Narrative:

We had a difficult time trying to get accurate ficons for the departure runway at ewr. We knew heavy wet snow was falling and the ramp was slushy, but to get runway conditions to try to apply weight penalties was difficult. When we had landed on 4L at ewr, we noted that a lot of slush was covering the last 3000 ft of runway. When preparing to depart an hour and a half later, we had a difficult time trying to get an accurate runway condition. There were extensive outbound delays. Ground control was busy and told us latest information was on the ATIS. The ATIS said the first half of the runway was plowed last half had a covering of thin snow with patches of slush. Visibility was 3/8 of a mi so it was difficult to check it ourselves. We asked an inbound company what the runway condition was. They said 'just wet' but they only used the first half. We finally applied 1/4 inch slush penalty to our weight and went. When we took off, we saw the last 2000 ft to 3000 ft or last third of the runway was covered with at least 1/2 inch to 1 inch of heavy wet slush. 1) we and our dispatchers need better information than what we got. The terms used need to be standardized. How much slush (depth), percent of runway covered, etc. 2) airport operators need to be aware that our performance requires the whole runway to be operational in case of an abort or engine failure at V1. If we would have lost an engine at or near V1, we would have been in a world of hurt.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR CAPT RPTS DISSATISFACTION WITH ATIS CURRENCY AND LACK OF UP TO DATE FIELD CONDITIONS ON RWY COVERAGE RELATED TO SNOW AND SLUSH FOR TKOF DATA FOR DEP TFC.

Narrative: WE HAD A DIFFICULT TIME TRYING TO GET ACCURATE FICONS FOR THE DEP RWY AT EWR. WE KNEW HVY WET SNOW WAS FALLING AND THE RAMP WAS SLUSHY, BUT TO GET RWY CONDITIONS TO TRY TO APPLY WT PENALTIES WAS DIFFICULT. WHEN WE HAD LANDED ON 4L AT EWR, WE NOTED THAT A LOT OF SLUSH WAS COVERING THE LAST 3000 FT OF RWY. WHEN PREPARING TO DEPART AN HR AND A HALF LATER, WE HAD A DIFFICULT TIME TRYING TO GET AN ACCURATE RWY CONDITION. THERE WERE EXTENSIVE OUTBOUND DELAYS. GND CTL WAS BUSY AND TOLD US LATEST INFO WAS ON THE ATIS. THE ATIS SAID THE FIRST HALF OF THE RWY WAS PLOWED LAST HALF HAD A COVERING OF THIN SNOW WITH PATCHES OF SLUSH. VISIBILITY WAS 3/8 OF A MI SO IT WAS DIFFICULT TO CHK IT OURSELVES. WE ASKED AN INBOUND COMPANY WHAT THE RWY CONDITION WAS. THEY SAID 'JUST WET' BUT THEY ONLY USED THE FIRST HALF. WE FINALLY APPLIED 1/4 INCH SLUSH PENALTY TO OUR WT AND WENT. WHEN WE TOOK OFF, WE SAW THE LAST 2000 FT TO 3000 FT OR LAST THIRD OF THE RWY WAS COVERED WITH AT LEAST 1/2 INCH TO 1 INCH OF HVY WET SLUSH. 1) WE AND OUR DISPATCHERS NEED BETTER INFO THAN WHAT WE GOT. THE TERMS USED NEED TO BE STANDARDIZED. HOW MUCH SLUSH (DEPTH), PERCENT OF RWY COVERED, ETC. 2) ARPT OPERATORS NEED TO BE AWARE THAT OUR PERFORMANCE REQUIRES THE WHOLE RWY TO BE OPERATIONAL IN CASE OF AN ABORT OR ENG FAILURE AT V1. IF WE WOULD HAVE LOST AN ENG AT OR NEAR V1, WE WOULD HAVE BEEN IN A WORLD OF HURT.

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.