Narrative:

Data for wet runway. The data is based on a dry runway. No correction is available until a contamination threshold of 1/8 inch or greater of standing water is applied. However, we operate daily on wet runways where the aircraft takeoff weight is equal or nearly equal to the runway limited weight, ie, lga on most summer days with no adjustment if the runway is reported wet. When I asked 3 different check airmen during my last check about this, none were even aware of the fact that the numbers were not adjusted for a wet runway. When I submitted this question to air carrier, they replied, 'there is no regulation for the manufacturer to provide or the operator to use wet runway data. Contaminated runway data is provided but unless the runway is considered contaminated, only dry runway data is used for takeoff performance.' do we need a federal rule to ensure we operate as safely as possible? It is my belief that we are betting our airline on the hope we will not lose an engine within 10 KTS of V1 every time we take off on a wet runway where our takeoff weight is nearly equal to the runway limited weight. With many takeoffs per day, I do not think we have the luxury of feeling lucky. I believe we are taking an unnecessary risk by not providing our pilots with accurate data for wet runway conditions and we are operating with a false sense of security just because a problem hasn't happened yet. However, if we as an airline have decided that we cannot afford to take a wet runway correction every time a weight limited runway is reported as wet, then pilots need to know that fact. And while we are being concerned if a 140000 pound aircraft takeoff weight is 100 pounds over the planned takeoff weight on a maximum power, I think we ought to also share the fact that the numbers we are betting on are not even valid for a wet runway. I hope there is something I am missing here, but I fear I am not. I hope marketing and financial planning have not eroded a ctlable margin of safety.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR PLT IS CONCERNED HIS ACR DOES NOT PROVIDE WT PENALTIES FOR WET RWY TKOFS.

Narrative: DATA FOR WET RWY. THE DATA IS BASED ON A DRY RWY. NO CORRECTION IS AVAILABLE UNTIL A CONTAMINATION THRESHOLD OF 1/8 INCH OR GREATER OF STANDING WATER IS APPLIED. HOWEVER, WE OPERATE DAILY ON WET RWYS WHERE THE ACFT TKOF WT IS EQUAL OR NEARLY EQUAL TO THE RWY LIMITED WT, IE, LGA ON MOST SUMMER DAYS WITH NO ADJUSTMENT IF THE RWY IS RPTED WET. WHEN I ASKED 3 DIFFERENT CHK AIRMEN DURING MY LAST CHK ABOUT THIS, NONE WERE EVEN AWARE OF THE FACT THAT THE NUMBERS WERE NOT ADJUSTED FOR A WET RWY. WHEN I SUBMITTED THIS QUESTION TO ACR, THEY REPLIED, 'THERE IS NO REG FOR THE MANUFACTURER TO PROVIDE OR THE OPERATOR TO USE WET RWY DATA. CONTAMINATED RWY DATA IS PROVIDED BUT UNLESS THE RWY IS CONSIDERED CONTAMINATED, ONLY DRY RWY DATA IS USED FOR TKOF PERFORMANCE.' DO WE NEED A FEDERAL RULE TO ENSURE WE OPERATE AS SAFELY AS POSSIBLE? IT IS MY BELIEF THAT WE ARE BETTING OUR AIRLINE ON THE HOPE WE WILL NOT LOSE AN ENG WITHIN 10 KTS OF V1 EVERY TIME WE TAKE OFF ON A WET RWY WHERE OUR TKOF WT IS NEARLY EQUAL TO THE RWY LIMITED WT. WITH MANY TKOFS PER DAY, I DO NOT THINK WE HAVE THE LUXURY OF FEELING LUCKY. I BELIEVE WE ARE TAKING AN UNNECESSARY RISK BY NOT PROVIDING OUR PLTS WITH ACCURATE DATA FOR WET RWY CONDITIONS AND WE ARE OPERATING WITH A FALSE SENSE OF SECURITY JUST BECAUSE A PROB HASN'T HAPPENED YET. HOWEVER, IF WE AS AN AIRLINE HAVE DECIDED THAT WE CANNOT AFFORD TO TAKE A WET RWY CORRECTION EVERY TIME A WT LIMITED RWY IS RPTED AS WET, THEN PLTS NEED TO KNOW THAT FACT. AND WHILE WE ARE BEING CONCERNED IF A 140000 LB ACFT TKOF WT IS 100 LBS OVER THE PLANNED TKOF WT ON A MAX PWR, I THINK WE OUGHT TO ALSO SHARE THE FACT THAT THE NUMBERS WE ARE BETTING ON ARE NOT EVEN VALID FOR A WET RWY. I HOPE THERE IS SOMETHING I AM MISSING HERE, BUT I FEAR I AM NOT. I HOPE MARKETING AND FINANCIAL PLANNING HAVE NOT ERODED A CTLABLE MARGIN OF SAFETY.

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.