Pilot claims unnecessary 'ADF required' note on sac ILS runway 2 approach plate.

Attributes
ACN	723050
Time
Date	200701
Place
Locale Reference	airport : sac.airport
State Reference	CA
Person 1
Qualification	pilot : commercial pilot : cfi pilot : multi engine pilot : instrument
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 50 flight time total : 10000
ASRS Report	723050
Events
Independent Detector	other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	none taken : anomaly accepted
Supplementary
Problem Areas	Chart Or Publication
Primary Problem	Chart Or Publication
Situations
Chart	airport : sac.airport approach : ils or loc rwy 2

Narrative:

The sacramento executive ILS or localizer runway 2 approach plate (amend 22C) says; under note 1) under the briefing strip 'ADF required.' this could cause a pilot in an airplane without an ADF (or GPS; which will substitute) to avoid this approach in favor of the less accurate; less safe; non-precision approachs. Requiring an ADF in this time of decommissioned NDB approachs doesn't make sense. Pilots are getting rid of ADF's or not repairing them as they are not able to shoot NDB approachs. There is even a transition route published on the chart from the VOR to the outer marker. I talked with the people responsible for changing the chart and was told that 'that's the way it is' when I questioned the ADF required phrase. If we must have an ADF required on the chart; at least it could be changed to 'ADF; GPS or radar required.' this is an unsafe requirement which could lead to an accident.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: PLT CLAIMS UNNECESSARY 'ADF REQUIRED' NOTE ON SAC ILS RWY 2 APCH PLATE.

Narrative: THE SACRAMENTO EXECUTIVE ILS OR LOC RWY 2 APCH PLATE (AMEND 22C) SAYS; UNDER NOTE 1) UNDER THE BRIEFING STRIP 'ADF REQUIRED.' THIS COULD CAUSE A PLT IN AN AIRPLANE WITHOUT AN ADF (OR GPS; WHICH WILL SUBSTITUTE) TO AVOID THIS APCH IN FAVOR OF THE LESS ACCURATE; LESS SAFE; NON-PRECISION APCHS. REQUIRING AN ADF IN THIS TIME OF DECOMMISSIONED NDB APCHS DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. PLTS ARE GETTING RID OF ADF'S OR NOT REPAIRING THEM AS THEY ARE NOT ABLE TO SHOOT NDB APCHS. THERE IS EVEN A TRANSITION RTE PUBLISHED ON THE CHART FROM THE VOR TO THE OUTER MARKER. I TALKED WITH THE PEOPLE RESPONSIBLE FOR CHANGING THE CHART AND WAS TOLD THAT 'THAT'S THE WAY IT IS' WHEN I QUESTIONED THE ADF REQUIRED PHRASE. IF WE MUST HAVE AN ADF REQUIRED ON THE CHART; AT LEAST IT COULD BE CHANGED TO 'ADF; GPS OR RADAR REQUIRED.' THIS IS AN UNSAFE REQUIREMENT WHICH COULD LEAD TO AN ACCIDENT.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 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.