Small Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Flight Crew Last 90 Days 50; Flight Crew Total 6000; Flight Crew Type 450
Situational Awareness
Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Incursion Runway
Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Airport; Human Factors
While departing RWY 5 @ CNI we made the radio calls to announce taxing to the runway; taking the runway; and departing the runway. As we accelerated through 60 kts a small aircraft was observed coming the opposite direction on RWY 23. We immediately aborted the takeoff and taxied off the runway. The other aircraft took-off and immediately turned to the right upon seeing us on the runway. The other aircraft made a takeoff call only after he had started his takeoff roll and had made no other calls that we were able to hear. He claimed to not hear our radio at all although the operator of the FBO stated that he had heard us make all of our calls. The other aircraft appeared to have a very weak radioDue to the slope of the runway; neither end is visible from the other. The incident could have been avoided through proper communication by the other aircraft announcing their intentions before taking the runway. I would suggest that signage or electronic monitoring be added to both runways announcing that the opposite end is not visible and to make sure to announce intentions before continuing out to the runway. The wind sock showed a direct crosswind so either runway was able to be used. When the opposite side of the runway cannot be viewed at a non-towered airport increased emphasis must be place on proper communication and awareness of aircraft operating in the nearby vicinity.
Corporate Jet Captain reported an aborted takeoff from CNI Runway 05 due to a single engine aircraft departing Runway 23. The Captain reported that due to the slope of the runway; neither end is visible from the other.