* In other words another attempt to deflect from the real issues of deception.


We've seen indignation. We've seen threats. We've seen 'woe is me'. We've seen the sacrificial website designer falling on his sword. When is TCT going to realise that answers, truthful answers, are the only thing that will make this go away?

As for her being ambushed at the 2016 AGM what did she want, written warning from each of her fellow members advising her of how they intended to vote? Isn't that the same as her not telling the membership that she and her entourage were going to be there to try to negate entirely legal proxy votes?

Her referral to "our LAA" is just bull. She has no interest in the Association whatsoever other than what awards she can force from it to prop up her bizarre 'turn of the last century' view of the world and how those awards will look on the movie poster. Her treatment of Brian Davies has been nothing short of abominable and her language, as 9 lives says, gives the game away. It's all about her.

@Nick.

The LAA awards committee have confirmed that they believed it to have been solo, and one of the people present has described what she did as a 'deception'. His choice of words.

Explain why Ewald had to get out of the Stearman before landing in front of a big crowd in Baragwanath if dual was not an issue?

It was sold to the world before, during and after as solo. It wasn't. Any attempt to re-write history will fail.

Explain why Ewald had to get out of the Stearman before landing in front of a big crowd in Baragwanath if dual was not an issue?

The 2016 Motion to Rescind did not mention the word "solo" either:

Sad sad sad
 

It seems this woman has a massive sense of entitlement and is bullying the LAA.

'Just guessing... Because the award is:

Perhaps the presence of an ATPL second pilot (who never touched the controls:rolleyes:), in a very well equipped cockpit, probably acting a as a navigator, removed the "feat of navigation" value of the award to Tracey! And, the issuance of an award for navigation under those circumstances would bring the LAA into disrepute! The quoted citation does read "her" flight, not "their" flight.

Nick.

If the solo issue isn't an issue, why was it so important that you had to join this forum and tell us you were the one to first say it?

As Sam says, the awards committee believe the flights to have been solo and that was obviously a part of their deliberation. In addition there's the 'feat of navigation' which turned out to be nothing more than following half a dozen very accurate GPS devices while a far more experienced pilot sat in the other (fully equipped) cockpit. Is that your fault too?


https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....6f4d91d666.jpg




(Edit: I really must hit 'Send' sooner, 9 lives beat me to it.)

Hi Sam,,
for information have you read D Moles post in LAA forum re Email proxy votes!!
John.

So if SOLO is so unimportant can you explain two things.
1) why did E get out?
2) Why do you keep on about it to the exclusion of everything else?


edit to add - and why did she say it?

I see she is posting on the LAA forum. She claims the judicial review was not her or her teams idea. I'd love to ask her if that means she is NOT threatening a judicial review.

I cant ask as I'm not registered on the LAA forum. Maybe I should register.

blueandwhite


I think you need to be an LAA member to join their forum. If you're not you could post your question(s) here, most people seem to be reading both and maybe someone will ask the question(s) for you.

Then again, TCT and her team seem not to have answered a single question thus far so I wouldn't hold your breath.

Received the latest issue of the magazine today with enclosed proxy voting form. Near the top it states: Please read the notes on 'How to fill in the Proxy Form' on our website, www.laa.uk.com. Blowed if I can find that and I don't want to spoil my vote, so someone please direct me to that information, or advise me on whether to use a tick or a cross in each box.

How can we be confident that our proxy votes particularly against motions 7. and 8. won't magically "disappear" before the votes get counted, or am I being too cynical?

As someone who earned a military pilot's brevet (wings) the hard way and who sincerely enjoys sharing flight deck responsibilities with women ex service pilots who equally deservingly got their wings, I take utmost exception to anyone who undeservingly wears what we men and women worked so hard to achieve.

Nickswebs, a quick question for you.

Did you by any chance work on the Boeing website, specifically their press release, and did you gild the lily there too?

From the Boeing website:

Boeing: Boeing Supporting Curtis-Taylor's S. Africa-to-UK Flight in Vintage Biplane

Staying on the thread topic, the LAA AGM, there are a few historical threads on the LAA Forum which are pertinent and worth calling to members' notice before this years AGM:

Tracy Curtis Taylor - separation truth and talk

Tracy Curtis-Taylor

Where Brian Hope made this prescient comment

A vote of thanks to Brian Hope

And of note is this previous thread, LAA-AGM. 22ndOct 2016 which has this optimistic comment in the OP of 4th Oct 2016:

There has been no previous response from Ms C-T to any previous thread or comment on the LAA Forums until this latest discussion.

