Date: 201409
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: SAF.Airport, NM
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class D SAF
ATC / advisory: Tower SAF
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Human factors: Other / Unknown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Airport; ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: During preparation for arrival into SAF we learned that there was no instrument approach available except the VOR DME A.  Since this airport does not have digital ATIS we did not realize the full extent of the impact on safety until we were very close to the airport.  Initially; we planned to fly the ILS approach to runway 02 until we realized the approach to that runway was NOTAMed out of service.  Then we thought we would fly an RNAV approach to runway 15 since that was the active runway and we would have some kind of published guidance at night in mountainous terrain.  Then the approach controller advised us that they were not allowed to issue a clearance to fly RNAV approaches at night.  However; we could fly the visual approach instead.   Since we were planning on flying a full approach; we were expecting to fly past the airport to the VOR and then initiate the approach.  However; I believe the approach controller was planning to clear us for the visual approach from the north which was a lot less flight distance to the airport.  This caused us to have less time to descend and plan for the approach.  We decided to stay above the min vectoring altitude and make a right 360 degree turn to help prepare for the approach.  According to the NOTAMs; the ILS to runway 02 was out of service; the VASI to runway 02 and 20 was out of service; and the approach slope indicator was out of service for runway 15.  We did not know that we could not fly RNAV approaches to this airport at night.  According to the recorded ATIS the visual approach to runway 15 was being conducted.  Therefore; we flew a visual approach to runway 15 and backed up the approach with the RNAV to a runway with no glideslope information at night in mountainous terrain.  Mountainous terrain; no published approach guidance; no glideslope guidance; at night.  It seemed to me that the approach controller did not understand why we could not accept a straight in visual approach to the runway.  Although I had the airport in sight; I did not feel comfortable flying directly to the field not knowing the elevation of the terrain between our location and the airport.  We should not be flying into airports at night without some kind of vertical guidance either RNAV or ground based; especially in hilly or mountainous terrain.  Why can't we fly RNAV approaches to this airport at night?  If there is a legitimate reason for not being able to fly RNAV approaches at night then it would be helpful to add a note to the 10-7 page stating such.




Synopsis: Regional Jet Captain approaching SAF learns that only the VOR DME A is available for approach in night VMC. The ILS is out of service and the RNAV 15 is not authorized at night. A visual approach to Runway 15 is accepted and the RNAV is used as backup.