June issue feedback

[Cactus]

can anyone make it go to the latest post when i click the link? it's really hacking me off now, as is getting one mail per posting.

[Alan Hall]

Many thanks for that David. I'll be hot on the internet after work tommorow to have a look.

[Tony Jones]

Some belated comments on the June issue. Personally I found it issue to be pretty good overall with coverage of a broad range of disciplines and model types.

The exceptions are:

1. Hangar 9 Cub review by Graham Ashby. He starts with 'As we get older I'm convinced our taste in aircraft changes, etc, etc. (Should be: 'I'm convinced that as we get older our taste in aircraft....' but that is perhaps grammatical nitpicking).
Frankly I am not interested in Graham's convictions or ruminations on life. Further more, we have to wade through the entire first column and a bit of the second one, hearing about where he first saw this model, etc., etc., before we come to anything of relevance to the job in hand. I just hate this sort of padding and waffle.

It also appears from subsequent posts that the Editor failed to notice or report on some problems highlighted by subsequent posts.

3. Seagull Decathlon review by David Ashby.
When describing the stalling characteristics, David writes: ...with a slightly nose heavy setup I couldn't achieve anything other than a gentle mushy nose drop . In a strong wind and at the same G of G setting she doesn't do anything at all!'
So the windspeed affects an aircraft's stalling characteristics, does it? Please explain how.

Perhaps in the same way the time of year and state of the flying field affects the performance of our radio sets?

Best wishes
Tony Jones.

[Tony Jones]

Avatar test. Please ignore

[David Ashby - Moderator]

Thanks Tony

We can always rely on you to be poised and as razor sharp as ever..

Come along now, I've answered your final comment before - on that occassion you took the comment too literally, you'll have to accept the previous answer there Tony, we chatted very amicably about this on the phone so why not let it lie?

1. Cub - what problems did the editor miss? Tony, we can't see any. The comments about prop nuts and pilot seating positions are not problems per se.

2. Decathlon - you're right but I think readers would know what I meant.

How's your article coming along ?

David.

[Tony Jones]

David

Re the Cub: I see that some purchasers reported problems with the cowl and windscreen fit, but I how see that in your reply you emphasise that yours were fine. So I retract that comment with apologies.

Re my 'final comment' - sorry I couldn't resist the dig.

However, regarding the stall characteristics I simply can't accept that 'readers would know what I meant'. There are all sorts of erroneous myths out there which confuse beginners, and the idea that wind speed somehow alters amodel's flying characteristics (gusts excepted)is one of them.
Another common one is that models always descend when turning downwind and climb when turning into wind. (Some flyers have this happen all the time, but it's down to mishandling, not the wind speed itself). And one member of our club is absolutely certain that a strong wind makes it more difficult to turn back into wind if he gets blown downwind.
So I was disappointed to see RCME perpetuating one of them.
No enormous deal though.

Best wishes
Tony

[Tony Jones]

David and Graham

Just in case you think I reserve my criticisms strictly for RCME, here is the text of an email to the editor of another mag with RCM in the title:

Dear Mr .....

Regarding the above test of the CRRC Pro GF-451 in the June issue, how am I supposed to have any confidence in a reviewer who uses the abbreviation rpms for Revolutions Per Minute? And adding a 'grocer's apostrophe' to make RPM's as the heading for the table relating to propellers is just adding insult to injury. Surely these mistakes should have been picked up during the sub-editing or proof reading stages - assuming you have such things?

Best wishes
Tony

[Cactus]

theres always one ain't there :D

[Tony Jones]

Him or me, Cactus? If you mean me, remember that my adopted middle name is MELDREW!

Cheers
Tony

[Tony Jones]

David and Graham

Further to the email I sent to the editor of another, lesser magazine, I thought you might like to know that he has replied to the effect that he considers the incorrect use of rpms as an abbreviation for Revolutions Per Minute in a technical treatise as unimportant and suggests that I should know that the writer is 'a very clever guy who works with Cambridge University'. How I am supposed to know this he doesn't explain. He also considers misplaced apostrophes 'not a hanging offence' - even for someone claiming to be a writer and journalist. I beg to differ!
Cheers
Tony

[Cactus]

heck Dave, i never thought i'd see you so blahzey about incorrect language lol

[Tony Jones]

David

The undoubted deterioration in written English is hardly surprising when lecturers in English doesn't care about correct grammar. I am delighted you are niggled and will continue to have the odd dig (which is all it was) whenever I like. May I recommend Lynne Truss's book 'Eats shoots and leaves'to you?

