Can FFF answer the main question of the thread? Rather than just dismissing the issue.
Sorry, must try harder.
I think the best way to get my point across is to try to give equivalent examples.
I can't think of any good,
common examples off the top of my head. A couple of not-so-good examples, though:
At my home airport, bad-weather circuits are nearly always done to the south, away from the helicoptor training area. Frequently, when I've previously asked for a bad-weather circuit, ATC have cleared me for a circuit to the north. I always query this (unless the clearance explicitly states a bad-weather circuit, which is rare), because experience tells me that very often there's been a mistake - for example, the controller has forgotten I'd asked for a bad-weather circuit. Sometimes, though, there's not been a mistake - the controller has cleared me for a bad-weather circuit to the north because the helicoptor training area is not active. But if there's any doubt, I ask.
Second example, also at my home airport. Unlike many of the other schools, my school's parking area is to the south of the airport. Normally, after landing, I'm instructed to vacate to the south. Occassionally, though, I'm instructed to vacate north. I nearly always query this, too, because the chances are the controller has not stopped to think about which school parks where, and has just cleared me to vacate on the side where most of the schools park. Or maybe not, maybe the route to the south is blocked, and I'm being taken a long way round for a good reason. Again, if there's any doubt, ask. (However, an awareness of priorities is important here. If there's an aircraft on short final behind me, then I'd rather vacate the runway, I don't care which way, and ask questions later, because I know that vacating the wrong way is unlikely to have any dire consequences, whereas blocking a runway which is needed is at best inconvenient, and at worst dangerous.)
This example, and the closest I can think of to the situation we're discussing: whilst downwind in the circuit, you are cleared to land. You read back the clearance (which is very unusual, because you usually received a clearance to land when on final, not downwind), and continue. By the time you've completed your checks, turned base, turned final, and you're approaching the threshold, a bit of doubt arises in your mind. It's so unusual to be cleared to land from the downwind position, that you're not 100% sure that the clearance really has been given. Once again, if there's any doubt, ask.
So, against the background of these examples, my point is this:
Let's say a pilot has become very used to being cleared outbound for a procedure whilst maintaining an altitude, the descent being given later on the approach (typically once you've passed inbound traffic). Then, one day, whilst in the hold, he is cleared for the procedure. He reads back the clearance and continues to complete the current hold. It's a windy day, he's not managed to hit his gate as accurately as he wanted, and during the inbound turn he has to make some corrections to ensure he established correctly on the inbound QDM. He completes the hold, goes beacon outbound, and is just about to start a descent, when a bit of doubt arises in his mind. Did the controller really clear me to descend? It's certainly not what he's used to, but he's been busy concentrating on the hold, and although he's reasonably sure he's cleared to descend, he certainly wouldn't bet his life on it. So...... what's he going to do?
Yes, in the ideal world it shouldn't happen. But it does. And I'd far rather ask for clarification than continue with an action which I'm less than 100% confident is correct.
But then, having re-read goddammit's original post, I have a bit of doubt in my mind - so I'll ask for clarification.
It strikes me, on reading goddammit's post again, that I may have misunderstood the question. Perhaps what you're asking isn't about pilots seeking clarificaiton on an uncertainty. Perhaps you're suggesting that pilots genuinely don't understand that the phrase "cleared for the procedure" includes the descent?
If that's the case, then I agree with you that it's not acceptable. The "excuse" for this would be that it does not happen often enough for pilots to be familiar with it.... but the "reason" why pilots don't understand the clearance is because instructors are not training their students properly. If something doesn't happen frequently in the aircraft, then the instructor ought to make a point of covering it in the sim, or in groundschool if a sim isn't used. I've come across a small number of students who, on the rare occassions they are cleared for the procedure, did not realise (as oposed to those who realised and understood, but by the time they went beacone outbound weren't sure exactly what the controller had said three or four minutes earlier) that this included the descent, and when I come across these students I make sure I debrief them on it. In fact, the last time this happened to me was this afternoon, and my student left the school without any doubt about the meaning of his clearance.
I hope that clears up my position on the subject. I certainly don't mean to be dismissive, but I'm not going to jump on the bandwagon of people who want pilots to descend when they go outbound without clearing up any uncertainty first.
FFF
----------------