This newspaper article from May 20, 2016 remains relevant, in particular the second last paragraph:

https://nationalpost.com/news/world/...famous-flights

I'm sure that this Canadian newspaper has no axe to grind with Tracey, but rather reports the facts revealed by their reporter's investigation of the story.

On the form itself it states "Please indicate which way you wish your proxy to vote by ticking the appropriate box alongside each Resolution."

In anticipation of the LAA AGM :
I note 9 lives ​​​​​​reference above,i.e. https://nationalpost.com/news/world/...famous-flights
I also note the ongoing avoidance by "Team Tracey" or whatever's acknowledgement or response to the "3 Questions", among any other explanations of certain examples of seemingly anomalous conduct . However, apparently tangential topics continue to be pursued incessantly,such as alleged misogyny in the LAA.
All this leads me to infer what seems to be a somewhat lame attempt to mimic the classic defence tactic before a jury, in the light of powerful prosecution evidence:

"Obfuscate, confuse and confound"

We will perhaps see ,come 21st October,how successfully this avenue of approach has been exploited.

Or not.

Signing off...

Until this was all re-ignited last month, my previous post was July (asking that everyone move on, that Tracey be left to carry on with her life), and then before that was November 2017.

When Tracey kicked it all off again, I was drawn back in.

Since then we have seen that questions remain unanswered - indeed the only response is aggression and deflection. Either on these pages or via lawyers, in public or in the shadows. The deceit continues, the whitewashing, the bullying...

Fundamentally, I guess it's down to whether this type of behaviour is deserving of our/your support (indeed honour) or not.

My vote is made, the AGM will show whether I'm in the majority or minority.

Safe Flights! Sam.

[speculation] One wonders if in the lead up to Tracey's Stewart Jackson proxy motion the LAA saw a spike in their new membership numbers.
You know, if this is all about money to be made off the film a few thousand quid in one-time-only membership fees for a proxy vote block might be considered a good investment. [/speculation]

Not saying this is the case, just wondering why Tracey would rake over the dying embers of the fire at this time unless there was a cunning plan.

I am now going to wait and see what develops over the coming days. It is clear to me that TCT will not answer any of the direct questions because to do so would reveal the extent of the lies.

This whole thing is about far more than just the use of the word SOLO, that is just the tip of a very large and sordid iceberg, it is about all the lies that sit behind all three flights. Hiding Ewald away, blaming others for the confusion, deliberate acts to make it something it was not, lack of airmanship, zero integrity etc.

TCT is dividing the LAA for her own aims. I must stress that it is important that EVERY member casts a vote based upon what THEY see, and have seen these past years. I would urge them to make a decision rather than leaving it to the Chairman to allocate on the day. I say this for two reasons;

1. It protects the Chairman from future accusations of favouritism (of either side) and
2. it prevents the Chairman from being put under pressure by high-ranking supporters (from either side).

Finally, just to lighten the mood on a dull Sunday morning, I think I have seen the cover to the latest book.

Have a good weekend all.
SWB


https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....e6975e0541.jpg

My wife, also an aircraft owner and LAA member, didn't bother to vote last time round. This time she's demanded I copy the proxy form for her.
She's filled it in and it's currently en-route. No prize for guessing which way she's voted.

Not in the least Colibri. I have a concern about the voting arrangements themselves. This a ballot that the LAA are running themselves so do wonder if a). there could be some way of "doctoring" the results or b). will T C-T and her legal team/lawyer call into the question the validity of the poll.? In my view it would have been preferable to have some independent outside body such as the Electoral Reform Society run the poll. That way the ballot papers go nowhere near the LAA offices or indeed its officials. Too late for that now, of course. Should add I have confidence in the LAA and its officers but the whole thing needs to be seen to be demonstrably above reproach.

For most voluntary societies fairly informal polls work well enough, providing there is trust in the system and the folk who operate it. Sadly the LAA has become entangled with some mighty devious people or maybe just one person. In that situation trust could easily break down. Gives me no pleasure to say that.

Submitted to the LAA forum just now from T C-T:
Dear Sam

In answer to yours of early Saturday morning, the 2018 motions mean what the words say. I don't think this forum is the place to respond in detail to your untrue allegations or to go into the reasons why your professional role in the 2013 Africa flight did not go well and you subsequently directed your bitterness against me.

As you know, since 2015, you and your friend Mike Flynn, a journalist now based in Thailand, who posts on PPruNe as 'Jay Sata', have waged a campaign of abuse against me. In addition to the stream of bile on PPruNe you variously bombarded the Air League, the Honorary Company of Air Pilots (you wrote to every chapter around the world), the RAeS, Women in Aviation and numerous other organisations involved in my outreach programme with destructive personal messages. You even contacted the ex-husband from whom I parted company with over twenty years ago in your efforts to promote an agenda of character assassination.

