ILS intercept question
Hi Guys!
After flying professionally for 6 years I recently came over an episode wich caused an argument between myself and my captain. (On ground afterwards of course).
The case was:
We were cleared direct a beacon that was positioned appx. on 8 mile final to the active RWY along the ILS centerline. The clearance was issued with the intention of giving us a visual approach later on. Upon approaching the beacon appx 5 miles from it at an altitude above MSA we still didn't have the field in sight and I suggested to request "maneuver space" in order to intercept the ILS final approach track ourselves before the beacon and thereby below the ILS GS. The captain stated immediately that that was not allowed and requested vectors for ILS instead which we got. We then completed the ILS approach for landing. Afterwards the discussion came up why or why not this was not allowed. My captain argued that we are only allowed to follow published procedures to intercept the ILS, either from an arrival procedure or from a fix designed as an IAF and in our case the only correct procedure would be to start a racetrack entry at the beacon ahead. I argued that it was not neccessary as we were above the MSA and could thereby fly in anywhat direction we wanted as long as our clearance allowed us to, also to intercept the ILS LLZ and later the GP from below, as long as we had other means of determening our position, either from a QDM from tower, beacon or radial. We agreed that we disagreed and that we should seek an answer to this. After asking another captain who argued the same as myself I decided to ask the question on this forum.
So if there are any Pans-ops and JAR-ops guru's out there that could give me a correct answer it would be highly appreciated!
I would like to point out that both the suggested procedures for approach are safe in my opinion. So the question is more what is legally correct ?