Narrative:

The ILS 22 at roc indicates the following notes. 1) DME and ADF required 2) radar required. Since the roc VORTAC is NOTAM'd out of service the DME; which is required for this approach; was OTS. After the crew discussed this requirement we decided that as long as the approach controller identified the FAF for us then we could continue with the approach. Upon making the request that approach call the FAF for us; he also noted that it was an outer marker; but; made the call regardless. After the approach controller indicated to us that we were over the FAF we were switched to tower and made an uneventful landing. Further discussion on the ground led us to contact supervisors to make sure we did in fact make a legal approach. This call made to further confusion; and seems as though the chief pilots office; flight standards; dispatch and operations manager thoughts were slightly different from each other. If a consensus was reached regarding this topic; I have yet to hear it. So the question remains; was this a legal approach? Why is the approach noted with these in this way? The majority of approaches I have encountered seem to indicate DME or radar required such as the ILS 10 at bwi. The way the chart is written indicates to me all three are required and in hindsight makes me question the legality of the approach without an alternate procedure NOTAM'd which there was not. I think the chart and how it is written is the root of a lot of the confusion.callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: the question about the legality of flying the procedure since the VOR/DME is out has been discussed extensively at the reporter's air carrier. The chief pilot and operations managers believe that it is legal.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN AIR CARRIER PILOT QUESTIONS WHETHER THE ROC ILS/LOC RWY 22 REQUIRES DME; ADF; AND RADAR. ALL ARE REQUIRED; BUT THE NACO CHART DOES NOT INDICATE THE RADAR REQUIREMENT.

Narrative: THE ILS 22 AT ROC INDICATES THE FOLLOWING NOTES. 1) DME AND ADF REQUIRED 2) RADAR REQUIRED. SINCE THE ROC VORTAC IS NOTAM'D OUT OF SERVICE THE DME; WHICH IS REQUIRED FOR THIS APPROACH; WAS OTS. AFTER THE CREW DISCUSSED THIS REQUIREMENT WE DECIDED THAT AS LONG AS THE APPROACH CONTROLLER IDENTIFIED THE FAF FOR US THEN WE COULD CONTINUE WITH THE APPROACH. UPON MAKING THE REQUEST THAT APPROACH CALL THE FAF FOR US; HE ALSO NOTED THAT IT WAS AN OUTER MARKER; BUT; MADE THE CALL REGARDLESS. AFTER THE APPROACH CONTROLLER INDICATED TO US THAT WE WERE OVER THE FAF WE WERE SWITCHED TO TOWER AND MADE AN UNEVENTFUL LANDING. FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THE GROUND LED US TO CONTACT SUPERVISORS TO MAKE SURE WE DID IN FACT MAKE A LEGAL APPROACH. THIS CALL MADE TO FURTHER CONFUSION; AND SEEMS AS THOUGH THE CHIEF PILOTS OFFICE; FLIGHT STANDARDS; DISPATCH AND OPERATIONS MANAGER THOUGHTS WERE SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT FROM EACH OTHER. IF A CONSENSUS WAS REACHED REGARDING THIS TOPIC; I HAVE YET TO HEAR IT. SO THE QUESTION REMAINS; WAS THIS A LEGAL APPROACH? WHY IS THE APPROACH NOTED WITH THESE IN THIS WAY? THE MAJORITY OF APPROACHES I HAVE ENCOUNTERED SEEM TO INDICATE DME OR RADAR REQUIRED SUCH AS THE ILS 10 AT BWI. THE WAY THE CHART IS WRITTEN INDICATES TO ME ALL THREE ARE REQUIRED AND IN HINDSIGHT MAKES ME QUESTION THE LEGALITY OF THE APPROACH WITHOUT AN ALTERNATE PROCEDURE NOTAM'D WHICH THERE WAS NOT. I THINK THE CHART AND HOW IT IS WRITTEN IS THE ROOT OF A LOT OF THE CONFUSION.CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE QUESTION ABOUT THE LEGALITY OF FLYING THE PROCEDURE SINCE THE VOR/DME IS OUT HAS BEEN DISCUSSED EXTENSIVELY AT THE REPORTER'S AIR CARRIER. THE CHIEF PILOT AND OPERATIONS MANAGERS BELIEVE THAT IT IS LEGAL.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 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.