When I fly I don’t program the on-board computer so I follow the ramps that the ATC gives me. Would the ATC pass the incorrect altitude for this plane?
Well yes, but as you point out it needs extreme trim to achieve that.
1 Like
The reason the trim and angles might be like this is because the plane by default is fully loaded. And 50% of fuel is just a bit too much for a typical sector on the 319. (and a cruise level of 390)
Suggest you lower fuel load or payload.
On the 321neo is the same, as well as most of airliners.
A plane can have a ceiling of 41,000 feet but that doesn’t mean that fully loaded it will always cruise at that altitude. That’s why with some airliners they have step climb. Cruise altitude is always going to depend on weight of the aircraft.
A typical 2 hour flight with reserves, will only require 30-35% of fuel load. And that’s if the plane is fully loaded as it comes by default.
5 Likes
When you do this it then makes the nose down approach and “float” on landing worse.
It seems there are two problems, one that it seems too heavy without flaps (extreme trim and nose up at 250 knots, 10,000 ft) and the other that it seems too light with flaps (nose down approach and float). Also too sensitive to wind.
We saw your post on the 321 thread. We asked you to post on our forums for further help. We can’t provide individual support in these forums.
The trim depends on the height / weight balance. The heavier you are the less high you can cruise without extreme trim. I’m currently cruising at 37000 ft with below 63t gross weight, and the aircraft is only 3-4 degrees nose up. If I went up to 39000 ft it would have to be more. The farther you fly the lower cruise level is recommended because of the additional fuel weight.
In real life transatlantic flights for example start with a lower cruise altitude, then as they use up fuel they can get higher.
3 Likes
Understood thanks. That would make sense if it were an individual issue. Are you not aware of or experiencing what I’m describing? If it’s something on a individual basis then I’ll seek assistance but my understanding is that it is with all users.
You explained it better than I did. Thank you!
Also, if you don’t set the fuel before a flight it will always default to 50%. And that is a lot. I don’t think it’s recommended to cruise very high with that amount. I only go to 39000 ft with the A319 if I have 30% or less fuel, or even less. For many domestic flights even 20% is enough. Still, if you set a high payload, you have to account for that as well.
2 Likes
Right. And IRL I think that’d be rare from my research to go above FL350-FL380 in a medium range jet. I’d imagine what the poster is describing, extreme trim at 50% weight at that high is probably realistic.
1 Like
By the way, I highly recommend watching FlightRadar. There you can find aircraft, see where they go from where and see their altitude. For example, I found an Easyjet this afternoon from Gatwick to Izmir (Turkey), it was an A319 cruising at 35000 ft. I’m now flying that same flight, only at 37000 ft (because why not). Shorter flights often go up to 37-38000 as I see, because they’re lighter. It’s fun to watch and actually very useful I think.
3 Likes
@dreampage thanks for that. Just downloaded the app on iPhone, really cool. Just tracked a Spirit airlines a319 going from Atlanta to Miami. It settled in at cruise FL350.
Thx for the explanations everyone. My picture was from a flight from Vienna to Helsinki, I think about 1600 km and 2.5 hours flight time. I think I set the fuel at 60%, that was a mistake a way too much. Indeed something about 30 or 35% was better.
Edit: sorry to post it here, but here is a picture from the A321. 30% fuel, FL380, mach 0.78. Still the AOA is at 5 degrees, trim is at 30% which is quite right I guess? Do I have to even lower the amount of fuel to get to a AOA of 3 or 4%? Or lower the altitude?
Edit2: forget my question. I descend to FL350 and the AOA went down to 3 degrees. I learned something tonight👍
@Richie81: really nice job with the cockpit lightning. Next week for the A319 as well?
1 Like
Each aircraft is different, even if they are from the same family.
Wing area/wing load has a significant effect on the climb and cruise altitude.
The A321 has a higher wing area compared the the A319. So, even if the max altitude of the a321 is
FL390. It has to be very light on both fuel and payload for a flight on the 321 to climb to FL390 in cruise.
Same example is find the 737-700 and the 737-900. The 700 typically flies higher in a similar sector than the the 737-900. The same can be said of the 777-200 and the 777-300. The bigger the wing area the less a plane typically climbs higher.
Typically 330-370 is the cruise level for the 321.
Remember the flight begins with a full payload on the 321neo. Which is not something you see 100% of the time neither. Its full pax and full cargo.
As for the lights, yes next week the 319. Thanks!
2 Likes
Well, you need the fuel for the flight, so I wouldn’t reduce it just to get a better AOA. 
If you plan the flight on the World Map like I do, then set the fuel so that there is some excess range displayed. I noticed at the A319 that it consumes a bit more fuel than what is displayed on the map, so I always load 5-10% “excess” fuel, especially if my trip goes West, as the general headwind makes the trip longer and demands more fuel.
And then, when you have the fuel needed, choose a cruise level that feels right. On longer trips I usually go for 37000 ft, but as I see on FlightRadar, many A319s cruise at 35000. If you don’t like the AOA / trim the autopilot uses you can always request a lower cruise altitude from the ATC. I’m pretty sure FL350 is good for any load, I don’t think you should stay lower in any members of the A320 family.
TL;RD fuel should be what’s needed (rather more, than too little), and choose the cruise altitude for that, not vice versa.
1 Like
Lots of learning on this topic. Thanks friends, there are things mentioned here that I had no idea.
I cruise at 40,000ft Mach 0.82 with the A319 and no problems except the plane sometimes loses power on the right engine and descends.
1 Like
I just bought the A319 and this thing CTD’s pretty much all the time. I’ve gotten it in the air maybe 1 out of 10 times at different default and 3rd party airports over the past 2 days. Worse luck starting from cold/dark. Better luck spawning on the runway. Weird thing is, I have better luck with it in Europe, than the US (where I live) I’ve not been able to get the corp versions in the air once. I’d like to like the jet, cause its kinda fun having a stubby airline jet and it’s great having all the liveries. Just too bad it CTD’s way way too much for me to try flying it again until the next update. Just thought I’d throw that out there for folks. I’m on XBOX series X. Hope they get it working cause I can’t get a friggin refund! I’m going to delete it and reload it and see if that somehow fixes it. And yes, I’ve done all the other tricks, deleting cache, unplugging, restarting, etc. This is getting old having to test for developers because MS/Asobo can’t create something for the devs to actually test their products with before sending it out to the world and users taking a chance spending $$ on something that should work. Yet I love flying so I’m hooked. Ugh. ha! Back to the 414 Cessna for awhile, now that plane actually works!
I just had a CTD right after landing at Memmingen Airport (EDJA). It’s a small handcrafted airport, not third-party, it’s part of a World Update.
After restarting the sim, I also tried to spawn at the same airport (Ramp 3, just for reference). After about a minute of spawning in, just as I was being pushed back, there was a CTD again.
So it looks like the A319 has a problem with European handcrafted (not third-party) airports, regardless of their size. So far Frankfurt, Nice Cote d’Azur and now Memmingen lead to CTD.
And with the a320 default ?