Although I know little of the licences and licence requirement, ownership and all the little nuances of EASA and FAA I have refrained from joining in the fascinating discussion.
May I ask that we try to bring the topic back to the main subject - ie the deception from day one. We stand our best chance of success if we stick to that and any other legalities can (and will) come out later. I wouldn't want to lose out on this simply because we have so much minor detail to sift through and miss out on something crucial.

As I have it so far -
TCT planned a fantastic venture but had no money to do it.
She convinced wealthy backers to finance the package based upon this whole idea of a SOLO bird flying the world in a beautiful aircraft unaided.
Sponsors jumped in fully believing the awesomeness of a SOLO expedition of this nature.
Awards and accolades plus a great deal of publicity ensued.
As time went on, and the press started to report the SOLO expedition, wise people started to question this claim.
TCT hit back and with claims that we got it wrong (by 'we' I include her sponsors in this) and went so far as to suggest that the negativity was down to an aggrieved former employee (an attempt in my eyes to deflect blame and also attract some sympathy)
The "I did not say it was SOLO" continued but more and more evidence has come to light - and is FACT - that she was promoting this as a SOLO flight.
So far only the LAA have taken positive action to right the wrongs, bearing in mind that their decision was made BEFORE the damning video came to light; imagine the outcome if that clip had been played just as TCT got up to address the congregation.

The aim now is to convince HCAP, Portsmouth Uni and the Royal Navy to strip this woman of the awards she has unjustifiably been granted, awards that could have been given to more deserving people. The only way that can be achieved is through a concerted effort to get concise and factual information to the media.
Artemis and BOEING need to come clean as to what they were told and if they would have supported this venture knowing what is known now ie it was never going to be SOLO; there is no shame in admitting you were taken in by her.

There is a way out of this for TCT - as she has no grounds to argue the FACTS and the information I am holding back on.

She needs to humbly hand back the awards, apologise for the confusion and accept that her over exuberance ran away with her. She can then start to build her credibility within the aviation world, show that she has a modicum of integrity and set the record straight. I know what I would do and the Press would be more inclined to avoid going for the jugular.


Stay focussed chaps and chapesses, there is light at the end of this tunnel.
Apologies if this is out of turn, I am not here to censure PPRUNE posters.

SWB

An excellent and well-reasoned post; I agree entirely that we should keep focussed on the main issue. :D

The only thing I would say about your post is that, if you do have further relevant information, IMHO you should publish it so that people have the fullest possible basis for forming their opinions about this.

SATCO's WB,

I don't believe that HCAP will ever ask for the return of award the Master (note: NOT the rank and file members) made. The wording of the citation did not include the word SOLO. From the outset, carrying out these self aggrandising jollies whilst wearing a non-entitled flying badge (sorry, expeditions) SOLO was not one of his requirements.

Equally, the big corporates will just fade away. It isn't in their interests to perpetuate the story, in any direction.

Personally, I think the whole issue will transition into oblivion, with the final act being a bland/no-existent entry in Wiki. Of course, it would be very interesting to see what would happen if TCT raised her head for a third aviation adventure. ;)

Might there be some mileage in contacting "Private Eye" & see if Mr.Hislop & co. are interested in the story ?

I fear ShyTorque is correct. Many institutions like HCAP have management boards and committees that are totally remote from its members. In private they probably even dislike their memberships and wish they would go away, so they can get on and do important things; the things the err.... members voted them in to do. In this case, I'll wager they know they have cocked up and think not too many people will notice. After all, who are HCAP? I have been flying for close on 40 years and never heard of them until recently and I'm sure it doesn't want nasty scrotters like me amongst their ranks. Besides, if their decision to make this award looks them look bad in the future, they can say that based on what they knew as that time the award was valid. Unfortunately for them, we already know it devalues the efforts and achievements of the people who are worthy of such accolades and respect, as the Tim Peakes of the world.

