You certainly are entitled to disagree with me - even jtrain is afforded that luxury. :laff:
For a moment, let's discuss your "who cares" philosophy. I approach this discussion with the utmost sincerity and respect. Aviation is a unique animal in that it is extremely difficult to produce a predictably safe product with so many individual personalities and the quirkiness that exists in most pilot pools. If pilots were allowed to individualize their flying techniques like picking and choosing checklist items or arbitrarily choosing their own techniques for abnormal situations, there would be an absolute meltdown of current safety standards. Standardization is what makes it work despite a few holdouts that still do it their way for reasons unknown. Defining touchdown zones, approach parameters, phraseology, emergency procedures and most other duties associated with a flight allows us all to essentially operate in this zone of commonality and predictability. I know what techniques and procedures my first officer will be using because we have trained that way. And, not having to wonder what the other guy is doing improves safety by significant margins.
So as you said, who really cares if you use zero or oh? I will admit that most controllers probably don't care. In fact, I don't ever recall hearing a controller scold anyone for using oh instead of zero. So if they don't care why should you? I think you should care because throughout an aviation career you will be called on and pressured by many to do things that are in strict violation of FARs and/or company regulations. You will have many many opportunities to put your own rationalizations and justifications into everyday routine things as well as very challenging situations that need solutions. Admittedly, some of the decisions I have made as a captain have not 100 percent complied with the all the rules. These decisions are never easy for me, nor should they be. If I allow myself to become comfortable using non standard techniques (including phraseology), it is only one small step in becoming comfortable with the next non standard thing, then the next, then the next. Standardization should be the norm for all of us as that is where we will achieve peace of mind in our careers, while providing our passengers with the absolute highest safety margins, which is essentially our job.
Am I perfect in my phraseology - Absolutely not. Do I say tree and fife instead of three and five - Nope. But, I am aware that five and fife are the same thing, as is tree and three. Zero and oh are not the same thing. Nobody would ever think to identify the NORAD fix as November Zero Romeo Alpha Delta would they?
I believe the successful outcome of a flight is no real indicator that the flight was conducted safely. I have seen horrible technique and poor decision making used on flight decks, yet they managed to get the airplane to the gate. Just because it arrived, can we seriously deduct that it is no different than the flight that arrives at the next gate over that was flown by a professional crew that conducted their flight to the highest levels of integrity and standardization? To the outsider they see no difference, but I would certainly have issues about which flight I placed my family on as would most here.
Here is the bottom line guys....You are all free obviously to pick and choose the way you will attach your signature to your flights. If you are comfortable in the way you do things - so be it. The purpose of my post was to remind everybody that it becomes a slippery slope when we start rationalizing that wrong is right - it isn't, and never will be despite the fact that we sometimes try to make it so. Learning from today, and being a better pilot tomorrow should be the worthy goal of each if us.
Here, here.....:beer: