Date: 201508
Location: ZID.ARTCC, IN
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
ATC / advisory: Center ZID
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Chart Or Publication; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I have made several phone calls to the IND center to discuss the arrival. I first spoke with a [individual X] who was an ops supervisor about the deviation I experienced during the arrival. He told me that this arrival has a high incidence of pilot deviations; so much so that they will not even give the clearance to descend via unless they look ahead to make sure that there will not be a loss of separation in the event that the pilots mistakenly execute the arrival. I asked why then; are they even continuing to use the procedure when they know it has a flaw in it?  He provided me with [another individual] number at the facility to discuss their procedure issues. When I spoke with [that person]; he was very informative as well. He felt that we should bring this further and said that he and his manager would support myself and my First Officer saying that the procedure does have issues and that we weren't given notification as required by the process when a deviation has occurred. My input to him is that there are a couple things that could be done that would have prevented the deviation from occurring first and foremost is to publish the procedure as they want it flown vs issuing deviations to the procedure. He gave me the number to [another person] with the FAA QA division to bring up my issue that we were not given notification and also the procedural issues and said to mention to [this person] that he [had] backed me up regarding this issue.In my conversation with [the FAA QA person]; we again discussed the topic and he again apologized that we weren't given notification that the deviation occurred. I asked why that when they know there is a flawed procedure as this appears to be the case here are they not stopping the arrival from being issued and fixing it before they use it. He agreed and said they would review the arrival procedure.My purpose for this ongoing follow up is to fix the issues at hand. The climb via and descend via clearances have many flaws throughout the country and it sounds as if this one in particular is a known issue. It is obviously causing many pilots to have deviations but worse yet may lead to a loss of separation.

Callback: Reporter stated the RNAV arrival in question is the SMUKE1 at IND; and he reiterated his continued concern with the frequency of pilot deviations on 'climb via' and 'descend via' published procedures.



Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported a deviation while performing a 'descend via' type of arrival. He debriefed the issue with the controlling air traffic facility and was told that there have been several pilot deviations associated with this particular arrival; possibly due to a design flaw in the procedure.