The Debrief Paragraph That Cannot Be Signed
Flight Cadet Hamza must submit a one-paragraph entry for his sortie-debrief file. The instructor marks it on grammar, clarity and formality of register. Hamza's draft contains these four sentences:
S1: 'The aircraft was inspected by the ground crew before the flight, which had been delayed twice.' S2: 'Neither the pilot nor the co-pilot were aware of the changed runway.' S3: 'The team decided to postpone the sortie due to the fact that the visibility was bad.' S4: 'Having completed the pre-flight checks, the engine was started by the cadet.'
The instructor's only written comment is: 'Not one of these four sentences is fully acceptable.' Hamza has twenty minutes to repair the paragraph, and he must be able to defend every change he makes in front of the flight commander.
1. Identify the specific fault in each of S1 to S4, classify each fault as grammatical, ambiguity, or register/style, and explain what the instructor's one-line comment rules out.
Read the worked answer
S1 - ambiguity. The relative clause which had been delayed twice has an unclear attachment: a reader can take it as the flight that was delayed, or the aircraft. The passive was inspected by the ground crew also pushes the actor to the end and makes the clause dangle awkwardly after it. It is not ungrammatical, but it is not reportable prose.
S2 - grammar. With neither ... nor joining two singular subjects, formal written English takes a singular verb: Neither the pilot nor the co-pilot was aware. The nearer-subject rule also gives was here, since co-pilot is singular. Were is the fault.
S3 - register/style. Due to the fact that is a five-word substitute for because, and bad is an unmeasured adjective. Nothing here is grammatically wrong; the sentence fails as an official record.
S4 - grammar (misrelated participle). Having completed the pre-flight checks is attached to the nearest noun, the engine, which produces the absurd reading that the engine completed the checks.
What the comment rules out: 'not one' means the candidate who finds three faults and declares the fourth acceptable has answered a different question. Four faults, four different reasons - the exercise is testing whether Hamza can separate grammar from style from ambiguity instead of labelling everything 'wrong'.
2. Rewrite S1 so that it has exactly one possible meaning, and show the alternative reading you have excluded. Then rewrite S4 with the participle correctly attached.
Read the worked answer
S1. The two readings are:
- (a) the flight had been delayed twice;
- (b) the aircraft had been delayed twice.
Rewrite for reading (a): The ground crew inspected the aircraft before a flight that had already been delayed twice.
Rewrite for reading (b): The ground crew inspected the aircraft, which had already been held on the ground twice, before the flight.
The repair technique is the same in both: replace the trailing which with either a noun that repeats the intended referent (a flight that) or a clause attached directly to the intended noun. Hamza must choose the reading that matches the facts, not one that merely sounds smoother.
S4. After the cadet had completed the pre-flight checks, he started the engine. The subject of completed is now explicitly the cadet, and the participle no longer floats.
3. Rewrite S3 so that it is formal, shorter, and states the reason concretely. Then explain why 'bad visibility' is a safety problem in a debrief, not merely a style problem.
Read the worked answer
Rewrite: The team postponed the sortie because the reported visibility of 1,500 m was below the squadron minimum of 3,000 m.
Three repairs are made at once: due to the fact that becomes because; bad becomes the measured value that triggered the decision; and the standard it was measured against is named.
Why it matters beyond style: a debrief sentence is evidence. 'Bad visibility' cannot be audited, cannot be compared with the forecast, and cannot be trended across sorties. Two readers will attach two different thresholds to 'bad', so the same entry could look like a sound decision to one commander and a press-on regardless to another. The measurable form makes the decision reconstructable: anyone can check whether 1,500 m really was below the minimum on that date. In an investigation, an unquantified adjective is a gap in the record, and gaps are read against the person who wrote them.