Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
MY FS FLIGHTS
Flight Score
Arrival
Fly the flare as one continuous check of the sink rate from 30 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 30 ft down to touchdown.
Watch for: Watch radio altitude and VSI through the flare, aiming to arrest the sink smoothly from 30 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 · 19 stages, 17 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.
At the 1,000 ft gate: speed above the reference speed.
The approach, gate by gate
Side view — the last 1,524 m of the approach.
Plan view — the first 1,524 m of the 2,132 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
The 484 m touchdown sits inside the full-score zone. The arrival was smooth.
The rest of the report
The flight began with the aircraft taxiing from the parking area to the runway, a process that took 6 minutes and covered less than 1 nautical mile. The Airbus A319 then departed from runway 09R at London Heathrow Airport (EGLL), with a takeoff distance of 1,435 meters, which was 43% of the runway length. The liftoff speed was 153 knots.
The local weather conditions at the time of departure were characterized by a temperature of 22 degrees Celsius and winds of 11 knots at 50 degrees. The crosswind component was 7 knots, while the headwind component was 9 knots. As the aircraft took off, it began its enroute climb, starting 1 mile northwest of Feltham in Greater London, England. The climb from 1,111 feet above sea level to 5,928 feet above sea level, an increase of 4,817 feet, was achieved in 2 minutes and covered a distance of 7 nautical miles.
Following the initial climb, the aircraft entered a level cruise phase, starting 1 mile north of Acton in Greater London, England. This phase lasted for 2 minutes and covered a distance of 6 nautical miles. The aircraft then began another climb phase, this time from overhead Borehamwood in Hertfordshire, England, to an altitude of 36,767 feet above sea level, an increase of 30,759 feet. This climb phase took 16 minutes and covered a distance of 107 nautical miles.
The aircraft then entered another level cruise phase, starting 2 miles southeast of Taddington in Derbyshire, England. This phase lasted for 9 minutes and covered a distance of 69 nautical miles. As the aircraft approached its destination, it began its descent phase, starting 2 miles southeast of Sedbergh in Cumbria, England. The descent from 36,994 feet above sea level to 1,411 feet above sea level, a decrease of 35,583 feet, took 20 minutes and covered a distance of 103 nautical miles.
The final approach to runway 06 at Edinburgh Airport (EGPH) was made from the southwest, with a heading of 59.0 degrees at 4 nautical miles and 1,285 feet above ground level. The landing on runway 06 was successful, with a touchdown point 62 meters beyond the touchdown zone. The touchdown speed was 120 knots, which was good, and the touchdown rate was also good at -184 feet per minute. However, the runway touchdown position was slightly misaligned by 4.8 meters from the centerline.
The local weather conditions at the time of landing were characterized by a temperature of 14 degrees Celsius and winds of 8 knots at 40 degrees. The crosswind component was 3 knots, while the headwind component was 8 knots. The total landing distance was 1,387 meters, which was 65% of the runway length. The runway rollout alignment was also slightly misaligned by 9.7 meters from the centerline.
In total, the flight covered a distance of 300 nautical miles and took 57 minutes to complete. The aircraft used a total of -5,290 kilograms of fuel during the flight.
The Airbus A319 aircraft successfully landed at Edinburgh Airport (EGPH) on runway 06, achieving a score of 88.1%. The final approach was initiated from the south-west, heading 59.0° at a distance of 4 nautical miles and an altitude of 1,285 feet above ground level (agl).
The aircraft's approach to the runway was characterized by a threshold height that was well above the target, indicating a safe margin for landing. The threshold speed was also satisfactory at 126 knots, demonstrating the pilot's ability to manage the aircraft's descent and speed. Upon touchdown, the aircraft's speed was 120 knots, which was within the acceptable range, and the touchdown rate was also good at -184 feet per minute (fpm).
However, there were some minor deviations from the ideal landing performance. The touchdown point was 62 meters beyond the designated touchdown zone, indicating a slight over-run. Additionally, the runway touchdown position was slightly misaligned by 4.8 meters from the centerline, which may have been due to a slight deviation in the aircraft's alignment during the final approach.
The local weather conditions at the time of landing were favorable, with a temperature of 14°C and a wind speed of 8 knots from a direction of 40°. The crosswind component was minimal at 3 knots, while the headwind component was 8 knots, which helped to stabilize the aircraft's approach.
The total landing distance was 1,387 meters, which accounted for 65% of the runway length. This was a relatively short landing distance, considering the aircraft's size and weight. However, the runway rollout alignment was slightly misaligned by 9.7 meters from the centerline, which may have been due to a slight deviation in the aircraft's alignment during the rollout phase.
Overall, the landing was considered satisfactory, with some minor deviations from the ideal performance. The pilots demonstrated good control and management of the aircraft during the final approach and touchdown phases, and the aircraft's performance was generally within acceptable limits.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values