Narrative:

Sjc had just begun operations on the new runway 30R. We were cleared to follow company to runway 30R. Sjc was landing aircraft on runway 30L, departing aircraft on runway 30R. We were #3 or #4 for takeoff on runway 30R and we observed a number of aircraft lined up on final for runway 30L. Sjc tower was kicking aircraft off runway 30R at a rapid rate. Early in the taxi out we saw a company B737 takeoff on runway 30R. During the taxi out, the first officer told me that there was no takeoff data for runway 30R. We had previously briefed takeoff data for runway 30L, which is over 1000 ft shorter than runway 30R. I elected to apply the 'like runways' method used when operating off diversion airports whereas this runway is unpublished (like altitude, length, temperature). Since this was a new runway, I reasoned that this method would apply and we were not 'wagging it' from an intersection on a published runway to expedite departure. This company aircraft immediately ahead of us then took off on runway 30R. I assumed the other company aircraft applied this same reasoning. We were immediately cleared for takeoff on runway 30R behind company. This was the 4TH leg of a 7 leg day on a 4 day trip. On the last leg of the day, my first officer and I discussed how to compute off-line data. It was then that I realized that I may have erred earlier that day. Upon landing in XXX, I discussed our runway 30R response with chief pilot. He called dispatch and the performance monitors. We were told that runway 30R data was in their flight planning but that commercial charts had failed to update the data on the aircraft. I was assured by the dispatcher that any runway 30R takeoff based on runway 30L data would have conservatively met all runway limit and climb/obstacle considerations. However, the crews would not have computed data for runway 30R, the takeoff runway. The chief pilot asked dispatch to make runway 30R data available to the crews on the release, or to put a note on the release asking future crews to call dispatch for the numbers if they wished to depart from runway 30R. At any rate, I brought this situation to management's attention as soon as I realized my error, so that other crews would not be called into a similar error. Supplemental information from acn 523450: we were flying flight abc from sjc-XXX. It was our 4TH leg of a 7 leg day and the 4TH day of a 4 day trip. After pushback, we were given clearance to taxi to runway 30R (new runway which just opened). The effective data of the data was aug/sep. It did not contain any data for runway 30R. I questioned the captain about this fact and he said we could use the data for runway 30L and still be legal. Although I wasn't sure we would really be legal using performance numbers for another runway, I was convertible with his decision, because we were using a runway which was longer and had no clear way or obstacle clearance concerns. Another company flight also departed runway 30R immediately in front of us, which also relieved some of my concern. I have flown a great deal with this captain and have never questioned his judgement or flying ability. I don't feel that safety was compromised in any way, but I do feel that we should have avoided the rush to stay on time and pulled to the side and radioed dispatch for runway 30R data to be completely legal.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: B737-300 CREW DEPARTED SJC RWY 30R WITHOUT PERFORMANCE DATA.

