"Dave Butler" wrote in message
...

Oh, right, sorry. I lost sight of the original premise, an ILS with ADF
REQUIRED. So what I should have said was:

"I think the alternate missed approach instructions still don't relieve
the
pilot of the requirement for carrying an ADF as explicitly stated on the
approach chart."


You're viewing the note "ADF REQUIRED" as having legal authority. I view it
as just a reminder that ADF is needed to fly the full approach, the missed
approach segment in this case. This isn't the first time this matter has
been discussed in this forum. As I recall from previous discussions, nobody
was able to present any definitive documentation in support of either view.
But logic tends to support the view that these notes are just reminders to
the pilot. Take a look at most LOC BC approaches and you'll find a similar
note that says "BACK COURSE". Is that a legal requirement that a back
course receiver must be aboard to fly the approach, or is it just a reminder
of reverse sensing?