User talk:G4gyro
Welcome![edit]
|
James Ketchell[edit]
Hi there! I rolled back your edit on the page about James Ketchell, as it does not accurately reflect the world records he holds from both the Guinness World Records and the FAI. He is officially recognised as holding the title of the first circumnavigation of the world in an autogyro. Smirkybec (talk) 21:38, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
- Hi, I'd appreciate it if you would engage in a conversation about the phrasing of these records rather than changing the wording of my edits and thus erasing the fact that Ketchell is the holder of the record for the first circumnavigation as certified by Guinness World Records - especially when that fact is correctly cited. The fact that you are removing that from the sentences is bordering on edit warring. Smirkybec (talk) 19:27, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
Apologies, I have not understood previously how to contact you by using this dialogue box. Please allow me to explain the context in which these flights have been made.
The distinction to be made is that the Guinness World Record is taken directly from the FAI Official world record (Guinness have always used the FAI as their ratifying body for any record to do with record setting aviation or space flights)
The actual FAI record that James Ketchell has set in this case is entitled "Speed around the World, Eastbound". (please refer to the actual FAI Record citation that is already in the list). Indisputably, it is the first "speed record" around the world and that has been officially recorded, over a minimum overall distance, as defined by the FAI who set a benchmark minimum distance to measure the average aircraft speed by over the course of the flight.
But the first actual, physical, circumnavigation by any autogyro aircraft (Norman Surplus and G-YROX) was not submitted for this particular "speed record" (as it took 4 years 28 days to complete) but nevertheless, this maiden Autogyro flight WAS also indisputably, the first physical circumnavigation of the planet by one pilot and one aircraft, regardless of time taken.
However, the reporting of the first "speed around the world, Eastbound" record to be promoted and claimed as therefore also being the "first circumnavigation" of an autogyro aircraft has therefore been somewhat disingenuous, false and wholly inaccurate, as James Ketchell's circumnavigation was actually completed 3 months after Norman Surplus completed his first full circumnavigation of the globe on 28th June 2019.
It has therefore been wholly untrue to assume that the first speed record to be set, also automatically, became the first absolute physical circumnavigation, as in this case, they are clearly not one and the same. But the continued use of the description "First Circumnavigation" in this context, does clearly still give that inference, when in fact it should be clarified as being the first official "speed around the world" record and therefore also the "fastest" circumnavigation...but it was definitely not the "first".
The FAI, in their wisdom, do not purport to police what is, or what is not, a full circumnavigation of the globe. The FAI only police and officially record, the speed at which a competing aircraft has flown around it. The common view of any global circumnavigation is that you land back in the same place as you had taken off, having crossed all lines of longitude and avoided the Arctic and Antarctic frigid zones. The FAI simply define their competition rules further than this by additionally setting a minimum distance to fly to act as a bench mark, so that all subsequent speed records around the world can be measured equally, by a similar minimum distance flown. Indeed they do not purport in their rules to define what a 'circumnavigation' actually is, and actually the word "circumnavigation"is not even mentioned in their 'speed around the world" rules.
I hope this clarifies the situation as the facts currently stand.
Apologies once again for appearing to be totally mute on replying to your earlier message on this subject. Please feel free to respond with any further clarification questions you might have. Best regards G4gyro (talk) 20:57, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you very much for your reply. I'm still not convinced by the argument here, as FAI said in 2015 - Surplus would not be credited with the first full circumnavigation due to the fact that he shipped his aircraft for part of the journey, so by definition he did not do a full physical circumnavigation in the aircraft. And in this post credit Ketchell with the "first round-the-world" trip.
- Secondly, do you have a citation for the fact that Guinness look to the FAI for the initial record, as the entry on their website does not give that impression as it states that the FAI fastest speed record is in addition to their certification.
- I have asked for comment on this on the talk page of the WikiProject Aviation given that we are at odds on the interpretation here. Smirkybec (talk) 21:17, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
Thank you also for your reply, You are correct the report from 2015 was factual but that 2015 citation has been used as a bit of a red herring...it did not take into account bringing the full picture up to date, in 2019....
