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 · 15 stages, 14 scored
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.
Side view — the last 602 m of the approach.
Plan view — the full 602 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
The 241 m touchdown sits inside the full-score zone. The arrival was smooth.
The rest of the report
The flight began with a quick taxi from the parking area to the runway, taking less than a minute and covering a distance of less than a nautical mile. The aircraft, a Cessna C172, then departed from runway 19 at LEVX Vigo Airport, with a takeoff distance of 408 meters, which was 17% of the runway length. The liftoff speed was 63 knots, and the local weather conditions were characterized by a temperature of 16°C and a wind speed of 1 knot at 270°.
As the aircraft climbed away from the airport, it began its enroute climb 1 mile south of LEVX Vigo Airport, rising from an altitude of 1,451 feet above sea level to 3,912 feet above sea level, an increase of 2,461 feet in just 4 minutes, covering a distance of 6 nautical miles. The climb was followed by a brief enroute level cruise, which started 3 miles south of Porrino and lasted for 2 minutes, covering a distance of 3 nautical miles.
The aircraft then began its enroute descent overhead Tui, descending from 3,398 feet above sea level to 2,193 feet above sea level, a decrease of 1,205 feet in just 2 minutes, covering a distance of 1 nautical mile. Following the descent, the aircraft entered another enroute level cruise, which started 1 mile north of Tui and lasted for 3 minutes, covering a distance of 5 nautical miles.
As the aircraft approached its destination, it began its final approach to runway 16 at LPVA Aerodromo do Cerval from the north, heading 160.0° at 1 nautical mile and 618 feet above ground level. The landing was made on a runway with a length of 602 meters, and the threshold height at 105 feet above ground level was excessively over target. The threshold speed at 56 knots was well below target, requiring the pilot to exercise caution to avoid stalling.
The touchdown point was very long, using more than 50% of the available runway, and the touchdown speed at 55 knots was a little fast. The touchdown rate was very heavy at -890 feet per minute, and the runway touchdown position was misaligned by 10.6 meters from the centreline. The local weather conditions at the time of landing were characterized by a temperature of 16°C and a wind speed of 1 knot at 270°, with a crosswind of 1 knot and a tailwind of 1 knot.
The total landing distance was 432 meters, which was 72% of the runway length, and the runway rollout alignment was slightly misaligned by 13.0 meters from the centreline. The total flight distance was 18 nautical miles, and the flight duration was 14 minutes, with a fuel consumption of 8 kilograms.
The Cessna C172 aircraft successfully landed at LPVA Aerodromo do Cerval, but the landing was not without its challenges. The pilot scored 70.8% on this landing, indicating room for improvement. The final approach to runway 16 was initiated from the north, heading 160.0° at 1 nm and 618 ft above ground level (agl).
Upon landing, the pilot encountered issues with the threshold height, which was excessively over the target at 105 ft agl. This suggests that the pilot may have descended too quickly or failed to maintain a steady rate of descent. Additionally, the threshold speed of 56 kn was well below the target, which could have resulted in a stall if not addressed promptly. The pilot must exercise caution to avoid stalling the aircraft during the landing phase.
The touchdown point was located very far down the runway, using more than 50% of the available runway. This indicates that the pilot may have been too aggressive with the flare or failed to maintain a steady rate of descent. The touchdown speed of 55 kn was also a little fast, which could have contributed to the long touchdown point. Furthermore, the touchdown rate was very heavy at -890 fpm, which may have put excessive stress on the aircraft's landing gear.
The runway touchdown position was also misaligned by 10.6 m from the centreline, which could have resulted in a longer rollout distance. Local weather conditions were relatively calm, with a temperature of 16 °C and a wind speed of 1 kn at 270°. The crosswind and tailwind components were both 1 kn, which suggests that wind was not a significant factor in the landing.
The total landing distance was 432 m, which accounted for 72% of the available runway. This indicates that the pilot may have been able to shorten the landing distance with more precise control of the aircraft's descent and touchdown. Finally, the runway rollout alignment was slightly misaligned by 13.0 m from the centreline, which could have resulted in a longer rollout distance and increased the risk of veering off the runway.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values