2018 Light Aircraft Association AGM award vote

[Senior Pilot]

To back up Pilot DARs post, this thread will run to cover the 2018 LAA AGM.

It should not be considered a repository for repeating posts already made (some frequently) on the currently closed T C-T thread: such posts will be deleted if copied over to this thread.

[Chris Martyr]

Originally Posted by Senior Pilot

It should not be considered a repository for repeating posts already made (some frequently) on the currently closed T C-T thread: .

Hear Hear !
The moderation team on PPRuNe have been extremely understanding and amenable in allowing this topic to run. I for one am very grateful for that !
The agenda for the LAA-AGM 2018 will become public in the next few days , and I'm sure that many await with interest to see how the wording of a certain proposal looks.

[kghjfg]

It is within the power of the LAA to fix this AND please everyone from all sides.

Add Ewald to the award.

The original award was for an amazing flight, originally thought to be solo, removed because the award was wrong.

(They can’t give me an award for going to the moon, because I haven’t)

The flight was still amazing, so simply give the award to Ewald AND TCT.

They’ll get the award they deserve, no one can say it’s not true or misleading. Everyone will be happy.

I wonder if that’s what they are going to do. Everyone would postal vote FOR that. They’d walk it, and everyone would be happy. Including TCT and Ewald surely?

[piperboy84]

Originally Posted by kghjfg

It is within the power of the LAA to fix this AND please everyone from all sides.

Add Ewald to the award.

The original award was for an amazing flight, originally thought to be solo, removed because the award was wrong.

(They can’t give me an award for going to the moon, because I haven’t)

The flight was still amazing, so simply give the award to Ewald AND TCT.

They’ll get the award they deserve, no one can say it’s not true or misleading. Everyone will be happy.

I wonder if that’s what they are going to do. Everyone would postal vote FOR that. They’d walk it, and everyone would be happy. Including TCT and Ewald surely?

Don't forget Sam, he should get an award too, for the logistics and getting the bags to the hotel promptly (most of the time anyway).

[pulse1]

Everyone would postal vote FOR that

I won't. You cannot just ignore the deceit and previous attempts to bully the LAA at the 2016 AGM and since. Neither do I think that a dual flight backed up by a support team is that amazing. Having watched the film of the African flight I think that the film crew are more deserving of an award. Mind you, if they were to include Sam Rutherford as well I might change my mind.

[9 lives]

The flight was still amazing, so simply give the award to Ewald AND TCT.

Wasn't the award for "Navigation"? I recall admissions of busting restricted airspace, low flying, flying in poor weather, and embarking without the required charts. Add that to following a magenta line, and was it really much of a flight in terms of award worthy navigation - for two pilots in a well equipped aircraft, - of whom one is an ATPL - being followed/lead by a chase plane?

[Checklist Charlie]

kghjfg wants to

Add Ewald to the award.

Why? by his own 'admission" he just sat there and did nothing!

No, I don't think he is deserving of inclusion in an award.

CC

[Right Hand Thread]

Originally Posted by piperboy84

Don't forget Sam, he should get an award too, for the logistics and getting the bags to the hotel promptly (most of the time anyway).

And don’t forget the refueller at Ogudugu.

kghjfg. I think you’re being too kind. This was a deliberate and repeated matter of deception that, when exposed, was denied many, many times. I certainly wouldn’d vote for anything other than the result obtained in 2016. In the words of George Bush Jnr ‘Fool me once shame on ummmmm fool you twice ahhhhhhh.......what was the question?’

[SATCOS WHIPPING BOY]

Pulse1 sums it up. A dual trip is nothing really special these days, especially when it is funded by giants of the aviation industry.

Would the suggestion to add Ewald to the award just to save face mean that he too should get an Honorary military rank, a University Doctorate, a Master's Medal etc etc?

I do find it amusing when I read the numerous misogyny claims from TCT.. She forgets that the award was given to her and withdrawn because of the lies, not because the LAA suddenly realised it had given it to a woman in error.

Although I can see some of the reasons for closing the other thread (keeping it focused on the upcoming LAA vote), we must not forget that this goes far deeper than just misleading the LAA. The other groups got around it with changing citation text to meet what with what happened and placated TCT; the LAA quite rightly stood its ground. I hope they maintain their dignity and do so again.

[kghjfg]

H(sic)CAP changed the wording in their award a number of times till they got it acceptable/right.
Adding Ewald to the award was just one suggestion.

TCT has confirmed she wasn’t solo hasn’t she? An award to TCT and Ewald, TCT as sole pilot, Ewald as the passenger.
You can give out awards for flights with passengers, you can get an award for being a passenger.

I don’t think Sam should be added to the award, it wasn’t an award for logistics, if the LAA think Sam should get an award, then fine, but that’s a DIFFERENT award.


Or, just give them a NEW award / recognition, that’s not voted for by the members is it?

So, the members can vote on whether to reinstate the original award, that’ll probably be “no”, but then she’ll receive the new award with its slightly different wording.

It’s just going to be like H(sic)CAP isn’t it?

[9 lives]

Or, just give them a NEW award / recognition, that’s not voted for by the members is it?

Why? In the light of day, and the truths of the flight being known after the fact, what is particularly award worthy about this flight? Why would it be so important to the LAA that they be trying to make an award fit compromised circumstances? Just don't give the award, it's much easier!

