Is the A321 overpowered ? (V1.21)

[Kort 3]

Hello guys,
The new V1.21 was fantastic,most of knows bugs are solved.
However,I had a problem with takeoff thrust settings on the A321 with CFM56 engines.
It's obvious that the CFM56 on A321 could provide more thrust than another CFM56s on A320/A319/A318.

However,even the flexible temperature was set to near max range,the A321 hurtled down the runway like a rocket.
(It's definitely that I had thrust bump settings off)

Check out this video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6SmrgIbUqc&feature=youtu.be

Taking off from VHHH heading to RCTP.
Takeoff grossweight is 73000KG with fuel onboard at 7720KG.
Using FLEX temperature at 98 degrees Celcius.
V1 144;VR149;V2 152

Is this takeoff acceleration behaviour normal ?


Greetings
Kort

[Joshua Che. 1601]

Using FLEX temperature at 98 degrees Celcius.

FLEX 98 is a invalid temperature. The engines have a flat rating where by thrust cannot decrease below 25% of max power.

[Kort 3]

FLEX 98 is a invalid temperature. The engines have a flat rating where by thrust cannot decrease below 25% of max power.

Understood. So we can conclude that the A321's CFM engine still have lots of power left at max derate. Which made the aircraft accelerated so fast ?

[Joshua Che. 1601]

Understood. So we can conclude that the A321's CFM engine still have lots of power left at max derate. Which made the aircraft accelerated so fast ?

Based on your takeoff weight, yes, it looks normal.

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

Gents keep in mind that the aircraft needs to be able to climb on one engine, so with both engines running on full power there is a lot of thrust.

I remember how pissed off my father (a fighter pilot back then) was when the MD80 came into service. When not loaded too much it could climb faster than his fighter could. And back then when fuel was cheap and people did not mind the noise so much, they often took off at full throttle and kept it as full throttle until they got to cruise.

[Kort 3]

Gents keep in mind that the aircraft needs to be able to climb on one engine, so with both engines running on full power there is a lot of thrust.

I remember how pissed off my father (a fighter pilot back then) was when the MD80 came into service. When not loaded too much it could climb faster than his fighter could. And back then when fuel was cheap and people did not mind the noise so much, they often took off at full throttle and kept it as full throttle until they got to cruise.

Haha,many of the former fighter pilots here are not satisfied with commercial airliners' thrust ,too.

I've tried an engine out climb out on your airbus,then it behaved as well as what you said.

I thnik this topic could be labeled "NO BUG" later?

Based on your takeoff weight, yes, it looks normal.

Thanks Joshua,I've got myself too used to CFM's thrust characteristcs in the former airbus versions.

[Airbus339 129]

Also on the IAE acceleration seems to be quite abrupt on takeoff and just after liftoff when it looks like a F16.

On 72T TOW with 53°C Flex, EPR was above 1.5 and it climbed at more than 4000ft/min (after liftoff). Is that normal?

[Airbus339 129]

I'm sorry to insist, but I made other tests with the IAE A321 and there's something strange: I made FLEX 41 Takeoff from Gran Canaria with a 82T aircraft and it climbed again at 4000ft/min: it's quite a lot considering the heavy weight. Also with a 20knots tailwind and ISA conditions regarding temperature, the A321 reached its maximum FL340, in 21 minutes, nearly five minutes before to what the flight planner said for this weight.

The A321 is known as a poor climber but in my tests it rockets more than an A319 or an A320 (now that all issues in my system, in particular with the initial climb of the A319, are gone)

Can you have a look on this?

[Guest]

Same here.

Miquel.