As I type now I'm sure an 18 storey shrine is being erected in a village in Cambridge to house this award. It will have a large picture gallery, full of photographs featuring one important person shaking hands with other people, sombre music, videos of cheering crowds and huge portraits of well know aviatrix. In the basement will be dartboards with faces instead numbers and rings. I'm sure the targets will be Jay Sata, Sam Rutherford etc.

PM

Sadly I feel the previous four posters are going to be shown to be correct. If so then the message to youth of today is that you can get what you want by deception - be that deliberate or just a case of little white lies getting totally out of control.

hey-ho, we can but try.

There is an interesting letter in this months Pilot Magazine (Dec2016) from Terry Holloway, Vice Chairman of the Air League. Terry declares in his intro that he is Chairman of the Awards Committee.

I only have my copy of the magazine for reference so cannot print the entire text here.

However he makes the point that
If the Air League knew the flight was not solo from day one why did they sit back and allow pretty much the entire UK media to print stories declaring TCT was embarking on a solo flight? Was that an honest approach?

Why did they not alert the press to the misleading headlines?

In my opinion they did nothing until the story started to break that the Spirit of Artefice expedition was nothing like Amy Johnsons historic flight.

Terry goes on to say.
A film documentary is reason to allow the deception in the worlds media Terry?

So the Honourable Company of Air Pilots also knew from the outset TCT was not flying solo from Farnborough to Sydney ?

What Terry does not reveal in his letter is he is also a Liveryman of The Honourable Company of Air Pilots.

Tracey Curtis Taylor is also a Liveryman of The Honourable Company of Air Pilots.

Does he know TCT on a personal level?

Of course he does.

Robert Marshall is a former director of Bird in a Biplane, Tracey Curtis Taylor's company.

https://www.endole.co.uk/company/077...iplane-limited

see http://www.pprune.org/private-flying...hreads-55.html

Boeing is one of the biggest UK suppliers/ clients of the Marshall Group.

Boeing Aircraft Corporation is TCT's major sponsor alongside Artemis.

Boeing is a major supporter of the Air League.:ok:

I thought Lancashire Aero Club (established 1922) claimed to be the oldest flying club in the UK?

From Cambridge's website:

This is an important theme, though with variation; for my limited understanding of the HCAP ('never heard of them before the TCT association) is a private organization, where the University and Royal Navy are obviously very public.

If the HCAP wants to issue an award, with a shifting purpose, in spite of all of the objective evidence that it is entirely without merit, only their own moral compass can guide them. In my opinion, they are massively discrediting themselves by doing this, as now their most memorable public presence in this time period is being caught up on the wrong side of a scandal, and steadfastly keeping themselves there - for what reason? It's the motivation within the HCAP to maintain this position which is so suspicious to me.

On the other hand, the University and the Navy are objectively required, on behalf of the public to do the honourable thing. I think that they need to be held to account.

With 425,000 views, and 2550 posts, with really none mounting any credible defense of TCT (unlike her FB page), it's obvious that aviation professionals are uniformly offended by TCT's deception. We aviation professionals, let alone being "the public" too, are entitled to have our dis satisfaction with the awards to TCT considered. The HCAP looses credibility with many of us, but maybe in their tight little circle of people, they really don't care - in which case they are not really in our aviation world anyway. The University and Navy objectively owe us (either as the aviation industry, and thus qualified observers, or simply very well informed public) a review of the award issuance, or a persuasive response as to why they would be content to allow the awards to remain.

As said, Boeing and Artemis look foolish, but will have no interest in being drawn into this. They made a poorly researched, uninformed investment in publicity, which backfired, they'll just walk away quietly - they did not issue any awards of grandeur on behalf of our industry. In that respect, they have nothing to undo....

Boeing and Artemis both have very expensive PR operations.

Despite all the publicity they have never answered any questions regarding the Spirit of Artemis.

