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 · 12 stages, 11 scored
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 1,000 ft gate: no landing flap set and off the centreline.
At the 500 ft gate: no landing flap set and off the runway's 3° glideslope.
The approach, gate by gate
Side view — the last 1,342 m of the approach.
Plan view — the full 1,342 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
Touched down 771 m past the threshold — beyond the full-score zone. The arrival was smooth.
The rest of the report
The flight began with a departure roll from runway 09 at I54 Mad River Airpark, a small airfield in Ohio, United States. The aircraft, a Piper PA28-236 Dakota, accelerated down the runway, covering a distance of 63 meters, which accounted for 8% of the total runway length. The liftoff speed was achieved at 61 knots, marking the beginning of the takeoff phase.
As the aircraft climbed away from the airfield, it encountered local weather conditions, with a temperature of 6 degrees Celsius and a wind speed of 10 knots from a direction of 252 degrees. The crosswind component was 4 knots, while the headwind component was 10 knots. The pilot successfully navigated the aircraft through these conditions, initiating the enroute climb phase.
The climb phase began overhead I54 Mad River Airpark, with the aircraft ascending from an altitude of 1,145 feet above sea level to 2,109 feet above sea level. This increase in altitude was achieved in just 3 minutes, covering a distance of 5 nautical miles. The climb was a testament to the aircraft's performance and the pilot's skill.
As the aircraft approached its destination, I74 Grimes, it began its final approach to runway 02. The approach was made from the south, with the aircraft heading 21.0 degrees and flying at an altitude of 1,045 feet above ground level. The pilot expertly guided the aircraft through the approach, ensuring a smooth and controlled descent.
The landing phase was a highlight of the flight, with the aircraft touching down on runway 02 at I74 Grimes. The touchdown point was located very far down the runway, using more than 50% of the available runway length. However, the touchdown speed of 49 knots was good, and the touchdown rate of -53 feet per minute was excellent. The runway touchdown alignment was also very good, indicating a high degree of control and precision.
Following the landing, the aircraft taxied to the parking area, covering a distance of less than 1 nautical mile in just 2 minutes. The total flight distance was 8 nautical miles, and the flight used 2 kilograms of fuel. The flight was a testament to the aircraft's performance and the pilot's skill, with a smooth and controlled takeoff, climb, approach, and landing.
The aircraft in question, a Piper PA28-236 Dakota, successfully landed at I74 Grimes from the south, heading 21.0° at 2 nautical miles and 1,045 feet above ground level (agl). The pilot demonstrated good control and precision throughout the final approach, ultimately landing on runway 02 with a good threshold height.
Upon closer inspection, it appears that the pilot achieved a satisfactory threshold speed of 78 knots, which is a crucial aspect of a safe landing. However, the touchdown point was somewhat long, utilizing more than 50% of the available runway. This may indicate that the pilot could have benefited from a slightly earlier touchdown or a more precise control of the aircraft's descent.
Despite the slightly long touchdown point, the touchdown speed of 49 knots was deemed good, and the touchdown rate of -53 feet per minute (fpm) was excellent. This suggests that the pilot was able to maintain a stable and controlled descent, which is essential for a safe landing.
The local weather conditions at the time of the landing were relatively calm, with a temperature of 5°C and a wind speed of 6 knots from 267°. The crosswind component was 6 knots, while the tailwind component was 2 knots. These conditions did not appear to significantly impact the pilot's ability to land the aircraft safely.
The total landing distance of 1,118 meters was 83% of the available runway length, which is a relatively high percentage. However, the runway rollout alignment was perfect, indicating that the pilot was able to maintain control of the aircraft during the rollout phase and bring it to a safe stop.
Overall, the pilot demonstrated a good level of skill and control during the landing, with a few areas for improvement. The final score of 87.4% suggests that the pilot was able to execute a safe and controlled landing, but could benefit from further refinement of their techniques to achieve an even higher level of proficiency.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values