Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
MY FS FLIGHTS
Flight Score
Departure
Make small rudder corrections against a fixed point at the far end of the runway to hold the centreline during the roll.
What happened: The aircraft drifted 6.1 m off the runway centreline during the ground roll, and wing drift like that usually keeps reappearing as bank in the climb, with 4.9° of bank in the first climb segment and 3.1° still showing in the second.
Watch for: Heading indicator: steady on the runway centreline during the roll, then wings level through the climb.
Arrival
Fly the flare as one continuous check of the sink rate from 21 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 21 ft down to touchdown.
Watch for: Watch radio altitude and VSI through the flare, aiming to arrest the sink smoothly from 21 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 · 18 stages, 16 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.
The approach, gate by gate
Side view — the last 1,524 m of the approach.
Plan view — the first 1,524 m of the 2,692 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
Touched down 624 m past the threshold — beyond the full-score zone. The arrival was smooth.
The rest of the report
The flight in question involved an Airbus A320 aircraft. As the aircraft began to prepare for departure, it spent 8 minutes taxiing from the parking area to the runway at Karol Wojtyła Airport in Bari, covering a distance of approximately 2 nautical miles. The departure roll took place on runway 07 at this airport.
During takeoff, the A320 accelerated to a speed of 168 knots and lifted off from the runway after traveling 1,427 meters, which was 58% of the runway length. The local weather conditions at the time were characterized by a temperature of 30 degrees Celsius, with winds blowing at 16 knots from a direction of 179 degrees. This resulted in a crosswind of 15 knots and a tailwind of 5 knots.
After departure, the aircraft began its enroute climb, starting from 1,114 feet above sea level and ascending to 36,503 feet, a total increase of 35,389 feet in just 25 minutes and covering 153 nautical miles. This phase of the flight took place north of San Paolo, Italy.
Once the aircraft entered level cruise, it remained at an altitude of 36,503 feet for 65 minutes as it covered a distance of 462 nautical miles. The level cruise began 9 miles northeast of Giulianova, Italy. After reaching its cruising altitude, the aircraft began its enroute descent from 36,254 feet to 1,669 feet, a total decrease of 34,585 feet in 34 minutes, covering another 153 nautical miles. The descent started 1 mile southeast of Belleneuve, France.
As the aircraft approached Charles de Gaulle International Airport in Paris, it entered the final approach phase from the west at an altitude of 1,314 feet above ground level. The local weather conditions at this time were characterized by a temperature of 25 degrees Celsius, with winds blowing at 16 knots from a direction of 130 degrees. This resulted in a crosswind of 11 knots and a headwind of 11 knots.
The aircraft landed on runway 09L at the Charles de Gaulle International Airport, touching down 141 meters beyond the touchdown zone at a speed of 131 knots. The touchdown speed was somewhat higher than the target speed, but the aircraft managed a fairly good touchdown rate of -221 feet per minute. The runway alignment during touchdown and rollout was perfect.
After landing, the aircraft taxied to the parking area, taking 6 minutes to cover a distance of less than 1 nautical mile. The entire flight distance was 776 nautical miles, taking a total of 137 minutes and consuming 5,816 kilograms of fuel.
The Airbus A320 aircraft executed a successful landing at Charles de Gaulle International Airport on runway 09L, with a high level of proficiency displayed during the maneuvers. The crew's approach to the runway was well-executed, with a heading of 85.0 degrees at 4 nautical miles and an altitude of 1,314 feet above ground level (agl).
Upon final approach, the aircraft maintained a stable and controlled descent, touching down at 131 knots, which was slightly above the target landing speed. However, the touchdown point was 141 meters beyond the designated touchdown zone, which indicates that the crew needed to apply slight braking forces after landing. Despite this minor deviation, the runway alignment and touchdown speed were otherwise acceptable.
Another notable aspect of this landing is the aircraft's performance in regards to the crosswind and headwind conditions. With a wind speed of 16 knots at 130 degrees, the crew managed to maintain a stable approach, and the crosswind and headwind components of 11 knots each were effectively countered.
In terms of other relevant factors, the threshold height at 76 feet agl was above the target, but the threshold speed of 137 knots was within acceptable limits. On touchdown, the aircraft demonstrated a good runway alignment and a moderate touchdown rate of -221 feet per minute (fpm).
Finally, the aircraft's performance during the rollout phase was commendable, with a very good alignment maintained over the entire distance. In total, the landing distance came to 1,102 meters, which corresponds to approximately 41% of the runway length. This overall performance suggests a well-executed landing by the crew, with some minor adjustments required to improve the touchdown point and landing speed.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values