Originally Posted by
RandomPerson8008
The world has done a lousy job of standardizing STAR phraseology.
Why does the FAA do it this way, Australia just expects you to comply with STAR altitudes when given "descend 3000 feet" (everywhere else this would mean descend unrestricted), Germany uses "transition and profile", and most other places say "descend via STAR 3000 feet"?
I do wish the US/FAA would just include the bottom altitude in their descend via clearances and the top altitude in their climb via clearances. Would it really take up that much extra air time, even if it is the same as what's charted?
-Edit apparently the Australians have changed their policy to include "descend via STAR" when issuing a lower altitude, which is good. The Canadians seem to be doing it the old Australian way now, though....haven't flown to either place in years.
Mainly fly FAA, so: (IMHO) I think the tops/bottoms are specifically excluded, so that if an altitude is given by ATC it is more likely to be noticed by the pilots.
Haven't flown into Germany for a while, so what does "transition and profile" mean????