HCAP and The Air League both knew TCT was not flying solo to Australia as Terry Holloway has confirmed via his letter to Pilot.

So there we have it...two very large sponsers conspiring to convince the worlds press via PR man Tim Kelly TCT was flying solo.

The Air League and the Honourable Company of Air Pilots are also complicit in this deception of the worlds media.

The latter wrote three citations to justify their recent award.

That alone must be a record?

..and, according to earlier posts, TC-T's partner at some time.

No wonder she had access to some influential people in the aviation world

With reference to Mr Holloway's quote:

(my cap's)

I'm not sure that's completely correct. Below the full unabridged text from the press release regarding TCT...

Press Release ? Annual Reception 3rd May 2016 ? The Air League

Quite so, Jay Sata.
It's interesting, though, that Boeing, with their expensive and extensive PR operation, were actively
banging the 'Solo Aviatrix' drum until only a matter of weeks ago.
Kinda makes you wonder, don't it?

I've been following this quite closely, as a former Amy Johnson memorial scholarship winner I get a bit annoyed with this woman comparing herself to Amy. She doesn't come close. For a start Amy had to buy her aircraft and finish the flight before she got the prize money and had no sponsors' names splashed all over "Jason".

With the deception she has shown no respect to the true pioneers, male and female, who first flew these routes.

Personally I wouldn't trust her to taxi one of my aircraft, let alone fly it.

Pilot Tracey Curtis-Taylor bidding to emulate Amy Johnson hits a parked helicopter | Daily Mail Online

Pilot Magazine
 

As a postscript to Terry Holloway's letter in Pilot the editor Philip Whiteman wrote the following.
Here is the Air League press release for May 3 2016
Press Release ? Annual Reception 3rd May 2016 ? The Air League

Inspiring? Where has that word appeared before?

TCT's PR team love it along with 'outreach'.

PS I don't think Jay Sata will ever get an Air League journalist award:D

Leicestershire Aero Club was formed in 1909. There is documentary evidence of this published at the time.

Anyway, the fact remains that TCT hasn't done herself, or women in aviation, any favours. It's a shame because on those occasions that I met her and spent time with her, she was good company. And the film is a fantastic film. I even own a copy of the DVD. But her disingenuous behaviour and her continued perpetration of untruths is unbecoming. It is an embarrassment that these awards are still allowed to stand. I have formerly been a member of the HCAP and this certainly has made me reconsider my plans to rejoin.

On another point made earlier about Barry Tempest - a grumpy old codger at times, and an incorrigible flirt at other times he may be, but the claims of misogyny and sexism are simply not true.

Noflynomore:

Well, it is not known if she was paid for the film. But you need to read the CFRs as she undertook these expeditions on an FAA licence. The key word limiting a private pilot to fly in connection with any business is "incidental". The flight has to be incidental to the business. As T C-T has set up a company around these flights, the subject of the film was the flight itself, and she actively pursued a film partner from the early stages of planning, there is a vanishingly small chance that the FAA would consider the film incidental. They are renowned for taking a very broad view of what incidental is not, eg a photographer not that long ago asked the FAA to clarify if he could later sell photos he took whilst flying and the answer came back 'no'.

If you're going to undertake these kind of flights it is easier to just get a commercial certificate than try and circumvent the CFRs or hope the FAA will agree with one's own interpretation of their rules. If you look at the various Americans who have undertaken flying expeditions they seem to all have a commercial ticket, or no overt sponsorship.

Dug up some good stuff here!

I have just started a thread on the Pacific, GA and Questions forum here http://www.pprune.org/pacific-genera...-walt-not.html which has produced some useful info.


