Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
MY FS FLIGHTS
Flight Score
Departure
Apply small rudder corrections against a point at the far end of the runway to hold the centreline during the roll.
What happened: The aircraft tracked 5.3 m off the runway centreline during the ground roll, and flights with this pattern usually carry extra bank, around 3°, into the first climb.
Watch for: Heading indicator: wings level, tracking the runway centreline
Arrival
Fly the flare as one continuous check of the sink rate from 42 ft, holding back pressure steadily rather than adjusting pitch piecemeal.
What happened: The flare drifted away from its intended profile rather than tracking it smoothly from 42 ft down to touchdown.
Watch for: Watch radio altitude and VSI through the flare, aiming to arrest the sink smoothly from 42 ft to touchdown.
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 · 20 stages, 18 scored
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.
Two stabilised approach gates, each with seven checks, where the approach path is 1,000 ft and 500 ft above the runway.
The approach, gate by gate
Side view — the last 1,819 m of the approach.
Plan view — the first 1,819 m of the 3,570 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
Touched down 666 m past the threshold — beyond the full-score zone. The arrival was smooth.
The rest of the report
The flight began with the Airbus A321 taxiing from the parking area to the runway at Pisa International Airport, taking approximately 6 minutes and covering less than 1 nautical mile. The departure roll took place on runway 22L, with a takeoff distance of 1,385 meters, which is 53% of the runway length. The liftoff speed was 152 knots.
As the aircraft took off, it encountered local weather conditions of 12°C temperature and a 6-knot wind at 130°. The crosswind was 6 knots, while the headwind was 0 knots. After departing from Pisa, the enroute climb started approximately 1 mile southwest of the airport, with the aircraft ascending from 1,022 feet above sea level to 34,011 feet above sea level, an increase of 32,989 feet in 17 minutes, covering a distance of 79 nautical miles.
The enroute level cruise began 2 miles northeast of Genoa Cristoforo Colombo Airport, lasting 16 minutes and covering 113 nautical miles. The aircraft then started its enroute descent 4 miles north of Morgex, descending from 34,007 feet above sea level to 5,005 feet above sea level, a decrease of 29,003 feet in 10 minutes, covering a distance of 45 nautical miles.
The enroute level cruise resumed 2 miles south of Saint-Prex, lasting 2 minutes and covering 5 nautical miles. The enroute descent started 1 mile north of Yvoire, with the aircraft descending from 5,010 feet above sea level to 2,731 feet above sea level, a decrease of 2,279 feet in 3 minutes, covering a distance of 8 nautical miles.
The final approach to runway 22 at Geneva Cointrin International Airport took place from the northeast, with the aircraft heading 225.0° at 4 nautical miles and 1,317 feet above ground level. The landing on runway 22 took place on a runway length of 3,570 meters, with the threshold height at 64 feet above ground level being above the target. The threshold speed was good at 132 knots.
The touchdown point was 240 meters beyond the touchdown zone, with the touchdown speed at 128 knots being a little fast. The touchdown rate was smooth at -136 feet per minute. The runway touchdown position was slightly misaligned by 3.7 meters from the centerline. Local weather conditions at the time of landing were 5°C temperature and a 1-knot wind at 291°, with a crosswind of 1 knot and a headwind of 0 knots.
The total landing distance was 1,729 meters, which is 48% of the runway length. The runway rollout alignment was very good. Taxiing to the parking area from the runway took approximately 3 minutes and covered less than 1 nautical mile. The total flight distance was 257 nautical miles, taking 57 minutes, and the aircraft used 2,654 kilograms of fuel.
The Airbus A321 successfully landed at Geneva Cointrin International Airport (LSGG) on runway 22, achieving a score of 90.5%. The aircraft approached the runway from the north east, heading 225.0° at a distance of 4 nautical miles and an altitude of 1,317 feet above ground level (agl).
The final approach was executed with a good threshold speed of 132 knots, which is within the acceptable range. However, the touchdown point was 240 meters beyond the designated touchdown zone, indicating a slight deviation from the intended landing spot. The touchdown speed of 128 knots was slightly faster than the recommended speed, which may have contributed to the deviation.
The touchdown rate was smooth, with a descent rate of -136 feet per minute (fpm), indicating a controlled and stable approach. The runway touchdown position was slightly misaligned by 3.7 meters from the centerline, which may have been due to the slight deviation in the touchdown point.
The local weather conditions at the time of landing were characterized by a temperature of 5°C and a wind speed of 1 knot from 291°. The crosswind component was minimal, at 1 knot, while the headwind component was zero. These conditions were favorable for the landing, with minimal wind impact on the aircraft's approach and touchdown.
The total landing distance was 1,729 meters, which is 48% of the runway length. This is a relatively short landing distance, indicating a good approach and touchdown performance. The runway rollout alignment was very good, with the aircraft maintaining a stable and aligned path after touchdown.
Overall, the landing was successful, with a good score of 90.5%. However, there were some minor deviations from the intended landing spot and touchdown speed, which may be addressed in future training exercises to improve the pilot's performance.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values