Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
MY FS FLIGHTS
Flight Score
Work on the flare
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 · 20 stages, 18 scored
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: 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 5,000 ft of the approach.
Plan view — the first 5,000 ft of the 10,272 ft runway, to the same scale as the side view.
Touched down 2,013 ft past the threshold — beyond the full-score zone. The arrival was smooth.
The rest of the report
The flight in the Cessna CJ4 Citation began with a departure roll from runway 36 at PAIW Wales. The takeoff distance was 2,128 ft, representing 46% of the total runway length. The liftoff speed was recorded at 133 kn. The local weather at the time of departure indicated a temperature of 36 °F, with a wind speed of 6 kn coming from 50° direction. The crosswind was measured at 4 kn and a headwind at 4 kn.
The enroute climb commenced overhead PAIW Wales and the aircraft climbed from 1,097 ft above sea level to 43,125 ft, a total increase of 42,028 ft over a span of 20 minutes while covering a distance of 128 nm. The climb was followed by an enroute level cruise that began 10 miles west of 2AK9 Independence Creek, lasting 44 minutes and covering 356 nm.
The descent phase of the flight started 19 miles southeast of Z90 Stampede Kantishna. The aircraft descended from 42,885 ft asl to 4,596 ft asl, a decrease of 38,289 ft in 22 minutes and covering 101 nm. Another enroute level cruise segment took place 2 miles north of Fairbanks for 7 minutes spanning 6 nm before another descent starting 1 mile north of Fox, going from 4,597 ft asl to 2,862 ft asl in 5 minutes, covering 3 nm.
The landing occurred on runway 20R at PAFA Fairbanks Intl, which has a length of 10,272 ft. The aircraft was at a height of 92 ft agl with a speed of 114 kn at threshold. The touchdown happened 1,777 ft from the threshold at a speed of 109 kn and a VSI of -331 ft/m. The local weather during landing indicated a temperature of 32 °F, with a wind speed of 10 kn from 247° direction. The crosswind was 5 kn and the headwind was 9 kn. The total landing distance covered was 3,330 ft, representing 32% of the runway.
After touchdown, taxiing from the runway to the parking area took 2 minutes and covered less than 1 nm. The entire flight covered a distance of 604 nm, lasted 117 minutes, and consumed 1,908 lbs of fuel.
It seems that there were multiple areas for improvement during the aircraft landing, leading to an overall score of 73.2%. Let's break down each phase of the landing and discuss how it could be improved.
During the Approach Phase, there was a poor descent path above the glideslope limit. This indicates that the aircraft was descending too steeply or too shallowly, which can lead to difficulties in establishing a stable approach. To improve this phase, the pilots should ensure they are closely monitoring the descent rate and adjusting as necessary to stay within the glideslope limit.
Moving on to the Landing Phase, it is concerning that the threshold height was significantly above the target. This suggests that the aircraft was too high upon approaching the runway. Additionally, a very poor landing flare was noted, which can result in a hard touchdown. To address these issues, the pilots should focus on maintaining a stable approach and carefully executing the landing flare to ensure a smooth touchdown.
In the Touchdown Phase, there were several discrepancies that need attention. The touchdown rate was hard, indicating that the aircraft landed with excessive force. The speed was also above the target, which can make it challenging to control the aircraft during touchdown. Furthermore, the touchdown point was 1021 ft beyond the touchdown zone, which can impact runway utilization and create safety risks. To improve this phase, the pilots should work on executing smoother landings, maintaining the appropriate speed, and aiming to touch down within the designated zone.
Finally, in the Rollout Phase, the runway alignment was 54 ft from the centerline. This deviation from the centerline can create challenges with taxiing and may impact the overall safety of the landing. Pilots should focus on maintaining proper alignment during the rollout phase to ensure the aircraft stays on the designated path.
Overall, there are clear areas for improvement in each phase of the aircraft landing. By focusing on maintaining a stable approach, executing smooth landings, and paying close attention to alignment, pilots can work towards achieving a higher landing score in the future. Encouragement and practice can help pilots enhance their skills and proficiency in executing successful landings.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values