AFTER INTERCEPTING ILN ILS RWY 22L; ATC ISSUED AN IMMEDIATE TURN OFF THE LOC TO AN HVT ACFT WHEN THE CTLR REALIZES THE ACFT WAS AT THE WRONG ALT AND CONFLICTING WITH ANOTHER ACFT ON VECTOR TO ILS RWY 22R. PIC EXPRESSED CONCERN THAT HIS ACFT WAS NOT TCASII EQUIPPED.

Narrative

DURING THE EVENT IN QUESTION; SIMULTANEOUS PARALLEL ILS APCHS WERE BEING CONDUCTED TO RWYS 22L/R AT ILN (WILMINGTON; OH). DURING OUR BASE LEG VECTOR WE WERE CLRED TO 3000 FT AND TOLD TO JOIN THE LOC FOR RWY 22L (IRHX). SHORTLY AFTER JOINING THE LOC; THE CTLR TOLD US TO MAKE 'AN IMMEDIATE L TURN TO HDG 190 DEGS' (THERE WAS ANXIETY IN HIS VOICE AND THE TFC ALERT ALARM COULD BE HEARD IN THE BACKGROUND). THE CTLR THOUGHT WE HAD BEEN RESTR TO 4000 FT WHEN IN FACT WE HAD BEEN CLRED TO 3000 FT (AS HAD THE OPPOSING TFC TO THE PARALLEL RWY 22R). I LATER CALLED THE DAY TRACON DUTY SUPVR TO FOLLOW UP. HE CONFIRMED THAT THE TFC CONFLICT ORIGINATED ON THEIR END; STANDARD PROC WOULD HAVE BEEN TO RESTRICT US TO 4000 FT UNTIL PARALLEL TFC SEPARATION WAS ASSURED. WE HAD IN FACT BEEN PREMATURELY CLRED TO 3000 FT (SUBSEQUENTLY CONFIRMED BY THE TWR TAPES). APPARENTLY THERE WAS A SHIFT CHANGE IN PROGRESS AT THE TIME AND THE RESTRICTING ALTS WERE MISCOMMUNICATED DURING THE CHANGEOVER. RECOMMENDATIONS: SINCE THIS FLT WAS FLOWN UNDER SUPPLEMENTAL PART 121; CARGO ONLY OPS; TCASII IS NOT REQUIRED EQUIP; AND THEREFORE IS NOT INSTALLED ON ANY OF OUR ACFT. THIS IS CLEARLY A CASE FOR THE FAA MANDATING TCASII FOR PART 121 CARGO CARRIERS. HAD THIS EQUIP BEEN INSTALLED; IT WOULD HAVE AFFORDED THE FLC OF BOTH ACFT WITH TIMELY TFC POSITIONAL AWARENESS AND CONFLICT RESOLUTION.