Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
MY FS FLIGHTS
Flight Score
Departure
Use smaller, smoother aileron inputs to hold the climb bank angle near wings-level.
What happened: During Climb 3 the bank angle averaged 10°, well beyond a steady wings-level climb.
Watch for: Attitude indicator - bank angle, keeping it close to wings-level through the climb.
Arrival
Raise the nose more slowly in the flare and stop as soon as the sink is checked; if it balloons, hold the attitude.
What happened: The flare ballooned, with 731 fpm of sink returning after the arrest; a balloon like this usually carries through to a firm touchdown, as it did here at 775 fpm.
Watch for: The runway ahead: the aircraft still sinking gently towards it through the flare, never rising.
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 · 24 stages, 22 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.
Two stabilised approach gates, each with seven checks, where the approach path is 1,000 ft and 500 ft above the runway.
At the 500 ft gate: speed above the reference speed.
The approach, gate by gate
Side view — the last 2,490 m of the approach.
Plan view — the first 2,490 m of the 3,570 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
Touched down 1,304 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 3 minutes and covered less than 1 nautical mile. The aircraft, an Airbus A320, then departed from runway 05 at LDSP Split Airport, a 1,552-meter runway that was used for 65% of its takeoff distance. The liftoff speed was 154 knots, and the local weather conditions at the time of departure were a temperature of 20°C, with a wind speed of 10 knots at 169°.
As the aircraft took off, it began its enroute climb, starting overhead Kastel Stafilic in Split-Dalmatia, Croatia. The climb from 1,085 feet above sea level to 35,842 feet above sea level was a significant increase of 34,757 feet in just 20 minutes, covering a distance of 97 nautical miles. The aircraft then entered a level cruise, starting 16 miles southwest of Mali Losinj in Primorsko-Goranska Zupanija, Croatia, and lasting 18 minutes, covering 124 nautical miles.
The enroute climb continued, starting 2 miles north of Stienta in Veneto, Italy, where the aircraft climbed from 36,352 feet above sea level to 36,827 feet above sea level, an increase of 476 feet in just 2 minutes, covering 10 nautical miles. The aircraft then entered another level cruise, starting 1 mile north of Castelnovo Bariano in Veneto, Italy, and lasting 22 minutes, covering 143 nautical miles.
As the aircraft continued its journey, it began its descent, starting overhead LIQD Aviosuperficie di Meggiana Piode in Piemonte, Italy. The descent from 36,852 feet above sea level to 19,748 feet above sea level was a decrease of 17,104 feet in just 9 minutes, covering 48 nautical miles. The aircraft then entered another level cruise, starting 1 mile southeast of Chamonix-Mont-Blanc in Auvergne-Rhone-Alpes, France, and lasting 2 minutes, covering 8 nautical miles.
The enroute descent continued, starting 3 miles north of Passy in Auvergne-Rhone-Alpes, France, where the aircraft descended from 19,245 feet above sea level to 3,925 feet above sea level, a decrease of 15,320 feet in just 9 minutes, covering 26 nautical miles. The aircraft then entered another level cruise, starting overhead Evian-les-Bains in Auvergne-Rhone-Alpes, France, and lasting 11 minutes, covering 13 nautical miles.
The final approach to runway 22 at LSGG Geneva Cointrin International Airport began, with the aircraft approaching from the northeast, heading 226.0° at 4 nautical miles and 1,249 feet above ground level. The landing on runway 22 was completed, with the aircraft touching down 821 meters beyond the touchdown zone. The touchdown speed was 158 knots, which was too fast, and the touchdown rate was hard at -487 feet per minute.
The local weather conditions at the time of landing were a temperature of 21°C, with a wind speed of 20 knots at 220°. The crosswind was 2 knots, and the headwind was 20 knots. The total landing distance was 2,341 meters, which was 66% of the runway length. The runway rollout alignment was misaligned by 21.2 meters from the centerline.
After landing, the aircraft taxied to the parking, which took 3 minutes and covered less than 1 nautical mile. The total flight distance was 481 nautical miles, taking 105 minutes, and the aircraft used 4,201 kilograms
The Airbus A320 aircraft attempted a landing on runway 22 at LSGG Geneva Cointrin International Airport, but the landing was deemed suboptimal. The aircraft was approaching the runway from the north east, heading 226.0° at a distance of 4 nautical miles and an altitude of 1,249 feet above ground level (agl).
Upon landing, the aircraft touched down 821 meters beyond the designated touchdown zone, which is a significant deviation. The touchdown speed of 158 knots was also too high, indicating that the pilot may have not fully arrested the aircraft's descent. Furthermore, the touchdown rate was hard at -487 feet per minute (fpm), which suggests that the aircraft may have experienced a high rate of descent during the landing.
The local weather conditions at the time of the landing were characterized by a temperature of 21°C and a wind speed of 20 knots from 220°. This resulted in a crosswind of 2 knots and a headwind of 20 knots, which may have contributed to the difficulties experienced during the landing. However, the wind conditions do not appear to be excessively challenging, and the pilot should have been able to manage the aircraft safely.
One of the most concerning aspects of this landing was the excessive threshold speed of 173 knots, which is significantly higher than the target speed. This suggests that the pilot may have not fully configured the aircraft for landing, which can lead to a range of safety issues. Additionally, the threshold height at 95 feet agl was significantly above the target, indicating that the pilot may have not fully descended the aircraft to the correct altitude.
The runway rollout alignment was also misaligned by 21.2 meters from the centerline, which suggests that the pilot may have not fully controlled the aircraft during the rollout phase of the landing. This can lead to a range of safety issues, including loss of directional control and potential runway excursion.
Overall, this landing was deemed suboptimal due to a range of factors, including excessive threshold speed, high touchdown speed, hard touchdown rate, and misaligned runway touchdown position and rollout alignment. The pilot should have been able to manage the aircraft safely under the given weather conditions, and further training or review may be necessary to improve the pilot's skills and knowledge.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values