Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
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 · 20 stages, 18 scored
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
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.
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 1,524 m of the approach.
Plan view — the first 1,524 m of the 2,395 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
Touched down 764 m past the threshold — beyond the full-score zone. The arrival was smooth.
The rest of the report
The flight in the Honda HA420 began with a 12-minute taxi from the parking area to the runway at LOWW Vienna International Airport. The departure roll took place on runway 29, with a takeoff distance of 665 meters, covering 19% of the runway. The liftoff speed was 131 knots. The local weather at the time of departure was 3°C with a wind of 22 knots at 299°, resulting in a crosswind of 1 knot and a headwind of 22 knots.
The enroute climb started 1 mile west of LOWW Vienna International Airport and lasted 30 minutes. The aircraft climbed from 1,551 feet above sea level to 40,184 feet above sea level, covering a distance of 143 nautical miles.
After reaching cruising altitude, the enroute level cruise began 1 mile southeast of Bischofsmais in Bavaria, Germany, lasting 25 minutes and covering 153 nautical miles.
The enroute descent commenced 1 mile south of Gersfeld in Hessen, Germany. The descent took 25 minutes, during which the aircraft descended from 40,849 feet above sea level to 2,804 feet above sea level, covering a distance of 112 nautical miles.
Following the descent, the aircraft entered another brief level cruise phase, starting 1 mile southwest of Wetter (Ruhr) in Nordrhein-Westfalen, Germany, lasting 5 minutes and covering 16 nautical miles.
The landing took place on runway 23L at EDDL Düsseldorf Airport, with a runway length of 2,395 meters. The height at threshold was 78 feet above ground level, and the speed at threshold was 117 knots. The touchdown occurred 764 meters from the threshold, with a touchdown speed of 96 knots and a Vertical Speed Indicator (VSI) reading of -89 feet per minute. The local weather at the time of landing was 2°C with a wind of 7 knots at 240°, resulting in a crosswind of 1 knot and a headwind of 7 knots. The total landing distance was 1,419 meters, accounting for 59% of the runway.
Finally, the aircraft taxied from the runway to the parking area in 3 minutes, covering less than 1 nautical mile. The total flight distance for this journey was 435 nautical miles, with a total flight time of 96 minutes. The aircraft consumed 294 kg of fuel during the flight.
First, congratulations on achieving an aircraft landing score of 86.3%! This is a strong result, indicating overall proficiency in various aspects of the landing process.
Let's delve into a more detailed analysis of the different phases of the landing:
Approach Phase: During the Approach Phase, there was a notable issue with the descent path being above the glideslope limit. This suggests that there may have been some challenges in maintaining the appropriate vertical profile during the descent towards the runway. It is essential for pilots to closely monitor the descent path to ensure a safe and smooth approach.
Landing Phase: In the Landing Phase, the threshold height was well above the target, and there was a very poor landing flare. The threshold height being higher than expected might result in a longer than necessary approach to the runway, potentially impacting the overall landing performance. Additionally, a poor landing flare can lead to a harder touchdown and potential issues with aircraft stability upon landing.
Touchdown Phase: Despite the challenges encountered during the Approach and Landing Phases, the Touchdown Phase had some positive points. The touchdown rate was excellent, indicating good control and timing during the moment of touchdown. Furthermore, the speed was on target, which is critical for a safe and effective landing. However, it is worth noting that the touchdown point being 335 m beyond the touchdown zone suggests that adjustments may be needed to ensure more precise landings in the future.
Rollout Phase: Finally, during the Rollout Phase, the runway alignment was considered very good. This is a crucial aspect of the landing process as it ensures that the aircraft continues along the centerline of the runway, thereby enhancing safety and efficiency during rollout.
In conclusion, while there were some areas for improvement identified in the analysis, it is essential to recognize the strengths demonstrated during the landing process. By addressing the specific issues highlighted, such as maintaining the descent path within the glideslope limit and improving the landing flare technique, you can further enhance your overall landing performance. Keep up the good work and continue to strive for excellence in every phase of aircraft operations. Happy flying!
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values