166k
I understood your explanation perfectly, I just do not think that it sounds very plausible. As you said originally, "an explanation as good as any", though you later implied that it was THE explanation. Either way, it illustrates an appalling laxity if you think that "heading 230" constitutes an instruction.
If you do not get any document amendments at LACC, two points. Why are you not making a fuss with the management - or SRG - if you do not have amendments drawn to your attention, but how is it that you still complain about the number that you have to remember?
Back to the point. As has been said previously, there is no definition of the term "radar heading" and it does not feature in any standard phraseology. Hardly surprising then that some pilots are confused by it - it should not be used.
Neither does it feature in ICAO definitions or phraseology. I do not quite understand your question about UK differences. The UK, as well as many other states, files differences from ICAO terminology, standards and recommended practices because it believes that it has good reason. Admittedly, these can sometimes create as many problems as they solve, but would you argue with the logic of using "holding point" instead of "holding position" or "flight level one hundred" etc instead of "flight level one zero zero" etc - particularly, of course, if some clown is going to throw in "heading one one zero" without "degrees" or a specific instruction in the same transmission.
Do not quite understand your closing shot - what exactly is PC about everyone trying for a bit of accuracy and common understanding in the interest of safety? That's why the young pilot chappie started this thread.