In light hearted tone,
Tony

[Cactus]

not sure your grammer was up to scratch then either me dear chappy :p

[Tony Jones]

Cactus

You've got me bang to rights there! I had originally written 'a lecturer in English' and failed to change the verb when I altered it to the plural. Damn!

I'm sure David Smith wont' object. After all my meaning is clear so the language has done its job. So sorted, whatever, know what I mean?

Cheers
T

[Tony Jones]

David

Excellent - here I am getting all worked up and distracted by this forum when I should be writing copy for someone else and you have been flying! You are clearly better organised than I am.

I will try and reign in my Meldrewish concern with grammar and punctuation in future, while not guaranteeing to suppress it completely. :)

Best wishes
Tony.

[Peter Miller]

My last job before retirement was as technician in the CDT department of an upper school.

Many of the pupils couldn't spell, didn't use punctuation and had no idea of grammar. E.g. Lathe spelled four different ways in one short essay. Some of their stuff was unintelligible

I had a stand up argument with the head of English. I told him all the above and he said "That doesn't matter so long as they can express themselves."

I maintain that you cannot express yourself clearly unless you have a reasonable command of the English language and its correct usage.

At the time of the argument kids were lying round on the floor in small groups making stupid noises into tape recorders. Not sure how that improved their English.

[Tony Jones]

David

You are so b****y reasonable!

For the purposes of discussion, not argument, I take your point about this forum being the wrong place to debate English usage, grammar and punctuation in general. However, the Meldrew in me has no option but to point up these issues where he finds them.

My post about incorrect abbreviations of technical terms used in another magazine was a (failed?) attempt to reassure David and Graham that I wasn't being particularly critical of RCME. I do, in fact, consider it to be the best of the bunch in this respect.
What truly amazed me was the other editor's opinion that incorrect abbreviations in a technical were unimportant. Something that neither Graham or David would condone, I am sure.

That said, I confess to being of the old school that believes that any communication system (such as language)MUST have firm rules if misunderstandings are to be avoided. But that is a matter of opinion, and as you say, regarded as outdated by many modern educators.

A helicopter friend of mine and his 7 passengers were killed in 1984 because a technician though the difference between 25 square millimetres and 25 millimetres square, unimportant.

Oops - I'm using the forum for the wrong purpose again. Sorry!

Best wishes
Tony

[Peter Miller]

I have to say that Spanish is a far simpler language than English. You spell it as you pronounce it.
Never mind, in a few years everything will be written in text message English, Thank God I won't be around then, or I hope not.
At least my dyslexic word processors have a spell checker!
Peter

PS David, there are three more plans on various magazine files waiting to be published, one in the August RCM&E.
I must get on with the next plan quickly or RCM&E won't have one on file.

[Peter Miller]

I had a Polish friend who reckoned that that was the most diabolical language and he WAS Polish

[Tony Jones]

David

At least Finnish has a specific word for 'woman you live with but are not married to'. So much better than the English 'partner', which can lead to misunderstanding: like the man who slagged of his domestic partner (male) at a party and was overheard by a friend of his business partner who passed his comments on to that person in error. Is avovaimo gender sensitive? If it is, so much the better as that solves another modern ambiguity!

Cheers
Tony

[Mike Rolls]

Although I have no knowledge of Polish I find it hard to believe that could be a more diabolical language than Latin. I suffered it for five years, never came to terms with it, was an appalling Latin scholar and to this day find it difficult, nay impossible, to believe than the average Roman equivalent of the Eastenders cast could have used it in the way we were taught it!

Mike

[Jon Sales]

I love it but then i am slightly biased towards the mag arn't i David.

[Peter Miller]

At one school we had a choice between Latin abd book keeping. I chose book keeping, much more useful

[Tony Jones]

We have a nice little 'private' thread going here. Let's hope Graham doesn't close it because the title is out of date.

I had to do Latin at school and although I hated it at the time, it has proved surprising useful to me as an English writer in later life.

Best wishes
Tony

[Tony Jones]

Oh goodie - my Avatar has finally been approved. Shame it isn't the animated .gif version with tapping paws and flashing yellow eyes.

My grammatical hate of the week: the incorrrect use of 'less' to mean 'fewer'.

Anyone like to add their contribution?

Cheers
Tony