it is mainly a large font airline history for dummies! If it is such a great tome then why hasn't it been updated and revised to include Qantas history from 2004 to the present? I particularly like the bit about Jetstar Asia having an enormous upside for Qantas! I also like in the bibliography the reference to "How airliners fly: A passengers guide.". Says it all really.

Over the years I have shot around 400 interviews for high end science documentaries including airline accidents.
It is a crying shame that GT is not an oracle of factual information the majority of the time. It is a privelaged position that is being squandered.

Rolling live news quickly makes the ill prepared look like a fool to the well informed on the given subject.
The challenge is to respond to a difficult complex or idiotic question.
Even live this is possible if you are prepared. The trick is to act like a politician and not be drawn and simply talk about something else!
But GTs tone is to dramatise and he appears eager to please regardless of the validity or relevance of the question.

Yesterday there was a high price paid by those who believe in the right of free speech. We should endevour to ensure that in exercising this right we are communicating honestly and accuratly, especially when discussing the cause of highly significant accidents that directly affect thousands of loved ones of innocent victims.

Mickjoebill

Geez, I should have sold tickets on TickeTek if I knew it would get this reaction :}

Full stop!

Well summed up, mickjoebill.
I have nothing more to add and can't see any use in continuing this thread after the preceding eloquent contribution.

Happy landings:ok:

Sigh. Another one with precious little appreciation of how the media works. I agree with the view of some earlier posters that "the media understands aviation way better than pilots understand the media"!


psycho joe,


If you appreciated the $ value of one second of air time on the morning shows such as Sunrise, you would realise that they would NEVER allow interviewees to give a "brief overview of their credentials".


But it has never been that way anyway. For ALL shows - commercial or otherwise, it is ALWAYS the interviewer that does the introduction. For the really slick introductions, they will say 2-5 words, but put a caption along the bottom of the screen (e.g "Aviation Expert") when the expert is on screen.


This is how it is done. The "expert" does NOT get a say on how the introduction is done. With your blinkered view of the world however, you choose to interpret this as GT "lying by omission". Take a look at Lateline or any other show that has "guests" - even chat shows. To you, all those guests must be liars!


But he is not there for the benefit of the well informed! Is that not blindingly obvious? How many times do I have to say this?

A fair point. Many would suggest that the nature of his 'analysis' is such that it doesn't benefit the ill-informed, either.

You ignored my post completely, Geoffrey (FGD135).

Is GT selling stories to Yahoo7 indicating that Qantas is the world's safest airline, and using the website "airlineratings.com" (of which he may have deep interests) as the "factual basis" for said statements?

Does GT perhaps own "airlineratings.com"?

I'm interested in knowing where everyone's interests lie.