Honk! Honk! Idiot klaxon.

Discuss all things 'aviation' that do not fit into a more appropriate forum
FarnboroJohn
Posts: 3038
Joined: Tue 28 Aug 2012, 6:57 pm

Re: Honk! Honk! Idiot klaxon.

Post by FarnboroJohn »

Tommy wrote:"Chipmunk's" :wall: :wall:

In addition to the inclusion of the Chipmunks, I also see that the "Greengrocer's Apostrophe" has made it into the media mainstream. This from the same paper that laments the young because schools aren't what they used to be and exams are too easy...

Gents - make sure you're better than the Daily Fail. You seldom ever need to use an apostrophe to pluralise nouns. Just add an "s" (or "es" as the case may be).

But, I realise it's one thing to rant about grammar, and another thing to just set out the correct way for others. It's the following:

Chipmunks, not Chimpunk's
F-16s, not F-16's
Idiots, not idiot's
Nazis, not Nazi's
Bigots, not bigot's
Apostrophes, not apostrophe's

... & so on and so forth.


*awaits someone to pull me up on some other grammatical issue... Did I forget the vocative? How about the gerund? :hypno:


It's a losing battle.... but we're British. We must fight it. I'm with you!

John

User avatar
Brevet Cable
Posts: 13725
Joined: Tue 05 Mar 2013, 12:13 pm

Re: Honk! Honk! Idiot klaxon.

Post by Brevet Cable »

speedbird2639 wrote:Conversely a lot of the other arms of the services active in WW2 received campaign medals and memorials for those lost; something which is only now starting to be addressed for people like those who served in Bomber Command as an example.

They got the ACE or F&G star.
Squaddies who fought & died - or were invalided out after being wounded - in the ETO prior to the Normandy Invasion didn't get anything other than the basic 1939-45 & WM
Tôi chỉ đặt cái này ở đây để giữ cho người điều hành bận rộn
아직도 숨어있다

User avatar
Brevet Cable
Posts: 13725
Joined: Tue 05 Mar 2013, 12:13 pm

Re: Honk! Honk! Idiot klaxon.

Post by Brevet Cable »

Tôi chỉ đặt cái này ở đây để giữ cho người điều hành bận rộn
아직도 숨어있다

User avatar
Rampvan
Posts: 769
Joined: Mon 21 Oct 2013, 1:00 pm
Location: Farnborough

Re: Honk! Honk! Idiot klaxon.

Post by Rampvan »

Tommy wrote:"Chipmunk's" :wall: :wall:

In addition to the inclusion of the Chipmunks, I also see that the "Greengrocer's Apostrophe" has made it into the media mainstream. This from the same paper that laments the young because schools aren't what they used to be and exams are too easy...

Gents - make sure you're better than the Daily Fail. You seldom ever need to use an apostrophe to pluralise nouns. Just add an "s" (or "es" as the case may be).

But, I realise it's one thing to rant about grammar, and another thing to just set out the correct way for others. It's the following:

Chipmunks, not Chimpunk's
F-16s, not F-16's
Idiots, not idiot's
Nazis, not Nazi's
Bigots, not bigot's
Apostrophes, not apostrophe's

... & so on and so forth.


*awaits someone to pull me up on some other grammatical issue... Did I forget the vocative? How about the gerund? :hypno:


Your spelling of "Daily Mail" is incorrect :facepalm:

reheat module
Posts: 604
Joined: Wed 01 Apr 2009, 8:53 pm
Location: Lincs

Re: Honk! Honk! Idiot klaxon.

Post by reheat module »

^^^^^^
Reads rather well to me.
Personally, I'd remove the word 'ever' in your phrase 'seldom ever' as may be indicative of tautology, or confliction, but otherwise no issues.
What do you believe to be the correct plural of 'lens'?
Canon systems

Binbrook 01
Posts: 430
Joined: Sat 31 Jan 2009, 6:17 pm

Re: Honk! Honk! Idiot klaxon.

Post by Binbrook 01 »

The Lincolnshire Echo, that noted newspaper from Lincoln that is now weekly.... which probably tells you something..... :tumbleweed: :tumbleweed:

Has run the same story about the Lightning UFO theory.... although it is without pictures of playschool style UFOs, however it is on the equally irritanting online formatted version. The format of which all online local newpapers seem to have copied now :mad:

Not like upsetting the family of said pilot seems to stop them churning out the same old sewerage... :wall:

User avatar
CJS
Posts: 8866
Joined: Thu 15 Jul 2010, 3:30 pm
Location: Hogwarts

Re: Honk! Honk! Idiot klaxon.