From that thread I followed a link to the Wings Over NewZealand bulletin board and did a general search from 2005 to date looking for posts relating to TCT and there's some interesting stuff there you can follow up, including new stuff from the NZ Herald reporting a "solo" flight to Australia.

http://rnzaf.proboards.com/thread/24...rtis-taylor-nz


What's really interesting however is this fabulous interview from a podcast on Aviation Extended where she is being interviewed about the Cape Town - Goodwood flight. Note this was recorded before it happened and so only shows intent as opposed to reporting events afterwards but it amply demonstrates her free and repeated use of the word "Solo" and the clear intention that this was to be a solo enterprise albeit with chase plane.

http://aviation-xtended.co.uk/wp-con...o-goodwood.mp3


Highlights are at 25:00 "...I will be flying solo across Africa"
26:40 "I flew as an instructor there for several years" (in NZ. "several" years and only 300hrs? Hmmm)
29:40 Further reference by TCT to her forthcoming "solo" flight.
33:10 Importance of a large engine for hot and high t/o performance.
34:35 Emphasises difference to her previous AN2 flight which "had crew on board"
36:30 "Being on your own..."
39:10 Recreation of Mary Heath's flight (word recreation is critically important)
42:25 Producers chuckling at her intention to fly as low as possible

Interestingly, possibly one of the most accurate and least overblown biographies of TCT is on the LAA website, Meet the Members: http://www.lightaircraftassociation....tis-Taylor.pdf

It seems remarkably free of the hyperbole seen elsewhere, even though it was published in 2014, after the Capetown - UK flight. Perhaps she realised that the LAA and its membership would not be easily misled.

FBW

JS,

(To correct your earlier post #2550),

Ms. T C-T is listed as an Upper Freeman of HCAP, not as a Liveryman.

Re the Air League:
Did they now?

Odd then, that the article in their July/August 2016 Newsletter article referred only to "Tracey Curtis-Taylor who had just completed an epic flight in her Boeing Stearman open cockpit bi-plane from Farnborough to Sydney in Australia, to pay tribute to Amy Johnson’s flight
in 1929" and not to Tracey Curtis-Taylor and Ewald Gritsch.

They certainly appeared to be under the impression that the earlier flight from Cape Town to Goodwood was solo.

From the July/August 2014 Air League Newsletter article “2014 Air League Annual Reception Celebrates Excellence”:
The Concise Oxford Dictionary gives the following for emulate:1. Try to equal or excel. 2 imitate zealously. 3 rival. It would, I think, be reasonable to assume that any flight emulating a historic solo flight would also be solo unless specifically indicated otherwise. Or alternatively, why was the recognition not to Tracey Curtis-Taylor and Ewald Gritsch for flying a Boeing Steerman from Cape Town to Goodwood to emulate the flight in 1926 by Lady Mary Heath if they knew it was not solo.

And leaving no room for misinterpretation as to their view of the first flight, from the September/October 2015 Air League Newsletter front page article "Reliving the Dream":

What is clear is that all of the sponsorship would have been raised based upon the flight(s) being SOLO. Would there have been the same enthusiasm to throw money into a non-solo, less glamourous venture?

This raises a few important questions:

- When exactly did the sponsorship requests begin?
- When was it decided that it would not be a solo flight?*
- Why was the solo aspect dropped?
- Were the sponsors informed of this material change? If so, when?
- Why was it felt necessary that the front seat would be occupied for the vast majority of the journey by Ewald?
- Why, many months after the return to the UK was TCT perpetuating the solo aspect?

Care to answer these questions Tracey? An updated statement would suffice.


* It could still have been solo and have the support/film plane alongside. Although this diminishes the risk and loneliness factors, the flight would still qualify as being solo.

From the HCAP citation.
I have some questions.

How did T-C-T raise awareness of science and technology especially by flying an 1940's vintage biplane? As nice as the Stearman is, there is no way in this day and age that it can be described as an advertisement of science and technology.

What evidence is there that she had any positive impact on young women anywhere?

What did T-C-T actually do during the excursion to directly raise awareness of science and technology in aviation among young woman. How many presentations did she give to young woman? Did she go into schools and out into the community to do any of this?


What did this aviation expedition actually achieve?

