Cleared for an approach - Can you descend and when?
Join Date: May 2020
Location: dublin
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OKAY folks, I’m delighted to say that I appear to have found reasonably definitive guidance on the question….
Now you have to try to remember exactly what phrase ATC cleared you with… DESCEND or CLEARED …. see below
If ATC clears the operator using the phraseology: “(Call sign) is cleared for the LAD 1 Arrival to Runway 23 at the XY airport”, the operator is cleared only for the lateral path of the arrival and ATC will provide permission to descend to altitudes as they want.
If the operator is cleared using the phraseology: “(Call sign) descend via the LAD 1 Arrival to Runway 23 at the XY airport”, the operator is cleared for both the vertical and lateral path of the published arrival and is expected to meet all altitude and airspeed limitations on the procedure.
Are we all done? 😁
Now you have to try to remember exactly what phrase ATC cleared you with… DESCEND or CLEARED …. see below
If ATC clears the operator using the phraseology: “(Call sign) is cleared for the LAD 1 Arrival to Runway 23 at the XY airport”, the operator is cleared only for the lateral path of the arrival and ATC will provide permission to descend to altitudes as they want.
If the operator is cleared using the phraseology: “(Call sign) descend via the LAD 1 Arrival to Runway 23 at the XY airport”, the operator is cleared for both the vertical and lateral path of the published arrival and is expected to meet all altitude and airspeed limitations on the procedure.
Are we all done? 😁
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: USA
Posts: 803
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, while I appreciate the reference detective work... no. 
On account of
1) The original question being about descending on an approach and not arrival, and
2) The particular example being that they were cleared with the verbiage of "cleared" (and not "descend via,") which according to your reference should give an answer of can not descend; but controller in the story gave an answer of yes, descend.
On account of
1) The original question being about descending on an approach and not arrival, and
2) The particular example being that they were cleared with the verbiage of "cleared" (and not "descend via,") which according to your reference should give an answer of can not descend; but controller in the story gave an answer of yes, descend.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Germany
Age: 53
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I feel that in this very example (TLV AMMOS 1E followed by the RNP W 30) things are quite clear: We usually get a clearance like: "Descend to ALT 6000ft via the AMMOS 1E ARRIVAL" - so we will to descend to 6000 ft respecting all the constraints on the arrival. At some point they will say "You are cleared for the RNP W 30", so we follow the ARRIVAL to HADAS, and as HADAS is not only the end of the ARRIVAL but also the IAF of the RNP Approach as well (and we are cleared for that approach), we can now follow the cleared RNP Approach which allows us to proceed to the runway and descend according to the procedure as well (HADAS AT 6000FT, MORIA at 3600ft, ROMIE at 2400ft, BG005 at 1800ft).
Thats how we do it every time and I would say itˋs quite straightforward.
Thats how we do it every time and I would say itˋs quite straightforward.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Germany
Age: 53
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It would be a different story if they would have just said "you are cleared for the AMMOS 1E ARRIVAL" when he was in FL 200. Then nobody could expect him to leave that altitude.
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: USA
Posts: 803
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But they were cleared for the RNP W 30 APPROACH, which implies that you can leave 6000ft after HADAS because that is the IAF.
It would be a different story if they would have just said "you are cleared for the AMMOS 1E ARRIVAL" when he was in FL 200. Then nobody could expect him to leave that altitude.
It would be a different story if they would have just said "you are cleared for the AMMOS 1E ARRIVAL" when he was in FL 200. Then nobody could expect him to leave that altitude.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Europe
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Exactly the same scenario I discussed with another instructor today: you are following a STAR maintaining 6000’, (last descend clearance was to 6000’, no “descend via”), STAR terminates at an IAF that has 3000’ minimum altitude (no other alt restrictions on STAR route remain). While still on the STAR, you get cleared for ILS Z (runway), nothing else.. What on Earth allows me to descent to 3000’ immediately? Maintaining 6000’ until IAF was not the answer he was looking.
Where is the written, official reference that would allow such a descend in Europe, U.S. or anywhere else? Because I have yet to see it, and I haven’t seen it in this thread yet, either. I understand if you’re in FAA and on a feeder route on an IAP chart and cleared for the approach, you can descent to the altitude depicted on that route (same rule as descending after IAF). But in this scenario we are still on a STAR, and not yet on the IAP chart. What I’ve seen on AIM though, is that you can descent if you’re cleared for the approach while you’re on a “published route”. The definition of the published route (in the pilot/controller glossary) could cover STAR route as it has altitude depicted, but I’m still skeptical if a clearance for ILS would allow you to descend while still on the STAR. I’ve been wrong before though.
Where is the written, official reference that would allow such a descend in Europe, U.S. or anywhere else? Because I have yet to see it, and I haven’t seen it in this thread yet, either. I understand if you’re in FAA and on a feeder route on an IAP chart and cleared for the approach, you can descent to the altitude depicted on that route (same rule as descending after IAF). But in this scenario we are still on a STAR, and not yet on the IAP chart. What I’ve seen on AIM though, is that you can descent if you’re cleared for the approach while you’re on a “published route”. The definition of the published route (in the pilot/controller glossary) could cover STAR route as it has altitude depicted, but I’m still skeptical if a clearance for ILS would allow you to descend while still on the STAR. I’ve been wrong before though.