The full backdrop of the Norman Surplus/G-YROX flight, was that it initially commenced in March 2010 in Larne, Northern Ireland. The flight however was stalled once it reached Japan in 2011 (flying eastwards around the world) by the Russians refusing permission to allow the flight to reach Alaska via the Bering Straits. The aircraft then remained (still en-route) in Japan until 2014 waiting for the Russian permission which at that time was still not given... Subsequently the aircraft was shipped over the Pacific Ocean by sea container to Oregon USA, where it stayed over the 2014/15 winter. In summer 2015, the aircraft restarted its circumnavigation flight from Oregon and continued across the USA and made the first ever Autogyro crossing of the Atlantic Ocean to reach the UK.(setting also an FAI record for that historic crossing in the process). The aircraft arrived again in Larne, Northern Ireland in August 2015...
At that time it was still widely assumed the Russians would not allow a foreign registered, autogyro type aircraft to fly across Russia. However by 2019 they had a change of mind and now it was going to be possible to fly in Russia after all. So it was decided to simply continue on with the circumnavigation flight, onwards from Larne, which now technically and physically remained "en-route" as an unbroken circumnavigation flight since commencement of the "new" 2015 starting point in Oregon. In April 2019 the flight continued across Northern Europe and the entire width of Russia Federation, crossed the Bering Sea, through Alaska and Western Canada, to eventually complete the first full Autogyro circumnavigation of the world by arriving back to the starting point of the Evergreen Aviation and Space Museum, McMinnville Oregon, on the 28th June 2019.
James Ketchell, who incidentally had been assisted greatly during the very technically challenging first half his own autogyro flight circumnavigation from the UK, (by flying alongside the much more experienced Norman Surplus continuously from Moscow through to Oregon), then went on to complete his own full circumnavigation flight, on his eventual return to the UK in September 2019 after 175 days of flight(which then became the first official FAI 'Speed around the world" Record for an Autogyro aircraft).
The FAI news report should really have said, more correctly, that it was the first round the world flight that was able to set an official FAI Speed around the World Record ...and not to tacitly imply that it was actually the first ever physical circumnavigation, as clearly it had not been...
The Guinness World Records have historically used the FAI as verification on many past aviation records, but as you now point out, it appears that they now also want to make their own separate certification adjudication process...the FAI part of the citation is indeed correctly worded...but the headline claim by Guinness that it is the "first" circumnavigation by autogyro is ambiguous... it should actually read that it is simply the first circumnavigation that has happened to have been applied for by a PR media savvy Autogyro pilot on the back of an FAI fastest speed record around the world record. No one from the Guinness World Record organisation has ever made contact with Norman Surplus (who is a 19x FAI world record holder) to check that the James Ketchell claim of "first" circumnavigation is in fact correct. I suspect it has simply taken this bogus "first" claim at face value and not thoroughly investigated and checked out the full background facts of the case. Can someone simply claim to be the first at doing something simply by being the first to say about it and even if they know that they were not actually the first to do it?? In essence it may be that the Guinness adjudicators have only been told certain selected parts of the full story and perhaps have then quickly jumped to their own conclusions
I agree, it would now be very useful to highlight a full discussion on the Aviation talk page as you describe.
Best Regards G4gyro (talk) 00:45, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
- I understand the ins and outs of both journeys, as I read up on both when I stumbled upon the articles. But I think the main issue you have just mentioned here is your interpretation/feelings towards Ketchell being more "media savvy" as that is starting to stray in an issue with Neutral Point of View. As Wikipedia editors, we don't get to make a judgement call as to whether Surplus is a more deserving of the title, and Ketchell is not. When it comes down to it, Ketchell has the recognition from Guinness and Surplus does not and how anyone feels about that is irrelevant. Your interpretation of the FAI piece reporting Ketchell's journey also should not influence how the information is reported in the various Wikipedia articles. Whether you think it is "bogus" or not, Wikipedia is not the place to insert that opinion. Smirkybec (talk) 09:52, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Yes I wholeheartedly agree with you that a neutral point of view should be maintained, but also at the same time that the full facts should always be presented and be upheld.
Currently the description that the "first circumnavigation" was also the "speed around the world circumnavigation", in the absence of also referring at the same time to the first physical circumnavigation flight (that went before it), appears to maintain only a selective part of the whole truth.
Without including the whole truth and context, the inference is then left in the readers mind, that the first speed record circumnavigation (however that is actually worded by the FAI and the Guinness Records) MUST also have been the first physical circumnavigation which, as we already have discussed, remains an assumption that is factually incorrect...
