Conde Naste Traveller
 

If I may answer your question Step Turn.

"The big benefit from all this?"

The accolades and promotional gates such a charade opens.She can now embark on the lucrative public speaking trail.
The sponsors get lovely text and pictures in high end publications.
http://media.cntraveler.com/photos/5...earman_001.jpg
This from a major travel magazine

http://www.cntraveler.com/stories/20...-across-the-us

By that criteria TCT is doing outstandingly well, being showered with honours and all.

From that link provided by Strake, which looks like it's a copy of an old web page, it seems to clearly state she flew solo over Africa. Maybe I'm misunderstanding the complexity of the issue but did she or didn't she?

She didn't.

A chap who worked with her, Mr Rutherford, has said she didn't fly solo. The bloke who flew with her, Mr Gritsch states (obviously) she didn't fly solo and Ms Taylor now says on her website that she didn't fly solo. I'll take a punt on all that and accept she didn't fly solo. Unfortunately, on a copy of her website from February 2015, as seen above, she states she flew solo across Africa. One therefore presumes that at the time is was Ms Taylor's intention that sponsors, charities, donors and the general public should believe that she flew solo. Any awards, medals, income, tea and biscuits with royalty etc, would also, again presumably, be on the back of that claim. At best, not an honourable tale.

JS,
Your post #604 re the present furious e-cleaning on google and wiki...
I did say that our mysterious MurielMary would be working overtime on this one.
I'll have to ask my 12 year-old IT-cluey nephew just what the score is re that kind of thing.

As if the original carefully planned, calculated and ongoing deceits weren't bad enough, the current attempted cleansing and cover-ups are just beyond the pale.
Of course, it must be done - there's quite a number of people out there trying to pretend they don't have egg on their faces, eh?
But .. it's all for the greater good, y'see - we can't have certain media and establishment figures embarrassed, can we?
It might reflect badly on our society.

She claims her occupation is aviator but flies the US registered Stearman on a PPL. That licence does not allow a pilot to earn a living from flying.

Another big lie is the front page of her website where she blatantly claims to be undertaking a circumnavigation.I am amazed Boeing allow their name to be used in such a charade.
http://www.birdinabiplane.com/images/tracey_may16.gif

Being picky - it's do-able to earn your living as a speaker and writer, talking and writing about flights done on a PPL, so long as you weren't actually being paid to fly. Brian Milton is an obvious such case.

(Not defending TCT, just continuing to say - just criticise her for what she's really (not) done. I would include aggressively editing out wikipedia entries that are factually true. Is there a mechanism to protest that via Wikipedia? - I've certainly heard of pages being taken down as they were basically advertising for some body or other.)

G

I agree Gengis but to claim your occupation is an aviator while flying on a ppl is stretching the truth a little. The circumnavigation is a blatant lie. The Spirit of Artemis crossed the Pacific in a box.

Brian Milton is a genuine adventurer who deserves nothing but praise for his flying.

That is quite true G. Many people have written and spoken about their criminal and deceitful activities for financial gain. Many have been stopped too.

I wouldn't go that far with BM, but maybe I know too much about him! He's still a far more honest and admirable individual than TCT however, regardless.

Jet - in TCT's case surely it's the talking and writing that's deceitful, there was nothing actually dishonest about the flights, just how they've been described; both before and after.

G

[HUMOUR] I think there are many of us who could say we don't make a living from flying, regardless of licence type :) [/HUMOUR]

"there was nothing actually dishonest about the flights, just how they've been described; both before and after."


By TCT's own partial admissions under duress, the wiki edits that's had more transitions than a whore's draws, it is very clear, isn't it, that deceit was intended from the very start.

Consider this. A student goes off on a qualify cross country for the purposes of gaining a licence. It is later discovered that said student had an instructor seated next to him.
Whilst the flight in itself could still arguably be 'legal' by definition, I imagine that the authorities would call 'foul play' The sole intense and purposes of THAT flight in my submission would then be to knowingly commit a criminal act to deceive others.

In TCT's case, whilst the flight/s, by definition, may have been legal, I would argue that the sole intent and purpose of those flight/s was for deceitful purposes. It was clearly for onward financial gain by TCT and others, and immoral receipt of awards by her, all by deception, from start to finish.

Can't disagree.

G

Perhaps she travelled (alone!) in the box with it? :p

You are 100% correct with you analysis Jetblue. I imagine her total sponsorship from the three journeys must be around £1 million given the size of the entourage and hotels etc.

In her three so called adventures she has deceived the press in to thinking she was a solo woman pilot hence the substantial coverage.The press releases must have suggested that otherwise they would never have bothered to cover the events.

The Today programme were misled as was Radio 4's Midweek. The HCAP Master was under the impression that she was alone hence the wording of his letter to her which appeared here earlier. The LAA were also clearly hoodwinked in to thinking she did the Africa flights alone and without GPS or they would never have given her the Bill Woodham navigation trothy.

Despite her admission that her flights were never solo she continues to paint the picture, in her public speaking engagements, that her flying was a difficult solo challenge that puts her on a pedestal for other aspiring women pilots.

I imagine she now plans to carve out a new career on the after dinner circuit. However there must come a time soon when a journalist challenges her in public to come clean.

I understand she is putting together another Aviatrix type film on the UK Sydney trip for the Discovery Channel.

The wiki cleaning and google removal will no doubt continue, as along with this thread ,it poses a threat to her future income stream.

I am surprised she has not tried to silence Pprune with legals.

I only heard a few seconds of the Midweek but the presence of a "passenger" at the scene of the accident was mentioned - if someone's been pulled out of the wreck it's probably not that easy to pretend they were never there.

I'ts wise to only sue for libel if you are being libelled.

Perhaps she could persuade the Legal Eagles at "Weavers of Warwickshire" to take this on? :8

HCAP position as on 21st June, despite the rumblings of discontent.....

Their position now? In all probability they won't have the courage to accept they screwed up so it is likely that the presentation will go ahead in October.

Will the deceitful recipient accept it? She obviously has no shame, so probably yes.