Post by CJS »

reheat module wrote:^^^^^^
Reads rather well to me.
Personally, I'd remove the word 'ever' in your phrase 'seldom ever' as may be indicative of tautology, or confliction, but otherwise no issues.
What do you believe to be the correct plural of 'lens'?


Lenses.

The phrase can be changed to "never". The little blighters are used for two reasons: To show contraction (shouldn't, fo'c'sle :shock: ) or to indicate possession (Tommy's rant, Chris's massive...yeah well, you get the idea :wink: ). But never to show a plural.

Without wishing to teach any grannys to suck eggs, don't forget that it's greengrocer's if you're talking about one of them possessing the apostrophe, but greengrocers' if you are referring to more than one.

Same as "the boy's football" and "the boys' football". Both could be be correct.

Sorry ;-)
"There's only one way of life, and that's your own"

FarnboroJohn
Posts: 3038
Joined: Tue 28 Aug 2012, 6:57 pm

Re: Honk! Honk! Idiot klaxon.

Post by FarnboroJohn »

CJS wrote:
reheat module wrote:^^^^^^
Reads rather well to me.
Personally, I'd remove the word 'ever' in your phrase 'seldom ever' as may be indicative of tautology, or confliction, but otherwise no issues.
What do you believe to be the correct plural of 'lens'?


Lenses.

The phrase can be changed to "never". The little blighters are used for two reasons: To show contraction (shouldn't, fo'c'sle :shock: ) or to indicate possession (Tommy's rant, Chris's massive...yeah well, you get the idea :wink: ). But never to show a plural.

Without wishing to teach any grannys to suck eggs, don't forget that it's greengrocer's if you're talking about one of them possessing the apostrophe, but greengrocers' if you are referring to more than one.

Same as "the boy's football" and "the boys' football". Both could be be correct.

Sorry ;-)


Grannies, surely? :lol:

John

User avatar
CJS
Posts: 8866
Joined: Thu 15 Jul 2010, 3:30 pm
Location: Hogwarts

Re: Honk! Honk! Idiot klaxon.

Post by CJS »

Good point!
"There's only one way of life, and that's your own"

Airwolfhound
Posts: 2707
Joined: Fri 06 Jun 2014, 12:53 pm
Contact:

Re: Honk! Honk! Idiot klaxon.

Post by Airwolfhound »

FarnboroJohn wrote:
CJS wrote:
reheat module wrote:^^^^^^
Reads rather well to me.
Personally, I'd remove the word 'ever' in your phrase 'seldom ever' as may be indicative of tautology, or confliction, but otherwise no issues.
What do you believe to be the correct plural of 'lens'?


Lenses.

The phrase can be changed to "never". The little blighters are used for two reasons: To show contraction (shouldn't, fo'c'sle :shock: ) or to indicate possession (Tommy's rant, Chris's massive...yeah well, you get the idea :wink: ). But never to show a plural.

Without wishing to teach any grannys to suck eggs, don't forget that it's greengrocer's if you're talking about one of them possessing the apostrophe, but greengrocers' if you are referring to more than one.

Same as "the boy's football" and "the boys' football". Both could be be correct.

Sorry ;-)


Grannies, surely? :lol:

John


Two be or not too be :wink: :lol: :lol:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/24874528@N04/

Agile, mobile and hostile ;-)

User avatar
Tommy
UKAR Staff
Posts: 9401
Joined: Mon 14 Mar 2011, 11:39 pm

Re: Honk! Honk! Idiot klaxon.

Post by Tommy »

Apologies for a) causing and continuing the thread drift, & b) the utterly, utterly boring nature of it, but:

reheat module wrote:Personally, I'd remove the word 'ever' in your phrase 'seldom ever' as may be indicative of tautology, or confliction, but otherwise no issues.


Well tautology is a matter of style over correctness (you can use a tautology, it's just that some see it as unnecessary), but fair cop, guv - you've got me there.

It's lawyer-speak to use tautologies sometimes; it enables you to squirm out of situations more easily than using direct words. I purposefully avoided using the word "never" writing my post, because I assume (as I always do) that I'm probably incorrect, and I was waiting for someone with more brains than I to find some obscure rule I don't know about that says it can be correct to use an apostrophe to pluralise a noun. It's easier to keep yourself clean by using more words than some consider necessary over using direct words like "never" (hence this mini-essay). So yeah, my bad.