It is this omission of all of the facts, and the overall inference that that then causes, which creates and maintains the current frustration and ambiguity.
The plain fact remains, the absolute, "first circumnavigation" of any aircraft type around the world, has to surely be the first physical flight around the world, where an aircraft has flown around the globe to return again to its starting point, regardless of the technicality as to whether any particular world record has also either been formally claimed (or not claimed). Any subsequent flight around the world can only thereafter be referred to as a "first" flight, when described in the full context in which it is being claimed as being the "first"... i.e. as in this case, that it is the first officially recorded speed record around the world...NOT that it is the first absolute flight around the world.
There can only ever be one absolute, physically first, circumnavigation. And that first, historic event occurred for an Autogyro type aircraft in Oregon, June 2019 - not the UK, September 2019. That simple fact of history cannot be disputed and should therefore be kept clear and unambiguous, in any worded text where it is presented. Best Regards G4gyro (talk) 12:07, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Yes that is also exactly my point, they are not like for like, they are not equivalent and never have been or will be. But by simply using the wording "first circumnavigation" when describing the Ketchell FAI speed record flight (without any further clarification), it is implying that that flight must also have been the absolute first time an autogyro physically flew around the world i.e. the absolute "First" circumnavigation, when clearly it was not...
There has never been any dispute about the validity of the Ketchell first FAI speed record and the Surplus flight is not trying to draw any equivalence to it. Rather, it is the other way around, where the Ketchell flight is inferring (by current lack of clarity) that it is also claiming equivalence as to being the first circumnavigation.
The Surplus unbroken circumnavigation took 4 years and 28 days (from Oregon to Oregon) (not 9 years - the prior initial 5 years, Northern Ireland to Japan and then being stalled by the Russian impasse, had to be discounted after the aircraft was shipped from Japan to Oregon).
In your assessment, what type of flight (in any aircraft) could you describe as being the absolute "first" circumnavigation? and what else could you possibly call it? In the absolute first of anything, there is simply no time limit to the task being done...The first circumnavigation of the world by a sailing ship (no matter how disjointed the journey and/or delayed en-route the ship may have been) did not need an official record to show it had succeeded in being the first to do so... yet was it not still recognised as the absolute first circumnavigation? Or was another, later, more concise voyage given that same title instead...There can only be one absolute first, no matter how slow, disjointed or irregular it may appear to be, it still will always remain physically the first.
In my editing attempts thus far, I have been trying to highlight the fundamental difference between these two flights, and to show them in their correct contextualised places relative to each other, which is exactly the opposite of trying to introduce any false equivalences or sameness between them.
In short, the Surplus flight is not trying to encroach on the overall achievement of the speed record setting Ketchell flight at all, but as it currently is described, the Ketchell flight IS trying to encroach on the overall achievements of the Surplus flight, by claiming the first circumnavigation.
Best Regards G4gyro (talk) 14:14, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
As a further update, a request has now been sent in to Guinness World Records, to enquire what exact supporting information they are basing their claim to award the title of "First" circumnavigation on...At the same time, they have also now been made aware of the existence of the Surplus circumnavigation flight (in case they were simply not unaware/ or had not been informed of it previously) and if deemed significant, this may then shed some further light on the overall validity and accuracy of their attributing a "first" Circumnavigation title, in the context of potentially new information coming forward. This process is expected to take some weeks, but hopefully will provide more clarity on the whole situation going forward. Best Regards G4gyro (talk) 21:20, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
- I have started a conversation on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aviation which I tagged you in, which another editor has commented on. I think any further conversation should take place there for the moment. Smirkybec (talk) 22:24, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi again, I have made the various edits as suggested. However on the Autogyro main page, I feel it would be appropriate to also include the "first Atlantic crossing" in the table of notable autogyro achievements? It is ratified by the FAI world record https://www.fai.org/record/17629 (Belfast, Maine, USA to Larne, Northern Ireland,UK) Unfortunately, I don't know how to edit the table to be able to introduce another row of information into the table? Are you possibly able to do that directly? or is it done by someone elsewhere? Many thanks G4gyro (talk) 12:47, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
Scrub my last comment, I have since worked out how to add a row to the table etc., best regards G4gyro (talk) 20:54, 31 March 2021 (UTC)