Narrative:

Aircraft was deiced prior to departure by FBO den. The night before about 4' of day snow had accumulated on the aircraft. The deice job was satisfactory as far as I could see on the preflight. I didn't notice any engine inlet ice, etc. Temperature was 13 degrees F. WX clear and dew point was -1 degree F. Engine anti-ice was not used on taxi as temperature and conditions didn't exist or warrant its use. On the takeoff roll I (PF) set power levers to the midrange and called for 'set takeoff thrust.' as I did so, the captain and I both noticed EPR was at 2.4. I should note that 2.15 was takeoff EPR on this JT8D-15 powered aircraft and we both instinctively commented on the high EPR and he started a power reduction to 2.15 EPR. At the same time we noted the N1 was only 80% and not 90% appropriate for takeoff thrust. The takeoff was rejected at a very slow speed (50-60 KTS). We applied engine anti-ice and did a brief run-up to eliminate inlet ice. A departure on 35R was normal. Even though they WX was clear and engine icing was not suspected or required, we were able to quickly identify the high EPR/low power condition and reject the takeoff because of 1 factor--darn good operating procedures and good simulator training. The captain and I had not encountered this scenario in real world operations. We both idented the problem because we are required to call 'normal power' by 60 KTS and check that N1 is 88% or greater. In addition, we have encountered this problem on numerous proficiency checks in the simulator. As a consequence, this rejected takeoff was a operational non-event for us. Good operating procedure and training does pay off.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR FO REPORT ON HOW GOOD TRAINING PREPARED THE FLT CREW TO HANDLE AN UNEXPECTED ICING SITUATION.

Narrative: ACFT WAS DEICED PRIOR TO DEP BY FBO DEN. THE NIGHT BEFORE ABOUT 4' OF DAY SNOW HAD ACCUMULATED ON THE ACFT. THE DEICE JOB WAS SATISFACTORY AS FAR AS I COULD SEE ON THE PREFLT. I DIDN'T NOTICE ANY ENG INLET ICE, ETC. TEMP WAS 13 DEGS F. WX CLR AND DEW POINT WAS -1 DEG F. ENG ANTI-ICE WAS NOT USED ON TAXI AS TEMP AND CONDITIONS DIDN'T EXIST OR WARRANT ITS USE. ON THE TKOF ROLL I (PF) SET PWR LEVERS TO THE MIDRANGE AND CALLED FOR 'SET TKOF THRUST.' AS I DID SO, THE CAPT AND I BOTH NOTICED EPR WAS AT 2.4. I SHOULD NOTE THAT 2.15 WAS TKOF EPR ON THIS JT8D-15 POWERED ACFT AND WE BOTH INSTINCTIVELY COMMENTED ON THE HIGH EPR AND HE STARTED A PWR REDUCTION TO 2.15 EPR. AT THE SAME TIME WE NOTED THE N1 WAS ONLY 80% AND NOT 90% APPROPRIATE FOR TKOF THRUST. THE TKOF WAS REJECTED AT A VERY SLOW SPD (50-60 KTS). WE APPLIED ENG ANTI-ICE AND DID A BRIEF RUN-UP TO ELIMINATE INLET ICE. A DEP ON 35R WAS NORMAL. EVEN THOUGH THEY WX WAS CLR AND ENG ICING WAS NOT SUSPECTED OR REQUIRED, WE WERE ABLE TO QUICKLY IDENT THE HIGH EPR/LOW PWR CONDITION AND REJECT THE TKOF BECAUSE OF 1 FACTOR--DARN GOOD OPERATING PROCS AND GOOD SIMULATOR TRNING. THE CAPT AND I HAD NOT ENCOUNTERED THIS SCENARIO IN REAL WORLD OPS. WE BOTH IDENTED THE PROB BECAUSE WE ARE REQUIRED TO CALL 'NORMAL PWR' BY 60 KTS AND CHK THAT N1 IS 88% OR GREATER. IN ADDITION, WE HAVE ENCOUNTERED THIS PROB ON NUMEROUS PROFICIENCY CHKS IN THE SIMULATOR. AS A CONSEQUENCE, THIS REJECTED TKOF WAS A OPERATIONAL NON-EVENT FOR US. GOOD OPERATING PROC AND TRNING DOES PAY OFF.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 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.