Narrative:

The visual approach was stable and on localizer and glideslope using the autopilot until about 800 ft when I disconnected it and hand flew the airbus. At 500 ft; the first officer made his call outs (stable; target; sink 900). The approach was normal and the first officer never made an 'unstable' call out to me. At flare there was no arresting the descent rate as I raised the pitch. I left the thrust levers in climb detent disregarding the retard aural warning. The aircraft landed hard. I felt the nose pitch up right after touchdown and I arrested the pitch; anticipating the aircraft was going to bounce. It did not. The nose gear slowly touched the runway and I taxied off the runway. While taxing to the gate there were no indications in the cockpit of a tail strike. The aft flight attendant called the cockpit while taxing to the gate; informing me that right after we touched down there was a loud bang noise from the rear of the aircraft that startled some passengers. At the gate I proceeded to inspect the tail section and found the drain mast was scraped and a section of the aft belly was scraped with skin damage a length of about 15 ft. There were no injuries or major complaints from crew or passengers as we deplaned.[I] could not arrest descent rate during flare. I have experienced this similar situation before with the airbus. The vapp speed gets too close to the vls speed; causing a lack of airspeed during the flare; resulting in a hard landing. The high density altitude was also a factor. I would like to see the company develop a procedure or correct the issue of why on the airbus the vapp speed; at times; gets too slow to adequately flare the aircraft on landing. Perhaps ref plus five KTS is not adequate for the airbus.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: An A321 tail strike during landing at a high altitude airport. The landing was firm and the nose pitched up slightly after landing.

Narrative: The visual approach was stable and on LOC and glideslope using the autopilot until about 800 FT when I disconnected it and hand flew the Airbus. At 500 FT; the First Officer made his call outs (stable; target; sink 900). The approach was normal and the First Officer never made an 'unstable' call out to me. At flare there was no arresting the descent rate as I raised the pitch. I left the thrust levers in climb detent disregarding the retard aural warning. The aircraft landed hard. I felt the nose pitch up right after touchdown and I arrested the pitch; anticipating the aircraft was going to bounce. It did not. The nose gear slowly touched the runway and I taxied off the runway. While taxing to the gate there were no indications in the cockpit of a tail strike. The aft Flight Attendant called the cockpit while taxing to the gate; informing me that right after we touched down there was a loud bang noise from the rear of the aircraft that startled some passengers. At the gate I proceeded to inspect the tail section and found the drain mast was scraped and a section of the aft belly was scraped with skin damage a length of about 15 FT. There were no injuries or major complaints from crew or passengers as we deplaned.[I] could not arrest descent rate during flare. I have experienced this similar situation before with the Airbus. The Vapp speed gets too close to the Vls speed; causing a lack of airspeed during the flare; resulting in a hard landing. The high density altitude was also a factor. I would like to see the company develop a procedure or correct the issue of why on the Airbus the Vapp speed; at times; gets too slow to adequately flare the aircraft on landing. Perhaps Ref plus five KTS is not adequate for the Airbus.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.