How Can Anyone Be Expected to Trust the Aviation Community When We Allow This Kind of BS to Go Unchallenged?
News/Analysis/Commentary by ANN CEO/Editor-In-Chief, Jim Campbell
Before I start… let me note that I am as sick of having to document issues involving Icon Aircraft as anyone… but being sick of something does NOT mean that the facts aren’t STILL important, the details STILL germane, and the damage STILL continuing to hurt the Aero-Verse with each passing day…
That said; aviation is a greatly misunderstood industry in terms of the quality/accuracy of the news/feature coverage we’ve gotten from the general media community. It ranges from really bad/negative coverage like the USA Today/NBC (and other) diatribes against GA, Sport Aviation and BizAv to a series of bizarre, convoluted and often inaccurate puff pieces designed to hype aspects of aviation… often at the misguided direction of members of our own community.
Few campaigns have been more questionable than Icon’s incessant effort/willingness to misinform and misguide general media journalists into providing glowing, over the top, error-ridden “flight reports” about the Icon A5, even though many of those reporting not only admit but seem to boast of their ignorance of all things aeronautical. Just as objectionable were Icon’s demands to credible aviation journalists to surrender control over part of the editorial process to them.
I just read two more ridiculous, errant puff pieces on Icon Aircraft—both published within the last few days... Just how many BS-ridden puff pieces does Icon Aircraft think it will take to convince everyone (or anyone, for that matter) that they're remotely credible?
I really don't think it works that way... but in this sad day and age, I could be wrong. Icon seems to have proven that hype/blunder/BS has outweighed substance and expertise for nearly a decade. And worse… in light of ALL the critical info FREELY and WIDELY available, why would these most RECENT articles omit or gloss over the immense difficulties we know Icon to be dealing with?
These latest stories are just embarassing -- The writer for Men's Journal -- who admits to having 'zero flight know-how' -- submitted the following errant prose about the Icon AOA system...
"Pushed to the brim at full throttle, the gauge will move from the safe green zone to the red marker, causing the plane to stall. And it did during our test flight. While most stalled planes will spiral out of control at this point, the A5’s spin-resistant airframe kept the plane airborne."
Let me get this straight... Full throttle produces a stall (with no mention of the aircraft’s attitude and angle of attack)? Most planes spiral out of control at the point of stall? Say what?
...Gag...
And mind you, we saw these stories as a result of the fact that Icon was tweeting these (and other) stories to the entire world as something they seemed to be quite proud of – with no effort to correct the many errors involved.
A story published by Acquire mag is almost as aero-ignorant...
"That Sport Pilot License requires 20 hours of total training and Icon has created its own curriculum where you'll learn to fly with the best. And by the best, we're talking former fighter jet pilots. Pricing will cost $9,500 for new pilots who will train in a 14-16 day program and existing pilots will pay $1,250-$2,500 for a 1-5 day program. Now excuse us while we shake the couch for that $207,000."
I wasn't aware that 'former fighter jet pilots' made the best instructors... as a matter of fact, that has NOT been my experience, but what do I, as someone who has earned a CFI-A, CFI-IA, CFI-ME and CFI-H (among a number of other tickets) know about all this? I guess not as much as the neophyte know-it-alls who wrote all those non-specific, error-ridden, hype-filled puff pieces...
Sigh...
And worse than that... does Icon really think they can take newbies from 'Zero-to-Hero' in 20 hours and two weeks or so? I REALLY want to meet the instructors who can do that... because I want to be THAT good an instructor someday... and, clearly, at this point I am not.
Maybe an exceptional student (and yes, a really good instructor) might be able to make a dent in the training regime in that time, but the 'plane fact of the matter' is that most newbies (and more than a few lapsed or low-time aviators) will not be able to earn an SP ticket (and be competent on land and sea) in that time, from a responsible DPE -- not even remotely – in 20 hours.
God help this industry... We deserve better. So much better…
And then there was this… I was alerted to the publication of an older Puff Piece, this one written by someone who claimed to have been a pilot for several years, a story that was filled with glowing, over-the-top, prose about the Icon A5, but little actual detail… the writer even claimed to have put a deposit down on the aircraft… The article had little to no concrete analytical detail, a dearth of applicable stats, a stark absence of useful/discernible stability and control data, no real performance data… just a lot of sugary, flowery, prose that made the Icon A5 sound like manna from heaven. This one was written by Jiri Marousek… currently an influential senior staffer from AOPA.