I admit to being caught unawares by the motion at the 2016 AGM to rescind the Woodhams Award and condemn me for bringing the LAA into disrepute. I didn't realise that having joined the Association in April of that year you had sent a string of emails to the Board demanding my disgrace, and had eventually found angry men willing to propose and second.

It was a remarkable and unprecedented achievement to get a motion humiliating a named individual carried almost entirely by proxy votes and it's understandably irritating to you and your friends that she should be so unreasonable as to seek justice. Why can't this damned woman accept the kicking she got and stay in the gutter where she belongs?

I refer to my post #147 above:

Q.E.D. ?

Dear Sam
In answer to yours of early Saturday morning, the 2018 motions mean what the words say. I don't think this forum is the place to respond in detail to your untrue allegations or to go into the reasons why your professional role in the 2013 Africa flight did not go well and you subsequently directed your bitterness against me.
As you know, since 2015, you and your friend Mike Flynn, a journalist now based in Thailand, who posts on PPRuNe as 'Jay Sata', have waged a campaign of abuse against me.

Presuming this means verbal abuse, it's only abuse if it's not true. Apart from an empty threat, no legal action has been taken against Mr Rutherford so one is able to draw a conclusion from that.

In addition to the stream of bile on PPRuNe you variously bombarded the Air League, the Honorary Company of Air Pilots (you wrote to every chapter around the world), the RAeS, Women in Aviation and numerous other organisations involved in my outreach programme with destructive personal messages. You even contacted the ex-husband from whom I parted company with over twenty years ago in your efforts to promote an agenda of character assassination.

I haven't seen any 'bile' from Mr Rutherford just sensible questions, supported by evidence, which have never been answered.

I admit to being caught unawares by the motion at the 2016 AGM to rescind the Woodhams Award and condemn me for bringing the LAA into disrepute. I didn't realise that having joined the Association in April of that year you had sent a string of emails to the Board demanding my disgrace, and had eventually found angry men willing to propose and second.

I sincerely doubt Mr Rutherford 'demanded' anything. On these pages, he has always been remarkably restrained in his comments.

It was a remarkable and unprecedented achievement to get a motion humiliating a named individual carried almost entirely by proxy votes and it's understandably irritating to you and your friends that she should be so unreasonable as to seek justice.

If the allegations that have been made are true (as supported by the evidence we have all seen in videos, still-shots and the media), how can that be 'seeking justice'? And again, an irrelevant diversion - a proxy vote is as good a vote as any other. They are used millions of times a year all over the world.

Why can't this damned woman accept the kicking she got and stay in the gutter where she belongs?

Why can't this woman answer the questions put to her about her claims?

As far as I'm concerned, when someone starts making random personal attacks without any evidence to support the statements made, they are trying to deflect the spotlight from the real issue.

It sounds to me that the LAA forum must be the perfect place to respond to concerns of the participants in that association!

So Tracey has been a pilot for umpteen years, yet joined the LAA only the same year as the motion to rescind the award to her? I take that to mean that she was not an LAA member when she initially received their award? Her term as a member would then seem to be only the brief period during which much more established members of the LAA reconsidered their first decision. Perhaps this last minute, low investment participation, which focused nearly entirely on objecting to the decision made by the majority of more invested members has made some of those members angry! Their gender is not relevant!

It sounds to me that "sending strings of emails... demanding" is an activity common to both members of the LAA, and Tracey. So she should not be surprised that this tactic is being applied to support interests which she does not share. It appears to me that when she withdrew to the shadows, the interest expressed in her fizzled, and indeed, discussions were closed. It appears to me that it is Tracey's "emails" which have re lit the fire at the LAA.

I've seen so many situations where the actions of an association are pretty well unanimous. It's so nice that so often an association can take action which represents the collective desire of its members. If it becomes apparent that there is large disagreement on the action to be taken, the association must be very careful and objective to assure that the member's votes are accurately recorded!

Doesn't she ever stop? Do she and her supporters realise the damage they could do to the LAA, and in doing so how much damage they could do to GA in this country? I've been flying since I was a kid, professionally for a bit over 30 years, aviation is the most balanced, equality driven pastime or profession. Nobody cares if you've got lumps in your jumper or your trousers, you are a pilot, be you a new PPL or an old lag ATPL. For all of the time I've been flying I've been a member of the PFA/LAA as that was where my GA heart is and always will be. I own a permit aircraft, so use all the LAA services, If the 2016 decision is overturned then the LAA will, in my opinion be as dishonest as T C-T, and as this and other threads have stated, ability is varied amongst all pilots, but honesty should not be. If the LAA pursue this course will the rank and file membership be able to trust the Executive Committee, or the Chief Executive ever again? Will the CAA be able to trust the LAA to carry out it's duties, or will there always be a question mark over the honesty of the organisation as a whole?

