Narrative:

After arrival at the aircraft for preflight I listened to the ATIS which was reporting w1x1/8F and runway 07 was the active runway. A check of our charts showed RVR on runway 07 and takeoff minimums of 600'. The crew was in agreement that we could takeoff with the current WX. When the automated weight and balance record was brought it had takeoff data for runways 13 and 31 only. Rather than delay the flight I decided to use runway 13 since the runways are essentially the same length. After takeoff I realized that in my rush to make an on time departure I had failed to rechk the takeoff minimums for runway 13. I checked and found that there was no RVR equipment on runway 13/31. I feel there were a series of events that occurred that had any one been changed a takeoff on a runway west/O RVR, with WX reported at w1x1/8F could have been avoided. If company operations personnel had reported runway 07 in use as they should have the automated weight and balance date would have reported performance data for runway 07 and I would have used runway 07 for takeoff. If I had rechked my takeoff minimums I would have discovered no RVR on runway 13, my intended runway of use. If the tower personnel had advised no RVR on runway 13 or reported 1/8 mi on runway 13 and RVR on runway 07 26v40 when I requested runway 13 I would have realized by that report there was no RVR on runway 13. I accept responsibility for making a wrong decision but I feel everyone in the airline industry and ATC should work together to make the safest possible operation.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR LGT MADE A TKOF USING RVR MINIMUMS BUT HE USED A RWY WITHOUT RVR EQUIPMENT.

Narrative: AFTER ARR AT THE ACFT FOR PREFLT I LISTENED TO THE ATIS WHICH WAS RPTING W1X1/8F AND RWY 07 WAS THE ACTIVE RWY. A CHK OF OUR CHARTS SHOWED RVR ON RWY 07 AND TKOF MINIMUMS OF 600'. THE CREW WAS IN AGREEMENT THAT WE COULD TKOF WITH THE CURRENT WX. WHEN THE AUTOMATED WEIGHT AND BALANCE RECORD WAS BROUGHT IT HAD TKOF DATA FOR RWYS 13 AND 31 ONLY. RATHER THAN DELAY THE FLT I DECIDED TO USE RWY 13 SINCE THE RWYS ARE ESSENTIALLY THE SAME LENGTH. AFTER TKOF I REALIZED THAT IN MY RUSH TO MAKE AN ON TIME DEP I HAD FAILED TO RECHK THE TKOF MINIMUMS FOR RWY 13. I CHKED AND FOUND THAT THERE WAS NO RVR EQUIP ON RWY 13/31. I FEEL THERE WERE A SERIES OF EVENTS THAT OCCURRED THAT HAD ANY ONE BEEN CHANGED A TKOF ON A RWY W/O RVR, WITH WX RPTED AT W1X1/8F COULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED. IF COMPANY OPS PERSONNEL HAD RPTED RWY 07 IN USE AS THEY SHOULD HAVE THE AUTOMATED WEIGHT AND BALANCE DATE WOULD HAVE RPTED PERFORMANCE DATA FOR RWY 07 AND I WOULD HAVE USED RWY 07 FOR TKOF. IF I HAD RECHKED MY TKOF MINIMUMS I WOULD HAVE DISCOVERED NO RVR ON RWY 13, MY INTENDED RWY OF USE. IF THE TWR PERSONNEL HAD ADVISED NO RVR ON RWY 13 OR RPTED 1/8 MI ON RWY 13 AND RVR ON RWY 07 26V40 WHEN I REQUESTED RWY 13 I WOULD HAVE REALIZED BY THAT RPT THERE WAS NO RVR ON RWY 13. I ACCEPT RESPONSIBILITY FOR MAKING A WRONG DECISION BUT I FEEL EVERYONE IN THE AIRLINE INDUSTRY AND ATC SHOULD WORK TOGETHER TO MAKE THE SAFEST POSSIBLE OPERATION.

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.