PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Private Flying (https://www.pprune.org/private-flying-63/)
-   -   Tracey Curtis-Taylor (Merged threads) (https://www.pprune.org/private-flying/579030-tracey-curtis-taylor-merged-threads.html)

S205-18F 24th Oct 2018 10:31

Is ct-c part of 3G classic aviation inc. ?

Jonzarno 24th Oct 2018 10:45

As I wrote about this above: there is no reason why Ms Curtis-Taylor should not be the owner of the US company that holds the registration of the Stearman.

I am not saying that this is definitely the case but, if Herr Gritsch sold her an N Reg plane that is officially held by that company, there is no reason whatever why she would need to change the company name, nor make it a subsidiary of her UK company.


hoodie 24th Oct 2018 11:00

Where is this thread going? What do people want to happen now?

I'm pretty uncomfortable with it. It now appears simply a vehicle to rehash previous info and continue to put the boot in following the LAA vote.

ak7274 24th Oct 2018 12:19

I agree with hoodie. No point in kicking someone when they are down.
The only thing I don't understand is why Ewald didn't publish his statement when needed by TCT.
Not only should Tracey let it go, so should we, unless it rears It's ugly head once again.

Pilot DAR 24th Oct 2018 12:52

So we're done with investigation into the ownership of the Stearman. If Ms. Curtis-Taylor makes a public statement worthy of discussion here, we'll consider that, otherwise, let's see what other aviation topics are out there for discussion......

runway30 24th Oct 2018 13:38

This is part of Ewald’s statement

“Yes, Tracey Curtis Taylor was the sole pilot on all her expedition flights. She has more than enough flight-experience as well as piloting and navigational skills to perform all of these flights on her own.”

Yet on the Wilmslow incident report Ewald is listed as “Other flight crew” and seems to be logging the flight time, indeed he had 410 hours on type where he wasn’t PIC.

I also notice that TCT gave her occupation as ‘Pilot’. I can’t think of another occasion I’ve seen someone who isn’t employed as a pilot describe it as their occupation.

Ebbie 2003 24th Oct 2018 13:46

For clarity on the trust thing for those who have likely not used one.

The beneficial owner of the airplane - what we would consider the person who owns it (paid for it) is separate from the trust company which is so far as the FAA is concerned is the "owner".

So the trust company is the one that gets it in the neck if there is something wrong.

Likewise, the trust company can raise a mortgage against the beneficial owner's airplane.

So, yup you have to trust them (do like a nice pun!

What this means is that there is no beastie hiding in the corner simply because Tracey does not have shares or ownership of 3G, the trust company - I have my airplane with Southern Aircraft Consultancy - I do not own that company nor do I have shares in it, I am (or more accurately my firm is) simply their client.

There are lots of red herrings around this frankly if she had flown someone else's airplane on the trips it would not have diminished the achievement the whole thing was about was she in the airplane and navigating a la 1930 stylie - seems to have rolled to a close unless/until someone comes up with the money to fund the lawyers - I would think there is little benefit to anyone in doing that.

Long distance trips are nothing special - I've done some myself (some 2,000+ miles) and it is a lot easier following the magenta line than older nav especiall over water - the most important things is a reliable airplane and lots and lots of money - so if you can raise the money you can go, if you can't then you can't - if you go on the cheap now that is impressive - building a career on the back of it is not intrinsically "evil" we live in a media driven world and so the moderately photogenic are always going to get publicity etc. Now us fat hypertensive diabetic fat blokes we gets nuffink! I would be happy to do Barbados to UK solo if someone can get BurgerKing to pay for it (no MacDonalds or KFC - we do have to keep up standards).

runway30 24th Oct 2018 14:26

The problem is when you can’t tell the difference between spin and deception. Spin is just putting your own interpretation on the facts, when you start changing the facts it is deception. Some people think that embellishments to your cv. is ok. It isn’t, even if you are a perfect employee, you have obtained money by deception. Some of the statements on TCT’s website, if they were used to solicit money to fund her expeditions, would in my view cause her problems if someone wanted to complain. They aren’t complaining so I guess that is where it ends.

airpolice 24th Oct 2018 14:49


Originally Posted by runway30 (Post 10291306)
They arenít complaining so I guess that is where it ends.

No, that is just where it stops, for now.

Where it ends, is when she has been through the court process and the public see the lies being exposed.

Sam Rutherford 24th Oct 2018 15:01

Blimey, calm down!

She claimed to have done something that she hadn't done. She's not claiming it any more (even if a full admission is still absent).

It's time to move on.

Pilot DAR 24th Oct 2018 15:22

Sam is right. New information only. I'd rather not have to close the thread, but I'm getting close....

funfly 24th Oct 2018 15:44

Close the thread, you've got what you wanted.
This lady flew a lot, as did many other ladies (I used to be an Associate member of the British Women's Pilots Association, there were plenty of worthy ladies there) Tracy is obviously a bit of a boaster and claimed she went solo when she seems not to have done. Dug herself in a bit of a hole actually.
Time to let it go now folks, doesn't do you any credit to kick the dog when she is down.

airpolice 24th Oct 2018 16:05

This topic was supposed to be about her claims and Sam's contrary position, given his inside knowledge of the facts. I agree that we should only be scratching at new itchy bits, but each week seems to bring evidence of the continuing talks and pre-launch book & movie press appearances. Far from being down, she's riding a wave of public appearances with nobody allowed to question the validity, or reasonableness of her claims.

I'm not the one who keeps getting Lawyers to threaten court action. Tracey is behind the drive to go to court, or to at least suggest going there.

Given her stubborn refusal to answer simple questions, I see court as the only place that anyone can get the truth. She's got to avoid that because of the difficult questions which will centre not on the Solo aspect, but the standard of airmanship that she has spoken about and demonstrated. Imagine her having to answer the questions in court, instead of just calling everyone a women hating old man. Did she actually fly just a few feet from a cliff face, or just say that she did? Was she authorised to fly th eAN2, or did she just say that she was? Did she buzz the Whales or just say that she did? Has she got as much experience in flying the Stearman as anyone else in the world, or is that just something that she says? Did the aircraft need the entire runway at Winslow to get to 50 feet agl, or did she just say that it did? Was the fuel contaminated or is that just something that she said? Is she allowed to wear RAF Wings or...

I'm sure you can see her dilemma with the questions. This has long passed the solo point, and once Ewald had admitted to being in that seat for most of the time, the point was surely accepted by anyone with half a clue. She can't deny saying it, after the trip, because we have all seen the Herne Bay video. So she explained that as slip of the tongue.

The other stuff is harder to wriggle out of. Did she buzz the Whales? She can't deny it, unless she wants to open the door to all the rest of her story being a lie. She can't admit it and still expect to be considered a role model for aspiring Pilots.

Unless a victim comes forward, there is no real prospect of a criminal charge. I'm not sure why you think that there needs to be.

clareprop 24th Oct 2018 16:28

She's a liar. We know it she knows it.
To take her to civil court, you would need to be an aggrieved party, damaged by her claims.
In the absence of anyone else, only Sam and Mike seem to come close. If they feel they can live with it then maybe members of pprune should do as well. If the LAA are content to accept her description of them as misogynistic old men , that is also their choice.
I suggest we keep our powder dry for future films and books.....

airpolice 24th Oct 2018 16:30

Clare, nobody is going to court.

She's the only one in a position to start that, and it would be a disaster so she can't.

It's a pity the LAA didn't see that and just ignore her lawyers.


All times are GMT. The time now is 23:27.


Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.