UTA_flyinghigh From Tunisia, joined exactly 14 years ago today! , 6495 posts, RR: 48
Reply 4, posted (11 years 10 months 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 3492 times:
707, from what I remember of my days in HS, if you're American, aircraft are on short final whereas if you're English aircraft are on short finals.
If you're Elbonian, aircrafts are on shorts finale.
Fly to live, live to fly - Air France/KLM Flying Blue Platinum, BMI Diamond Club Gold, Emirates Skywards
Planemaker From Tuvalu, joined Aug 2003, 6753 posts, RR: 34
Reply 5, posted (11 years 10 months 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 3476 times:
Flyf15 & TriStar500:
Have you ever thought that the words/abbreviations or 'lingo' are not invented?
Aviation is awash with technical words and abbreviations, many standard and others that may be unique to a manufacturer or airline or country. Even within the same company, one division may use a different abbreviation for the very same part.
Here is a real example of a sentence that is almost all abbreviations:
Did QA MRB the HSTA RTV RNC?
Many A.Net members could give you several other examples. Just because you haven't seen it before, don't assume it is invented.
Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
BNE From Australia, joined Mar 2000, 3204 posts, RR: 11
Reply 6, posted (11 years 10 months 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3437 times:
For some people on Airliners.net English may not be their main language so they may get confused on whether to use aircraft or aircrafts. Its not something that would get picked up by the spel checkar.
Also in Elbonian would it be court finale or petit finale, the English/French dictionary wasn't so clear.
Socrates17 From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 54 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (11 years 10 months 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 3362 times:
Thank you Grammer Police. (I'm not being sarcastic. As Mrs. Slocomb used to say "I am, unanimous in that.")
But cut our fellow aviafans (new word?) a break, you should see some of the misspellings and malapropisms in the Amazon comments. And these people are supposed to be able to read. (BTW - Is a DC3 with a bad engine a malaprop?)
Bobrayner From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2003, 2227 posts, RR: 6
Reply 10, posted (11 years 10 months 19 hours ago) and read 3286 times:
English is a dynamic language. If it weren't, it would be unpossible to introduce words like aircraft firstwise.
So, somebody decides to pluralise the word by suffixing -s? This may be a little annoying when you first read it, but it doesn't hurt anyone. The writer knows what they mean; you know what they mean; and the wasted energy due to typing an extra character and storing that information on a PC is subcountable.
This process is even less annoying than creating plurals with the -en suffix. Aircrafts, sheeps, childs; it's all the same to me.