With all the talk about outreach there is scant evidence of any outreaching actually happening, unless of course out reaching includes extending your arm to hold a glass of plonk.

Sorry, I'm a bit of a late joiner on this thread, without searching through all the links over the 129 page, is there a photo of TCT wearing RAF wings anyone could put on the thread or a link to before I hit the nuclear button.

Thanks in advance

Ivor

Will this do? (Please follow the link and click the thumbnail)

That will do nicely, will be on he case shortly.

Ivor

Remember the human
 

While, like many, I've read most of the posts here over time I have wondered latterly whether there's been a little too much of an intense witch-trial that's going on.

While it would seem on the face of it that some irrregularities have occurred, deception even, I think it behoves us to remember that this is a real person you're discussing. Someone who may be guilty of puffery, but is perhaps otherwise a decent person who has also done [good] things - as claimed - in aviation.

Those who don't take the time to follow noflynomore's links might want to read this from the rnzaf.proboards site:

This doesn't seem to be a bio of an evil person and while she may have later claimed something that has turned out to be untrue I'm not sure it necessitates the degree of vilification that appears here?

From my perspective - somewhat removed from many of yours - this thread looks to be more and more like a self-fueled holocaust gone awry. There is other life out there beyond PPRuNE, you've done a great job at exposing something that shouldn't have happened, but let's be the bigger people and not unnecessarily kick someone while they're down :=

I'm sure HCAP et al are now well aware of the issues and will do whatever they're going to do as they see fit. The repetition of these things isn't going to change much from here on in, and may border on Einstein's definition of insanity as I'm sure you all know- and yes I'm well aware of the double entendre :}

FP.

FP

There are many posting here who think that Ms Curtis-Taylor should decline or return the awards she has received given that they appear to have resulted from the mistaken belief that her flights were solo when in fact they were not; and more of us who object strongly to her wearing RAF wings that, by her own admission, she never earned.

So can I ask what you think should be the outcome of this situation, and how do you think that that outcome can best be assured?

First_Principal
Would a decent person have deliberately "misrepresented" the expeditions, not once but several times? No.

Would a decent person attempt to cover up the "misrepresentation" once exposed? No.

Would a decent person attack and falsely accuse the people who have pointed out the "misrepresentations"? No.

Has she declined or returned any awards because they are based on falsehoods (or at best "misunderstanding") as a decent person would? No.

One is left with the inescapable conclusion that she is not, in fact, a decent person and so does not deserve sympathy.

Sadly, not continuing to repeat these things is precisely what she and her PR team are hoping will happen - they would like nothing more than for all the fuss to stop and be forgotten, so she can get on with her "inspirational" - and presumably lucrative - speaking engagements, and planning the next all-expenses paid jolly.

I assume from your post that you feel that profiting by deception is acceptable behaviour in the "other life out there beyond PPRuNe"?

There is a very simple way for her to put an end to the fuss - come clean, admit the deceptions, return the awards and then we can all return to the "other life out there beyond PPRuNe", as you so delightfully put it.

FBW

FP makes a fair point and I too have been trying to rein in some of the more fanciful accusations but the fact remains that TCT is guilty of far, far more than mere puffery.

Those of us that are Professional Pilots rightly and jealously guard claims and accolades made within our sphere of interest, especially the historic ones of our recent aviation "ancestors'.

So when some jumped-up, unsubstantiable claim to fame is assiduously marketed by City interests for commercial gain via a well connected PPL who claims to have a CPL and all sorts of other qualifications that never seem to have been used, who claims all sorts of high falutin' membership and insider dealings with the Great and the Good of our industry yet no one knows her, or has rejected her, who has clearly not only deliberately misled the media over several years re her "achievements" but has since then seen to it that she never once corrected the errors her publicity machine originally put about it isn't any wonder that Professional pilots who have a vested interest in being seen as reliable, honest and truthful take exception.

