Halifax Wreckage Recovery Baltic Sea

Profile picture for user paulmcmillan

Member for

19 years 9 months

Posts: 2,554

Member for

10 years 10 months

Posts: 952

I knew the Halifax was an advanced design, but would you like to reconsider that statement?
Profile picture for user Matt Poole

Member for

14 years 9 months

Posts: 376

Had to laugh at your post, Graham, and I suspect that there will be a few readers who won't get it...which adds to the enjoyment.

Member for

10 years 5 months

Posts: 1,737

I think Graham missed the last photocaption.

Member for

10 years 10 months

Posts: 952

I did indeed, working from the thread title and the specific posting. Sometimes it is possible to be too obvious on the internet.
Profile picture for user J Boyle

Member for

14 years 11 months

Posts: 9,617

The article said "bailed out, the photo cutline said eject. another example of an editor (or whoever writes the headlines and photo cutlines) not reading the story. But if you read a dictionary, a crew member who bails out could be said to eject himself. Eject means "remove by force". A crewmember hurling himself through an open hatch is indeed ejecting himself from the aircraft.
Profile picture for user Matt Poole

Member for

14 years 9 months

Posts: 376

I acknowledge Eric's sense of humo(u)r, not just Graham's. Words can hit the funny bone, even when their usages are technically correct, like "eject" in the caption. And then there are other cases where one pronunciation has two meanings, and the media has fun with it. For example, take the words "furor" and "Fuhrer". Over the years, I've noticed that media reports about WWII and Hitler or Nazis love to use "furor". Going back to 1985, I remember the controversy when President Ronald Reagan visited Bitburg Cemetery. From the always-accurate Wikipedia: The Bitburg controversy involved a ceremonial visit by U.S. President Ronald Reagan to a German military cemetery in Bitburg, a town in extreme western Germany near the border with Luxembourg, in May 1985, designed to commemorate the end of World War II in Europe 40 years earlier. The visit aroused considerable criticism, both in the United States and around the world, when it became known that members of the Waffen-SS, the military arm of Nazi Germany's SS (Schutzstaffel), were also buried there. The entire SS was judged to be a criminal organisation at the Nuremberg trials. The fact that Reagan had not been scheduled to visit former Nazi concentration-camp sites compounded the controversy, and a trip to Bergen-Belsen concentration camp was later added to his itinerary. I remember headlines at the time about the "Furor over Bitburg". Here's one of them, and the use of "furor" is technically correct: https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1985-04-30-mn-19891-story.html I've seen "furor" used in similar stories since then, as well. Most of the time, not always (probably), the writers/editors know exactly what they're doing in choosing "furor". The New York Daily News is legendary for its cheeky headlines, too. You can see some of them here: https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/new-york-daily-news-front-pages-2018-gallery-1.3732896