Love those pathetic phrases..
"it's increasingly common" and "now widely accepted".
So are certain other stupid things like drugs - but that doesn't mean they're a benefit to society as a whole.

I hear there's a protest rally happening next Sunday..
Something to do with the semi-literate demanding a louder voice, I believe.
Appropriately worded signage is being prepared for the event.

Suggestions as to how we might best assist this challenged sector of our community will be welcomed.
.

What is alarming about the recent ATSB "reports" is the one about VH-TAK (Investigation: AO-2016-082 - Engine failure and forced landing involving Piper PA-28, VH-TAK, 3 km NW of Bankstown Airport, NSW, on 21 July 2016)
This was an engine failure out of BK yet :

Engine and fuel system inspection

The ATSB did not conduct an inspection of the engine and fuel system as part of this investigation.

The aircraft insurer elected to write the aircraft off without conducting an investigation to determine the cause of the power loss.

Yes, seems a bit strange that the cause of the power loss wasn't mentioned - why bother putting out a report at all if you don't tell people what actually happened?

Seeing as we're on the subject of grammar, this excerpt from the report sounds somehow wrong - perhaps 'power reduced further' might be better.

Still, we're probably all comfortable using the term 'total loss of power', so on a scale of zero power loss to total, there must be increasing power loss on the way, I suppose!

Yes, AOTW.
".. the power loss increased".
Like the brat I quoted earlier ... "That's how it is now - get used to it!"
I think I need to go have a good lie down.

I wonder what the late Mac Job would think if he was aware of the depths to which the ATSB reports have descended.:sad:

Anyone who has read articles published in the old ASD would have noted the high standard of grammar etc used in that now sadly missed publication.

I think the work experience kid must have written that "Investigation" report. It is meaningless drivel.

I hope "they" have gone back to school now to learn how to write English. "the power loss increased" would have had my old English teacher coming at you with a long ruler.

Your tax dollars at work, people.

Meanwhile a report I put in three weeks ago about a caravan who decided to do a low level left hand orbit on final on 24R and then flew over me on parallel final on 24L 100 feet above and in the opposite direction never even got acknowledged.

Reminds me of a report in an RAF Air Clues flight safety magazine which I read countless yonks ago. Seems a Vampire (single seat fighter) reported to ATC his engine was vibrating badly and he asked for a GCA (Ground Controlled Approach). He was vectored in IMC to final then transferred to the GCA frequency where the radar controller started to talk him down.

In the event, he crashed well short of the runway but survived. At the Court of Inquiry the ATC controller said he asked the pilot if the heavy vibration was still present during the GCA. The pilot replied the vibration had now ceased.

The ATC told the Court that he assumed from that news that everything was OK and the approach would be normal. He added "the pilot told me the vibration had ceased but he didn't say that was because the engine had actually stopped."

Exhibit L in a long list of grammatical crimes - 'literally' Majority misuse rules!

Literally unbelievable.

They/their has been used in this fashion for far longer than the PC brigade have been to the fore. I suggest that if it seems wrong then your education might be lacking.

I don't like the "misuse" of words like "literally" either, but like it or not the language changes. If educated folk from the 1600s heard us speak they would think it was full of mistakes that we think are perfectly correct. The only difference is that we are old enough to know how it used to be, we've seen it evolve, and we get upset because we "know" it's wrong. To people in the year 2100 though, it will just be how english is, and the fact that "literally" used to mainly be used to denote that something was not exaggerated will be a quaint fact trotted out at pedant's parties.

The one that really gets my goat is the increasing use of "aircrafts" as the plural of aircraft. I see it more and more in professional publications and can see that it's only a matter of time before it becomes mainstream.

It's a shame that English doesn't have a genderless singular pronoun, which leads to the use of "they" and "their" when talking about a single person. That said, it always annoys me, and sometimes confuses me when it is done. I think it's better to construct sentences to avoid it, and if that requires "he or she" then so be it?

We all understand that PC, not Personal Computer but Political Correctness, has gone mad. If anyone is ever able to find a copy of "Voices from the Swamp", a collection of articles written by South China Sunday Morning Post journalist Peter Sherwood between 1987-1989, I would highly recommend the publication. Unfortunately it does not have an ISBN and may be difficult to find outside Hong Kong. If found, I am sure the reader will consider the effort worthwhile.

Yes gender political correctness seems trivial when you have a dick.

What IS this forum? Surreal - first post since joining in 2003???
Finally a topic you thought you'd share your two bobs worth???

I thought you might have known, joseph.
They're out there, lurking, just waiting for what they think is the right moment.
Be afraid ...

I am!
I might work with them! :eek:

I'm just looking forward to 2029 when Surreal delivers their next sentence. ( the use of 'their' is not lost on me)

Reminds me of the old joke:

Some Aussie parents adopted a German toddler who was apparently normal in all respects, but showed no signs of developing the ability to talk.
A couple of years went by and they took him to all kinds of specialists to see if they could find out what was going on, but to no avail. After a while, they resigned themselves to the fact he was never going to be able to talk.
On his fifth birthday, the had a little party, and the boy's adoring adopted Mum made a lovely cake. After he'd blown out the candles and tried a piece, his mother, who was in the habit of talking to him as if he'd answer even though she knew he never would, said "How did you like your cake, darling?"
"Oh, I'm sorry to say it was a little dry, mama."
Disbelievingly, the parents looked at one another. Their baby boy had finally spoken, and in a perfect sentence, although he had a strong German accent.
"Oh, darling, if you could talk, why haven't you done it before now?" said Mum, tears in her eyes.
"Vell, everything was perfectly acceptable up to now."

Dear Josephfeatherweight (you chose the right name there didn't you?),

I have have commented on PPRuNe many times since 2003, but used another handle.
I now can't find the password and discovered I had another one.
Hope that helps out your sweet little brain.
(You might recognise my old posts because they usually contain the word DICK in them).

For those that are actually interested in why government bodies choose gender neutral language in official documents - there is plenty of information available online which explains the very good reasons to do so. But hey, most people are not interested in using their brains and understanding; most people just want to throw their own ill-equipped opinions into the ring and have a whinge at the world about political correctness. Those poor privileged white men being ignored again. Diddums.

I can see why your other posts usually have the word DICK in them somewhere.......:rolleyes:

There used to be a term for the obsession manifested by that habit, but it's probably now politically incorrect.

Don't worry: White male pilots will slowly be culled from the gene pool, due to an inability to glean anything useful from ATSB reports.