Our Grown Ups think they know better than Airbus so we drift around with cost index 30 but then plan selected .81 over the ocean. Downside gives a descent speed of .78/275 which is no use to man nor beast. as we also fly with the spy in the cab, I tend to leave the CI and amend the descent to .81/310. Dropping the cabin rate to 250'/min uses less fuel in descent but starts you down in a cruise descent well out. Now if you are going into SFB or coming off the ocean Eastbound this can help - 290 abeam LIFFY/DUB, LGW restrictions etc are easily met, on a profile of sorts with minimal fuel wasteage. Here comes the problem though - as previous posters have said, it has a big wing, it can get a scurry on but only until you reach .84/320 and then the wing soars like an Eagle as opposed to the 320 which soars like an Anvil ! All in all a challenge at times. What I still can't understand is why on the 320 we are 30 miles behind Britannia at TOD and 4 miles behind them on final
