Narrative:

Takeoff had been delayed due to thunderstorms over the departure fix and we were holding at approach end of runway. Tower advised they were going to release us at xa:23 local. Started engines and performed checklist and MEL procedures. Another air carrier landed before us and had cleared runway. We were cleared for takeoff. Sometime after the 80 KT callout and at an estimated 100 KTS; tower said 'air carrier X; abort.' immediately rejected takeoff with full reverse and autobrakes. Tower then asked us to clear runway as soon as possible due to another aircraft on final behind us. We cleared runway as quickly as feasible but the other aircraft was instructed to go around. After clearing runway; stopped aircraft on taxiway kilo. First officer communicated with tower while I advised passengers of reason for abort. I could only tell them that ATC had instructed us to abort as I did not yet know the reason and tower advised they would explain via telephone. Elected to return to gate and have aircraft inspected by maintenance and coordinated same with operations. Since we had been off gate for over 2 hours; passengers needed to be given opportunity to deplane. Since we were not sure of disposition of flight; he decided to deplane all passengers. Chief pilot agreed to contact tower to see what had transpired and the reason we were told to abort and call me back. Aircraft performed flawlessly during abort with excellent braking and anti-skid as well as directional control. Brakes on left side gave overheat ECAM though temperature was only slightly above 300 degrees. Use of brake fans initiated. Cause; as per explanation by tower supervisor; there was a malfunction with the ground radar. It issued a conflict alarm and although the controller knew there was not a conflict; FAA procedure required controller to take action based on the alarm and issued the instruction to abort. [A] suggestion; an abort at high speed; especially on a short wet runway; allows little room for error. As a pilot; we must make a split second decision and there is no time to question the controller as to why we are being instructed to abort. I realize the need for SOP's; but a controller should be able to use his or her judgment in cases like these and be allowed to deviate; when necessary; if it is a safer course of action.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Air Carrier reported a high speed abort instruction from the Tower on a limited distance wet runway; reportedly an automated ATC alarm was the reason the instruction was issued by ATC.

Narrative: Takeoff had been delayed due to thunderstorms over the departure fix and we were holding at approach end of runway. Tower advised they were going to release us at XA:23 local. Started engines and performed checklist and MEL procedures. Another Air Carrier landed before us and had cleared runway. We were cleared for takeoff. Sometime after the 80 KT callout and at an estimated 100 KTS; Tower said 'Air Carrier X; Abort.' Immediately rejected takeoff with full reverse and autobrakes. Tower then asked us to clear runway as soon as possible due to another aircraft on final behind us. We cleared runway as quickly as feasible but the other aircraft was instructed to go around. After clearing runway; stopped aircraft on Taxiway Kilo. First Officer communicated with Tower while I advised passengers of reason for abort. I could only tell them that ATC had instructed us to abort as I did not yet know the reason and Tower advised they would explain via telephone. Elected to return to gate and have aircraft inspected by Maintenance and coordinated same with operations. Since we had been off gate for over 2 hours; passengers needed to be given opportunity to deplane. Since we were not sure of disposition of flight; he decided to deplane all passengers. Chief Pilot agreed to contact Tower to see what had transpired and the reason we were told to abort and call me back. Aircraft performed flawlessly during abort with excellent braking and anti-skid as well as directional control. Brakes on left side gave overheat ECAM though temperature was only slightly above 300 degrees. Use of brake fans initiated. Cause; as per explanation by Tower Supervisor; there was a malfunction with the Ground RADAR. It issued a conflict alarm and although the Controller knew there was not a conflict; FAA procedure required Controller to take action based on the alarm and issued the instruction to abort. [A] suggestion; an abort at high speed; especially on a short wet runway; allows little room for error. As a pilot; we must make a split second decision and there is no time to question the Controller as to why we are being instructed to abort. I realize the need for SOP's; but a Controller should be able to use his or her judgment in cases like these and be allowed to deviate; when necessary; if it is a safer course of action.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2013 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.