Narrative:

I flew into our company home base approximately AA00 local. At that time WX was 1000 ft overcast rain with ice in clouds. Rain turned to freezing rain, sleet and wet snow by BB30 local. I was jumpseating home and rode out with the captain of this flight. He had been delayed and assistant chief pilot drove us out to our aircraft. During the ride out I observed a considerable amount of wet snow slush built up on the ramps and mentioned to the assistant chief pilot that if these conditions prevailed on the runway, that we would not be able to takeoff. His reaction was to deny there was a potential problem and mentioned that there wasn't any where near 4 inches of snow on the ground. I pointed out that what was on the ground was definitely wet snow and slush not dry snow. (Our aircraft limits are 1/2 inches wet snow or slush or 4 inches dry snow for takeoff). The assistant chief pilot seemed to be unhappy with my observation and did not comment further. We were delayed for our pushback and taxi out. At the end of the runway I inspected the wings (going back and opening the entrance doors on both sides of the aircraft). They were contaminated, so we elected to taxi back and taxied onto the runway. All 3 of us commented on the poor conditions of the runway and the difficulty of stopping in an emergency or achieving projected speeds on the takeoff roll. It was obvious by ruts in the wet/slushy snow that there was considerably more than 1/2 inch contaminating the runway. The ruts were from an aircraft that had just departed. At the time the tower was giving runway advisories as being cleared and freshly bladed 50 ft either side of centerline. Our company owns and operates its home base airport. They maintain the facilities, operate the tower, do the WX observations, and clear snow. I feel there is a very real potential for individuals responsible for: the operations, not to report conditions that may be unsafe or beyond our company operation limitations to keep the operation going. There are no checks and balances and very little oversight by independent (new company) entities. This is possible because we are a cargo airline and the traveling public is usually not at risk. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter is greatly concerned that because the airport is owned by the company he flies with, that the goal of production will over ride common sense when it comes to safety. He wanted his chief pilot to be more concerned with the safety of that evenings operation. He stated that 99% of the departures are of company aircraft. His concern was: 1) his chief pilot didn't seem to be interested in whether the snow was wet or dry snow. 2) the runway was announced as clear from snow on the ATIS, but there was an accumulation of snow on the runway. 3) tower said the runway condition should be good for takeoff. Reporter's aircraft taxied back for deicing. That action took 2 1/2 hours to complete so when they taxied back for takeoff the runway had been cleared of clutter. Reporter is concerned that if someone is not experienced with runway clutter they could be encouraged to fly when it is not safe. He further indicated that all the air carrier procedures were good regarding runway clutter. For example they would use maximum thrust for a runway clutter takeoff and used balanced runway 'V' speeds.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: POTENTIAL TKOF WITH RWY CLUTTER.

