Air carrier departing with min RVR questions if legal.

Attributes
ACN	200335
Time
Date	199201
Day	Fri
Local Time Of Day	1201 To 1800
Place
Locale Reference	airport : syr
State Reference	NY
Altitude	agl bound lower : 0 agl bound upper : 0
Environment
Flight Conditions	IMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tower : sdf
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Medium Large Transport, Low Wing, 2 Turbojet Eng
Flight Phase	climbout : takeoff
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : atp
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 80 flight time total : 9000 flight time type : 2000
ASRS Report	200335
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : commercial pilot : instrument pilot : atp
Events
Anomaly	other anomaly other
Independent Detector	other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	other
Consequence	Other
Supplementary
Air Traffic Incident	other

Narrative:

Prior to taxiing out from the gate in syracuse, the ATIS was reporting west 5 X 1/2 southwest bs patches of snow on runway 28. As we taxied out, ground advised us that the RVR had dropped to 1600 RVR in blowing snow. Since that was below landing mins, I requested and got a takeoff alternate from dispatch. When we were cleared onto runway 28, tower said that visibility was now 1000 ft and asked if we were legal for takeoff. I checked the terminal page which showed that takeoff on runway 28 was permitted down to RVR of 600, 600, 600. I concluded that we were legal and departed. After the fact, I had second thoughts. Parts of the runway had patches of snow and drifting snow. So did I have runway centerline lighting and markings which are required to use 600 RVR? I felt that I had adequate forward visibility through out the takeoff roll, but now I'm not sure that I met the criteria for using 600 RVR.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR DEPARTING WITH MIN RVR QUESTIONS IF LEGAL.

Narrative: PRIOR TO TAXIING OUT FROM THE GATE IN SYRACUSE, THE ATIS WAS RPTING W 5 X 1/2 SW BS PATCHES OF SNOW ON RWY 28. AS WE TAXIED OUT, GND ADVISED US THAT THE RVR HAD DROPPED TO 1600 RVR IN BLOWING SNOW. SINCE THAT WAS BELOW LNDG MINS, I REQUESTED AND GOT A TKOF ALTERNATE FROM DISPATCH. WHEN WE WERE CLRED ONTO RWY 28, TWR SAID THAT VISIBILITY WAS NOW 1000 FT AND ASKED IF WE WERE LEGAL FOR TKOF. I CHKED THE TERMINAL PAGE WHICH SHOWED THAT TKOF ON RWY 28 WAS PERMITTED DOWN TO RVR OF 600, 600, 600. I CONCLUDED THAT WE WERE LEGAL AND DEPARTED. AFTER THE FACT, I HAD SECOND THOUGHTS. PARTS OF THE RWY HAD PATCHES OF SNOW AND DRIFTING SNOW. SO DID I HAVE RWY CTRLINE LIGHTING AND MARKINGS WHICH ARE REQUIRED TO USE 600 RVR? I FELT THAT I HAD ADEQUATE FORWARD VISIBILITY THROUGH OUT THE TKOF ROLL, BUT NOW I'M NOT SURE THAT I MET THE CRITERIA FOR USING 600 RVR.

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.