Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Conflict Airborne Conflict
Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Aircraft; Procedure
Near GRIDR intersection; ATC called other traffic at 13;500 feet; we were at 13;000 feet climbing. [We] got the RA; descended initially; then climbed; had the other aircraft in sight when we were instructed to climb again; [and] notified ATC.Controller did his best to keep us clear. We were in an Airbus 321; 186;000 lbs; were vectored off the ZZOOO2 because we could not make the climb restriction.In conjunction with ATC; construct STARs [that] a heavy Airbus 321 can make.
Climbing out of SAN on the ZZOOO2 RNAV departure; we were given headings after ZZOOO because we could not make the crossing at JORRJ at 14;000 feet. After gaining enough altitude we were sent direct GRIDR. ATC gave us a traffic alert of small aircraft at 11 o'clock. Had them on TCAS at 500 feet above; [and] as Pilot Flying; I increased climb rate per the Captain's suggestion to avoid a conflict. When the traffic was 100 feet above the TCAS triggered a descending RA; so I applied the required maneuver since we did not have a visual (weather was CAVU); then RA reversed to a climb RA so I complied with that. At that point; we had a visual on the aircraft and we resumed our climb as they passed off the wing. Notified ATC of RA. Two aircraft going over the same point in tight airspace.
A321 flight crew reported the aircraft's poor climb performance led to a vector off course and an airborne conflict. Captain suggested designing STAR procedures that heavy A321 aircraft could comply with.