In your original post you make a reference to “talking and hearing fast”. The following is an extract from an article entitled "Pilots and Memory: A Study of a Fallible Human System" by Robert Baron of The Aviation Consulting Group and written with reference to much academic research including both NASA and the FAA:
When ATC reads a clearance, and the pilot reads it back, many errors are noticeable, based on the delivery speed of the clearance. It is this author's estimate that clearances that are delivered at the highest speeds have as much as a 80% readback error rate, whereas clearances that are delivered at conversational speeds may only have a 10%-20% readback error rate.
Air Traffic Controllers do have a manual that provides tips on communication with pilots (FAA, 1999). Under chapter two in the manual entitled "Human Factors for Air Traffic Control Specialists: A User's Manual for Your Brain," the limitations of human memory are elucidated to remind controllers that human memory is fallible, and practical techniques should be used to offset these limitations. Highlights of the chapter include:
Speaking slowly and distinctly gives any listener a better chance of correctly hearing what was said.
Give pilots no more than three pieces of information in a single transmission. Studies have shown that cramming too much information in a single transmission can cause problems.
So, it's long been recognized that transfer of information is dependent on a number of factors, not just speed. Speed doesn’t necessarily equate to efficiency as you’ve no doubt found when you’ve operated into India or some ports in SE Asia - I assume you have, or do you only operate into North America?
This from the the supplement to UK CAP 413:
For level changes and reports, TO shall only be used in connection with altitude or height, e.g. DESCEND TO ALTITUDE 3000 FEET. It is not used when describing Flight Levels, e.g. CLIMB FLIGHT LEVEL 250
I guess this came in because someone might misinterpret (and readback) an instruction such as "Descend two four zero zero feet" as meaning "Descend to four zero zero feet" - think Flying Tigers Kuala Lumpur. So, I assume that when you fly to UK airspace you not only follow company procedures (if you work for CX that is) but also national procedures as to do otherwise you would have to ask yourself the following question:
What's professionalism? Not having a clue about the airspace procedures of the country you're flying over is certainly lack of it.
No-one’s perfect in this job and I’m staggered that this trivial event has sparked such a response, most of which was inconsequential until safety issues were touched on by your original post. Lord Spandex has highlighted one, i.e. visual approaches and I'm now highlighting the other.
Surely, a flexible approach to national idiosyncrasies might reduce the number of incidents in our incident-prone industry. However, going by his thread I doubt it very much (anyway, everyone knows Aussie ATC is the best..)
STP