Approach Clearance

[zilir]

If a pilot receives the following clearance :
"Cleared VOR DME approach RW18 via INLOT 1J report established final approach track"

Assuming that the pilot has the right approach plate with all minimums published does the ATC controller needs to still advice the pilot that he has to descend according to profile. If the controller does not advice the pilot to descend according to profile what is the pilot expected to do.

Thank you in advance

[ZOOKER]

This sounds like a clearance given in a procedural, (i.e. non-radar) environment, therefore ATC may have no indication that the a/c has descended below the minimum published altitudes.
If you depart on a SID, ATC does not usually instruct you to comply with the minimum altitudes. It is effectively a reversal of this.

[blissbak]

While you are flying the standard procedure terrain clearance is your task.

[zilir]

In fact the environment is radar but since the traffic sometimes is very low we clear flights to approach via a STAR.
A DLH flight after being cleared for approach via the STAR as i mention on my previous msg called back asking if he he was cleared to descend, it was kind of confusing since, as per our understanding, if you issue a clearance for approach via a STAR he has by force to follow the profile as published in the AIP.

[Denti]

Since different controllers see that sometimes different it is just good airmanship to ask if not sure.

Usually i would understand a clearance like that to follow the procedure altitudes. However there are exceptions, for example transitions from SID to approach which may require different wording. Those designed by DFS have usually a warning on the charts: cleared for transition is only the lateral path, cleared for transition and profile is both the lateral and vertical path. This only applies to transitions though, if you only need a SID and approach i would think no "and profile" is needed but would clear things up for the flight crew.

[DB6]

Speaking as a pilot, once you clear me for the approach you clear me all the way to the point at which I need landing clearance (or I go around). However it is normal for us to report e.g. established inbound/ base turn complete - for controller awareness - and these calls, together with the (strictly unnecessary) 'descend with the procedure......' reply from the controller, can be interpreted by some as compulsory so leading to the uncertainty you describe.
The important call for us to make is 4D (or equivalent) as that prompts you to give us landing clearance. Up until that point we are proceeding as cleared.

[zilir]

Thank you everyone, appreciate your inputs

ilir

[Quintilian]

Because of the different interpretations of what a STAR-clearance actually means, there was published an AIC in Norway in 2010 to clear up these matters...


SID/STAR PROCEDURES IN NORWAY FIR

The intention of this AIC is to provide updated guidelines for the use of SID and STAR in Norway FIR.

1. Arriving aircraft (STAR) and clearances

1.1 A STAR is characterised by an uninterrupted track from a defined start point up to a defined end point (for instance IF, FAF/FAP) where a relevant instrument approach may commence.

1.2 A clearance to follow a STAR implies that the aircraft shall follow the published track at its last cleared level and descend only according to explicit level clearance(s) from ATC.
When a STAR clearance is issued together with a clearance for instrument approach (see paragraph 3.2.2), this implies a clearance to commence descend.

1.3 An instrument approach shall not be commenced without an explicit clearance from ATC.
If a clearance for an instrument approach has not been received, the aircraft shall enter the holding pattern at the STAR end point (see para. 1.1).

2. Level clearances in conjunction with SID/STAR

2.1 When an arriving aircraft on a STAR is cleared to descend, the aircraft shall follow the published vertical profile of the STAR. Published level restrictions (eg. CROSS (significant point) [AT OR] ABOVE/BELOW (level)) shall be adhered to, unless such restrictions are explicitly cancelled by ATC. Published minimum levels based on terrain clearance shall always be applied.

2.2 When a departing aircraft on a SID is cleared to climb to a level higher than the level(s) specified in the SID, the aircraft shall follow the published vertical profile of the SID, unless such restrictions are explicitly cancelled by

ATC.
Note: This regulation applies when the SID specifies significant points which shall be crossed below/above a specified level. Most SIDs in Norway contains just a published initial cleared level (specified in the SID chart description). Further clearance to levels above this level can be issued without utilising the phraseology described in paragraph 3.2.4 below.

2.3 Level restrictions issued by ATC shall be repeated in conjunction with subsequent level clearances in order to remain in effect.


PDF:
https://www.ippc.no/ippc/display_pdf...0_A_005_en.pdf

[caber]

Sometimes, as a pilot, we have those little brain lapses too. One person looks at the person next to them and says, what did we just get cleared for? In those situations, standard procedure is to just ask the controller to make sure instead of trying to figure it out ourselves.
Additionally, different countries have different rules about altitude restrictions and again, sometimes we have those little brain lockups that make it easier to just ask for a little reminder than cause a major issue.

I mean, I've heard. Wouldn't ever have happened to me.....

[zilir]

Quintilian, it seems that, since you had to issue a AIC, you have identified this as an issue. Standarisation is the best way to avoid miss understanding. This would, potentially, remove the possibility for any "lapses", as pointed by caber, since the pilot would be prepared for what clearance he could expect
tks
ilir