Narrative:

Sbgl (rio de janeiro) is a 'special airport' and was reviewed before arrival. It is surrounded by mountainous terrain. Conditions: VMC. Before 'top of descent' into sbgl, the 'pirai 15' arrival and 'descent charlie 1' approach were reviewed and briefed by first officer. On our descent into sbgl we were cleared 'via arrival pirai 15' with the 'descent charlie 3.' somewhere between seba and lunat, we requested ATC to repeat the clearance (the portugese accent muted the english). Between lunat and pirai VOR he confirmed we were cleared 'via arrival pirai 15' with the 'descent charlie 3.' after passing pirai VOR, the first officer turned to 146 degree heading to proceed to the LOM, coincidently capturing the localizer almost immediately. The minimum altitude at the VOR was at or above FL080 and we were around FL100. The 'descent charlie 3' states 2000 ft as the crossing altitude for the LOM. I tuned 2000 ft into the altitude alert as the next altitude cleared to and the first officer continued the descent, intercepting the GS around 27 mi igl. Continuing on the GS/localizer, VMC conditions, to the LOM, at or around D18.0 igl, ATC called and asked us our altitude. He also stated we should be at 7000 ft. We were a little above 6000 ft at the time (on GS) and immediately climbed to 7000 ft. At 7000 ft we were now above the GS and having the field in sight, requested a visual approach. Upon receiving clearance for the visual approach, we proceeded to get the airplane into the landing confign: at 2000 ft our checks were complete and came back on glide path between 800 ft and 1000 ft. We landed without incident. After securing the aircraft, I called approach control, and discussed the clearance with them. The english communication was terrible at best, portugese being the primary language. After discussions about the clearance and altitude requirements, he agreed that the 'descent charlie 1' should be issued with the 'arrival pirai 15.' what went wrong?: on crossing the pirai VOR, we were never issued vectors (and should have been according to the arrival). The clearance to the 'descent charlie 3' after the pirai VOR, does not in any way give you an intercept course or heading, but does give you an altitude of 2000 ft. We were to proceed to the FAF, descending to 2000 ft, and then do the procedure turn unless cleared otherwise. ATC failed to give vectors and altitude restrs, as published and expected on the arrival. Later they expected us at an altitude that was never specified. If they had issued the 'descent charlie 1,' a vector and altitude would not be necessary. In closing, conditions were VFR and safety was not an issue, procedures were. Due to the confusion with ATC, I recommend that the 'descent charlie 1' only be used in the future for runway 15.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: WDB CREW DSNDED BELOW PUBLISHED XING ALT OF 7000 FT ON THE PIRAI 15 ARR INTO SBGL. THE CTLR ISSUED THE WRONG CHARTED DSCNT TO THE ILS RWY 15. LANGUAGE BARRIER CONTRIBUTED.

Narrative: SBGL (RIO DE JANEIRO) IS A 'SPECIAL ARPT' AND WAS REVIEWED BEFORE ARR. IT IS SURROUNDED BY MOUNTAINOUS TERRAIN. CONDITIONS: VMC. BEFORE 'TOP OF DSCNT' INTO SBGL, THE 'PIRAI 15' ARR AND 'DSCNT CHARLIE 1' APCH WERE REVIEWED AND BRIEFED BY FO. ON OUR DSCNT INTO SBGL WE WERE CLRED 'VIA ARR PIRAI 15' WITH THE 'DSCNT CHARLIE 3.' SOMEWHERE BTWN SEBA AND LUNAT, WE REQUESTED ATC TO REPEAT THE CLRNC (THE PORTUGESE ACCENT MUTED THE ENGLISH). BTWN LUNAT AND PIRAI VOR HE CONFIRMED WE WERE CLRED 'VIA ARR PIRAI 15' WITH THE 'DSCNT CHARLIE 3.' AFTER PASSING PIRAI VOR, THE FO TURNED TO 146 DEG HDG TO PROCEED TO THE LOM, COINCIDENTLY CAPTURING THE LOC ALMOST IMMEDIATELY. THE MINIMUM ALT AT THE VOR WAS AT OR ABOVE FL080 AND WE WERE AROUND FL100. THE 'DSCNT CHARLIE 3' STATES 2000 FT AS THE XING ALT FOR THE LOM. I TUNED 2000 FT INTO THE ALT ALERT AS THE NEXT ALT CLRED TO AND THE FO CONTINUED THE DSCNT, INTERCEPTING THE GS AROUND 27 MI IGL. CONTINUING ON THE GS/LOC, VMC CONDITIONS, TO THE LOM, AT OR AROUND D18.0 IGL, ATC CALLED AND ASKED US OUR ALT. HE ALSO STATED WE SHOULD BE AT 7000 FT. WE WERE A LITTLE ABOVE 6000 FT AT THE TIME (ON GS) AND IMMEDIATELY CLBED TO 7000 FT. AT 7000 FT WE WERE NOW ABOVE THE GS AND HAVING THE FIELD IN SIGHT, REQUESTED A VISUAL APCH. UPON RECEIVING CLRNC FOR THE VISUAL APCH, WE PROCEEDED TO GET THE AIRPLANE INTO THE LNDG CONFIGN: AT 2000 FT OUR CHKS WERE COMPLETE AND CAME BACK ON GLIDE PATH BTWN 800 FT AND 1000 FT. WE LANDED WITHOUT INCIDENT. AFTER SECURING THE ACFT, I CALLED APCH CTL, AND DISCUSSED THE CLRNC WITH THEM. THE ENGLISH COM WAS TERRIBLE AT BEST, PORTUGESE BEING THE PRIMARY LANGUAGE. AFTER DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE CLRNC AND ALT REQUIREMENTS, HE AGREED THAT THE 'DSCNT CHARLIE 1' SHOULD BE ISSUED WITH THE 'ARR PIRAI 15.' WHAT WENT WRONG?: ON XING THE PIRAI VOR, WE WERE NEVER ISSUED VECTORS (AND SHOULD HAVE BEEN ACCORDING TO THE ARR). THE CLRNC TO THE 'DSCNT CHARLIE 3' AFTER THE PIRAI VOR, DOES NOT IN ANY WAY GIVE YOU AN INTERCEPT COURSE OR HDG, BUT DOES GIVE YOU AN ALT OF 2000 FT. WE WERE TO PROCEED TO THE FAF, DSNDING TO 2000 FT, AND THEN DO THE PROC TURN UNLESS CLRED OTHERWISE. ATC FAILED TO GIVE VECTORS AND ALT RESTRS, AS PUBLISHED AND EXPECTED ON THE ARR. LATER THEY EXPECTED US AT AN ALT THAT WAS NEVER SPECIFIED. IF THEY HAD ISSUED THE 'DSCNT CHARLIE 1,' A VECTOR AND ALT WOULD NOT BE NECESSARY. IN CLOSING, CONDITIONS WERE VFR AND SAFETY WAS NOT AN ISSUE, PROCS WERE. DUE TO THE CONFUSION WITH ATC, I RECOMMEND THAT THE 'DSCNT CHARLIE 1' ONLY BE USED IN THE FUTURE FOR RWY 15.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 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.