I was interested to read the following on page 7 of the ATSB preliminary report:
The crews indicated that
there would likely have been some benefit in additional cues to highlight the shortened runway
length, including:
• Auditory cues, such as having their attention drawn specifically to the shortened runway when
given various clearances.
and, on page 14:
APAM had requested for ASA [Airservices Australia] (Melbourne Tower) to amend take off
phraseology to include that the runway was shortened, however this was declined as it was non-
standard and too prescriptive
(my bolding).
As a pilot not trained or based in Australia, but who operates there regularly, I found it incomprehensible that Airservices Australia declined to amend their take off phraseology! This should be a standard practice in Australia, as it is in the rest of the world.
Skybrary have a good article with links to the appropriate ICAO and FAA documents. Why can the phraseology not be amended during reduced length operations to add one word? "Malaysian 128, Runway 34
Shortened, Cleared for Take-off"