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 · 22 stages, 20 scored
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
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 1,583 m of the approach.
Plan view — the first 1,583 m of the 1,748 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
Touched down 856 m past the threshold — beyond the full-score zone. The arrival was smooth.
The rest of the report
The flight in the A321 began at MMTM Gen Francisco Javier Mina Intl, with a short taxi distance of less than 1 nm to the runway. The departure roll took place on runway 31, with a takeoff distance of 1,403 m, representing 55% of the runway length. The liftoff speed was 150 kn, with local weather conditions at 31°C and a wind of 8 kn at 10°, resulting in a crosswind of 6 kn and a headwind of 6 kn.
The enroute climb started 1 mile north of Tampico, climbing from 1,130 ft asl to 31,197 ft asl, covering a distance of 131 nm over 21 minutes. The enroute level cruise began 10 miles north of MMNE La Escuadra Airport Nuevo Padilla, lasting 4 minutes and covering a distance of 34 nm.
The enroute descent started 25 miles east of Linares, descending from 31,120 ft asl to 3,928 ft asl, covering a distance of 91 nm over 18 minutes. The next enroute level cruise started 3 miles north of Cienega de Flores for 1 minute, covering 4 nm. The subsequent descent started 1 mile southwest of Cienega de Flores, descending from 3,640 ft asl to 3,185 ft asl over 2 nm.
A go-around was performed on runway 20 at MMAN Del Norte Intl at 1,154 ft agl. The landing finally took place on runway 20 at MMAN Del Norte Intl, with a runway length of 1,748 m. The height at the threshold was 55 ft agl, with a speed of 142 kn. The touchdown occurred 856 m from the threshold, at a speed of 141 kn with a VSI of -221 ft/m. Local weather conditions at landing were 33°C, with a wind of 8 kn at 350°, resulting in a crosswind of 5 kn and tailwind of 6 kn.
The total landing distance was 1,512 m, representing 86% of the runway. The total flight distance covered was 280 nm, taking a total of 72 minutes and utilizing 3,416 kg of fuel.
Overall, a landing score of 80.0% indicates that there are areas for improvement in the aircraft landing performance. It is important to analyze each phase of the landing process to identify specific areas that need attention.
During the Approach Phase, the poor descent path above the glideslope limit suggests that the aircraft was not properly aligned with the glide path, which can lead to a higher than desired descent rate. This can affect the aircraft's ability to maintain a stable approach and decrease the margin of safety during landing.
In the Landing Phase, while the threshold height was good, the very poor landing flare indicates that there may have been a lack of proper pitch control during the descent to the runway. A proper landing flare is crucial for a smooth touchdown and can help prevent hard landings or bouncing on touchdown.
Additionally, the poor landing heading and bank angle stability during landing suggest that the aircraft may have had issues with maintaining a consistent direction and alignment with the runway. This can impact the overall stability of the landing and increase the risk of veering off course during rollout.
In the Touchdown Phase, while the touchdown rate was fair and the speed was on target, the touchdown point being very long and using more than 50% of the available runway indicates that there may have been inefficiencies in the landing approach. Landing further down the runway can limit available stopping distance in case of emergencies, potentially compromising safety.
Furthermore, the runway touchdown position being 12.2 m from the centerline suggests that there was a significant deviation from the desired touchdown point, which can impact the overall alignment with the runway and require corrective actions during the rollout phase.
The warning about landing with a 6 kn tailwind is also concerning, as tailwinds can increase landing distances and decrease overall control of the aircraft during touchdown and rollout. It is important to always consider wind conditions and adjust landing techniques accordingly to ensure safe operations.
Overall, the analysis indicates that there are specific areas in the landing process that need attention and improvement. Focusing on maintaining proper descent paths, improving landing flare techniques, ensuring alignment and stability during landing, optimizing touchdown points and minimizing deviations from the centerline, as well as considering wind conditions for safer operations, can help increase the overall landing performance and safety of the aircraft. With practice, attention to detail, and a commitment to continual improvement, the aircraft landing score can be improved to ensure safer and more efficient landings in the future.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values