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 · 18 stages, 16 scored
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 1,524 m of the approach.
Plan view — the first 1,524 m of the 2,539 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
The 159 m touchdown sits inside 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 6 minutes and covered less than 1 nautical mile. The aircraft, a Boeing 737-800, then departed from runway 09 at GMFF Fes Saïss International Airport. The takeoff distance was 1,709 meters, which accounted for 58% of the runway. The liftoff speed was 161 knots, and the local weather conditions at the time of departure were characterized by a temperature of 28 °C, with a wind speed of 5 knots at 72°.
As the aircraft climbed out of Fes Saïss International Airport, it began its enroute climb, which started 1 mile east of the airport. The climb took 19 minutes and covered a distance of 123 nautical miles, during which the aircraft ascended from an altitude of 2,916 feet above sea level to 37,043 feet above sea level, an increase of 34,127 feet. The enroute level cruise phase began 31 miles northwest of Melilla, Spain, and lasted for 120 minutes, covering a distance of 847 nautical miles.
The enroute descent phase started 1 mile south of Harfleur, France, and took 28 minutes to complete, during which the aircraft descended from an altitude of 35,585 feet above sea level to 1,406 feet above sea level, a decrease of 34,179 feet. The descent covered a distance of 134 nautical miles. The final approach to runway 26 at LFQQ Lille Airport was made from the east, with a heading of 257.0° at 4 nautical miles and 1,244 feet above ground level.
The landing on runway 26 at LFQQ Lille Airport was successful, with a touchdown distance of 162 meters, which was good. The touchdown speed was 152 knots, which was fast, and the touchdown rate was firm at -329 feet per minute. The runway touchdown alignment was very good, and the runway rollout alignment was perfect. The local weather conditions at the time of landing were characterized by a temperature of 13 °C, with a wind speed of 20 knots at 269°.
The taxiing period from the runway to the parking took 5 minutes and covered less than 1 nautical mile. The total flight distance was 1,113 nautical miles, and the flight duration was 179 minutes. The aircraft used 6,820 kilograms of fuel during the flight.
The Boeing 737-800 aircraft successfully landed at Lille Airport (LFQQ) on runway 26, achieving a score of 97.0%. The final approach was conducted from the east, heading 257.0° at a distance of 4 nautical miles and an altitude of 1,244 feet above ground level (agl).
The aircraft touched down on the runway with a good threshold height, indicating a well-executed approach. However, the threshold speed was above the target speed, coming in at 153 knots. This may have been due to the aircraft's descent rate or the pilot's decision to maintain a higher speed for a smoother touchdown.
The touchdown distance of 162 meters was within acceptable limits, demonstrating good control and precision during the landing. However, the touchdown speed of 152 knots was slightly faster than desired, which may have resulted in a firmer touchdown rate. The touchdown rate of -329 feet per minute (fpm) was indeed firm, but this may have been a consequence of the higher-than-target touchdown speed.
The runway touchdown alignment was very good, indicating that the aircraft was properly aligned with the runway centerline at touchdown. The local weather conditions at the time of landing were characterized by a temperature of 13°C and a wind speed of 20 knots from 269°. The crosswind component was minimal at 4 knots, while the headwind component was 20 knots, which likely contributed to the aircraft's higher-than-target threshold speed.
The total landing distance of 1,156 meters was 46% of the runway length, which is a relatively short distance considering the aircraft's size and weight. The runway rollout alignment was perfect, indicating that the aircraft was properly aligned with the runway centerline during the rollout phase.
Overall, the landing was successful, with the aircraft demonstrating good control and precision during the approach and touchdown phases. However, there may be opportunities for improvement in terms of touchdown speed and rate to achieve a more optimal landing performance.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values