Not that you did it, RM, but on the general point, I don't know what it is about grammar and spelling that makes people comb through your post looking for other spelling and grammar flaws. Like "haha! You're not such a smartarse!" Yeah, true, but that doesn't stop someone from being correct about the original point. In this instance, all I was doing was trying in a friendly way to let others know the correct way, because the moment you point it out to specific people, you're called a grammar-nazi, told to get a life, got no friends, sad, etc... So I am often left wondering how we correct grammar if those who make the errors don't notice it, and when you tell them, instead of going "oops, I missed an apostrophe" (which, let's be honest, is a perfectly forgivable mistake!) they come out all guns blazing asking how on earth you dare question the integrity of their incorrect language use.

I hasten to add that I make as many spelling & grammatical mistakes as anyone else (probably more), but that doesn't stop the correct rule from being pointed out.

Anyway, as I said in the post above; you add an s, (or an es as the case may be). For lens, I take it to be "lenses". Unless there's some other obscure semi-Latin rule that I don't know about.

Buuuuut there we go. A long post about grammar. Waheeey! I doubt anyone's still here reading this. :sleepy: :cuppa:

Rampvan wrote:Your spelling of "Daily Mail" is incorrect :facepalm:


Factually, I don't consider that it is. They fail at a rate which is daily.

User avatar
Brevet Cable
Posts: 13725
Joined: Tue 05 Mar 2013, 12:13 pm

Re: Honk! Honk! Idiot klaxon.

Post by Brevet Cable »

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-us-canada-42589965/explosion-as-two-planes-collide-in-toronto-pearson
Explosion as two planes collide in Toronto Pearson

Two planes crashed into each other at Toronto's Pearson Airport, Canada. The passengers and crew were evacuated unharmed.
Tôi chỉ đặt cái này ở đây để giữ cho người điều hành bận rộn
아직도 숨어있다

User avatar
Gonzo230
Posts: 277
Joined: Sun 01 Jul 2012, 8:13 am

Re: Honk! Honk! Idiot klaxon.

Post by Gonzo230 »

Yes, looks like an explosion to me...........

User avatar
Brevet Cable
Posts: 13725
Joined: Tue 05 Mar 2013, 12:13 pm

Re: Honk! Honk! Idiot klaxon.

Post by Brevet Cable »

Not forgetting the sensationalist use of "collide" & "crashed into each other", when the truth is that the WestJet aircraft was stationary & the Sunwing aircraft was being pushed back by a ground tug.
Tôi chỉ đặt cái này ở đây để giữ cho người điều hành bận rộn
아직도 숨어있다

User avatar
MicrolightDriver
Posts: 1427
Joined: Sun 31 Aug 2008, 10:23 am

Re: Honk! Honk! Idiot klaxon.

Post by MicrolightDriver »

I don't see the sensationalism in it really. Genuinely alarming stuff for those involved I would imagine.

User avatar
CJS
Posts: 8866
Joined: Thu 15 Jul 2010, 3:30 pm
Location: Hogwarts

Re: Honk! Honk! Idiot klaxon.

Post by CJS »

No doubt MicrolightDriver, but you'll have to concede that it's fairly ott language to use in the reporting afterwards.

Technically it might be accurate, but there's a fair old range of "explosion" and "collision" isn't there?!
"There's only one way of life, and that's your own"

User avatar
Gonzo230
Posts: 277
Joined: Sun 01 Jul 2012, 8:13 am

Re: Honk! Honk! Idiot klaxon.

Post by Gonzo230 »

MicrolightDriver wrote:I don't see the sensationalism in it really. Genuinely alarming stuff for those involved I would imagine.


Exactly. There was an explosion, there was a collision.

Pretty accurate report, really.

User avatar
MicrolightDriver
Posts: 1427
Joined: Sun 31 Aug 2008, 10:23 am

Re: Honk! Honk! Idiot klaxon.

Post by MicrolightDriver »

CJS wrote:No doubt MicrolightDriver, but you'll have to concede that it's fairly ott language to use in the reporting afterwards.

Technically it might be accurate, but there's a fair old range of "explosion" and "collision" isn't there?!


Sorry, having just watched it again I actually think it's more balanced than I'd initially thought!

The descriptions are factually accurate and appear over the actual footage as it plays out for the viewer to watch for directly for themselves. No embroidery along the lines of 'huge fireballs engulfing', or 'passengers screaming in terror', or that people 'feared catastrophe'.

Other descriptions of the event are available. Excerpts from CBC News for instance:-

'It was chaos'

When the planes struck, amusement turned to panic on board WestJet's Boeing 737-800, according to passenger Gustavo Lobo.

