Narrative:

Filed route for las-lax is oasis 5 hec J64 lax. With the 6/X/89 revision to the civet there are no feeder routes to civet intersection depicted on the profile chart. The lax center controller cleared us for the civet profile descent when we were 40 mi from civet intersection. The route we were filed for had us intersecting the runway 25L localizer (part of the profile) at civet intersection. However, the maximum altitude at civet is FL160, according to the profile chart. Thus, it is necessary to begin a descent at least 25 mi prior to being established north the profile. We are cleared for a profile descent without being established on any portion of the procedure and with no instructions for establishing ourselves on the procedure. I believe that this is unsafe and it violates the lessons cleared from the crash several years ago near dulles airport. As I recall, that crash was the genesis of the ASRS system. Either the civet profile chart should be amended to include feeder routes or the controllers should give more specific clrncs, which some now do ('maintain present heading to intercept the runway 25L localizer, descend to 14,000', cleared for the civet profile descent, comply with restrictions').

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR WAS CLEARED FOR A PROFILE DESCENT 40 MILES FROM THE PUBLISHED ROUTE WITHOUT BEING ESTABLISHED ON ANY PORTION OF THE PROC.

Narrative: FILED ROUTE FOR LAS-LAX IS OASIS 5 HEC J64 LAX. WITH THE 6/X/89 REVISION TO THE CIVET THERE ARE NO FEEDER ROUTES TO CIVET INTERSECTION DEPICTED ON THE PROFILE CHART. THE LAX CENTER CTLR CLRED US FOR THE CIVET PROFILE DESCENT WHEN WE WERE 40 MI FROM CIVET INTXN. THE ROUTE WE WERE FILED FOR HAD US INTERSECTING THE RWY 25L LOC (PART OF THE PROFILE) AT CIVET INTXN. HOWEVER, THE MAX ALT AT CIVET IS FL160, ACCORDING TO THE PROFILE CHART. THUS, IT IS NECESSARY TO BEGIN A DESCENT AT LEAST 25 MI PRIOR TO BEING ESTABLISHED N THE PROFILE. WE ARE CLRED FOR A PROFILE DESCENT WITHOUT BEING ESTABLISHED ON ANY PORTION OF THE PROC AND WITH NO INSTRUCTIONS FOR ESTABLISHING OURSELVES ON THE PROC. I BELIEVE THAT THIS IS UNSAFE AND IT VIOLATES THE LESSONS CLRED FROM THE CRASH SEVERAL YEARS AGO NEAR DULLES ARPT. AS I RECALL, THAT CRASH WAS THE GENESIS OF THE ASRS SYSTEM. EITHER THE CIVET PROFILE CHART SHOULD BE AMENDED TO INCLUDE FEEDER ROUTES OR THE CTLRS SHOULD GIVE MORE SPECIFIC CLRNCS, WHICH SOME NOW DO ('MAINTAIN PRESENT HDG TO INTERCEPT THE RWY 25L LOC, DESCEND TO 14,000', CLRED FOR THE CIVET PROFILE DESCENT, COMPLY WITH RESTRICTIONS').

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.