When I questioned an AOPA spokesperson about this and whatever potential concerns or conflicts that might be raised as a result of this and other related issues, I received a highly defensive reply that, the first time around, did not answer my questions. Further requests for more info produced/provoked more defensive replies and even some accusatory language… including what appeared to be a preference for more positive journalism, instead, without discerning whether or not such positive stories might actually be credible, “We need more people to talk positively about flying in non-aviation outlets.”
And while good positive press about aviation is something to be preferred and desired… it does us no good if that good positive process is hype, smoke and mirrors, errant, aero-BS and damaging to the extreme by virtue of the fact that the glowing words are simply not real.
And in the case of the Icon hype campaign, too many of the words attached to the Icon PR/BS campaign are misleading or untrue, or defy the laws of physics, or are simply the machinations of people who seem more interested fleecing the public for a few more bucks than providing solid truthful info designed to credibly educate the public with data that is verifiable, real and useful in combination (with other credible sources) to make a decision to join our community.
And finally there’s this...
Telling the emperor he has no clothes has a price. Speaking truth to power (even when that 'power' is largely imaginary) can exact a penalty. While few people challenge those who write the puff pieces, or work for those sad publications that are clearly driven by concerns over what flowery words will get them the biggest ad dollars, the few who try to tell the truth often get clobbered… sometimes literally. In our case; I have tried to tell the truth about a number of initially unpopular topics for many years and gotten insulted, threatened, assaulted, and even sued for it -- more than once. And while we’re ALWAYS been proven right, no one seems to want to acknowledge or even approve of such attempts to be a good aero-citizen. Both my family and I have suffered greatly for the crime of being right and… and truthful… and for being willing to say what needs to be said to a community that can often be cheated or even harmed/killed by the hype-mongers and liars that occasionally
victimize our brothers and sisters in flight.
Just a few days ago, one of the most dunder-headed and knowingly false attempts to defame us and deflect our critical stories about Icon, that we’ve seen in quite a while, was published online by an Icon apologist… one who boasted of a professional relationship shooting pictures of the Icon A5. The least serious of his attempts to defame was his accusing us of pessimism -- but he confused the fact that truth is not pessimism…and hype is not truth… so we think his terminology is WAY off the mark. He also accused us of not using 'facts' in our stories – many of the same facts that have been repeated in a number of other publications -- after we broke the story and emboldened other writers/editors to do some real journalism… for a change. He also suggested that we had not talked to Kirk Hawkins (false – we used to talk to Kirk quite regularly until we started asking questions he seemed unwilling to answer) -- and then seemed to suggest
that the reason I had not flown the Icon A5 was -- get this -- that I was not a pilot!
After the better part of a thousand flight reviews over the course of 40 years, numerous articles in which my properly licensed bona fides were essential to get anywhere near the airframes that we tested or evaluated, stories in which I earned additional ratings or worked through FAA mandated training, I was amazed that anyone could be this desperate, this stupid, and this knowingly errant. This person, an aviation photographer that took the pictures of the Icon A5 that were featured in Men’s Journal by the name of Tyson Rininger, has been asked to either retract or prove his statements ASAP… and the result is, of course… silence.
But then again; we have come to expect such silence (and what appears to be cowardice, in my opinion) from such misguided and uninformed Icon apologists, in the past. There is a great old saying that observes that it is much easier to be thought a fool, than to speak up and remove all doubt.
Sadly, though, such tactics DO have an effect.
I have talked to quite a few aviation journalists who have expressed admiration/approval for the stands we’ve taken while bemoaning the fact that their editors and publishers won’t let them do likewise (usually over fears of losing ad dollars)… or those who fear for themselves and their families as a result of the inevitable harassment and ridicule that hard journalism often elicits from critics who have no other defense besides character assassination and personal attacks.
And that, folks, is about as sad it gets.
I promise you all this. While we have the ability to do so… we’re going to keep telling you the truth. We’re going to be VERY careful (as always) to verify our sources, we’re going to wait until we have enough facts to produce credible stories BEFORE we publish them, and our over-riding concern will be to supply you with good, solid, truthful info that we feel you need, deserve, and are entitled to… even if it seems like we’re the only ones left who believe in real journalism anymore…
Again, because you deserve it. We do this because you are our brothers and sisters in flight, because we care for and about you... and because we’ve witnessed, time and time again, the horrors, disappointment, injuries and even deaths that can occur when such info is not fully available.
It’s the right thing to do… and I’ll keep trying… I promise.
SpaceX to Launch Inversion RAY Reentry Vehicle in Fall
See All