When is the pilot responsible for his obstacle clearance?

@ Achimha - found this excerpt in an airline flight operations manual:

Flight below Minimum Safe Altitudes

In general no flight may be operated below published MEAs.
For limiting portions of flight (e.g. shortcuts, radar vectoring off route etc) however a flight may be operated below published minimum altitudes when it is assured that following conditions are met:

Flight below MSA down to cleared FL/ALT by ATC:
• Confirmed aeroplane position within applicable MSA area and
• Radar vectored and
• terrain/obstacle clearance can be assured by use of appropriate charts

So coming from the NW you could ask Hurghada APP for a vector to "HGD" VOR and a descent to ALT 4000ft and - provided they clear you - you start the descent to 4000ft when within the area depicted on your approach chart. The highest elevation on this Jeppesen approach chart is 730ft marked by an arrow - so 4000ft are safe (however a vector by ATC is required).

[edited for text formatting]

The fact that an aircraft is permitted to be assigned an appropriate IFR altitude still requires a clearance to do so. In the US, one needs a clearance to descend to an altitude and an approach clearance does not authorize descent until established on a published portion of the approach, feeder route, STAR, or airway. It took the 93 fatalities of TWA Flight 714 in 1974 to change the guidance on this subject.

So it seems the US and Europe take the same approach. No descent below the last assigned altitude unless established on a procedure or instructed by ATC. Never descent to MSA yourself.

Peter wrote:

I think most people would descend to the approach platform if they were given the "cleared for the approach" a bit further out... taking the MSA into account in most cases.

If you visit here in the US, don't do it. Controllers are well trained not to issue an approach clearance on a random route without assigning an altitude, so if one isn't assigned, you will be violated if you leave the last assigned altitude while not on a charted route.

We do have a new style of procedure that uses a TAA (Terminal Arrival Area) on RNAV approaches. However, there is no MSA charted. Instead there are segments that perform the function of a MSA called arrival segments with one giant distinction, the charted altitudes in the segments are considered a part of the approach procedure and an aircraft is permitted to descend to the charted minimum altitude once cleared for the approach and inside the TAA segment. This is one case where the pilot is expected to descend to the minimum once inside the segment without additional clearance. Generally the segments are broken into three areas, a straight in segment, a right base segment and a left base segment. The segment is formed by a 30 NM arc centered on one of three IAF locations. The pilot is expected to navigate to the appropriate IAF and descend to the charted altitude.

With MSA

Without MSA

Also look at this Hindsight article: in the UK the ICAO 4444 phraseology concerning restricted climbs/descends is not yet adopted.

If El Gouna (see post #13) was in Australia, in one of the regions outside radar coverage where great many our small airfields are located, a pilot of an aircraft flying in IMC and intending to land there would be allowed to descent to the applicable Minimum Sector Altitude depicted on the approach chart. He/she could descent to ONLY 4000FT when arriving from NE, on a published route or off-route, since the minimum attitude in hold over HDG VOR is higher than the MSA in his/her arrival sector. On an Australian chart for this approach,.. 4000FT would be given as the MSA in the NE sector.

PS It is very likely that, if based in Australia, this airport would also have some DME or GNSS ARRIVAL PROCEDURES published. These might allow descent to below published MSAs when closer to the VOR or arriving on a specified radial from the aid.

Since DME and/or GNSS ARRIVAL PROCEDURES mentioned in my previous post are uniquely Australian, some details about these NPAs can be found here (see Section 7, page 13).
Please note that GNSS cannot be used to provide lateral guidance during this type of approach.

ANTEK wrote:

If El Gouna (see post #13) was in Australia, in one of the regions outside radar coverage where great many our small airfields are located, a pilot of an aircraft flying in IMC and intending to land there would be allowed to descent to the applicable Minimum Sector Altitude depicted on the approach chart.

I know Antek’s post is over three years old, and maybe he now realizes this, but the difference between the US and Australia in his example is that in the US the flight would be in controlled airspace (Class E or other) vs Class G in Australia…