Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
MY FS FLIGHTS
Flight Score
Shorten the long landing
Ground effect becomes significant below about one wingspan of height. A Cessna 172, with a 36 ft span, enters ground effect at flare height - the float it feels in the hold-off is ground effect arriving on cue. An A320, with a span around 117 ft, has been in ground effect since before the threshold and there is no sudden cushion to feel, only a gradual reduction in induced drag that lengthens any float you allow.
Read more in Flare TimingStart to finish · 22 stages, 20 scored
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: five 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.
Side view — the last 1,932 m of the approach.
Plan view — the first 1,932 m of the 2,783 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
Touched down 1,203 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 10 minutes and covered a distance of 2 nautical miles. The aircraft, an Airbus A320, then departed from runway 26L at Munich Airport (EDDM). The takeoff distance was 1,477 meters, which is 37% of the runway length. The liftoff speed was 168 knots, and the local weather conditions at the time of departure were a temperature of 13°C and a wind speed of 14 knots at 260°.
As the aircraft climbed to its cruising altitude, it started its enroute climb from an altitude of 2,505 feet above sea level (asl) to 33,102 ft asl, an increase of 30,597 feet in 12 minutes, covering a distance of 131 nautical miles. The climb began overhead Hallbergmoos in Bavaria, Germany. The aircraft then entered a level cruise, which started 2 miles south of Ruda in the Czech Republic and lasted for 13 minutes, covering a distance of 221 nautical miles.
The enroute descent started 2 miles northeast of Krolikowo in Poland, where the aircraft descended from 33,041 ft asl to 11,613 ft asl, a decrease of 21,428 feet in 9 minutes, covering a distance of 58 nautical miles. The aircraft then entered another level cruise, which started 2 miles north of Nowe in Poland and lasted for 2 minutes, covering a distance of 6 nautical miles.
The enroute descent started again, this time from 10,961 ft asl to 6,649 ft asl, a decrease of 4,312 feet in 7 minutes, covering a distance of 31 nautical miles, 2 miles west of Kopytkowo in Poland. The aircraft then entered another level cruise, which started 3 miles south of Somonino in Poland and lasted for 6 minutes, covering a distance of 20 nautical miles.
The final enroute descent started 2 miles northwest of Linia in Poland, where the aircraft descended from 6,609 ft asl to 1,597 ft asl, a decrease of 5,012 feet in 4 minutes, covering a distance of 17 nautical miles. The aircraft then began its final approach to runway 11 at Gdańsk Lech Wałęsa Airport (EPGD), heading 113.0° at 4 nautical miles and 1,105 feet above ground level (agl).
The landing on runway 11 at EPGD was notable for several factors. The threshold height at 131 ft agl was excessively over target, and the threshold speed was well above target at 154 knots. The touchdown point was 784 meters beyond the touchdown zone, and the touchdown speed was 148 knots, which was fast. The touchdown rate was fair at -244 feet per minute (fpm). The runway touchdown position was slightly misaligned by 7.1 meters from the centreline.
The local weather conditions at the time of landing were a temperature of 10°C and a wind speed of 19 knots at 210°. The crosswind was 19 knots, and the tailwind was 2 knots. The total landing distance was 1,848 meters, which is 66% of the runway length. The runway rollout alignment was misaligned by 21.3 meters from the centreline.
After landing, the aircraft taxied to the parking from the runway, which took 2 minutes and covered a distance of less than 1 nautical mile. The total flight distance was 493 nautical miles, and the flight duration was 66 minutes. The aircraft used 3,577 kilograms of fuel during the flight.
The Airbus A320 aircraft successfully landed at EPGD Gdańsk Lech Wałęsa Airport, but the landing was not without its issues. The final approach to runway 11 from the west was initiated at a height of 1,105 feet above ground level (agl) and a distance of 4 nautical miles from the runway. The aircraft was heading 113.0 degrees at the time of the approach.
Upon landing, the aircraft touched down 784 meters beyond the designated touchdown zone, which is a significant deviation from the target. The touchdown speed of 148 knots was also faster than the target speed, indicating that the pilot may have been unable to slow the aircraft down sufficiently before touchdown. The touchdown rate of -244 feet per minute was considered fair, suggesting that the aircraft did not experience a severe impact upon landing.
The local weather conditions at the time of the landing were characterized by a temperature of 10 degrees Celsius and a wind speed of 19 knots from a direction of 210 degrees. This resulted in a crosswind of 19 knots and a tailwind of 2 knots, which may have contributed to the difficulties experienced during the landing. The runway length at EPGD Gdańsk Lech Wałęsa Airport is 2,783 meters, which is sufficient to accommodate the Airbus A320.
The total landing distance of 1,848 meters was 66% of the available runway length, indicating that the aircraft was able to stop safely within the designated area. However, the runway rollout alignment was misaligned by 21.3 meters from the centerline, suggesting that the pilot may have experienced difficulties in maintaining a straight course during the rollout phase.
Overall, the landing was considered to be 68.4% successful, indicating that while there were some issues with the landing, the aircraft was able to touch down safely and come to a stop within the designated area. However, the deviations from the target touchdown zone and speed, as well as the misaligned runway rollout, suggest that the pilot may have benefited from additional training or practice to improve their landing skills.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values