This is not puffery. This is straightforward, unmitigated fraud and deception by failure to correct the original guff her publicity machine first stated.

Everyone who has read the BIAB story was wowed with the notion of this personable, attractive bimbo flogging her way around the world solo because that is what all the hype said. Or rather, that her hype said it in the first place until everyone got the idea, and then went silent when they changed the plan from a solo transworld to a sponsored corporate expedition but never chose to correct anyone, never once as far as I can tell, never once failed to surf on the accolades of the "solo" myth they had instigated and were now perpetuating by remaining wilfully silent every time the fraud was unwittingly passed by the media across the front of their smug dishonest faces.

They ran for two or three years on the myth that everyone else understood that these were solo trips - a myth they had started and nurtured yet never chose to correct from the first take off by which time "solo" was, for them a long forgotten detail that was still assiduously cultivated in the media as so many journalists affadavits have shown.

And then tried to wriggle, weasel and squirm out of the lie with nonsense like getting EG to say people don't understand what they are talking about because there is no engine starter in the front cockpit ( a deeply offensive and disrespectful lie in the face of intelligent pilots) or the utterly risible cavil about "sole" as opposed to "solo"pilot. Or an aircraft rolled into a ball and the report submitted as an "incident" instead of "accident". I don't think she'd recognise the difference between the truth and an outright lie if it bit her hard on her perfumed, manicured, gucci clad arse, although that day is yet to come.

How dare these charlatans seek to bamboozle Professional pilots with this infantile and idiotic claptrap?

Do they really hold us - with our professional knowledge - ignorant of technicalities and in the same level of contempt as idiots that they, their PR drones and the meeja clearly view the public in general?

The sheer arrogance that these confidence tricksters fling in the face of the industry they so falsely claim to represent is the reason people here are exercised at their dishonesty. Professional pilots guard their Professionalism jealously by the exercise of that honesty and transparency that TCT and her cohorts so manifestly lack, and honesty and trustworthiness that makes Aviation itself the accepted and trusted part of life that it is. These people actively undermine this trust and thus earn our eternal emnity.

You may fool the media, the Daily Fail and elsewhere Tracey, with your peevish 5th form wailings on your website about orchestrated campaigns by nasty people and hilarious and oh so predictable claims of misoginy in this, the least misogynistic industry there is.

The Flying world sees you for what you are, Madam. And always will. How dare you set yourself up as "emulating" Lady heath like this? What an obscenity. What an utter obscenity.

If you value your "reputation", such as it is, you'd get in a Tiger Moth and do the trip again, solo - that is, on your bloody own, with no GPS, no ipad, no mobile phone and especially no Ewald to hold your pink, manicured lily-livered hand. Then we might begin to take notice. After your abject apologies for the last few years of con-tricks.
Pfff! I won't hold my breath.

Please, please, couldn't you get your PR team to have you take up golf or poker or cucumber growing?

Because you're done in Aviation.

Ms TC-T could issue an apology for causing offence regarding the use of a non-entitled flying badge and desist from wearing them again. That would be enough for me.

She could do the same regarding some of the awards, but I know that some will stand. HCAP seem oblivious to the upset and bad feeling theirs has caused.

I'm fairly sure that she will apologise for nothing because she sees nothing wrong with what she's done.

......but let's be the bigger people and not unnecessarily kick someone while they're down - First Principal

FP would appear to have accidentally and precisely highlighted the problem - the lady concerned just does not seem able to admit to being down - except perhaps after her accident, sorry "incident", in Arizona of course....:=

Jack

Let me make my position absolutely clear at the start. I think that TCT's behaviour in this matter has been disgraceful and that this thread has done a fantastic job in exposing this. That is why I was one of the LAA members who voted to rescind her award, and would certainly do the same if a member of HCAP.

