Narrative:

During takeoff roll on ZZZ; first officer called '80 knots'- captain saw '50 knots'- a 30 knot difference. At '100 knots on first officer's airspeed indicator; captain's airspeed read '70 knots'. We performed a rejected takeoff procedure due to the unreliable airspeed which was considered a 'safety of flight' item. We complied all items in our quick reference handbook; all after landing checklists and returned to a company assigned gate for maintenance analysis and trouble shooting. Upon further maintenance investigation; a pitot leak was discovered with a seal in the captain's pitot drain system.this aircraft just came out of the hanger after an unsuccessful (attempted) repair for a inoperative APU. The onboard ard was dated and was expired for the last 5-6 days. The temperature in the cockpit upon arrival was 96f with a heat index in the cockpit of well over 100f. There was no cooling attempted or in place in either the flight deck or the avionics bay area on the aircraft. Let me cut to the chase here: it was unbearably hot in the aircraft flight deck for both flight crew and associated critical avionics equipment. I reached out via phone to the senior flight duty officer about this concern and was offered minimal assistance. The 'maintenance readiness' of this particular airbus aircraft was questionable at best. We had multiple additional issues including additional MEL's added to the aircraft prior to departure. It's unfortunate that more of a concentrated 'team effort' was not provided by maintenance to make this aircraft suitable; safe and ready for flight. This situation certainly made things much more difficult for an aircrew to perform their required duties during an early morning critical period launch. I feel my recent recurrent training 3 weeks ago provided a great refresher in safely handling a 100 knot critical rejected takeoff of an unsafe aircraft just as the sun was beginning to rise. My first officer was sharp; professional; alert and knowledgeable. He provided me outstanding assistance in dealing with our rejected takeoff and subsequent procedures- I certainly appreciated his help!

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A300 Captain reported a rejected takeoff due to unreliable airspeed indications with a 30 kt. difference between pilot's and first officer's airspeed.

Narrative: During Takeoff Roll on ZZZ; First Officer called '80 Knots'- Captain saw '50 Knots'- a 30 Knot Difference. At '100 Knots on First Officer's Airspeed Indicator; Captain's Airspeed read '70 Knots'. We performed a Rejected Takeoff Procedure due to the Unreliable Airspeed which was considered a 'Safety of Flight' item. We complied all items in our Quick Reference Handbook; all After Landing checklists and returned to a Company assigned gate for Maintenance analysis and trouble shooting. Upon further maintenance investigation; a Pitot Leak was discovered with a seal in the Captain's Pitot drain system.This aircraft just came out of the hanger after an unsuccessful (attempted) repair for a inoperative APU. The onboard ARD was dated and was expired for the last 5-6 days. The temperature in the cockpit upon arrival was 96f with a heat index in the cockpit of well over 100f. There was NO cooling attempted or in place in either the flight deck or the avionics bay area on the aircraft. Let me cut to the chase here: It was UNBEARABLY hot in the aircraft flight deck for both Flight crew and associated critical avionics equipment. I reached out via phone to the Senior Flight Duty Officer about this concern and was offered minimal assistance. The 'maintenance readiness' of this particular Airbus aircraft was questionable at best. We had multiple additional issues including additional MEL's added to the aircraft prior to departure. It's unfortunate that more of a concentrated 'team effort' was NOT provided by Maintenance to make this aircraft suitable; safe and ready for flight. This situation certainly made things much more difficult for an aircrew to perform their required duties during an early morning critical period launch. I feel my recent recurrent training 3 weeks ago provided a great refresher in safely handling a 100 knot critical rejected takeoff of an unsafe aircraft just as the sun was beginning to rise. My First Officer was sharp; professional; alert and knowledgeable. He provided me outstanding assistance in dealing with our Rejected Takeoff and subsequent procedures- I certainly appreciated his help!

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.