Regional Jet 900 (CRJ900)
Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Confusion; Distraction; Situational Awareness
Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff; Flight Crew Returned To Gate; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Aircraft
During takeoff roll at approximately 80-90 knots a vibration and low rumble noise began. My first thought was that it may be a flat tire because the vibration was less pronounced and sharp as I have seen with a nose wheel shimmy. At approximately 2 seconds into the event the aircraft experienced a significant reduction in the acceleration rate. The reduction lasted approximately 2 seconds; but I made the decision to abort because of the severity of loss of acceleration rate and over concerns that it may reoccur. We completed the abort; notified ATC and exited the runway and stopped on the taxiway. I made an announcement to the passengers and spoke with the flight attendants and informed them of the situation and that at this time there was no need for evacuation. I had completed all the items on the QRH rejected take procedure but neglected to call for it until after I had called for the after landing checklist. I contacted Dispatch next and informed them of our aborted takeoff. I contacted operations to coordinate a return to the gate. Once at the gate I called Maintenance Control to have technicians inspect the aircraft. I coordinated with Dispatch and ZZZ Operations to have the passengers deplaned. A replacement aircraft was sent from ZZZ1 so that we could complete our flight. There were two company maintenance technicians at the airport at that time working on another aircraft. They came over to our aircraft and we gave them the information concerning the abort so they could do their troubleshooting. They thought it may have been an issue with the main landing gear tires; brakes; and anti-skid system. A Contract Maintenance Technician was also there working with the company technicians and found a possible discrepancy with the nose landing gear. The First Officer spoke with a passenger who described banging noises and noticed the deceleration. After discussing that with the First Officer we may have experienced a compressor stall. I spoke with Maintenance Control the following day and was told one of the engines experienced several hot starts and this may be related to a possible compressor stall. The First Officer; did a great job during the abort; and communicating with ATC and OPS. The Flight Attendants did a great job taking care of the passengers. I should have called for the rejected takeoff checklist first before the after landing checklist.
[Report narrative contained no additional information.]
A flight crew reported rejecting the takeoff at 80-90 KTS due to a compressor stall.