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 · 22 stages, 20 scored
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.
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 1,759 m of the approach.
Plan view — the first 1,759 m of the 3,237 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
Touched down 635 m past the threshold — beyond the full-score zone. The arrival was smooth.
The rest of the report
The flight began with the Airbus A320 taxiing from the parking area to the runway at Hartsfield Jackson Atlanta International Airport, taking 6 minutes and covering a distance of 2 nautical miles. The departure roll took place on runway 26L, with a takeoff distance of 1,775 meters, which was 58% of the runway length. The aircraft lifted off at a speed of 151 knots.
As the aircraft climbed to its cruising altitude, it encountered local weather conditions of 2°C temperature and a wind speed of 7 knots at 330°. The crosswind was 6 knots, and the headwind was 3 knots. The enroute climb started overhead College Park, Georgia, and continued to an altitude of 34,448 feet above sea level, an increase of 32,411 feet in 16 minutes, covering a distance of 91 nautical miles.
The enroute level cruise began overhead Benton, Tennessee, and lasted for 45 minutes, covering a distance of 311 nautical miles. The aircraft then started its descent from 33,481 feet above sea level to 11,719 feet above sea level, a decrease of 21,762 feet in 16 minutes, covering a distance of 89 nautical miles. The descent started 5 miles northeast of Alexandria, Indiana.
The aircraft then leveled off 3 miles south of KPPO La Porte Municipal Airport, La Porte, Indiana, and remained at that altitude for 2 minutes, covering a distance of 9 nautical miles. The enroute descent began 1 mile west of 42II Norm's Airpark, La Porte, Indiana, and continued to an altitude of 8,413 feet above sea level, a decrease of 3,121 feet in 5 minutes, covering a distance of 22 nautical miles.
The aircraft then leveled off 19 miles northwest of Michigan City, Indiana, and remained at that altitude for 2 minutes, covering a distance of 7 nautical miles. The enroute descent started 15 miles east of Uptown, Illinois, and continued to an altitude of 1,948 feet above sea level, a decrease of 6,268 feet in 6 minutes, covering a distance of 23 nautical miles.
The final approach to runway 27C at Chicago O'Hare International Airport began from the east, heading 270.0° at 4 nautical miles and 1,267 feet above ground level. The landing took place on runway 27C, which was 3,237 meters long. The threshold height was well above the target, and the threshold speed was slightly above the target at 139 knots.
The touchdown point was 153 meters beyond the touchdown zone, and the touchdown speed was 132 knots, which was a little fast. The touchdown rate was firm at -318 feet per minute. The runway touchdown position was misaligned by 8.5 meters from the centerline. The local weather conditions at the time of landing were -13°C temperature and a wind speed of 7 knots at 320°, with a crosswind of 5 knots and a headwind of 4 knots.
The total landing distance was 1,611 meters, which was 50% of the runway length. The runway rollout alignment was slightly misaligned by 8.3 meters from the centerline. The taxiing to the parking area from the runway took 3 minutes and covered less than 1 nautical mile.
The total flight distance was 561 nautical miles, and the flight duration was 100 minutes. The aircraft used 4,206 kilograms of fuel during the flight.
The Airbus A320 aircraft successfully landed on runway 27C at KORD Chicago O'Hare International Airport, but with some notable deviations from the ideal landing parameters. The final approach was initiated from the east, heading 270.0° at a distance of 4 nautical miles and an altitude of 1,267 feet above ground level (agl). The aircraft touched down on the runway, but the touchdown point was 153 meters beyond the designated touchdown zone, indicating a slight deviation from the intended landing spot.
The touchdown speed of 132 knots was slightly above the target speed, suggesting that the aircraft may have been slightly fast on touchdown. The touchdown rate of -318 feet per minute (fpm) was firm, indicating a controlled descent. However, the threshold height at 71 feet agl was well above the target, suggesting that the aircraft may have been higher than intended at the threshold.
The local weather conditions at the time of landing were characterized by a temperature of -13°C and a wind speed of 7 knots from 320°. The crosswind component was 5 knots, while the headwind component was 4 knots. These conditions may have contributed to the slight deviations from the ideal landing parameters.
The runway touchdown position was misaligned by 8.5 meters from the centerline, indicating that the aircraft may have been slightly off-center during touchdown. The runway rollout alignment was also slightly misaligned by 8.3 meters from the centerline, suggesting that the aircraft may have been experiencing some directional control issues during the rollout phase.
The total landing distance of 1,611 meters was 50% of the runway length, indicating that the aircraft was able to stop within a reasonable distance. However, the deviations from the ideal landing parameters suggest that the pilots may have needed to make some adjustments to the landing technique to compensate for the wind and other factors. Overall, the landing was successful, but with some room for improvement in terms of precision and control.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values