"Out of nowhere there was an audible crunch and the plane rocked slightly," Lobo told CBC News. "We looked out the window and saw that the plane had backed up into us. Everyone was a little shocked and kind of chuckling at the situation."

They didn't laugh for long, he said.

"Panic set in when [we saw] what seemed to be fuel spewing from the crash. After a couple of seconds the entire thing ignited and it was chaos inside the plane. People screaming and panicking all while the flight attendants shouted to try and control the situation."

Lobo took a video of the fire, and said eventually everybody slid down the emergency slides to safety, though the process was slowed by passengers who insisted on taking their carry-on luggage with them.

Fire and smoke

Ali Alagheband, also on the flight with his wife and 12-year-old son, said a "big ball of fire" lit up the right-side windows just seconds after the plane rattled with the force of the collision.

"Everybody was saying the F-word and screaming," Alagheband said, adding that he mostly stayed calm until black smoke seeped into cabin.

"The flight attendants kept saying 'remain seated, remain seated,'" he recalled. Fearing they'd soon be gasping for air and stuck on the plane, he told his son to stay calm and wear an oxygen mask if they fell from the cabin's ceiling.

"There was fire and there was fuel in that wing," he said. A mechanical engineer by trade, he could tell "it wasn't a good situation."

Nobody knew an evacuation was underway until a passenger stood on his seat and yelled that a door had opened, he said.

But as the crowd moved toward the door, some passengers blocked his family's escape.

"I was yelling at people reaching overhead to get their bags. It was ridiculous," he said. "I was literally yelling, 'Get the F off the plane."


DonaldGrump
Posts: 225
Joined: Mon 23 Jan 2017, 6:57 pm

Re: Honk! Honk! Idiot klaxon.

Post by DonaldGrump »

Good to see that the BBC is showing the rest how to produce a good accurate report .....anyone find any deliberate mistakes?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-42932616

User avatar
Brevet Cable
Posts: 13725
Joined: Tue 05 Mar 2013, 12:13 pm

Re: Honk! Honk! Idiot klaxon.

Post by Brevet Cable »

Bit of a thread resurrection, but I think this is worthy of inclusion :
https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/large-passenger-jet-en-route-14619521
Thus proving that there are still plenty of throbbers out there.
Tôi chỉ đặt cái này ở đây để giữ cho người điều hành bận rộn
아직도 숨어있다

Ken Shabby
Posts: 765
Joined: Mon 29 Sep 2008, 12:23 pm
Location: Romford, Essex
Contact:

Re: Honk! Honk! Idiot klaxon.

Post by Ken Shabby »

Brevet Cable wrote:Bit of a thread resurrection, but I think this is worthy of inclusion :
https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/large-passenger-jet-en-route-14619521
Thus proving that there are still plenty of throbbers out there.


A read through the comments below the 'story' goes some way to restore your faith in the human race.
Ken

Binbrook 01
Posts: 430
Joined: Sat 31 Jan 2009, 6:17 pm

Re: Honk! Honk! Idiot klaxon.

Post by Binbrook 01 »

Well you can sum up most of the regional newspapers now when they all use the same awful webpage layout.

Not to mention the additional Fake News S**t.... Scroll down to the bottom)

The story of the F-86D rediscovered after 73 years :joystick: :joystick: :joystick: :tumbleweed:

User avatar
MarkL
UKAR Supporter
Posts: 1874
Joined: Sun 31 Aug 2008, 5:44 pm

Re: Honk! Honk! Idiot klaxon.

Post by MarkL »

Tommy wrote:"Chipmunk's" :wall: :wall:

In addition to the inclusion of the Chipmunks, I also see that the "Greengrocer's Apostrophe" has made it into the media mainstream. This from the same paper that laments the young because schools aren't what they used to be and exams are too easy...

Gents - make sure you're better than the Daily Fail. You seldom ever need to use an apostrophe to pluralise nouns. Just add an "s" (or "es" as the case may be).

But, I realise it's one thing to rant about grammar, and another thing to just set out the correct way for others. It's the following:

Chipmunks, not Chimpunk's
F-16s, not F-16's
Idiots, not idiot's
Nazis, not Nazi's
Bigots, not bigot's
Apostrophes, not apostrophe's

... & so on and so forth.


*awaits someone to pull me up on some other grammatical issue... Did I forget the vocative? How about the gerund? :hypno:



Yawn's...... no wait !
HTAFC