Narrative:

Flight was filed for the sfo 9 departure; but departures were being conducted off of runways 28L/right so received a revised segment showing the CUIT4 SID. Since I have been flying out of the airport for over 30 years; I looked over at the hill on the departure routing and it was obscured. Previously; the hill had to visible for terrain avoidance (approximate 1100 foot ceiling). I contacted clearance and they informed me that the ceiling/visibility requirement had been deleted and a minimum climb gradient had been substituted. There is no mention of the change or the ability to meet the gradient in the airport advisory page. I contacted dispatch and we discussed the situation. I chose; and the dispatcher agreed; to decline the CUIT4 SID and instead flew the SFO9 SID straight out through the gap. Since I can only speculate based on my experience; it appears that the A321 cannot meet a 535 feet per mile or 560 feet per mile gradient at 205;000 lbs with a turn after departure. There appears to have been a procedural change with the SID in question which went unnoticed. No climb performance/gradient information is provided on the airport advisory page as well. This leaves the crew with no information with which to make any sort of informed decision regarding aircraft performance.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A321 Captain notes that the requirement for the hill to be visible departing Runway's 28L/R on the CUIT4 from SFO has been deleted and replaced with a minimum climb gradient. His company issued airport briefing page does not discuss this issue and he does not believe his aircraft is capable of the climb rate required. The SFO9 is requested instead.

Narrative: Flight was filed for the SFO 9 departure; but departures were being conducted off of Runways 28L/R so received a Revised Segment showing the CUIT4 SID. Since I have been flying out of the airport for over 30 years; I looked over at the hill on the departure routing and it was obscured. Previously; the hill had to visible for terrain avoidance (approximate 1100 foot ceiling). I contacted clearance and they informed me that the ceiling/visibility requirement had been deleted and a minimum climb gradient had been substituted. There is no mention of the change or the ability to meet the gradient in the airport advisory page. I contacted Dispatch and we discussed the situation. I chose; and the Dispatcher agreed; to decline the CUIT4 SID and instead flew the SFO9 SID straight out through the gap. Since I can only speculate based on my experience; it appears that the A321 cannot meet a 535 feet per mile or 560 feet per mile gradient at 205;000 lbs with a turn after departure. There appears to have been a procedural change with the SID in question which went unnoticed. No climb performance/gradient information is provided on the airport advisory page as well. This leaves the crew with no information with which to make any sort of informed decision regarding aircraft performance.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2013 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.