B737 MAX 8 flight crew reported a high speed rejected takeoff due to an APU Caution Light.
Synopsis
B737 MAX 8 flight crew reported a high speed rejected takeoff due to an APU Caution Light.
Narrative
Rejected due to an APU caution light and overspeed light that flickered on for a second and then stayed illuminated around 100 knots. Weather conditions were marginal and taking off into high terrain at the departure end. Taxiied the aircraft off of the runway and ran the APU Overspeed QRH; reviewed the hot brake temp; charts; taxiied back to the gate and entered logbook entry into logbook. Followed rejected takeoff procedures per AOM and inspected the aircraft for damage. Local maintenance then inspected the aircraft and found no visible damage. Deplaned aircraft due to INOP APU and no pre-conditioned air being available at the airport. Aircraft was then grounded.Cause: Early morning; third leg for the day coupled with last flight of the sequence.Suggestions: Although the APU caution light could have been handled after take-off; we felt the safest thing to do was abort the take-off and handle the situation. The APU was not running at the time of take-off which confused us to as to why we were receiving messages regarding an overspeed. This is a new 737 MAX and seems it is sending out erroneous messages.
Second reporter narrative
On takeoff roll an APU overspeed caution light flickered on momentarily and then remained illuminated at 100 knots. The decision was made to reject the takeoff due to marginal weather and terrain in the area. After Taxiing off the runway and stopping the aircraft the QRH was reviewed for APU Overspeed; hot brake temp charts were reviewed; and logbook entry was made into logbook. Aircraft was inspected for damage by both local maintenance and flight crew per AOM and no visible damage was noted. The aircraft was deplaned and ultimately grounded due to maintenance inspections required after the rejected takeoff. Cause: Before every flight we brief rejected takeoff criteria both before and after 80 knots. In this case the weather and terrain in the area played a factor in the decision to reject the takeoff at 100 knots. Suggestions: Continuous review of rejected takeoff procedures and criteria to ensure the best possible decision is made in time critical situations.
More incidents for this aircraft family →
Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.