I first met T C-T during the build up to the Africa trip, she struck me as someone very full of herself, and downright rude to people who were of no use to her, a real Me! Me! Me! character. Well get this Tracy, the aviation worldwide is about Us! Us! Us! those of us who fly for the love of it, those who scrape together what they can for a few hours a year, those who spend years building or restoring their own aeroplanes, those who give their time, aircraft and money on "outreach programmes" to bring on the youth element, people who make the spare seats in their aircraft available to others less fortunate and share with them the joy of flying. Every day people are flying far more interesting and challenging flights than yours, usually without a support crew or chase plane, usually because they want to make the flights for them, not to make publicity out of the movie rights.

A long time ago I worked as a ferry pilot (Cessna 208's and 206's from the factory to Africa) I met a wonderful German lady, a wife and mother who's job was ferrying big Pipers either way, I'm ashamed I can't remember her name, but pre-IPad when GPS was very new she went once or twice a month, unsung across the Atlantic, alone in an aircraft with nowhere near the navigation equipment you had, But I suppose Fraulien in a Cherokee doesn't have the right sound to it, and by the way, ladies flying biplanes (and I know a few) are not Birds in Biplanes, they are pilots in biplanes. So please stop the insults calling us all mysoginists, we aren't, you seem to want to hang onto a past that went a long time ago.

Please Tracy, do aviation in general and the LAA in particular a favour, drop it, I don't want to see the LAA split by a nasty, powerful vote against you, if you carry on like this, your aviation legacy will go from bad to utterly toxic.

As well as voting against this motion I have also written to the Honours Committee attaching these threads, because you are definitely not fit for any form of award, or honour at all.

SND

SND
It would appear she has no worries what so ever as to the damage she can potentially do to the LAA and GA aviation her only worry is to get recognition, this has been all too evident all the way through the posts both here and the LAA forum. The me me me scenario certainly appears to be the case and other things like spitting the dummy and throwing the toys out of the pram come to mind!! I suspect she is used to getting her own way by bullying and harassing people (Legal letters) into giving her what she wants!! Well I for one dont give way to bullies and it just increases my resolve to make sure they get their just deserve..
I think a letter to the Honours Committee is a great idea She certainly has shown herself as being totally unsuitable for any titles...
John

I can remember as a youth, eagerly waiting to earn my PPL, so I could join my national equivalent of the LAA. I was a proud member for decades. But, As I saw changes in leadership, and actually paid attention at meetings as to the reduction in effective leadership, and association senior members who thought that it was about them, I became disillusioned. I left the association. Apparently, I was not the only person who held the senior leaders in disdain, I was told that in the following two years, the association had about a 25% reduction in membership.

Happily, that association has had a complete leadership change, and I am very impressed with the future I see for it, I have joined again. But it shows me that the members can, and will speak with their membership renewals. The LAA leaders would be wise to remember that is it the membership base which is important, rather than the interests of a few (perhaps) prominent individuals, particularly when the interest of an individual is for them self, and not even for the association benefit anyway!

It is imperative that, for the future well-being of the LAA, we are all clear that the outcome of the vote has nothing whatsoever with the Association's Board. The vote outcome will be the Membership's view, not theirs.

If we say that an overturning of the decision shows the LAA to be dishonest then we will be not only being unfair on the LAA Board - who are simply following the Articles of the Association - but we are also wrongly saying that following due process is untrustworthy - when in fact it is precisely the opposite.

Following fair process, regardless of the outcome, is precisely what we should be expecting from the LAA. And that's what we are getting, so far as I can see.

This situation is difficult for the LAA. I think that we should be acknowledging them and supporting that, rather than throwing rocks.

This may possibly be off-thread in which case I am happy to delete but I do think it is an example of the duplicity which runs through the whole saga. I have picked this up from a Wikipedia discussion on the Arizona crash.

BiaB website current page quote: 'The engine suffered a partial power loss, most likely caused by contaminated fuel, which was sufficient to stop it flying at the high density altitude of 7000ft.'

NTSB Probable cause conclusion:

The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows:

• The partial loss of engine power during takeoff initial climb in high-density altitude conditions for reasons that could not be determined because a postaccident examination of the airplane and engine revealed no anomalies.

References: BiaB: Tracey Curtis Taylor - Aviatrix, Adventurer, Inspirational Speaker
NTSB: https://www.ntsb.gov/_layouts/ntsb.a...11X13726&key=1