Narrative:

Departing denver on 17R; I rejected the takeoff due to a master caution forward door entry light. Our speed at the time of the reject was approximately 80-90 knots. The airspeed possibly could be higher. I am not positive if the autobrakes were iniated. I should have continued the takeoff. The first officer did a great job and made the required call outs. After the reject; we taxied off the runway and notified the passengers and tower. We checked brake cooling requirements and returned to the gate. Our brake cooling time was 44 minutes. At the gate we called dispatch; maintenance; and spoke to denver maintenance. I asked if brake temperature readings applied to rejected takeoffs and maintenance said it did. So; denver maintenance did brake temperature readings and said we could disregard the 44 minute required cooling period. We weren't sure if that was correct and we didn't push until 46 minutes had passed; just in case that was incorrect. We MEL'd the forward entry door; and maintenance had also entered in brake temperature readings.I need to remember that rejected takeoffs above 80 knots are for engine failures; fire or fire warnings; and predictive windshear warnings. I elected to abort when I shouldn't have. Also; maintenance control needs to be aware that brake temperature readings do not apply to rejected takeoffs. Departing denver on 17R; I rejected the takeoff due to a master caution forward door entry light. Our speed at the time of the reject was approximately 80-90 knots. The airspeed possibly could be higher. I am not positive if the autobrakes were iniated. I should have continued the takeoff. The first officer did a great job and made the required call outs. After the reject; we taxied off the runway and notified the passengers and tower. We checked brake cooling requirements and returned to the gate. Our brake cooling time was 44 minutes. At the gate we called dispatch; maintenance; and spoke to denver maintenance. I asked if brake temperature readings applied to rejected takeoffs and maintenance said it did. So; denver maintenance did brake temperature readings and said we could disregard the 44 minute required cooling period. We weren't sure if that was correct and we didn't push until 46 minutes had passed; just in case that was incorrect. We MEL'd the forward entry door; and maintenance had also entered in brake temperature readings.I need to remember that rejected takeoffs above 80 knots are for engine failures; fire or fire warnings; and predictive windshear warnings. I elected to abort when I shouldn't have. Also; maintenance control needs to be aware that brake temperature readings do not apply to rejected takeoffs.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: B737 flight crew reported rejecting the takeoff at approximately 80-90 kts because a door light illuminated.

Narrative: Departing Denver on 17R; I rejected the takeoff due to a Master Caution Forward Door entry light. Our speed at the time of the reject was approximately 80-90 knots. The airspeed possibly could be higher. I am not positive if the autobrakes were iniated. I should have continued the takeoff. The First Officer did a great job and made the required call outs. After the reject; we taxied off the runway and notified the Passengers and Tower. We checked brake cooling requirements and returned to the gate. Our brake cooling time was 44 minutes. At the gate we called Dispatch; Maintenance; and spoke to Denver Maintenance. I asked if brake temperature readings applied to rejected takeoffs and Maintenance said it did. So; Denver Maintenance did brake temperature readings and said we could disregard the 44 minute required cooling period. We weren't sure if that was correct and we didn't push until 46 minutes had passed; just in case that was incorrect. We MEL'd the forward entry door; and Maintenance had also entered in brake temperature readings.I need to remember that rejected takeoffs above 80 knots are for engine failures; fire or fire warnings; and predictive windshear warnings. I elected to abort when I shouldn't have. Also; Maintenance Control needs to be aware that brake temperature readings do not apply to rejected takeoffs. Departing Denver on 17R; I rejected the takeoff due to a Master Caution Forward Door entry light. Our speed at the time of the reject was approximately 80-90 knots. The airspeed possibly could be higher. I am not positive if the autobrakes were iniated. I should have continued the takeoff. The First Officer did a great job and made the required call outs. After the reject; we taxied off the runway and notified the Passengers and Tower. We checked brake cooling requirements and returned to the gate. Our brake cooling time was 44 minutes. At the gate we called Dispatch; Maintenance; and spoke to Denver Maintenance. I asked if brake temperature readings applied to rejected takeoffs and Maintenance said it did. So; Denver Maintenance did brake temperature readings and said we could disregard the 44 minute required cooling period. We weren't sure if that was correct and we didn't push until 46 minutes had passed; just in case that was incorrect. We MEL'd the forward entry door; and Maintenance had also entered in brake temperature readings.I need to remember that rejected takeoffs above 80 knots are for engine failures; fire or fire warnings; and predictive windshear warnings. I elected to abort when I shouldn't have. Also; Maintenance Control needs to be aware that brake temperature readings do not apply to rejected takeoffs.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site 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.