Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
MY FS FLIGHTS
Flight Score
Shorten the long landing
Ground effect becomes significant below about one wingspan of height. A Cessna 172, with a 36 ft span, enters ground effect at flare height - the float it feels in the hold-off is ground effect arriving on cue. An A320, with a span around 117 ft, has been in ground effect since before the threshold and there is no sudden cushion to feel, only a gradual reduction in induced drag that lengthens any float you allow.
Read more in Flare TimingStart to finish · 24 stages, 22 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.
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.
The approach, gate by gate
Side view — the last 1,864 m of the approach.
Plan view — the first 1,864 m of the 3,026 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
Touched down 1,015 m past the threshold — beyond 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 13 minutes and covered a distance of 2 nautical miles. The Airbus A320 then departed from runway 25C at Frankfurt Airport (EDDF), with a takeoff distance of 1,725 meters, which accounted for 43% of the runway. The liftoff speed was 169 knots.
As the aircraft took to the skies, it encountered local weather conditions of 29°C temperature and a wind speed of 9 knots at 310°. The crosswind was 8 knots, while the headwind was 5 knots. The enroute climb started approximately 1 mile south of Kelsterbach, Hessen, Germany, and involved a significant ascent from 1,389 feet above sea level to 37,860 feet above sea level, an increase of 36,471 feet in just 19 minutes, covering a distance of 106 nautical miles.
Following the climb, the aircraft entered a level cruise phase, which began 1 mile west of Obermehler, Thuringia, Germany, and lasted for 39 minutes, covering a distance of 309 nautical miles. The enroute descent started 2 miles southeast of Brdow, Greater Poland Voivodeship, Poland, and involved a descent from 36,913 feet above sea level to 1,643 feet above sea level, a decrease of 35,270 feet in 26 minutes, covering a distance of 85 nautical miles.
The final approach to runway 33 at Warsaw Chopin Airport (EPWA) was made from the southeast, heading 332.0° at 4 nautical miles and 1,281 feet above ground level. However, the aircraft was forced to execute a go-around at 51 feet above ground level. Eventually, the aircraft landed on runway 33, with a runway length of 3,026 meters. The threshold height was good, but the threshold speed was slightly above the target at 132 knots.
The touchdown point was 593 meters beyond the touchdown zone, with a touchdown speed of 115 knots, which was considered good. The touchdown rate was firm at -397 feet per minute. Notably, the runway touchdown position was significantly misaligned by 21.8 meters from the centerline. The local weather conditions at the time of landing were 23°C temperature and a wind speed of 20 knots at 320°, with a crosswind of 4 knots and a headwind of 20 knots.
The total landing distance was 1,777 meters, accounting for 59% of the runway. The runway rollout alignment was also misaligned by 22.2 meters from the centerline. After landing, the aircraft taxiied to the parking area, a process that took 5 minutes and covered less than 1 nautical mile. The total flight distance was 516 nautical miles, taking 118 minutes, and the aircraft used 4,549 kilograms of fuel.
The Airbus A320 aircraft successfully landed on runway 33 at EPWA Warsaw Chopin Airport, but with some notable deviations from optimal performance. The final approach was initiated from the south east, heading 332.0° at 4 nautical miles and 1,281 feet above ground level (agl). The aircraft touched down on the runway, but the touchdown point was 593 meters beyond the designated touchdown zone, indicating a slight deviation from the intended landing spot.
The threshold speed, which is the speed at which the aircraft touches down on the runway, was slightly above the target speed at 132 knots. This is still within acceptable limits, but it suggests that the pilot may have been slightly too aggressive in their approach. The touchdown speed of 115 knots was good, indicating that the pilot had managed to slow the aircraft down effectively before touching down. The touchdown rate of -397 feet per minute (fpm) was firm, suggesting that the aircraft was not bouncing or skipping along the runway.
However, the runway touchdown position was significantly misaligned by 21.8 meters from the centerline, which could have implications for the aircraft's stability and control during the landing roll. The local weather conditions at the time of the landing were favorable, with a temperature of 23°C and a headwind of 20 knots at 320°. The crosswind was minimal at 4 knots, which reduced the risk of the aircraft being blown off course.
The total landing distance of 1,777 meters was 59% of the runway length, which is within acceptable limits. However, the runway rollout alignment was misaligned by 22.2 meters from the centerline, which could have contributed to the aircraft's deviation from the intended landing spot. Overall, while the landing was successful, there were some notable deviations from optimal performance that could be addressed through further training or adjustments to the aircraft's approach and landing procedures.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values