Flying a STAR

[AcroBoy]

Flew into San Antonio recently and was cleared for the marcs 9 arrival. At the appropriate intersection I started to descend per the star, and ATC asked where I was going. There was nothing in the star that said to maintain assigned altitudes unless otherwise assigned, so I tried to follow the altitudes as written in the star. ATC instructions were simply to follow the marcs 9 arrival.

I need to review the far and aim, but in general are we supposed to stay at the last assigned altitude, or unless directed otherwise, follow the altitudes in the published star?

Or, could this be some local practice?

 

[OzPilot]

I am not instrument rated, I am just doing all the theory now to prepare for the exam in a week.

From my understanding is that if you are cleared for an named approach, you should be executing that specific approach as documented.

The other reasons not to follow it as documented is if you are getting radar vectored or have been requested to get to a fix in another manner.

e.g. "N12345, cleared for the marcs 9 arrival, maintain 8000 feet until MARCS, then continue as published"

or something along those lines.

I could be wrong, however it would be nice to get other opinions so I have an indication that I need additional study in this area


http://flightaware.com/resources/airport/KSKF/ALL/all/pdf

 

[HPNPilot1200]

You are not authorized to leave your assigned altitude unless ATC gives you a clearance to descend either to an altitude, a crossing restriction, or "descend via" clearance. The MEAs and "expect" altitudes are not to be followed until ATC issues a verbal clearance to do so.

See AIM 5-4-1

1. STAR/RNAV STAR/FMSP procedures may have mandatory speeds and/or crossing altitudes published. Other STARs may have planning information depicted to inform pilots what clearances or restrictions to “expect.” “Expect” altitudes/speeds are not considered STAR/RNAV STAR/FMSP procedures crossing restrictions unless verbally issued by ATC.

NOTE- The “expect” altitudes/speeds are published so that pilots may have the information for planning purposes. These altitudes/speeds shall not be used in the event of lost communications unless ATC has specifically advised the pilot to expect these altitudes/speeds as part of a further clearance.
[SIZE=-2] REFERENCE-
14 CFR Section 91.185(c)(2)(iii).[/SIZE]

2. Pilots navigating on STAR/RNAV STAR/FMSP procedures shall maintain last assigned altitude until receiving authorization to descend so as to comply with all published/issued restrictions. This authorization will contain the phraseology “DESCEND VIA.”

(a) Clearance to “descend via” authorizes pilots to:

(1) Vertically and laterally navigate on a STAR/RNAV STAR/FMSP.

(2) When cleared to a waypoint depicted on a STAR/RNAV STAR/FMSP, to descend from a previously assigned altitude at pilot's discretion to the altitude depicted for that waypoint, and once established on the depicted arrival, to navigate laterally and vertically to meet all published restrictions.

 

[AcroBoy]

My assumptions were the same as yours- I was instructed to fly the arrival but was not given any altitude assignments or restrictions.

In the absence of these instructions I flew the altitudes on the published star, which apparently was incorrect.

 

[OzPilot]

You are not authorized to leave your assigned altitude unless ATC gives you a clearance to descend either to an altitude, a crossing restriction, or "descend via" clearance. The MEAs and "expect" altitudes are not to be followed until ATC issues a verbal clearance to do so.

See AIM 5-4-1

Thanks, I'll review the AIM (OKAY Yep... 5-4-1 is totally clear on this...

 

[AcroBoy]

Jason, thanks for helping to look it up. So, for future reference, the star provides lateral guidance, but altitudes are those assigned by atc. As it turned out, even though I had a visual on the apt and reported this, they gave me a slam dunk and kept me at around 4000 agl until five miles or less on base.

Anyway, thanks again -a good question for a biennial exam.

 

[HPNPilot1200]

Jason, thanks for helping to look it up. So, for future reference, the star provides lateral guidance, but altitudes are those assigned by atc.

If your clearance included the STAR or ATC clears you via the "XYZ STAR" then yes, the STAR provides lateral guidance for your route of flight.

