Dear Airbus, please can you
 

Dear Airbus

In your latest FCOM for the A320 family, in Aircraft Systems, Aircraft General, Ground Clearance Diagrams, you’ve removed the actual figures and just left us with the dots to try and work out the actual numbers. Knowing from old FCOMs, I am ok, but anyone going onto the A320 will just have to try and guess what the actual figures are for expanse A321 9.7 and 11.2, A320 11.7 and 13.5 and A319 13.9 and 15.5.

Please can you put the figures back on the side lines

How's the exact number relevant?! There's no way to read the attitude to the 10th of a degree on your PFD. Let alone determine if the struts are compressed, semi-compressed or not compressed.

Don't you think it's more relevant to look at factors that influence the tail clearance? Significant crosswind, tailwind, high gross weight, (threats), high rotation rate, early rotation, incorrect performance calculation, incorrect oleo inflation (errors) etc. And try to eliminate them? I.e. use correct take off rotation techniques, consider using a higher flap setting or higher thrust setting when the above factors are present?

During line training, when asked by the line trainer what the tailstrike limits are compressed and extended, what is the trainee going to say and refer too.

I would venture that if they're not supplied to the trainee, they won't be asked about? How can they? I'm lost.

They won't be able to ask if they cannot provide the reference. There are many details that are removed throughout the years from FCOM

It's a worrying trend. Manufacturers continue to feel that pilots need ever less information, ultimately dooming the poor sod to the monicker of button Pusher and not much else. Shame on you Airbus and Boeing. In the case of the latter hundreds are dead as a result and the company is in turmoil.

But what are those poor clueless line trainers to ask now? Concepts require knowledge and a bit more explanation than just a by rote learned number one can regurgitate without applying the concept behind into practice. It is much easier to ask for a number and give a clear "correct" or "wrong" to tick a box.

I don't have the latest FCOM. Which numbers have been replaced by dots? Is OP referring to the max pitch-up when on the runway, before a tail strike?

what use is asking the trainee to regurgitate a number? More appropriate questioning would be after say a descent brief asking what the effect of a different flap setting to that selected F3 vs Full would be? Or after a crosswind takeoff asking what would the effect of too much aileron input. Or when checking the output of the EFB before takeoff asking what the pros and cons of the selected flap are. Or what are the likely consequences of a stuffed up EFB falcon takeoff.

That’s how you can gauge a trainee’s understanding of a topic, rather than a rote leaned number.

That said, I see no harm in having in the manuals, although it may be encouraging pilots to look at their PFD s rather than the picture outside. Get that right and inside will be just fine.

In a normal World yes, in Doha no :)

Agreed with the concept stated above. Although wish this was discussed over a different parameter such as safety (overpressure) release valve trigger setting.

For Tailstrike pitch limit, both with oleos extended or compressed, a proper practice for PM is to observe the PFD and call out "pitch, pitch" if approaching the limiting attitude. AFAIK most aircraft today are modded with auto-callout to do exactly that for landing.

Headless rota learning? No thanks.
Knowing your A/C limits properly to safeguard the operation? Well, nobody wants to devaluate the profession, do we.

https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....e3f3c8c73b.jpg
Sorry to spoil the party.

Who cares what the actual limits are? Just know your support calls and ‘yell’ PITCH when required. Knowing that the tail may strike at x degrees doesn’t practically help.

I agree with Ollie Onion. I think what it's really important is for the PM to closely monitor the pitch during the flare and to do the standard call out in due time when applicable: >10 degrees for 319/320 or >7.5 degrees for A321.
From the old FCOM, the tail strike value for A321 was at 9.5 degrees and A320 11.5 degrees with the gears fully compressed.

And what about during take off in a max take off weighted a321

Soooo how's that bit of information going to help one prevent a tail strike? Seems more of a gotcha type question than anything to me.

Know how to rotate? Rotation rate as the main culprit for many. That said, having flown A321s in a previous company, it was actually not the A321 which had the highest tail strike risk, it was the A320. Most pilots were really aware that an A321 is a bit longer than the A320, but they often rotated the A320 like an A319.

It is less about knowing an exact figure, it is more knowing how to fly and adjust your flying technique according to the variant you're sitting in. Even more so if flying several types at once of course.

Same as Denti. Rotation technique is the key to avoid tailstrike during take off.
Saying that on the NEOs, they added up a rotation mode which helps to prevent the tail strike during take off.