Narrative:

SOP's for our airline have the first officer doing most of the predep performance, specifically airspds and power settings. On this particular day, we were departing from maf, field elevation of 2871 ft MSL. The record temperature as posted via ATIS was 28 degrees C. We had a full passenger load of 34 souls with 3 crew members. During our taxi out, the first officer briefed me that due to the recorded outside air temperature and heavy payload a reduced power would not be available. Therefore, maximum power would be required, which I was told was 100%. Since it was my leg to fly, I then briefed the takeoff, during which I stated and preset our takeoff power in our constant torque on takeoff equipment at 100%. We received a takeoff clearance and started our takeoff roll. At 80 KIAS the first officer stated that I had complete control of the aircraft, which I verbally accepted. As I xferred my hand from the steering tiller to the yoke, I noticed that the left engine itt was at 930 degrees C -- 3 degrees higher than our limit of 927 degrees. I then called for an immediate abort. The abort was uneventful. After we cleared the runway and took care of the necessary duties, I then reached for the takeoff power setting chart to doublechk the maximum takeoff power available. It was at this point when the first officer realized that he incorrectly looked up the wrong altitude on the takeoff power setting chart. He used 1000 ft MSL versus 3000 ft MSL (maf is again 2871 ft MSL). This error caused us to incorrectly set takeoff power 2% higher than the required 98%, thus the resulting excessive itt limit. I recorded and reported the high engine temperature to the appropriate auths. Maintenance returned the aircraft to service within an hour. The flight continued with no further incidents. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: the reporter stated the takeoff power calculation was made using the incorrect field altitude which resulted in the left engine internal turbine temperature to go 3 degrees over the limit. The reporter said the maintenance manual limits were higher, but a visual inspection of the inlet and tailpipe was made and found ok for service. Callback conversation with reporter acn 452171 revealed the following information: the reporter stated the cause of the overtemp of #1 engine was using the incorrect takeoff field elevation in the takeoff power calculation.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A SAAB 340B ON TKOF ROLL REJECTED THE TKOF AT 80 KTS DUE TO L ENG EXHAUST GAS TEMP EXCEEDANCE CAUSED BY INCORRECT TKOF PWR CALCULATION.

Narrative: SOP'S FOR OUR AIRLINE HAVE THE FO DOING MOST OF THE PREDEP PERFORMANCE, SPECIFICALLY AIRSPDS AND PWR SETTINGS. ON THIS PARTICULAR DAY, WE WERE DEPARTING FROM MAF, FIELD ELEVATION OF 2871 FT MSL. THE RECORD TEMP AS POSTED VIA ATIS WAS 28 DEGS C. WE HAD A FULL PAX LOAD OF 34 SOULS WITH 3 CREW MEMBERS. DURING OUR TAXI OUT, THE FO BRIEFED ME THAT DUE TO THE RECORDED OUTSIDE AIR TEMP AND HVY PAYLOAD A REDUCED PWR WOULD NOT BE AVAILABLE. THEREFORE, MAX PWR WOULD BE REQUIRED, WHICH I WAS TOLD WAS 100%. SINCE IT WAS MY LEG TO FLY, I THEN BRIEFED THE TKOF, DURING WHICH I STATED AND PRESET OUR TKOF PWR IN OUR CONSTANT TORQUE ON TKOF EQUIP AT 100%. WE RECEIVED A TKOF CLRNC AND STARTED OUR TKOF ROLL. AT 80 KIAS THE FO STATED THAT I HAD COMPLETE CTL OF THE ACFT, WHICH I VERBALLY ACCEPTED. AS I XFERRED MY HAND FROM THE STEERING TILLER TO THE YOKE, I NOTICED THAT THE L ENG ITT WAS AT 930 DEGS C -- 3 DEGS HIGHER THAN OUR LIMIT OF 927 DEGS. I THEN CALLED FOR AN IMMEDIATE ABORT. THE ABORT WAS UNEVENTFUL. AFTER WE CLRED THE RWY AND TOOK CARE OF THE NECESSARY DUTIES, I THEN REACHED FOR THE TKOF PWR SETTING CHART TO DOUBLECHK THE MAX TKOF PWR AVAILABLE. IT WAS AT THIS POINT WHEN THE FO REALIZED THAT HE INCORRECTLY LOOKED UP THE WRONG ALT ON THE TKOF PWR SETTING CHART. HE USED 1000 FT MSL VERSUS 3000 FT MSL (MAF IS AGAIN 2871 FT MSL). THIS ERROR CAUSED US TO INCORRECTLY SET TKOF PWR 2% HIGHER THAN THE REQUIRED 98%, THUS THE RESULTING EXCESSIVE ITT LIMIT. I RECORDED AND RPTED THE HIGH ENG TEMP TO THE APPROPRIATE AUTHS. MAINT RETURNED THE ACFT TO SVC WITHIN AN HR. THE FLT CONTINUED WITH NO FURTHER INCIDENTS. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE RPTR STATED THE TKOF PWR CALCULATION WAS MADE USING THE INCORRECT FIELD ALT WHICH RESULTED IN THE L ENG INTERNAL TURBINE TEMP TO GO 3 DEGS OVER THE LIMIT. THE RPTR SAID THE MAINT MANUAL LIMITS WERE HIGHER, BUT A VISUAL INSPECTION OF THE INLET AND TAILPIPE WAS MADE AND FOUND OK FOR SVC. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR ACN 452171 REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE RPTR STATED THE CAUSE OF THE OVERTEMP OF #1 ENG WAS USING THE INCORRECT TKOF FIELD ELEVATION IN THE TKOF PWR CALCULATION.

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.