Literal Altitude Conversions - Dumb Journalists
This probably won't have legs, but I've got to vent my spleen somewhere. I was reading an article on the SMH website where the aircraft involved in the Buffalo accident "dropped 244 metres" before the crash. Similarly, when referring to things like CAT, with an aircraft in the cruise at, say, F310 (reported in the overseas press as approximately 31000 ft) our darlings in the press do a literal conversion and inform us that the aircraft was cruising "at approximately 9994 metres"
How in hell can 9994 be "approximate"?
I know our idiot laws require that things be reported in metric, but why are the dumb-asses in the press so lazy that they do a literal conversion (probably off a website converter) rather than use some nouse with regard to the word "approximate" and say " the aircraft was cruising at approximately 10000 metres?"
OK, I am being pedantic, but this recurs again and again and again and infuriates the bejeezus outa me.
On the other hand, maybe I should get a hobby.