Narrative: SJC HAD JUST BEGUN OPS ON THE NEW RWY 30R. WE WERE CLRED TO FOLLOW COMPANY TO RWY 30R. SJC WAS LNDG ACFT ON RWY 30L, DEPARTING ACFT ON RWY 30R. WE WERE #3 OR #4 FOR TKOF ON RWY 30R AND WE OBSERVED A NUMBER OF ACFT LINED UP ON FINAL FOR RWY 30L. SJC TWR WAS KICKING ACFT OFF RWY 30R AT A RAPID RATE. EARLY IN THE TAXI OUT WE SAW A COMPANY B737 TKOF ON RWY 30R. DURING THE TAXI OUT, THE FO TOLD ME THAT THERE WAS NO TKOF DATA FOR RWY 30R. WE HAD PREVIOUSLY BRIEFED TKOF DATA FOR RWY 30L, WHICH IS OVER 1000 FT SHORTER THAN RWY 30R. I ELECTED TO APPLY THE 'LIKE RWYS' METHOD USED WHEN OPERATING OFF DIVERSION ARPTS WHEREAS THIS RWY IS UNPUBLISHED (LIKE ALT, LENGTH, TEMP). SINCE THIS WAS A NEW RWY, I REASONED THAT THIS METHOD WOULD APPLY AND WE WERE NOT 'WAGGING IT' FROM AN INTXN ON A PUBLISHED RWY TO EXPEDITE DEP. THIS COMPANY ACFT IMMEDIATELY AHEAD OF US THEN TOOK OFF ON RWY 30R. I ASSUMED THE OTHER COMPANY ACFT APPLIED THIS SAME REASONING. WE WERE IMMEDIATELY CLRED FOR TKOF ON RWY 30R BEHIND COMPANY. THIS WAS THE 4TH LEG OF A 7 LEG DAY ON A 4 DAY TRIP. ON THE LAST LEG OF THE DAY, MY FO AND I DISCUSSED HOW TO COMPUTE OFF-LINE DATA. IT WAS THEN THAT I REALIZED THAT I MAY HAVE ERRED EARLIER THAT DAY. UPON LNDG IN XXX, I DISCUSSED OUR RWY 30R RESPONSE WITH CHIEF PLT. HE CALLED DISPATCH AND THE PERFORMANCE MONITORS. WE WERE TOLD THAT RWY 30R DATA WAS IN THEIR FLT PLANNING BUT THAT COMMERCIAL CHARTS HAD FAILED TO UPDATE THE DATA ON THE ACFT. I WAS ASSURED BY THE DISPATCHER THAT ANY RWY 30R TKOF BASED ON RWY 30L DATA WOULD HAVE CONSERVATIVELY MET ALL RWY LIMIT AND CLB/OBSTACLE CONSIDERATIONS. HOWEVER, THE CREWS WOULD NOT HAVE COMPUTED DATA FOR RWY 30R, THE TKOF RWY. THE CHIEF PLT ASKED DISPATCH TO MAKE RWY 30R DATA AVAILABLE TO THE CREWS ON THE RELEASE, OR TO PUT A NOTE ON THE RELEASE ASKING FUTURE CREWS TO CALL DISPATCH FOR THE NUMBERS IF THEY WISHED TO DEPART FROM RWY 30R. AT ANY RATE, I BROUGHT THIS SIT TO MGMNT'S ATTN AS SOON AS I REALIZED MY ERROR, SO THAT OTHER CREWS WOULD NOT BE CALLED INTO A SIMILAR ERROR. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 523450: WE WERE FLYING FLT ABC FROM SJC-XXX. IT WAS OUR 4TH LEG OF A 7 LEG DAY AND THE 4TH DAY OF A 4 DAY TRIP. AFTER PUSHBACK, WE WERE GIVEN CLRNC TO TAXI TO RWY 30R (NEW RWY WHICH JUST OPENED). THE EFFECTIVE DATA OF THE DATA WAS AUG/SEP. IT DID NOT CONTAIN ANY DATA FOR RWY 30R. I QUESTIONED THE CAPT ABOUT THIS FACT AND HE SAID WE COULD USE THE DATA FOR RWY 30L AND STILL BE LEGAL. ALTHOUGH I WASN'T SURE WE WOULD REALLY BE LEGAL USING PERFORMANCE NUMBERS FOR ANOTHER RWY, I WAS CONVERTIBLE WITH HIS DECISION, BECAUSE WE WERE USING A RWY WHICH WAS LONGER AND HAD NO CLR WAY OR OBSTACLE CLRNC CONCERNS. ANOTHER COMPANY FLT ALSO DEPARTED RWY 30R IMMEDIATELY IN FRONT OF US, WHICH ALSO RELIEVED SOME OF MY CONCERN. I HAVE FLOWN A GREAT DEAL WITH THIS CAPT AND HAVE NEVER QUESTIONED HIS JUDGEMENT OR FLYING ABILITY. I DON'T FEEL THAT SAFETY WAS COMPROMISED IN ANY WAY, BUT I DO FEEL THAT WE SHOULD HAVE AVOIDED THE RUSH TO STAY ON TIME AND PULLED TO THE SIDE AND RADIOED DISPATCH FOR RWY 30R DATA TO BE COMPLETELY LEGAL.

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.