However, like First Principal and a few others in this thread recently, I think the tone of the debate has changed recently. There are much worse things in the world than misrepresentation and imho TCT does not deserve some of the comments that are now being made in this thread. By all means continue the campaign to rescind any unjustified awards but let's tone down the rhetoric a bit and concentrate on reasoned argument, please. Thank you all.

Ooo, Ooo, Me! Me!.... 'Cause the Stearman was equipped with the latest navigational avionics? :E

I've thought about this, it's a fair question. This thread can benefit from balance, and people reviewing the depth of their passion on this topic. Compared to TCT's FB page, there have been very few posters who present a position which can be seen to not be objection to her actions. It does not hurt us to think about the possible outcomes of our pursuing TCT.

Having thought about it, there are more than 100 pages of posts here, nearly all expressions of dis satisfaction with TCT's conduct in one way or another - since she had a reasonable awareness of the dis satisfaction, and opportunity to make it right. Her response has been mostly mildly evasive and blame shifting, with very little taking responsibility and actually making it right.

If TCT wants the vilification to stop, she has been well advised by many here, as to what it would take to achieve that. She could do it directly here, or employ her otherwise ample PR machine to set things right.

Maybe so.
The way I see it is that the TCT machine is just playing for time.

Once the Nylon "reality" production covering the Oz jaunt comes to a TV set near you, it'll be a whole different ball game.
For a limited period, the gullible public will then be demanding that 'Our Tracey' be carried on high to receive appropriate recognition for
her perceived courage, tenacity, airmanship and unbounded altruism.
(Don't forget to wrap yourself in the Union Flag, Tracey).

The other side of it is, of course, that those others who stand to benefit from such wide media exposure will be going .."Oh well,
there's the Brand Awareness we paid for - let's move on now and let her sort her problems out.
(After a suitable pause, of course.)
See if I'm not right.


p.s. On the TV show, I'm looking forward to the bits where TCT is "mobbed" by 4000 Karachi schoolgirls and, later on, sitting around
the campfire, chewing on a goanna with the Central Australian Aboriginal womenfolk, while "inspiring" them.
Should be a hoot.
.

As far as I see it, no one is kicking someone who is down; down will be when the awards have all been TAKEN back. We have given her, and will continue to give her, a dignified escape route. GIVE them back and recover some integrity and respect.

The lack of proof from the BiaP side of things speaks volumes; if there was a misunderstanding then we would by now have seen the e-mails or letter copies sent to the papers asking to correct the SOLO headlines. We would have seen a copy of the Press Pack that all papers have clearly had as they all use the same language, clearly showing us that she never mentioned SOLO and that this is all brought about by imaginative journos jumping to conclusions. We would have video footage of her saying "I would just like to make it clear that I was not SOLO". The closest we get to this is the clarifications about the chase plane, but never any mention of Ewald other than "mentioning" him as an engineer.

Instead we have verifiable hard evidence that SOLO was being repeated at every opportunity, headlines left unchecked, articles written with verified quotes about being alone/solo/on ones own. Official documents being played down and stories about events that just don't stack up to the slightest scrutiny.

It is not too late, people have done far worse, come clean and had very successful careers moving on from what happens short-term. The outcome is fairly and squarely in her hands.

Until that happens we will continue to find facts and keep this in the spotlight.

All publicity is good publicity. I'd never heard of Artemis Investments before this.

With all those resources behind her surely she could have done something truly pioneering rather than this 'emulating" caper.

Saw Fedor Konyukhov go overhead in his balloon in July. HE is a pioneer!

Really Clare Prop? Would you consider employing them? :ok:

LOL I've been a flying instructor for 25 years...no money for things like investments! I see in some videos the logo has been blurred out although other aircraft in the vid have BREITLING in big jolly letters! Can't afford one of them either!

Meanwhile I find it hilarious that the inevitable sexism accusations are coming out when someone pretends to be inspirational to women calls herself by the derogatory term "bird". Something you would expect to hear from the character Sid the Sexist in Viz magazine!