As an Englishman, apart from sheer buggerousness (a wellknown Aussie trait
) Why the hell would you
wantto use a word which is ambiguous or context-dependent, when you have a clear, definitive alternative?
Left= departed or changed direction.
To = intended destination, adittionally (too) 1+1 (two)
superflous if correct unambiguous phraseology is used.
Right = okay, relative direction, immediacy.
"left to 110 right "....OK,it wouldn't be transmitted by even the most gormless, but it's possible, so why make holes in the cheese when you don't need to?
departed or vacated =clear and unmistakeable...left is open to misintrepretation.
to/two has caused accidents, that's easy to see why.
RT procedures were established when valve-radio on AM (Amplitude Modulation) was the only horse in town. It's deficiencies were largely mitigated by procedures which attempted to overcome the------ or the SCCCCHHHHHHH....
Why not just think about what you're saying and wether it could be said in a clearly-defined ,unambiguous way which a "foreigner" could not misinterpret.
This truly
IS a safety issue which CASA could devote it's energies to ,instead of hounding colour-defecient pilots.....
CVD pilots =no accidents 20+years
Military night vision (monochrome) gogle pilots=no accidents
Misinterpreted/ not heard/faulty radio accidents....
LOTS
why compromise safety when you don't have to?