[Mike Flynn]

Can someone from the LAA give us some background on the late Bill Woodham and why he has an annual award?

Am I correct in understanding Colin Hales has won it twice flying his homebuilts?

[XV666]

It is worth following the LAA forum and this thread, https://services.lightaircraftassoci...php?f=5&t=5519, which has recently been retitled to emphasise to LAA members the importance of voting at their AGM.

Posts to date are certainly unsupportive of the motion brought by the Vice President of the LAA!

[Sam Rutherford]

For the avoidance of doubt, the suggestion that I be added to the award was a joke.

At least, I very much hope it was!

[Chuck Glider]

Originally Posted by heli

It is worth following the LAA forum and this thread, https://services.lightaircraftassoci...php?f=5&t=5519, which has recently been retitled to emphasise to LAA members the importance of voting at their AGM.

Posts to date are certainly unsupportive of the motion brought by the Vice President of the LAA!

Well we have a spare in the person of John Brady, in case anything happens to VP Jackson.

[gasax]

Well LAA members certainly need to vote on the basis of very well known facts. It is almost inconceivable that TCT would succeed (although we have yet to see the exact terminology of the motion). From my point of view there then needs to be some housekeeping on the LAA's part. The first element is a vote of 'no confidence' in Stewart Jackson'. On the LAA website he is stated to be a director. Amongst the duties of a director are to exercise 'due diligence' inI discharging their duties - a difficult thing to justify if you are supporting a proven 'untruth'.

Then I think that the award of prizes for events or achievements which the blazer brigade believe are worthy needs to be re-considered. An LAA member flying an LAA aircraft maybe - but how can a sponsored dual flight with well-publicised errors and mistakes be worthy of a prize? How can it be worthy of re-consideration? It seems the LAA board need to either grow a backbone or get out of meaningless dinners and prizes.

[SATCOS WHIPPING BOY]

I wonder how many times the motion wording has changed since its first submission to LAA, changed to perhaps counter or avid any points raised in these and LAA forum pages.

Any sensible person would do the right thing for the benefit of all parties and simply withdraw the motion- the matter would be closed and everyone could move on to more positive things . If it goes ahead, it will end in tears for at least one side (vote against TCT) and perhaps both (vote for TCT). If she gets the vote then it won't end there, I can guarantee that.

[ChampChump]

T CT has posted on the LAA website. AIUI, forum conventions mean quoting it here isn't something I'm happy to do but members will no doubt wish to read it.

[SATCOS WHIPPING BOY]

It is a shame that she won't post here. Straight answers to straight questions. No trolling, no malicious squabbles just the TRUTH.

[Senior Pilot]

Originally Posted by ChampChump

T CT has posted on the LAA website. AIUI, forum conventions mean quoting it here isn't something I'm happy to do but members will no doubt wish to read it.

Since the LAA Forum is publicly accessible, I have no issues about cut and pasting the post by T C-T since it is directly pertinent to this thread. I trust that responses here (if any) will be measured and polite without reverting to the repetitive posts on the now closed thread.

Re: The Importance of Voting at OUR AGM .

by Tracey Curtis-Taylor » Tue Oct 02, 2018 11:02 pm

I am sorry that the 2018 AGM is confronted by a motion about me. It comes at the suggestion of the Chairman. I felt that the process whereby massed proxy votes at the 2016 AGM stripped me of the Woodhams Award on the never explained grounds that I had ‘brought the LAA into disrepute’ was deeply flawed. The Chairman was not prepared to consider the possibility that his actions and those of the Board before, during and after the AGM might have been anything less than exemplary; he issued the challenge.
Since the LAA was notified in September 2018 of a motion asking members to agree that what was done in their name in 2016 was wrong, the PPruNe chat forum has been awash with repetitious and abusive messages from a small group of trolls with an impressive capacity for hatred. They are incensed that the Times dared to publish a feature on the LAA and myself by a journalist specialising in aviation matters. Nasty stuff about me previously run by the Daily Mail and the Sun evidently troubled them less.
This obsessive discussion – slightly moderated in language – has now transferred itself to the LAA forum where some twelve angry men have spent the last two weeks agreeing with each other. Expressions of outrage that the previously expressed democratic will of the membership that I be disgraced would be subverted by the motion sit rather oddly with this message posted on 2 October 2018 about how to defeat it: “If every contributor to this thread can galvanise five LAA members and ensure those votes are posted (collect/post them yourselves if you have to), it's job done. Many of us are in groups where our co-owners are compelled to be LAA members. Use that disadvantage to our advantage”.
I have made a statement on the motion which will, I hope, be seen by all members; but just to correct a few of the bilious fantasies being peddled on this forum:
• I am not a liar, nor in the habit of taking credit for the other people’s achievements.
• I have never solicited an award from the LAA or any other organisation.
• I do not have the backing of a ‘PR machine’ or ‘legal team’, nor do I possess an influential ‘entourage’ of ‘establishment’ figures. ‘Tracey & Co’ are imaginary foes; if the trolls really think they are the proles they utterly deceive themselves.
• I have no agenda to subvert the LAA. The object of Stewart Jackson’s motion is to clear my name of allegations gratuitously made against me and the LAA’s name of being vindictive and misogynistic, and move on.
• The claim made in a message of 20 September that the passing of the motion would be followed by ‘all manner of other undesirable actions being brought to bear’ is arrant nonsense.