Capt Kremmin

Nice try! I guess your next piece will be about five loaves of bread and a couple of fish. :)

Its not about envy, jealousy or spite, is it. It is about the lengths that this woman actually went to by claiming a prize by deceit, surrounding an alleged 'solo' flight, despite warnings to tone down the deceitful content.

If she had just found another male mug to sponsor her RTW flight with her instructor/aircraft owner, in aid of encouraging more female pilots to the scene, she would have been given a big thumbs up, [well from me anyway] but it's much more than that, isn't it.

Following on from that deceit, she has allegedly stolen the opportunity from another female who was going to enact AJ's flight in a Tiger Moth.

If your reasoning for our vocal concerns were credible or plausible, we wouldnt have been encouraging the other woman, would we.

What a pity "The Invisible Man" wasn't available for this flight.......:rolleyes:

Jack

I spent a very happy hour or so flying a Stearman from the front seat and this included tail chasing other Stearmans and my one and only attempt at formation flying. I don't remember ever thinking that my view particularly restricted me in what I was trying to do.

Meldrex

"That is taking it a bit too far"


Well I'm not convinced it is. I have been hunting for Amanda Harrison's message but if my memory serves me correctly, it went along the lines of this....

"I told TCT about my SOLO flight recreating Amy Johnsons flight. The next thing I knew was that she had taken/stolen my idea whilst I was still in the process of sponsorship/preparations."

Amanda may even be following this thread, in which case she may tell us exactly.

In the meantime, I've copied a link for those that may not know about the genuine and bona fide attempt of the SOLO flight.

http://www.sponsorfinder.co.uk/asset...da_sponsor.pdf

I see that all posts about the inappropriate medal award have been deleted by the censors here.

That's a pity. There was some good truth being posted here.

Apparently the bull**** of the bull****ter at the heart of the lies about her "Solo" endeavours has triumphed over Truth here, as well as at a pomp-filled proposed dinner occasion.

That's sad.

It's sad because it distorts and corrupts what independent aviation is actually about.

Might this broad statement have captured a greater theme than intended? There is more than just one moderator "caring for" this thread. I am not aware of any collaboration, nor intent to restrict discussion away from medal awards.

Bear in mind, that sometimes a post is seen to contain some useful information, and perhaps, a short passage which cannot be allowed to remain. Mods do not generally edit a post. Thus, and otherwise useful and informative post may be removed because of one short passage (or release of private information) which could not be allowed to remain. If in doubt, an original poster might wish to repost, with dubious material no longer included, perhaps the remainder of the repost would be entirely welcomed. Just a thought....

I am not going to post anything else at this stage but thanks for the invitation Pilot DAR.

I think by now regular readers will know that I know more than I post but what I post has substance.
.

I am not going to comment anymore.

Niccolo Machiavelli 1469 - 1527

Gee whiz, make my role difficult eh?

Claiming solo is not true.

And I agree with your post but Ian could have been a little bit more proactive.

I find the flying magazines a bit tedious because we read the regurgitated press releases for years plus the cliched 'air to air' shot on the cover every month.

When a big story like this emerges they don't want to know.

There was no reason to shut down the thread on TCT and Ewald .

It was just pressure from a few regulars who now see the Flyer forum as part of ther daily tedium.

If you don't believe me look at those with high numbers of posts.

The general trend is for all magazines,not just flying, to be a bit of a 'Groundhog Day'

How often have you looked at an airport or newsagents stand and decided 'read it all before' and walked away with nothing.

Sometimes I feel reading any magazine is like a glossy expensive version of the Metro.

Jay

What would you prefer on the front of an aviation magazine if not a shot of an aeroplane flying?

If I'm reading between the lines correctly as far as Jay Sata's last post is concerned, I'm thinking that this could be a bit of a hollow victory for GA. :(

There is never a victory for GA.

In the national press it is perceived to be a pastime of the wealthy who periodically come to grief when they run out of luck,lack of experinece or fuel and crash.

It fills space with lineage and pictures of aircraft wrecks.

The higher level is when very rich people crash expensive ex military aircraft.

I am not going to be drawn in to comment on TCT anymore but suffice to say her 'Tribute to Amy Johnson' must have burnt over £1 million of someones cash.

Nice work if you can get it.

Let us us just see how this story pans out.

How about a bit of imagination?

I saw a beautifully crisp, clear and colourful image of a Stearman not long ago.
It was posed in front of an equally colourful, but somewhat second-hand, R44.
Perhaps an editor might consider that one as an attention-getter.

You will never see that on the front cover of any magazine apart from Private Eye:ok:

The problem these days is that we are all way in front of magazine editors and what they can write in a glossy twelve times a year.

Sure they have nice trips here there and everywhere to check out aircraft no one will ever buy.

I bought Pilot decades ago partly for the aircraft adverts.

AFORS has taken that market from them.

I don't need to be reminded I need a Breitling watch or all the other expensive stuff I can buy on ebay for half the price.

The letters page was another area I bought Pilot 30 years ago plus the stuff from Alan Bramson.

I can get all that and more from the internet in seconds
now.

Then of course we have the carousel of editors who move from magazine to magazine.

Dave Calderwood,Philip Whiteman etc.

If you look at the cost of any glossy magazine and check out what is editorial and advertorial then you pay a lot for very little original text.

I suspect I am opening another can of worms as we put one to bed elsewhere.

You may have a point, JS but, in a former life, I did spend a bit of time in magazine publishing.

Things are, of course, much tougher these days and so one's news-stand presence must attract the attention of the potential purchaser.
Of course the full-page Breitling, Boeing and Cessna ads, together with the 'in depth' advertorials inside, bring in essential revenue, but..
First, you've got to move the product itself.

Now, I do believe (and I'm sure my Art Director would have agreed with me) that the picture we're talking about, as a magazine cover, is a winner.
It ticks all the boxes.
It contains all the essential ingredients guaranteed to attract not only aviation enthusiasts, but potential advertisers as well.
Leaving aside for a moment the subliminal depiction of two complementary aspects of past and present day aviation being so forcefully attracted to each other, the picture itself conveys an atmosphere, at the same time, both dynamic and serene.
Then, apart from dramatically depicting everything from the ruggedness of Boeing and Hamilton Standard's products, it opens a gateway opportunity for the suppliers of plexiglass products and airframe refinishing goods to showcase their wares.

The cover would then draw attention to the gripping features inside.
I can see it now..

EXCLUSIVE!
TRACEY: Her Story.
The secret women's guide to success in any chosen field.

WITCH HUNT!
Jealous and vindictive men pursue our Tracey.


I tell you, it'd just walk off the news-stands.