Narrative: I FLEW INTO OUR COMPANY HOME BASE APPROX AA00 LCL. AT THAT TIME WX WAS 1000 FT OVCST RAIN WITH ICE IN CLOUDS. RAIN TURNED TO FREEZING RAIN, SLEET AND WET SNOW BY BB30 LCL. I WAS JUMPSEATING HOME AND RODE OUT WITH THE CAPT OF THIS FLT. HE HAD BEEN DELAYED AND ASSISTANT CHIEF PLT DROVE US OUT TO OUR ACFT. DURING THE RIDE OUT I OBSERVED A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF WET SNOW SLUSH BUILT UP ON THE RAMPS AND MENTIONED TO THE ASSISTANT CHIEF PLT THAT IF THESE CONDITIONS PREVAILED ON THE RWY, THAT WE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO TKOF. HIS REACTION WAS TO DENY THERE WAS A POTENTIAL PROB AND MENTIONED THAT THERE WASN'T ANY WHERE NEAR 4 INCHES OF SNOW ON THE GND. I POINTED OUT THAT WHAT WAS ON THE GND WAS DEFINITELY WET SNOW AND SLUSH NOT DRY SNOW. (OUR ACFT LIMITS ARE 1/2 INCHES WET SNOW OR SLUSH OR 4 INCHES DRY SNOW FOR TKOF). THE ASSISTANT CHIEF PLT SEEMED TO BE UNHAPPY WITH MY OBSERVATION AND DID NOT COMMENT FURTHER. WE WERE DELAYED FOR OUR PUSHBACK AND TAXI OUT. AT THE END OF THE RWY I INSPECTED THE WINGS (GOING BACK AND OPENING THE ENTRANCE DOORS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE ACFT). THEY WERE CONTAMINATED, SO WE ELECTED TO TAXI BACK AND TAXIED ONTO THE RWY. ALL 3 OF US COMMENTED ON THE POOR CONDITIONS OF THE RWY AND THE DIFFICULTY OF STOPPING IN AN EMER OR ACHIEVING PROJECTED SPDS ON THE TKOF ROLL. IT WAS OBVIOUS BY RUTS IN THE WET/SLUSHY SNOW THAT THERE WAS CONSIDERABLY MORE THAN 1/2 INCH CONTAMINATING THE RWY. THE RUTS WERE FROM AN ACFT THAT HAD JUST DEPARTED. AT THE TIME THE TWR WAS GIVING RWY ADVISORIES AS BEING CLRED AND FRESHLY BLADED 50 FT EITHER SIDE OF CTRLINE. OUR COMPANY OWNS AND OPERATES ITS HOME BASE ARPT. THEY MAINTAIN THE FACILITIES, OPERATE THE TWR, DO THE WX OBSERVATIONS, AND CLR SNOW. I FEEL THERE IS A VERY REAL POTENTIAL FOR INDIVIDUALS RESPONSIBLE FOR: THE OPS, NOT TO RPT CONDITIONS THAT MAY BE UNSAFE OR BEYOND OUR COMPANY OP LIMITATIONS TO KEEP THE OP GOING. THERE ARE NO CHKS AND BALANCES AND VERY LITTLE OVERSIGHT BY INDEPENDENT (NEW COMPANY) ENTITIES. THIS IS POSSIBLE BECAUSE WE ARE A CARGO AIRLINE AND THE TRAVELING PUBLIC IS USUALLY NOT AT RISK. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR IS GREATLY CONCERNED THAT BECAUSE THE ARPT IS OWNED BY THE COMPANY HE FLIES WITH, THAT THE GOAL OF PRODUCTION WILL OVER RIDE COMMON SENSE WHEN IT COMES TO SAFETY. HE WANTED HIS CHIEF PLT TO BE MORE CONCERNED WITH THE SAFETY OF THAT EVENINGS OP. HE STATED THAT 99% OF THE DEPS ARE OF COMPANY ACFT. HIS CONCERN WAS: 1) HIS CHIEF PLT DIDN'T SEEM TO BE INTERESTED IN WHETHER THE SNOW WAS WET OR DRY SNOW. 2) THE RWY WAS ANNOUNCED AS CLR FROM SNOW ON THE ATIS, BUT THERE WAS AN ACCUMULATION OF SNOW ON THE RWY. 3) TWR SAID THE RWY CONDITION SHOULD BE GOOD FOR TKOF. RPTR'S ACFT TAXIED BACK FOR DEICING. THAT ACTION TOOK 2 1/2 HRS TO COMPLETE SO WHEN THEY TAXIED BACK FOR TKOF THE RWY HAD BEEN CLRED OF CLUTTER. RPTR IS CONCERNED THAT IF SOMEONE IS NOT EXPERIENCED WITH RWY CLUTTER THEY COULD BE ENCOURAGED TO FLY WHEN IT IS NOT SAFE. HE FURTHER INDICATED THAT ALL THE ACR PROCS WERE GOOD REGARDING RWY CLUTTER. FOR EXAMPLE THEY WOULD USE MAX THRUST FOR A RWY CLUTTER TKOF AND USED BALANCED RWY 'V' SPDS.

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.