Airmanship?
Airmanship is a dead duck in many airlines, especially in the developing part of the world; it has been superseded by SOP, and it is standard practice to use FDR data to punish pilots who deviate for whatever reason.
SOP is good and necessary for many reasons, but when it is used to save the airline a bit of fuel it becomes questionable if the PIC is not given options.
Fuel uplift, routing, flap settings, Take off thrust, use of reverse, GA & diversions
are among the areas where the PIC in reality has no longer a say if he wants to stay out of trouble.
Combine that with cultures where it is easy to intimidate the pilots, and you will find some appalling CRM, where among other things it is unthinkable that the F/O will challenge the PIC during an unstable approach.
It has been a 10-year uphill battle as Airbus instructor mostly in Asia to make my students appreciate that there may be times when a GA, a TOGA takeoff, a full flap/full reverse landing etc. is in place despite SOP "recommending" a fuel saving option with smaller or no margins. There is a widespread reluctance among my pilots to accept the responsibility that comes with showing airmanship, maybe because e.g. a simple GA is an "event" that you have to defend afterwards.
Thanks Dan for the brake brief. May I add that full reverse actually reduces landing distance by about 10% if combined with MED auto brake on a slightly slippery runway (A330 figs)
Any of you 320 experts who can confirm from the pics that CONF 3 was used?