Perhaps TCT has applicable DA qualifications. It seems to me that (two destroyed aircraft notwithstanding), there is question about her thruthfulness, solo piloting and navigation skills, and discipline. A qualified pilot does not assure a good mentor and "brand ambassador", which is what TCT seems to want to present. Doing the flying is one thing, holding yourself up publicly as an example of excellence at it is something well beyond that....

Where can one locate evidence of this so called "DA" qualification? I'm darned if I can locate it, but then my computer doesn't like me!

Display Authorisation. It's a UK thing, although other Nations have a similar concept.

I'm unsure why anyone would think that TC-T doesn't have a DA.
You can bet your bottom dollar that she would have had an experienced 'passenger' with her if/when it was given to her.

As she has evidenced, anything is possible with a few nudges, lots of winks and tons of BS.

The CAA behavioural and attitudinal fitness assessment

To organise or participate in a flying display you must complete behaviour and attitudinal fitness assessment if you are to be a:
•Flying display director (FDD)
•Display authorisation evaluator (DAE)
•Display pilot (from 1 April 2016)

What do we look for?

When we’re making an assessment on your fitness for one of these roles we look for evidence related to your:
•attitude
•integrity, credibility, honesty and openness
•diligence
•soundness of judgement
•willingness to obey the law
•likelihood of risk generating

This can be seen in:
•past compliance with regulatory obligations
•being subject to enforcement action by regulatory authorities
•a history of deliberate or reckless provision of false or misleading information, or misleading omissions made, to a relevant authority in relation to any regulated or business activity
•dishonest behaviour or other improper conduct
•previous engagement with CAA

Unless the aeroplane is a designated multi-crew aircraft, you cannot fly a display with a passenger on board. This has been the case for a considerable period of time. I'm not sure why you feel the need to cast doubt on TCT's DA? The displays that I saw were safely flown and showed the relevant aircraft in a manner appropriate to the the type. Revalidation of a DA takes place on a roughly annual basis, so competency is continually monitored.

Unless you have personal experience of TCT's displays (have you watched many of her displays? Or any at all? How about flying with her in a formation display?) you might want to stop this line of commentary.

Like I said, I know she has held one. I don't know if her DA is current, but being rude about this particular aviation accomplishment is avoiding the core issue originally raised.

fwjc, I am intrigued by your "might want to stop this line of commentary." so please why so?

At the same time can you explain how "the core issue originally raised" would stand up to a "The CAA behavioural and attitudinal fitness assessment"

Thanks

CC

Because continuing to pick at something about which you know very little and has nothing of note to contribute towards the original concerns raised, just makes you look silly and undermines the original case made. Clutching at straws is daft when there are great big logs already there.

As I've already said, I don't know if TCT has a current DA. I don't know who her DAE is. The assessment you refer to has only been in place for a short period of time, and is an entirely subjective assessment. I'm quite sure that in all these pages there hasn't been serious, evidenced accusations made regarding her attitude to flight safety, or indeed that her behaviour has compromised flight safety.

While it can be argued that her attitude and behaviour when dealing with the press and with questions around the circumstances of her long distance flights might not have been the most appropriate, you're onto an entirely different question when it comes to this aspect of her flying. Next thing you'll be suggesting that she made a terrible decision to wear flying suit and Campbell helmet, or perhaps her hair cut was wrong.

Give it up trying to find non-existent dirt on the air display side of things and focus on the "solo / non-solo" flight situation which is quite obvious and blatant.

Which thread have you been reading?

I have never questioned Traceys ability to fly.

Just her lack of confidence in navigation and cross country solo flight.

The big issue has been her bragging of being a great ambassaor for female solo flying whlle having a bloke up front?

The story might have worked if it had been Two Birds in a Biplane but a Bird in a Biplane (Plus. nice man and engineer/instructor ) up front in the hot seat was never going to pass muster.

