To finish the above quote:

"...nothing like flying a Boeing Stearman. [Points to photo of same flying near Ayers Rock.] Nice, big, roomy cockpit; great ailerons; good in crosswinds; you know it's just a... lovely aerobatics."

An important attribute to consider when choosing an alternative model aircraft to recreate a long distance cross country flight!

Despite my criticism of TCT's exploits I actually think that she missed her vocation.

She has an ability to engage with an audience without doubt hence her sponsorship and awards.

I have watched a few of her media interviews and she sells the story well.

Sadly this story was a bit over egged.

If she really believes in outreach then a few years in working with the Missionary Aviation Fellowship might convince me she is committed.
https://www.maf.org

A Moth is over rated???

I did my ppl on a Tiger. The adverse yaw taught me the correct use of my feet. After the Tiger I flew the wonderful DH60 Gypsy. The handling was gorgeous after the Tiger and far better than the Stearman.

The Stearman needed pushing to where I wanted it, the Gypsy responded to a delicate touch and positively purred when stroked.

Both Lady Heath and Amy Johnson flew DH60's However I found this recently.

"An interesting story from that flight is that when she requested the British Air Ministry for a plane to lead her across the Mediterranean sea, she was denied.

Not to be defeated, she asked Benito Mussolini for an escort plane. He agreed on the condition that she share her experiences with him. In failing health in her last years, Lady Heath was destitute when she died."

The link is here Lady Sophie Mary Heath (1897-1939), Pioneer Aviatrix so maybe British aviation's Waltess in Chief"s flight was more authentic than we thought.

I do wonder though, when will she answer the questions asked? And apologise for her trashing of GA?

SND

Those of us of an atheistic persuasion, might be less impressed by that particular ability to travel the world convincing gullible people of the truth behind their fantasies.


But you are quite right - if she actually did something useful, like the huge amount of outreach that some people do do, I think that the world would look far more kindly upon her.

G

Quote:
"Both Lady Heath and Amy Johnson flew DH60's "

FWIW, I read some time ago (as previously mentioned) that Lady Heath used an Avro Avian for her Cape Town to Croydon flight, and this article seems to confirm it:

Mary Heath: The Life and Sad Demise of ?Lady Icarus?-The Forgotten Aviatrix ? Nerdalicious

According to Wiki, it was probably her Avian III with an 84 hp Cirrus Mk II engine.

I fail to see how those facts about Lady Heath are of any relevance to this thread about TCT.
On a point of detail, and to get things absolutely correct, she was either: Mary, Lady Heath or Lady Heath. She was never Lady Mary Heath!

There is a very good book about Lady Heath called Lady Icarus.
She certainly used an Avian on her trip from South Africa, but she certainly had flown "Moths".

The title "Lady" before the Christian name is borne by daughters of Dukes, Marquesses and Earls. This lady's title derived from her husband's baronetcy, so she should be called "Lady Heath".

TCT would not have been able to use a "Moth", since Ewald would have been sitting where the extra fuel tank for the necessary range would have been.

terry holloway saidWould that be Lady Mary Icarus, or Lady Icarus Heath?!

AlsoThat is unsurprising, given your very evident - others might say blinkered - support of T C--T. Many others might find the similarities quite striking, and would think T C--T quite astute for noticing the similarities, and telling anyone who will listen how she follows in Lady Heath's footsteps.

I agree with pilotmike here, those quotes about Lady Heath with only minor substitution (partner for husband) etc match perfectly what I know about TCT.
However, that is private background information and I won't divulge any more.

I am led to understand that Terry knows TCT better than I, so his comment about relevancy is surprising. That description of a self-promoting individual who is out to further their own aims and ambitions is spot on.

Re #3000 and the Nylon Films link. The clip over the whales was, based on a comparison of the size of the mainwheel and the shadow wingspan, filmed from approximately 300 ft. If anyone wants it more accurately, give me the diameter of the wheel and the distance front the front cockpit eye height to the centre of the mainwheel and I will refine the calculation!

The RAF wings in the pictures posted are, I think, Mess Kit wings with a King's crown i.e. pre 1952. It will be medal miniatures next!

Lomcevak,
Your 300ft estimate looks to be pretty right. Thanks for your trouble.
However, as had been noted earlier in this thread, the distance fixed-wing aircraft are required to keep from whales is 1000ft.

So, not only are we dealing with TCT's subsequent inane embellishments on this particular score (10 or 25ft etc), but the silly girl has
recorded her blatant rule-breaking on a publicly released film. :D

What were you doing while this was going on, Ewald?
Oh, that's right, you were only a passenger. :ok:
.

Stanwell,

If you look at that piece of video, from the landing gear leg angle it appears that the filming took place from the front cockpit. Therefore, if EG was in the front cockpit he was the cameraman and therefore well aware of the relative position of the whales and most certainly not just a passive passenger!

In which case it appears that there is nothing wrong with wearing the wings which are effectively either a talisman or a brooch.
It appears that many service wives/girlfriends/ partners wear something remarkably similar on frocks/blouses/jackets/coats. That is very acceptable and certainly isn't fraudulent.
As for the Whales where does it say you can't fly over them at less than 1,000 ft?
It's a great piece of film.

Terry, as you weren't actually a pilot in the RAF, you probably don't understand the faux pas involved in wearing an actual RAF pilot's flying badge to which one is not entitled. Nor the outrage which such a thing arouses amongst those who've actually earned their 'wings' the hard way.

Certainly some pilots' wives and partners wore 'sweetheart brooches', but those are entirely different.

I don't know about the region that TCT was flying, but there are many national regulations in this regard, and for my experience, most say 2000 feet above. Buzzing whales is certainly not permitted. This should absolutely not be an element of any publicity, mentoring or outreach, it sends entirely the wrong message. A, that wildlife is being disrespected, and B, that low flying is okay, particularly over water, where the risk to safety because of possible ditching is increased.

Is that what Ms Curtis-Taylor is saying? Personally, I don't think that saying the wings are a "talisman or a brooch" will run as an excuse. She is wearing them on a flight suit in the position they would be worn by a genuine RAF pilot.

As you were kind enough to offer to ask her: is there any news from her about the other two questions?

Assuming the lady can fly the aircraft and assuming the chap in the front wasn't there to provide a CPL then I'm thinking the insurance company needed him there - bit like ferry insurance when you need experience of the route.

Terry,

Mess Kit wings are only to be worn by RAF Qualified Service Pilots (QSPs) on Mess Kit; they are not a casual adornment that may be worn by their partners (there are specifically manufactured brooches for that case) and they are not attached to any other form of dress, even by those who are RAF QSPs. Also, the version to be worn should have a King's/Queen's crown appropriate to the gender of the monarch at the time at which they were awarded. As a retired RAF officer, I would have expected you to have been aware of that.

Some of the background and scenery in the film is indeed wonderful, including the whales. However, in my opinion the context determines that it is NOT a 'great piece of film'

I understand the pride in RAF wings only too well. One doesn't serve for 34 years without "getting it"! Also recognise the emotion of pretence, but I do not remotely think she was remotely attempting to impersonate an RAF pilot, and certainly not with that brooch!
What really makes me see red is blatant impersonation of "veterans" either by uniform, insignia or medals. One sees plenty of people doing that in "fancy dress" at Goodwood events and elsewhere, and I really don't think TCT is in that category!

That's my opinion not her response to a question!