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 · 18 stages, 16 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 1,855 m of the approach.
Plan view — the first 1,855 m of the 2,501 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
Touched down 680 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 A321, then departed from runway 13R at Budapest Liszt Ferenc International Airport, with a takeoff distance of 1,418 meters, which accounted for 47% of the runway. The liftoff speed was 158 knots.
As the aircraft took to the skies, it encountered local weather conditions of 14°C temperature and a wind speed of 6 knots at 70 degrees. The crosswind was 5 knots, while the headwind was 3 knots. The enroute climb started approximately 1 mile northwest of Vecses, Hungary, and involved a significant increase in altitude from 1,472 feet above sea level to 35,534 feet above sea level, a rise of 34,062 feet in 21 minutes, covering a distance of 118 nautical miles.
Following the enroute climb, the aircraft entered a level cruise phase, which began 2 miles north of LDB1 Pitomaca Airfield in Pitomaca, Croatia, and lasted for 9 minutes, covering a distance of 61 nautical miles. The enroute descent phase started 3 miles east of Glina, Croatia, and involved a decrease in altitude from 35,519 feet above sea level to 1,529 feet above sea level, a drop of 33,989 feet in 21 minutes, covering a distance of 80 nautical miles.
The final approach to runway 13 at LDZD Zadar Airport was made from the northwest, with a heading of 136.0 degrees at 4 nautical miles and 1,254 feet above ground level. The landing on runway 13 at LDZD Zadar Airport, which had a length of 2,501 meters, was notable for a threshold height that was above the target, and a threshold speed that was well above the target at 150 knots.
The touchdown point was 264 meters beyond the touchdown zone, with a touchdown speed of 145 knots, which was considered fast. The touchdown rate was fair at -230 feet per minute. The runway touchdown position was slightly misaligned by 4.5 meters from the centerline. Local weather conditions at the time of landing were 20°C temperature and a wind speed of 15 knots at 138 degrees, with a crosswind of 1 knot and a headwind of 15 knots.
The total landing distance was 1,774 meters, accounting for 71% of the runway. The runway rollout alignment was very good. The taxiing period from the runway to the parking took 6 minutes and covered less than 1 nautical mile. The total flight distance was 268 nautical miles, with a total flight time of 67 minutes and a fuel consumption of 3,057 kilograms.
The Airbus A321 aircraft successfully landed at LDZD Zadar Airport, but with some notable deviations from the ideal approach and landing parameters. The final approach was initiated from the north-west, heading 136.0° at 4 nautical miles and 1,254 feet above ground level (agl). The aircraft touched down on runway 13, which has a length of 2,501 meters.
However, the threshold height at 60 feet agl was above the target, indicating that the aircraft was slightly higher than desired at the point of touchdown. Furthermore, the threshold speed was well above the target at 150 knots, suggesting that the aircraft was descending at a faster rate than intended. This could be attributed to the aircraft's airspeed being higher than necessary for a smooth touchdown.
The touchdown point was 264 meters beyond the touchdown zone, which is a significant deviation from the ideal landing spot. Additionally, the touchdown speed of 145 knots was faster than the target speed, resulting in a touchdown rate of -230 feet per minute (fpm), which was only fair. This indicates that the aircraft's descent was not as controlled as it could have been.
The runway touchdown position was also slightly misaligned by 4.5 meters from the centerline, which may have been due to the crosswind or headwind conditions. The local weather conditions at the time of landing were characterized by a temperature of 20°C and a wind speed of 15 knots at 138°. The crosswind component was minimal at 1 knot, while the headwind component was 15 knots, which may have contributed to the aircraft's slightly misaligned touchdown.
Despite these deviations, the total landing distance of 1,774 meters was only 71% of the runway length, indicating that the aircraft was able to stop relatively quickly after touchdown. The runway rollout alignment was very good, suggesting that the pilot was able to maintain control of the aircraft during the rollout phase.
Overall, while the landing was not perfect, the aircraft was able to touch down safely and come to a stop within a reasonable distance. However, there is room for improvement in terms of achieving a more controlled descent and touchdown speed.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values