Ladies and gentlemen, I have watched this highly entertaining thread with some amusement and I found myself unable to resist the temptation to participate and spoil the fun.
Regarding the aerodynamics: notwithstanding her swept wings, A320 is quite a happy floater. If flown a bit above Vapp its runway gobbling capacity is on pair with PA-28, factored for size. I have done about 500 landings as PF in her and watched the roughly same number, in various WX and rwy conditions, and never observed the need to land her with anything except idle thrust. However, if handled with average manual flying skills, it can be safely landed with thrust above idle. It's against the SOP but it wont harm you if you've done everything else properly (I was told that and checked it in the sim, if you wonder). Ground spoilers are helpful to keep her on the ground but they're not really essential if you keep your touchdown soft enough not to bounce. I'm digressing a bit but I must mention that the hardest part of my conversion form 320 to Q400 was learning to land with power on - something I haven't done for previous 4000 hours. If you haven't seen her, Q400 is straight winged thus it is pretty certain that wing sweep is not the only factor affecting the landing characteristics of an aeroplane.
It is only natural for pilots to try to defend the coleague as much as possible and search for the culprit in machine and but sequence of this mishap started at first touchdown, with 752 fpm RoD when mainwheels met the tarmac and I see no sugestion that machne made the pilot do that. Even if it wasn't for second touchdown, it would warrant heavy landing inspection.
It wasn't first case it happened on A320 either. I remember exactly the same sequence described in Flight somewhere in mid-90ies, Air India was involved, if I'm not mistaken. Hard landing with thrust levers out of idle, WOW latched, bounce, levers retarded, ground spoilers, smack.
Inflight deployments of ground spoilers did happen on other aeroplanes, like DC-8 and DC-9. Ground spoilers logic on 320 is pretty simple, with not much place for agonizing over complex codes or byzantine faults; wheels are spinning, struts are compressed, trust levers are at idle, therefore we're on the ground and are stopping so we could use some boards to assist with the braking effort. Now, some could scream that we need another input to really check whether aeroplane is on ground, eg. radio altimeter. Good thinking - errr, not. Introducing one more input parameter would needlessly complicate things and introduce more potential for failures. Now that something for competent risk analysts like PBL to dwell upon and judge whether the new solution creates more problems than it solves.
Regarding the computers: all of you worrying about being replaced by computer, wondering why the ATHR computer doesn't better anticipate the need to change to thrust or being shocked by inability of SEC to recognize the bounce, stop now! Real intelligence is needed to accomplish any of the three aforementioned tasks and as far as it is known there is no intelligent computer anywhere in the world nor it is reliably forecasted that it will be made anytime soon. 99% of the line flying is routine and routine is something that computers excell at. The remaining 1% remains insurmountable obstacle for electronics and it is where we earn our pay or get killed.
Originally Posted by CONFiture
To write that a go-around must be initiated following a high bounce, is not enough.
A note should clearly warn that retarding the thrust levers after a bounce could trigger the full deployment of all ground spoilers in the air !
I'm not sure what procedure is nowadays, when I was converting to A320 in early 2007, procedure I was taught to TOGA TEN after bounce - TLs in TOGA detent (ground spoilers would auto stow) and maintain pitch 10°, accept the second bounce if it happens. Follow normal go-around procedure only when rate is absolutely positive. Regarding the need for note, perhaps you're right but then those whose interest in their aeroplane did not end with the FCOM had very good chances of hearing about previous landing mess ups.
Originally Posted by PJ2
or one can move the thrust levers forward (out of the autothrust regime) and obtain instant thrust.
I see what you mean, but taken out of context it can be a bit misleading. To clarify: you can get increase above thrust commanded by ATHR by putting TLs between CLB and TOGA detent. However there's nothing instantaneous about it: CFM56s have lots of inertia, V2500s even more so and 60 tons of aeroplane is not to be regarded lightly. Burst of power at last second might save botched landing in Twotter, chances of same procedure succeeding on 320 are extremely slim. Heavier the aroplane more the forethought is required to fly it.