I have always had grave reservations about who, other than the captain, can call an abort. Far better to make an appropriate call concerning the perceived problem, rather than putting one's total trust in the chap that decides an abort is warranted. As most people accept, it is the captain who should always make that critical call and subsequent actions to go or stop.
Some operators blithely state in their Operations Manual that any crew can call an abort. I wonder if they have ever had a long hard look at that statement to examine the potential for a complete stuff up at high speed?
Some years back I was talking to an old ex RAF flight engineer on Handley Page Hastings I think. When I met him he was now on the B727. He stated that in his squadron the flight engineer could call an abort (if he thought it was warranted, of course) and that it was mandatory for the captain to stop immediately an abort was called by the F/E.
This sounded dangerous to me especially as I think in the Hastings the F/E was seated sideways behind the two pilots faced sideways and did not have an immediate view through the front windows to see what runway was left in front.
On one occasion the F/E saw a flickering engine gauge and called "Abort" shortly before lift off. The startled captain immediately aborted the take off but managed to stop before running off the end. The captain then turned to the F/E and asked why he had called an abort. Just imagine nowadays a blind abort by a captain purely on a crew call without any idea of the problem. Yet the potential is there in some airline SOP's.
In this case the captain apparently chided the F/E for what he (the captain), saw as a wrong decision to call abort. The aircraft was then back-tracked for another take off, with my drinking friend the RAF F/E, smarting under the captain's remark.
Half way into the next take off run, the F/E hollered "ABORT" in a loud voice and true to RAF SOP the captain stood on the brakes and came to a smoking brake stop. Again he had no idea why the F/E had called the abort, so he turned slowly around in his seat and said what's the bloody problem now.
The F/E said that there was no engine or airframe problem captain, but that you violated SOP's by not taxiing right to the end of the runway before you started the take off run.
Now that might have been a slightly exaggerated tale of derring do by the F/E, but it had me worried. Sure, it was 25 years ago when he was a F/E on a Hastings , but now he was on the 727 and he firmly believed that as a crew member, he could call an abort and the captain would obey and sort things out after the event.
I am also surprised to read in this thread that the captain and first officer can "share" a rejected take off. I think the example given was the captain who was guarding the throttles simply closed the throttles as a sign that an abort was on, while the first officer (or PNF, whatever) selected speed brakes and applied reverse thrust. I don't recall who did the brakes.
What fantastic Torville and Dean synchronisation in a split second, that must have been demanded of the captain and first officer - or should I say the PNF and PF.
Talk about a recipe for potential confusion, I would have thought. Or is this just another example of the warm and fuzzy application of perceived CRM?
Thre is no doubt in my mind that the captain should always be the one to decide on, then initiate the abort, with all handling of brakes, speed brakes and reverse by the captain- particularly on a slippery runway abort where a cross wind might require judicious juggling of reverse thrust if the aircraft starts to weather-cock due wind and reverse thrust vectors.