Strikes me we have the best of both worlds:
We can follow the standard phrasiology; no-one has post ANY critism of a pilot using only the standard calls.
OR
We can, if we judge the situation to warrant it, e.g. multiple runways in use, or a non-standard circuit being flown, add
a short rider the standard call, e.g. "DOWNWIND 23". I don't see the problem with adding this bit of additional information, or even the more verbose example of "DOWNWIND for GLIDE LANDING". I think that longer call adds to air safety, rather than detracts from it.
I do understand your point that people are being taught that this is the "right" way to do it, when patently it is NOT in the standard phrasiology. My personal view is that the standard is for guidance and is not an immutable standard. If I want someone to know exactly where I am in the circuit I'll add the bit extra.
The guy who landed on the wrong runway having made a sensible RT call needs his compass checking!
(This is not fault of sloppy RT!)
[ 10 December 2001: Message edited by: tacpot ]