Narrative:

We were taking over a crj-200. The aircraft had a deferred right pack. We spoke with the inbound crew and they informed us that the aircraft was hot and miserable and the passengers were complaining of the heat because of the deferred pack. I made a decision to refuse the aircraft based on the outside temperature of 34 deg C. I informed the dispatcher of my refusal and I was told to call the chief pilots. Two chief pilots met me at the gate and we discussed why I should take the aircraft but the decision was up to me. I informed the chief pilots that we were refusing the aircraft due to the outside air temperature; the deferred pack and that cabin temperatures could possibly reach 100 deg F due to delays and possible long taxi. I feel that I made a proper decision to refuse the aircraft due to the summer heat and that cabin temperatures could possibly exceed 100 deg F in the cabin and may possibly stay there for quite sometime before the cabin cools off or ever cools off at altitude (FL310 with a single pack). We had refused the same aircraft yesterday for the exact same reason. We were not required to contact a chief pilot and explain ourselves as to why we were refusing the aircraft. The first officer and I were released from the flight and we were informed chief pilot would fly the round trip with a ready reserve first officer. The chief pilots informed us that it was a legal deferral and that there was nothing wrong with the aircraft. We had a difference of opinion regarding the 'go; no go' decision based on safety and passenger comfort due to the outside air temperature and the ability for the cabin to properly cool down. I felt that the aircraft should not have been operated with 70 passengers with an overheated cabin for the possibility of someone passing out or getting heat stroke.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A flight crew refused to operate a single pack CRJ-200 during hot; humid weather because cabin temperatures could reach unhealthy levels.

Narrative: We were taking over a CRJ-200. The aircraft had a deferred right pack. We spoke with the inbound crew and they informed us that the aircraft was hot and miserable and the passengers were complaining of the heat because of the deferred pack. I made a decision to refuse the aircraft based on the outside temperature of 34 deg C. I informed the Dispatcher of my refusal and I was told to call the Chief Pilots. Two Chief Pilots met me at the gate and we discussed why I should take the aircraft but the decision was up to me. I informed the Chief Pilots that we were refusing the aircraft due to the outside air temperature; the deferred pack and that cabin temperatures could possibly reach 100 deg F due to delays and possible long taxi. I feel that I made a proper decision to refuse the aircraft due to the summer heat and that cabin temperatures could possibly exceed 100 deg F in the cabin and may possibly stay there for quite sometime before the cabin cools off or ever cools off at altitude (FL310 with a single pack). We had refused the same aircraft yesterday for the exact same reason. We were not required to contact a Chief Pilot and explain ourselves as to why we were refusing the aircraft. The First Officer and I were released from the flight and we were informed Chief Pilot would fly the round trip with a ready reserve First Officer. The Chief Pilots informed us that it was a legal deferral and that there was nothing wrong with the aircraft. We had a difference of opinion regarding the 'go; no go' decision based on safety and passenger comfort due to the outside air temperature and the ability for the cabin to properly cool down. I felt that the aircraft should not have been operated with 70 passengers with an overheated cabin for the possibility of someone passing out or getting heat stroke.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 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.