AN ACR FO IS CONCERNED WITH TKOF ABORTS ON WET RWYS AND WITH OPERATING FROM A RWY WITH HARD-PACKED ICE ON THE FAR END.

Narrative

AT ORD ON FEB/THU/94 WE TAXIED OUT TO RWY 32L AT TXWY T10. THE TXWYS WERE HARD PACKED SNOW AND ICE. RWY 32L WAS CLR AS FAR AS WE COULD SEE AS WE TAXIED ONTO THE RWY. AS WE APCHED V1; WE SAW THAT; FROM JUST BEYOND THE POINT OF ROTATION; THE RWY WAS COVERED WITH HARD PACKED SNOW. I DO NOT THINK THAT THE AIRPLANE COULD HAVE BEEN STOPPED ON THE RWY IF AN ABORT HAD BEEN INITIATED A FEW SECONDS BEFORE V1. GOING OFF THE END OF RWY 32L MAY NOT BE TOO SERIOUS DUE TO A CLRWAY. I AM DEEPLY TROUBLED ABOUT JETLINER ARPTS THAT HAVE OBSTRUCTIONS AT THE ENDS OF THE RWYS (NO CLRWAYS). THIS MAKES NO ALLOWANCE FOR ERROR IN A HIGH SPD ABORT WHEN OPERATING AT OR NEAR RWY LIMIT WT ON A DRY RWY. THERE IS NO CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENT FOR A WET RWY IN ACCELERATE-STOP DISTANCE. THIS MEANS TO ME THAT A JETLINER OPERATING AT RWY LIMIT WT; WHERE FIELD LENGTH IS LIMITING; WILL NOT STOP ON A WET RWY DURING AN ABORTED TKOF AT V1. FAR 25.109 DOES NOT INCLUDE WET RWYS. FAR 139.309 AND 77.25 SHOULD NEVER BE 'GRANDFATHERED!' CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE RPTR STATES THAT HE HAS WRITTEN THE ACR DISTRICT OFFICE IN LOS ANGELES ABOUT THIS PROB AND WAS TOLD THAT THAT OFFICE HAD NO JURISDICTION IN THE MATTER. THE RPTR ALSO HAS WRITTEN AN OFFICIAL HIGHLY PLACED IN THE DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION AND IS AWAITING A RESPONSE. THE RPTR ASKED THAT THE ANALYST REMOVE 'OR ICY' FROM HIS RPT AND THIS HAS BEEN DONE. THE RPTR DOES NOT KNOW IF THE RWY IN QUESTION HAD BEEN SANDED. THE RPTR WAS ADVISED THAT THE FAA SAFETY HOT LINE IS AVAILABLE FOR HIS USE AND HE PROMISED TO CALL TODAY. THE RPTR FLIES MOSTLY OUT OF SAN. HE BELIEVES THAT THE RWY AT SAN IS INADEQUATE AND IS AN ACCIDENT WAITING TO HAPPEN AS IT HAS NO OVERRUN AREAS AT EITHER END.