Helicopter
Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Rotorcraft; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Other / Unknown
Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Airspace Structure; Chart Or Publication; Procedure
I did two flights both returning from the north. IFR route to ZZZ vectors to ILS Runway XXR with the heading toward ZZZZZ about 150 degrees at 5500 ft. As I recall on both approaches at about 3 miles from ZZZZ; coming from the north; on a heading of 150 I was assigned a 180 heading and 4000 ft. Inside of 3 miles I was assigned 250 heading and descent to 3800 ft.; maintain 3800 ft. until established; then cleared for the approach.Because the turn is originating so close to ZZZZ; the aircraft has to turn more than 100 degrees to intercept the final approach course. This puts the aircraft in a roll AOB (Angle of Bank) of at least 30 degrees. This is a steep AOB for a Medevac flight; the crews are typically working on the patient. The turn also puts us inside ZZZZ; before ZZZZ3.This vector also puts us above the glide slope; from 4000 ft. to the glide path the aircraft needs to descend 400 ft. in less than a minute and continue that descent at 500 fpm to be on glide path. This puts the aircraft at almost a 1000 fpm descent just to get to the glide slope and then adjust to 500 fpm to continue on course and on glide slope all occurring within about 2 minutes. The distance from ZZZZ to the final approach fix is 4.3 miles and the aircraft would need to descend from 4000 ft. to 2500 ft. at 90 kts. in about 3 minutes. My point; it is aggressive and in my opinion not necessary to put us in that position. As a general rule glide slope should not be intercepted from above. This type of profile forces us to slow down and have a rapid rate of descent; this can cause an unstable approach. This vector profile is a recurring trend for TRACON controllers. I have addressed this many times with the supervisors and directly with the controllers as its occurring. Controllers have cited there is a MVA (Minimum Vectoring Altitude) in that area and they can't get us lower or there is 'a lot of traffic'. I am well aware of the MVA and TERPS (Terminal Instrument Approach Procedures). What I don't understand is why can't the controllers vector us at 4000 ft. and closer to ZZZZ2; or between ZZZZ and ZZZZ2; before turning us onto the localizer and glide slope? There is a feeder route on the initial approach from ZZZZ1 (Initial Approach Fix) to ZZZZ2 at 4200 ft. This is in the sector that we are arriving from the north; but the controllers will not use the higher altitude and vector closer to ZZZZ2 before turning us onto the localizer. Also the initial approach segment between ZZZZ2 and ZZZZ goes from 4200 ft. to 3600 ft.; yet the controllers never put us at 3600 ft. prior to ZZZZ within the TERP of the approach. Filing a flight plan to ZZZZ1 or ZZZZ2 IAP has no effect; controllers just disregard and vector as stated.
A Medevac Helicopter Pilot reported assigned vectors for final approach risks unstable approach and endangers patient care.