Altitudes published on the chart (MEAs, expect to cross, etc.) are advisory only until ATC clears you to descend lower. They can elect to have you descend to an altitude, cross a fix at a certain altitude (not always at the expected altitude), or "descend via" the STAR. A "descend via" clearance allows you to navigate both laterally and vertically on the STAR, descending to meet all of the "expect to cross" restrictions.

 

[Let'sgoflying!]

even though I had a visual on the apt and reported this, they gave me a slam dunk and kept me at around 4000 agl until

That would be the punitive segment of the star!

 

[AcroBoy]

Well, I admit to not flying a lot of stars or dps, so learned something new. Atc was great fitting me into the flow. My Baron was like a Ford Escort on the ramp, it was the cheapest plane by a factor of ten.

 

[Let'sgoflying!]

No harm done and your post reminded a bunch of people about a gotcha.
Another one is "join the localizer 17R" - lateral guidance only; do not capture the G/S!

 

[EdFred]

No harm done and your post reminded a bunch of people about a gotcha.
Another one is "join the localizer 17R" - lateral guidance only; do not capture the G/S!

Yup! Join the localizer only means sideways...CLEARED ILS...means up and down.

As far as STARs go, I've never seen one start low enough where I'm going that I would ever get it issued.

 

[midlifeflyer]

As far as STARs go, I've never seen one start low enough where I'm going that I would ever get it issued.

http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/1106/00571GOOFY.PDF

Interesting, though... I've flown the route between the Palm Beach and northwest Orlando areas a number of times. The routing has always be exactly the same as the GOOFY arrival but I've never had it specifically assigned.

 

[HPNPilot1200]

Yup! Join the localizer only means sideways...CLEARED ILS...means up and down.

As far as STARs go, I've never seen one start low enough where I'm going that I would ever get it issued.

There aren't a ton, but there are some out there. Coming back from Venice FL last year, ATC cleared me direct to some fix and then the Ft. Lauderdale 2 arrival into FXE. I had to get them to spell the fix because it wasn't on my flight plan. A few moments later I found it was on the STAR.

 

[Wingsofglass]

Well, I admit to not flying a lot of stars or dps, so learned something new. Atc was great fitting me into the flow. My Baron was like a Ford Escort on the ramp, it was the cheapest plane by a factor of ten.

I seem to get STARs on a somewhat regular basis in my little Diamond. I have never been given a "descend via" clearance though, it's always ATC controlling altitude. I hear you on the cheapest plane on the ramp thing. One trick I have discovered when flying into a fancy airport with lot's of big iron is to point my nose at the most expensive thing on the ramp when I come off the taxiway. Within seconds people are running to marshal me someplace in the back and I never have to wait for help.

 

[ghogue]

....... A "descend via" clearance allows you to navigate both laterally and vertically on the STAR, descending to meet all of the "expect to cross" restrictions.

Jason,
This is from the 7110.65T ATC:

4-5-7. ALTITUDE INFORMATION....
h. Instructions to vertically navigate on a STAR/RNAV STAR/FMSP with published restrictions.....................
.....................................

2. A descend via clearance shall not be used where procedures contain published “expect” altitude restrictions.
NOTE-
Pilots are not expected to comply with published “expect” restrictions in the event of lost communications, unless ATC has specifically advised the pilot to expect these restrictions as part of a further clearance.

However, I have been given such a clearance at least once.

gary

 

[Doggtyred]

I am not instrument rated, I am just doing all the theory now to prepare for the exam in a week.

From my understanding is that if you are cleared for an named approach, you should be executing that specific approach as documented.

The other reasons not to follow it as documented is if you are getting radar vectored or have been requested to get to a fix in another manner.

e.g. "N12345, cleared for the marcs 9 arrival, maintain 8000 feet until MARCS, then continue as published"

or something along those lines.

