Narrative:

Air carrier X taxied to runway 31 for departure. Lndgs were using runway 22. The WX was cavu. We took 'position and hold' on runway 31. After an aircraft landing on runway 22 had cleared the runway's intersection, the tower cleared us for takeoff. An air carrier Y L-1011 was observed on final approach to land on runway 22, but it appeared that we would pass over (airborne) the runway's intersection before the L-1011 landed. Also, I accepted the controller's judgement since they have a better vantage point and more resources available. As our aircraft approached the V1/vr speed, ATC tower issued a go around clearance to the L-1011. We had begun our rotation -- a 5-7 degree body angle had been attained, but had not reached vlof. The main gear oleos had extended but the wheels had not left the runway and the aircraft was still in the ground mode. Now that the L-1011 was remaining airborne and accelerating towards the runway's intersection, it was judged that if we continued the takeoff, and became airborne, that both aircraft would be above the runway's intersection at the same time, and that the best case scenario would have been a very near miss. The aircraft's nose gear was lowered to the runway and the takeoff was rejected. The V1/vr speed was 127 KTS. The aircraft was at taxi speed with 1000 ft of runway available. Supplemental information from acn 264884: cleared for takeoff from runway 31 at lga. Shortly into the takeoff roll the first officer stated that there was 'traffic on final for 22 (intersecting runway).' the traffic at this time appeared to be on a slightly shorter final than we are accustomed to seeing, but not dangerously so. As we accelerated and approached the intersection of the 2 runways, the tower instructed the traffic (a L-1011) to go around. We simultaneously (approximately) reached V1 of 127 KTS. Realizing that, at best, we would miss the traffic by only ft, the captain elected to abort (though we were slightly above V1 and the nose had just rotated). The abort was successful with at least 1000 ft of runway remaining. Flight attendants had instructed passenger to brace for impact and I had instructed flight attendants to remain seated (via PA). Taxied back to gate for brake cooling and high energy stop inspection by maintenance. Tower never asked why we aborted (as they always do). Supplemental information from acn 264886: as we approached the intersection of runway 22/31, the tower told air carrier Y to go around. Had we continued the departure, we would had collided with the aircraft at the intersection of the 2 runways, or we would have been extremely close to air carrier Y aircraft (ft).

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: MULTIPLE RWY OP INTERSECTING RWYS ACR X HAD LTSS NMAC WITH ACR Y. SYS ERROR.

Narrative: ACR X TAXIED TO RWY 31 FOR DEP. LNDGS WERE USING RWY 22. THE WX WAS CAVU. WE TOOK 'POS AND HOLD' ON RWY 31. AFTER AN ACFT LNDG ON RWY 22 HAD CLRED THE RWY'S INTXN, THE TWR CLRED US FOR TKOF. AN ACR Y L-1011 WAS OBSERVED ON FINAL APCH TO LAND ON RWY 22, BUT IT APPEARED THAT WE WOULD PASS OVER (AIRBORNE) THE RWY'S INTXN BEFORE THE L-1011 LANDED. ALSO, I ACCEPTED THE CTLR'S JUDGEMENT SINCE THEY HAVE A BETTER VANTAGE POINT AND MORE RESOURCES AVAILABLE. AS OUR ACFT APCHED THE V1/VR SPD, ATC TWR ISSUED A GAR CLRNC TO THE L-1011. WE HAD BEGUN OUR ROTATION -- A 5-7 DEG BODY ANGLE HAD BEEN ATTAINED, BUT HAD NOT REACHED VLOF. THE MAIN GEAR OLEOS HAD EXTENDED BUT THE WHEELS HAD NOT LEFT THE RWY AND THE ACFT WAS STILL IN THE GND MODE. NOW THAT THE L-1011 WAS REMAINING AIRBORNE AND ACCELERATING TOWARDS THE RWY'S INTXN, IT WAS JUDGED THAT IF WE CONTINUED THE TKOF, AND BECAME AIRBORNE, THAT BOTH ACFT WOULD BE ABOVE THE RWY'S INTXN AT THE SAME TIME, AND THAT THE BEST CASE SCENARIO WOULD HAVE BEEN A VERY NEAR MISS. THE ACFT'S NOSE GEAR WAS LOWERED TO THE RWY AND THE TKOF WAS REJECTED. THE V1/VR SPD WAS 127 KTS. THE ACFT WAS AT TAXI SPD WITH 1000 FT OF RWY AVAILABLE. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 264884: CLRED FOR TKOF FROM RWY 31 AT LGA. SHORTLY INTO THE TKOF ROLL THE FO STATED THAT THERE WAS 'TFC ON FINAL FOR 22 (INTERSECTING RWY).' THE TFC AT THIS TIME APPEARED TO BE ON A SLIGHTLY SHORTER FINAL THAN WE ARE ACCUSTOMED TO SEEING, BUT NOT DANGEROUSLY SO. AS WE ACCELERATED AND APCHED THE INTXN OF THE 2 RWYS, THE TWR INSTRUCTED THE TFC (A L-1011) TO GAR. WE SIMULTANEOUSLY (APPROX) REACHED V1 OF 127 KTS. REALIZING THAT, AT BEST, WE WOULD MISS THE TFC BY ONLY FT, THE CAPT ELECTED TO ABORT (THOUGH WE WERE SLIGHTLY ABOVE V1 AND THE NOSE HAD JUST ROTATED). THE ABORT WAS SUCCESSFUL WITH AT LEAST 1000 FT OF RWY REMAINING. FLT ATTENDANTS HAD INSTRUCTED PAX TO BRACE FOR IMPACT AND I HAD INSTRUCTED FLT ATTENDANTS TO REMAIN SEATED (VIA PA). TAXIED BACK TO GATE FOR BRAKE COOLING AND HIGH ENERGY STOP INSPECTION BY MAINT. TWR NEVER ASKED WHY WE ABORTED (AS THEY ALWAYS DO). SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 264886: AS WE APCHED THE INTXN OF RWY 22/31, THE TWR TOLD ACR Y TO GAR. HAD WE CONTINUED THE DEP, WE WOULD HAD COLLIDED WITH THE ACFT AT THE INTXN OF THE 2 RWYS, OR WE WOULD HAVE BEEN EXTREMELY CLOSE TO ACR Y ACFT (FT).

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.