using medical terminology to express technical matters

[JACEK1]

Hello everybody!

I have not written you for quite a while.

I would like to ask you if it is appropriate to use medical terminology when we discuss repairs to ships or replacements of various ship's fittings.

Repair Yard XXX has finished installing systems for cleaning ballast water. These are the first orders that the shipyard has received from the regular client – KESS Company, an owner of a fleet of car carriers. The first of the ships, AAA, was equipped with a system at the shipyard this July, the second, CCC, underwent the operation to install a system this August.

What do you think of the bolded part?

Is it properly used?

Thank you.

 

[JACEK1]

Should I leave it as it is or change?

 

[Rover_KE]

Who are you writing it for?

 

[tedmc]

Jacek
You started off by saying that the ships were installed with "systems to clean ballast water".
Then you said ships AAA and CCC were each installed with "a system". Are they the same system?
If they are, I think it would have been clearer to say: The first ship, AAA, was installed with xxx system, followed by BBB with the same system/ with yyy system. Or, "installation work for the xxx system was first carried out on AAA followed by CCC.
Factual reports should be precise and specific rather than leave room for the reader to wonder what the terms mean.

 

[probus]

The word operation is not in itself a piece of medical jargon. Of course you can use it.