A320 does not have an aft fuel trim tank. However to amend my earlier post, A320 CG does move with fuel consumption. So my question for Those Who Know remains somewhat the same: Would cg changes due to fuel burn in any way exacerbate the set of conditions already being discussed resulting in an unsustainable climb?
Quote “nice to know.. but in A320, CG always move backward with fuel consumption, irrespective of the tank..” at 13 Aug 2011 at:
fuel consumption and CG movement [Archive] - PPRuNe Forums
Other comments on A320 cg changes, Google:
trim changes due to a320 fuel consumption
Conflicting quote: “It's interesting to note that the performance chapter for the A320 bases all the figures on a MAC of 33%. Seems to me that if you start off with a MAC of34%, the fuel burn will cause the MAC to decrease during the flight towards a lower number, say about 30% depending on the length of the flight. This will keep the MAC close to the book value of 33%. Since the performance figures are based on 33%, wouldn't it make sense to load the airplane to reflect this value? Seems not many ops people, chief pilots etc pay much attention to this area.” 20 May 2013 at:
A320 CofG THS [Archive] - PPRuNe Forums