PS. Just got back to the UK. No nasty legal letters from Lorna Skinner at Matrix lawyers who were threatening to sue me and Sam Rutherford last autumn. I guess there is no defence for the truth.

What now for the Spirit Of Artemis?

With Artemis no longer sponsoring can it still use their name?

I have made serious posts in this thread accusing TCT of poor attitude and behaviour toward flight safety, evidenced simply on statements attributed directly to TCT. She has bragged about flying her aircraft in ways which are generally regarded as unsafe, and violating airspace.

This is not the kind of thing any pilot should brag about, but certainly not a pilot claiming to champion outreach in aviation!

You mean apart from the claims she made herself? :confused::confused::confused:

Well apart from the level busts at Victoria falls, the airspace infringement at Entebbe, the emergency landing at an airfield found by accident because they didn't have any charts with them, the ultra-low flying close to large flocks of birds, failing to ensure a safe path whilst taxiing (and killing a helicopter in the process), the questionable "incident" at Winslow and the curiosity over licenced flying of an N-reg from Hungary to UK... her flying has been exemplary :ugh:

Then take into account the lies, misdirection and subterfuge surrounding all the flights, coupled with a well documented propensity to exaggerate... her integrity is flawless.

It's very curious that this thread, which is of very litlle interest to private pilots and contains nothing new, continues to ramble on. What is its purpose other than to make most of the small number of those who make frequent posts make themselves appear foolish and anti female pilots?

Hornet - I don't think a single contributor to this thread has ever made an anti female pilot post. We have also asked the question as to why there are so few females in aviation. Furthermore you don't even have to look hard to find very positive and encouraging posts from posters about past and present females in aviation, genuinely praising their achievements and contributions to aviation. This thread would have existed if TCT was a member of any group under represented in aviation because the thing that started it was duplicity and hypocrisy. Not good traits in any area of our lives, but as this is an aviation website and she doesn't have a commercial licence...

PM

Personally, having read every post in this thread since the beginning, I have no recollection of any post which displayed a bias against female pilots. I recall reading many in which there was strong support from both genders that gender is not an issue in piloting, other than both should be equally appreciated and supported.

For myself, I don't feel foolish in prolonging my disdain for a pilot's actions of low honour and self discipline. My expressions of disapproval of TCT's self seeking publicity of less than ideal piloting hopefully serve to remind new, impressionable pilots that this is not the way to advance one's flying career. Were TCT to make the effort to respond to, and take responsibility for dishonour of which she stand accused here, I'm sure that many posters, certainly me, would close the case and move on. I have not seen any effort on TCT's part to take any responsibility. Indeed, I have seen small indicators (referenced in this thread) of what I could interpret to be her intent to continue on in a similar way in the future. I hope that is not the case.

I am a private pilot, I haven't made frequent posts, and I certainly am not anti female pilots (having been mentored by, among others, the wonderful Mary Meagher).

But I did watch the initial TV documentary and (like millions of others) believed that what I was seeing was true.

I (like millions of others) later discovered I had been conned.

And when the perpetrator of this deception continues digging herself into a hole by blatantly standing in front of misleading charts, making false statements on video, then driving straight into a stationary helicopter, while simultaneously claiming to be the victim of sloppy journalism, then yes, I am understandably incensed.

So, in short, this thread is totally justified and it is right that the same torch which has been shone on her activities to date is similarly shone on any future venture.

If she claims to do something, let her do it; if she deceives, let her suffer the consequences.

This thread is in no way anti female pilots. I, and most of the other female pilots I know, are as outraged as anyone by the shenanigans of the "Bird in a Biplane", starting with that ridiculous name. As a female pilot and instructor, I've encountered my fair share of prejudice over the years. But not here!

As a female pilot (but not instructor :O) I completely agree with this - couldn't have put it better myself.

@Step Turn

You have it exactly right: I can not add a single syllable to what you have said in your last post :ok: