Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
MY FS FLIGHTS
Flight Score
Departure
Make small rudder corrections against a fixed point at the far end of the runway to hold the centreline during the roll.
What happened: The aircraft drifted 5.6 m off the runway centreline during the ground roll, and wing drift like that usually keeps reappearing as bank in the climb, with 2.5° of bank in the first climb segment and 8.3° still showing in the second.
Watch for: Heading indicator: steady on the runway centreline during the roll, then wings level through the climb.
Arrival
Hold the aim point and wait for the speed to bleed before raising the nose, starting the flare within the normal band instead of 60 ft.
What happened: The flare began at 60 ft, 15 ft earlier than the normal band.
Watch for: Radio altimeter: start the flare within the normal flare band
See Arrival Landing
Arrive slow and the sink rate at the threshold is already above schedule, the flare is short because there is no energy to extend it, and the touchdown is hard in a way that feels exactly like a late flare. Diagnosing a slow arrival as a late flare is the catastrophic misread: you respond by flaring earlier, which bleeds more speed, which makes the next one worse. The tiebreaker is threshold speed against VRef, not feel. Never diagnose a flare without it.
Read more in Flare TimingStart to finish · 23 stages, 22 scored
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
The threshold, the flare and the hold-off. The approach that led to it is the stabilisation gates below.
One stabilised approach gate: seven checks where the approach path is 500 ft above the runway. The 1,000 ft gate was not assessed, because the approach did not join final that far out.
At the 500 ft gate: off the centreline and speed above the reference speed.
The approach that landed joined below the 1,000 ft gate, after a go-around. The gate assessed on the earlier approach is not shown - it was not the landing's.
The approach, gate by gate
Side view — the last 1,524 m of the approach.
Plan view — the first 1,524 m of the 2,175 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
Touched down 721 m past the threshold — beyond the full-score zone. The arrival was smooth.
The rest of the report
The flight began with a taxiing period from the parking to the runway, which took about one minute and covered less than one nautical mile. The aircraft in question was a Boeing 737-900. As it took off from runway 15 at EDDH Hamburg Helmut Schmidt Airport, it faced a local temperature of 28 degrees Celsius, with a wind velocity of 18 knots at 127 degrees. The aircraft experienced a crosswind of 8 knots and a headwind of 16 knots.
During the takeoff process, it reached a liftoff speed of 173 knots, after covering 1,469 meters, which corresponds to 46% of the runway length. Once airborne, the flight embarked on an enroute climb from the ground level to a height of 17,392 feet above sea level, over the town of Alsterdorf in the Free and Hanseatic City of Hamburg, Germany. This remarkable ascent covered a distance of 27 nautical miles in just six minutes, resulting in an increase of 16,335 feet.
Following this ascent, the aircraft began its descent, commencing over the town of Ludersburg in Lower Saxony, Germany. The descent from 17,374 feet to 15,170 feet above sea level was a decrease of 2,204 feet, covered in two minutes, and spanned 9 nautical miles. The flight then entered a level cruise phase, lasting approximately 10 minutes, and covering 33 nautical miles, east of the town of Bleckede in Lower Saxony, Germany.
In the following enroute climb phase, the aircraft ascended from 15,232 feet to 22,261 feet above sea level, in three minutes, resulting in an increase of 7,029 feet. This section covered 18 nautical miles, initiating over the town of Bornsen in Saxony-Anhalt, Germany. Next, the flight proceeded to another level cruise phase, lasting 73 minutes and spanning 92 nautical miles. This prolonged cruise phase started over the city of Wolfsburg in Lower Saxony, Germany, and was followed by the final descent.
The final descent started over the town of Salzkotten in Nordrhein-Westfalen, Germany, when the aircraft went down from 22,394 feet to 2,479 feet above sea level, dropping a total distance of 19,914 feet in six minutes, and covered just 2 nautical miles. The airplane then prepared for a final approach onto runway 24 at EDLP Paderborn Lippstadt Airport, arriving from the northeast, with a heading of 237.0 degrees, at an altitude of 1,678 feet above ground level.
Upon entering the final approach phase, the Go-Around procedure was executed. During the attempt to touch down on runway 24 at EDLP Paderborn Lippstadt Airport, the runway length was 2,175 meters. Unfortunately, the threshold height at an altitude of 99 feet above ground level was significantly higher than what was expected, while the threshold speed was excellent at 144 knots.
When the aircraft landed, the touchdown point was 271 meters beyond the designated touchdown zone, with a touchdown speed of 124 knots and a descent rate of 203 feet per minute per second, which is considered fair. The runway touchdown position was slightly misaligned from the centerline, by 4.5 meters.
The landing distance covered a total distance of 1,101 meters, which corresponds to 51% of the runway length. The runway rollout alignment was very good. Taxiing from the runway back to the parking took around seven minutes and covered less than one nautical mile. The total flight distance covered a total of 189 nautical miles and took 58 minutes, using 10,520 kilograms of fuel throughout the entire flight.
The Boeing 737-900 aircraft successfully landed at EDLP Paderborn Lippstadt Airport, with an overall score of 71.2%. Despite a few initial setbacks, the pilot managed to bring the aircraft in for a relatively smooth landing.
The final approach was from the north east, heading 237.0° at 1nm (1.8 kilometers) and 1,678 feet above ground level (agl). As the aircraft began its descent, the landing on runway 24 was executed successfully. However, there were some issues with the touchdown height, with both approaches exceeding the target threshold height of 98 feet agl by approximately 1-0 feet.
In the first landing attempt, the threshold speed was significantly higher than expected, reaching 317 knots, whereas the target speed was much lower. This indicates that the pilot may have needed to apply excessive force or speed to the aircraft to compensate for some factor, such as wind resistance or a misjudged rate of descent.
Fortunately, the second landing attempt showed significant improvement, with the threshold speed coming in at a much more reasonable 144 knots. This suggests that the pilot may have corrected the issues from the first attempt, adjusting their approach to bring the aircraft in more smoothly.
The touchdown point was found to be 271 meters beyond the touchdown zone, which is slightly outside the target. However, the touchdown speed itself was within acceptable parameters at 124 knots. The rate of descent, though not ideal at -203 feet per minute (fpm), was not overly concerning given the circumstances.
There were some minor issues with the alignment of the runway touchdown position, with the aircraft being 4.5 meters to the left of the centerline. Despite this, the landing distance was still relatively short, coming in at 1,101 meters, which is about 51% of the total runway length of 2,175 meters.
The local weather conditions at the time of the landing were moderate, with a temperature of 18°C and a gentle breeze of 5 knots from the west (260°). This suggests that wind resistance was not a significant factor in the aircraft's performance.
Overall, the aircraft handled the landing relatively well, with some areas for improvement. The pilot made adjustments from the first to the second attempt, ultimately achieving a relatively smooth touchdown.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values