Mr Boeing can’t speak proper.
 

Engine Fire Switch.

It’s not a switch is it? It’s a HANDLE.
It’s something that you grasp and pull and twist. It has multiple functions.
Every other control in the flight deck follows accepted descriptive naming conventions. eg: switch, selector, lever, knob etc.

The word “Fire” in it’s title also implies exclusivity, whereas it is also used in non fire related checklists.

For twenty years I’ve watched people stumble over this counter-intuitive mouthful in the simulator every six months. The preceding item being Fuel Control Switch adds to the tongue twisting (as an aside why not the more intuitive “Fuel Cutoff Switch?).

I’d settle for “Engine Fire Handle” but how about Engine Emergency Shutoff Handle compressed to “E-Handle”? Or did another manufacturer have a patent on that?

I could go on all day about the grammatical shortcomings of the Boeing QRH but let’s just start here...
Boeing don’t accept unsolicited comments hence this missive...

Rant over.

Did you feel better now?

I suggest you absolutely avoid the French aeroplane. If Boeing leaves you ranting, you really have no idea what horrors are manifest in the 'European' jet.

Grammar
 

"Boeing don't"?

Boeing is not plural it is a single Corporation.

Boeing doesn't.

:O

C77 - It's a UK vs. US english thing (i've run into it many times in global forums) and a battle you can't win - a draw is the best you can expect.

In "the King's English," corporations are usually treated as plural entities, an association of multiple individuals, a "they." It may be related to the royal "We."

We in the US (including me) subsume the individuals into one entity, an "it" - a curiously "collectivist" approach for our ruggedly-individualistic society to take, but there it is.

And certainly in a phrase such as "Did Boeing pay its/their taxes?" - the singular is clearer about whose taxes are under scrutiny, and who might pay a fine (presumably not each individual employee). ;)

Well.
 

Thanks pif. I'll take a draw, then, someone has to defend the Murcan language.

You've got two things going on here. First off, anything Boeing puts out in the AFM or MM is written in something they call "simple English". Supposedly simple English is easier for people who don't have English as their native language to understand. However it loses much of the subtlety that native English speakers depend on so it has the effect of making less clear to them. Whenever we came up with instructions or procedures that would go into the AFM or MM, we had to give it to another group who then re-wrote it in simple English (sometimes we didn't even get to review it afterwards to make sure they hadn't inadvertently changed the meaning). I suspect that's where Fire Handle became Fire Switch - internally we always called it the Fire Handle...


Secondly the lawyers get involved - for example a throttle cable doesn't break or fail, it "separates"...:ugh:

Americans do not speak English, they think they do but unfortunately for them they speak "American".

Nurse Ratched has brought my medication and I feel better now...
Thanks for some insightful replies.
I will leave with my favourite Electronic Checklist QRH double negative from Airspeed Unreliable:

“Airspeed cannot be trimmed to the desired pitch attitude:”
Select option: Yes / No

"It cannot" should be preceded by No, ie, "No, it cannot". Simples. Clear as mud.


However, if you imagine the question "Is this correct?" after the proposed problem, then, "Yes, that is correct. It cannot be trimmed..." becomes the way to reply. Aaarrrggghhhh....

Yes; but try explaining something to a Russian without using a double negative, and you'd get the same confusion...hence it's written for all cultural understandings of English.

When the BAC 1-11 went to the USA, I believe the them "FUEL COCK" was an issue.

HSPOV L: I empathise.

"Simple English" Hm? My QRH to hand is 2013, so I apologise if this has been changed in recent years. Firstly, I had many comments on the text of QRH after during years of giving TR courses to a wide spectrum of cadets & primary language. I watched their confusion and errors caused by some uncertainties that I briefed them on them in advance. As has been said, it is very difficult to make comments direct to Boeing. The appropriate 'tech pilot' who did have access was not overly interested.

One common mistake was during 'One Engine Inoperative Landing' B738.
#2 Set VREF 15 or VREF ICE.
NOTE:........

#3.............

50% of cadets did not set VREF of any type. Why? Because the text was not in the usual format. Suggestion.

#2 VREF 15 or VREF 15 ICE........................SET
NOTE:................

This is how all other actions are commanded. It works, it is simple, but here was a scenario where the text format caused it not to work.

There are others where simple text is not the case, especially in the NOTES. Using a QRH is not the time to wonder, "I know what I'm reading, but is it what they meant.?" There was a huge improvement many years ago. The concept was good, but sometimes I have wondered if the lawyers took over from the pilots, as wordsmiths.

Back to the Fire Handle/Switch and pilots struggling with the mouth music under stress. For me it's important to 'do' the correct thing. Is it really a negative point to use the wrong word? Doing nothing while you flounder with your memory of Recall Items is more negative. Similarly on takeoff/GA "is it positive rate or positive climb?" No idea, but put the gear up FGS.

Gees no worries whilst they're calling em autoTHROTTLES

From our books and checklists I have always found the isolation valve switches a bit counter intuitive. "Isolation valve switch.....ON" sounds like you are isolating something, but in fact you do the opposite. To me, a valve is either open, closed or automatic.

I have always considered these statements as true/false.


However, I find the Boeing checklists to be mostly simple to follow. This is also a thing I hear from pilots transitioning from Airbus.

I couldn't agree more !
Assuming that the QRH for the bus is written in a similar language to the technical manuals (I'll have a look when I'm back in work tomorrow) there will be nothing "Quick" about it.
And for me, regardless what is written in the books, it's a Fire Handle.

If you really want to rant, plenty more material in (supposedly written in English) documents produced in south of France.

Well it is a switch - it just happens to be operated by a handle. :ok:

Like a few "switches" in my Boeing... they're actually pushbuttons... :confused:

Things have never been the same since we bloody colonists rebelled. :)