On RV+ILS, that is my understanding, it’s not unusual to get vectored on altitudes above FAP on ILS but never 2nm before FAP, if this happens it means you have 600ft to burn and 1000ft above you are unlikely to capture from above or you would hit secondary lobes, in this case I think I will assume I can safely descend to FAF altitude once in protected area…
I think the assumption on RV+ILS is that you have no clue where “the FAF is”, all you know is your FAP when you hit the glide slope and you can blindly trust ATC to give you a descent ROD 
You also need to have means to validate the glide slope at FAP: if there is no DME you have to cross FAP at published platform overhead the FAF FIX
On RV+LOC, you should be on radar vectors at platform altitude 2nm before the run at the FAF, some LOC & ILS have different glideslopes (e.g. Cambridge)
Also worth mentioning analog autopilot, some modes don’t hook well when you are far away from FAF or very fast on speed, so you may want to keep it HDG and VS untill you get to the FAF
There is also ILS Z, ILS Y, ILS X to watch for, they are all the same but some have different FAF altitudes, see Brest LFRB
@AdamFrisch yes I-ND is ILS & DME identifier, there is for the other runway end with different morse code, the list of identifiers is in UK AIP GEN2.5, I guess one reason why we use Jepps
That may place you outside the DOC of the ILS. If the last clearance was say 4000ft but the platform (the GS intercept) is charted at 2000ft, the 4000ft will place the GS intercept at 2x the distance. It will probably still work but…
My 4000ft were an example based on a GS charted at 3500ft. In your 2000ft example, ATC would descend you to 2500ft on vectors. Robert is right that 99% ATC will descend you below the charted altitude to capture from below, which is even easier.
In the last 15 years, all over the world, the number of times I self initiated a descend to „platform altitude“ on vectors was zero.
It was always maintain ATC vectors + altitude until established or, in case of full procedure, ATC would issue descend clearance for IAF, „cleared approach“, and passing IAF follow and descend according to chart.
If ATC wants you to intercept GP on higher FAP on radar altitude than FAF on procedural altitude then why they can’t just publish a new procedure with new FAF and call it Z, Y, X?
Here is ILS at Brest, on radar ATC can vector at 2kft or 3kft depending if you are C172 or B737
Returning to the original question. Would ATC really clear you for an approach whilst vectoring you?
I think he meant when your are given the last vector then “cleared for ILS” (or cleared to intercept, cleared for approach…), at that moment you are likely at higher altitude than the one on plate for FAF/FAP
I think Peter is right: you are no longer on vectors = you own your obstacles clearance and you are cleared to the procedure all the way to the runway surface but you need clearance to land
The question is when to descend? and how far?
I think you are entitled to FAF/FAP altitude once on plates final course (not when still on vector), once established there is no reason to stay on higher radar altitude doing nothing and hoping it will work out of the blue, especially at high speed with tailwind for landing or circling, it won’t !
@lbra at least in the UK on the intercept if above the platform altitude the clearance is when established descend on the glide path, they are not clearing you ILS or to descend to platform before intercepting the LOC.
I don’t remember but I thing there is a minimum tolerance inside a VOr radial or a ILS before to be able to descend. I would say something like 10 degree on NDB, 5 on VOR/ILS. when ILS17 was existing on LFMV, we had a holding 3000 on the NDB located just next to the runway, where from the holding you start your outbound leg descending to 1700ft. As it was a NDB, you would be allowed under 3000ft outbound leg only if within the 10 degree of the outband radial. Once at 1700ft and (something like) 10 DME of the ILS, you can turn left to intercept.
At that moment, the approach controller is asking you to report established, and then pass you to the tower.
but they never give you altitude clearance, you are cleared approach from the holding (or arriving inbound NDB if there is no traffic).
(sorry for the pict quality, I had to deep dive into google as this approach no longer exist)
Would ATC really clear you for an approach whilst vectoring you?
If you mean
then, yes, definitely, because you cannot fly an approach (or even intercept a LOC) unless “cleared for the approach”.
I agree with Snoopy that own-descent to platform is rare, but I have had it a few times. Can’t recall where though. It surprised me at the time. The IAP could not have been flown without a self-descent (too high, etc).
AdamFrisch wrote:
Absolutely no mention of the ILS frequency in any box on the plate,
The ILS frequency is on a box below the airport. (In the middle of the Thames estuary.)
No I meant being vectored and cleared for the approach are contradictory.
The approach is as published, all sectors including the MAP. So if you are cleared for that you can descend to the published altitudes for each section of the approach.
If you are vectored lets say to the stage between the IF and the FAF/FAP you would normally be vectored to a point a minimum of 2nm before the FAF/FAP and given a clearance to descend to that platform altitude, if not already there, and asked to report established. This could be either on the LOC, LLZ or ILS or glidselope.
Or you may be asked to report at 4 miles or whatever.
In the case where you are cleared for the approach and can not descend to the altitude of the platform, normally because you have been given a late approval to descend to the IAF, and you can not descend sufficiently during the procedure either because regulation forbids it or because it would be uncomfortable to do so, you will be expected to enter the hold to further descend so that you can comfortably reach platform altitude by 2NM before FAF so that you can cofigure the aircraft for a stabilised approach.
If at the end of being vectored you cannot comfortably be able to cofigure the aircraft for a stabilised final approach segment, you need to inform ATC, who should vector you to a position where you can comfortably do that.
