I'm sure we're all familiar with the go/no go standard phrasing for reporting whether something is OK or not. Having a standard phrasing clearly makes comprehension easier and more reliable, especially in an international field where not everyone speaks the same languages, and especially when mistakes can be very costly.
But it seems like these two phrases in particular are the worst possible choice. If it's hard to hear the speaker and you don't hear the first syllable of "no go", it just sounds like "go". And even if you hear the first syllable but not the second, it still sounds enough like "go" to be easily misinterpreted.
It seems like the only advantage of go/no go is that the two phrases are different lengths, so that if you can hear the stress but the sounds themselves are indistinct, you can still tell them apart.
Whose idea was go/no go, and why did those phrases catch on, instead of two more distinguishable ones, such as "go" and "not good"?