English Triumphs Again!

The Gods of the Internet, Lords of the Grammar Nazis, have heard my plea. Or, you know, they got an editor to look at the follow-up to that scramjet article.

This makes [a scramjet engine] more efficient than a conventional rocket engine as it does not need to carry its own oxygen supply, meaning that a vehicle using one could potentially carry a larger payload.

I still protest to rockets and air-breathing engines being compared this way, but I guess that’s why I’m an engineer and not a journalist. (No offense, Greg 😉 )

3 Responses to “English Triumphs Again!”


  • None taken 🙂 Science journalism is notoriously difficult. The topics are frequently complicated, and the experts on them who get interviewed can’t usually explain things in a short quotable way that reporters like and understand. I’ve been meaning to write a few things for the SciTech section here to see if I do it better or worse than the current writers.

    Actually, after a quick glance at the new BBC article, the think I most strongly object to is the sentence that’s got one of the interviewees talking to the BBC News website. Unless news.bbc.co.uk equipped with a speech-to-text dialogue system, that probably won’t do too much. Also some odd comma use, or lack thereof.

  • Um… in paragraph two of the above, for “think” read “thing.” One of my more frequent typing mistakes.

  • If this were actually science journalism, that would be one thing. But as far as I’m concerned, it isn’t 😉

    I noticed “think” but wasn’t going to say anything.

    Now, did you read the article linked in this post or the one from the previous post? Because the one in this post was better, albeit marginally.

Leave a Reply