Philthy
To some degree I disagree with you. One presumes that R/T phreseology is mandated so that pilot and ATS operators alike, know what is expected. Sadly, ATS operators are FAR BETTER at the use of correct phraseology than the general pilot population.
However, if we're to allow individual ATSers to demand a readback of their pet thing, then proscribing the phraseology in the AIP is a waste of time.
I forget what the guy into Alice said the other day, save that it was not particularly signifficant. It wasn't a wind check but the scenario could be likened to being given a wind check, x-wind 5 kts, and being asked to read back, "copied 5 kts x/wind".
IMHO we read back far too much. In the
good old days where
most R/T was acknowledged with the transmission of a call-sign, things seemed to work well from my perspective. I can't see that anything has improved by the mandating of more and more detailed readbacks, so that now, it's not uncommon to be unable to get onto ATS for, say a descent clearance, because Bloggs (not THE Capn Bloggs of course) is reading back,
"copied no Eye-Ef-R traffic, area Que-En-Aitch one zero one three, cleared to leave control area on descent when ready, contact BNE centre one two fife deycimal zero leaving Flight level one eight zero"
37 words;
when the only response required is
one zero one three, one two fife daycimal zero
9 words
ps. haven't had a detailed look at the 8Jun amendment yet, some of the above comments may be incorrect in the light of what ever is in the amendment.