I fly a lot of places (usually within the United States). When I take Delta, the flight attendants seem to recite (with minor differences) a prepared preflight speech detailing safety information.
They seem to have a lot of minor grammatical issues, but the most annoying to me is something like the following: "Pull the mask firmly toward you to start the flow of oxygen. Even though the bag will not inflate, oxygen is flowing." (something similar appears in an official version).
My main concern here is the tense. They are saying that the bag "will (not) inflate" (future) but that oxygen "is flowing" (continuing present). It's surprisingly difficult to come up with a better version, although I thought of a few variations that, if not solving the problem, would at least improve the sound (e.g. "Oxygen flows even if the bag does not inflate.").
Although I can't think of a grammatical reason, I feel like once the imperative tone is dropped (e.g. "[You ]Pull the . . ."), having consistent tenses becomes more important--and not having them becomes more egregious.
The whole thing is supposed to be conditional future also, although tacking the necessary would onto each sentence would decrease clarity, so I agree with their choice to leave it implicit.
I'm not so much asking because I don't know whether this is wrong (I'm almost certain it is), but because I'd like to know what the internet thinks of this. I have never seen anyone else notice this (and because it's so consistent and awkward, I usually visibly cringe).