Date: 201205
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: SF 340B
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Powerplant Fire/Overheat Warning
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft; Weather
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We had a tail pipe hot warning on takeoff and we executed a rejected takeoff with very little braking and exited the runway. I contacted Dispatch and gave them all the relevant information and they transferred me to Maintenance Control. I explained to them what happened and that I knew that with moderate rain a tail pipe hot can be a false positive. They agreed and asked me how long the light (tail pipe hot) was on. I told them it was on for about five seconds. They told me that I could make another takeoff attempt. I asked them if there was anything else I needed to do before departing; and they said no. So we departed and flew to destination without incident. When we landed; Dispatch called me and transferred me to Maintenance Control. I was told by them that there was an airworthiness directive for the tail pipe hot warning that we had and that the plane could not go anywhere until Maintenance looked at it. So I wrote up what happened in the aircraft logbook. This event occurred because there was a tail pipe hot warning during takeoff; and we followed standard operating procedures by aborting the takeoff. We were told by Maintenance Control that it was ok to attempt another takeoff; and that no further action was required.


Second narrative: The Captain and I were performing a normal take off. At 80 KTS; the Captain transferred controls to me. At about 100 KTS a master warning light came on due to a tail pipe hot CWP message. Both the Captain and I called for an abort. The Captain then took control of the aircraft. Using mostly reverse thrust; he stopped the aircraft with about 1;000 FT of runway left. After exiting the runway; we went through the QRH for the tail pipe hot light which had already extinguished. We communicated with Maintenance Control that the tail pipe hot light illuminated for only about four to five seconds. They then informed us that it was nothing that we needed to worry about and that we were clear to continue the flight as planned which we then did.


Synopsis: SF340 flight crew reports rejecting a takeoff for a tail pipe hot warning at 100 KTS. The warning ceases before any crew action and Maintenance Control is contacted for advise. Maintenance advises to attempt another takeoff; which is successful. Upon landing the crew is advised that an Airworthiness Directive is involved and maintenance action is required.