I could be wrong, however it would be nice to get other opinions so I have an indication that I need additional study in this area


http://flightaware.com/resources/airport/KSKF/ALL/all/pdf

An arrival procedure is not an approach procedure.

Maintain assigned altitude until given new instructions or cleared for the approach.

You should also report vacating your assigned altitude.

 

[spiderweb]

Yeah, this can be a gotcha. SIDs, STARs, DPs, whatever--they look like approaches, they're the same size paper as approaches, etc. So naturally altitudes look like they're to be complied with. Just remember lat nav only unless otherwise instructed.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

I hear you on the cheapest plane on the ramp thing. One trick I have discovered when flying into a fancy airport with lot's of big iron is to point my nose at the most expensive thing on the ramp when I come off the taxiway. Within seconds people are running to marshal me someplace in the back and I never have to wait for help.

I'm gonna have to remember that trick!

 

[flyingcheesehead]

There aren't a ton, but there are some out there. Coming back from Venice FL last year, ATC cleared me direct to some fix and then the Ft. Lauderdale 2 arrival into FXE. I had to get them to spell the fix because it wasn't on my flight plan. A few moments later I found it was on the STAR.

I got the BLUBELL TWO on my way to KEFD. First and only time I've ever been assigned a STAR. I didn't try to follow any altitudes though, as they're marked like minimum altitudes at 2000 feet and I was up at 9,000 feet.

Glad this question was posted, though, it's a good reminder.

 

[denverpilot]

Thanks, I'll review the AIM (OKAY Yep... 5-4-1 is totally clear on this...

Side-comment: Looks like in this case the AIM *is* regulatory -- contrary to what dozens of people online will tell you. Interesting.

 

[EdFred]

Side-comment: Looks like in this case the AIM *is* regulatory -- contrary to what dozens of people online will tell you. Interesting.

Not really. The "shall" in the AIM is merely paraphrasing 91.185(c)(2)(iii). 91.185 is what is regulatory. It would be like me posting it on here. My post isn't regulatory, but what I am referencing is.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Not really. The "shall" in the AIM is merely paraphrasing 91.185(c)(2)(iii). 91.185 is what is regulatory. It would be like me posting it on here. My post isn't regulatory, but what I am referencing is.

Which is one of the two primary reasons for #1 in the list in my signature block - the AIM includes information that =is= regulatory.

 

[EdFred]

Which is one of the two primary reasons for #1 in the list in my signature block - the AIM includes information that =is= regulatory.

True, but IIANM all the regulatory information in the AIM is paraphrased/quoted FAR information, and the AIM is not the sole source of said regulations, correct.

 

[midlifeflyer]

True, but IIANM all the regulatory information in the AIM is paraphrased/quoted FAR information, and the AIM is not the sole source of said regulations, correct.

Pretty much correct. But there are exceptions, one of which is the second primary reason for my #1.

Consider for example, the definition of "suitable RNAV system" in FAR 1.1:

==============================
Suitable RNAV system is an RNAV system that meets the required performance established for a type of operation, e.g. IFR; and is suitable for operation over the route to be flown in terms of any performance criteria (including accuracy) established by the air navigation service provider for certain routes (e.g. oceanic, ATS routes, and IAPs). An RNAV system's suitability is dependent upon the availability of ground and/or satellite navigation aids that are needed to meet any route performance criteria that may be prescribed in route specifications to navigate the aircraft along the route to be flown. Information on suitable RNAV systems is published in FAA guidance material.
==============================

Here you have a FAR that, instead of hashing through everything imaginable that goes into a "suitable RNAV system," requiring a regulation change every time there's some new technology breakthrough, defers to non-regulatory "guidance material" (like the AIM) to flesh things out.

The point (mine anyway ) is that "the AIM is not regulatory" while technically correct, means very little, practically speaking.

 

[EdFred]

The only part of the AIM I consider regulatory is 4-1-9g 1.

 

[midlifeflyer]

The only part of the AIM I consider regulatory is 4-1-9g 1.

Now, don't start that one!