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 · 22 stages, 20 scored
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 1,534 m of the approach.
Plan view — the first 1,534 m of the 2,914 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
Touched down 737 m past the threshold — beyond the full-score zone. The arrival was smooth.
The rest of the report
The flight began with the Airbus A320 taxiing from the parking area to the runway at LEST Santiago-Rosalía de Castro Airport, a process that took 8 minutes and covered a distance of 1 nautical mile. The aircraft then departed from runway 35, with a takeoff distance of 1,675 meters, which accounted for 57% of the runway. The liftoff speed was 155 knots, and the local weather conditions at the time were a temperature of 10 degrees Celsius and a wind speed of 23 knots at 259 degrees.
As the aircraft climbed to a higher altitude, it began its enroute climb from 2,159 feet above sea level to 29,530 feet above sea level, an increase of 27,371 feet in just 15 minutes, covering a distance of 84 nautical miles. The climb started 1 mile north of LEST Santiago-Rosalía de Castro Airport, and the aircraft continued to ascend to its cruising altitude.
The enroute level cruise started 1 mile southwest of Paramo del Sil, Spain, and lasted for 35 minutes, covering a distance of 299 nautical miles. The aircraft then began its enroute descent from 29,044 feet above sea level to 5,836 feet above sea level, a decrease of 23,207 feet in 14 minutes, covering a distance of 96 nautical miles. This descent started 3 miles north of LEAE Alcolea de Cinca Airport in Aragon, Spain.
The aircraft then entered another level cruise phase, this time overhead La Llagosta, Spain, and lasted for 2 minutes, covering a distance of 9 nautical miles. The enroute descent started 1 mile southeast of Vilassar de Mar, Spain, and the aircraft descended from 5,837 feet above sea level to 2,380 feet above sea level, a decrease of 3,457 feet in 4 minutes, covering a distance of 15 nautical miles.
The aircraft then entered another level cruise phase, this time 12 miles southeast of Sant Pol de Mar, Spain, and lasted for 18 minutes, covering a distance of 19 nautical miles. The enroute descent started 4 miles southeast of el Besos i el Maresme, Spain, and the aircraft descended from 2,256 feet above sea level to 1,299 feet above sea level, a decrease of 956 feet in 2 minutes, covering a distance of 5 nautical miles.
The final approach to runway 24R at LEBL Josep Tarradellas Barcelona-El Prat Airport was made from the northeast, heading 246.0 degrees at 4 nautical miles and 1,282 feet above ground level. The landing on runway 24R was successful, with a touchdown point 289 meters beyond the touchdown zone. The touchdown speed was 126 knots, which was good, and the touchdown rate was excellent at -96 feet per minute.
The local weather conditions at the time of landing were a temperature of 13 degrees Celsius and a wind speed of 23 knots at 260 degrees. The crosswind was 6 knots, and the headwind was 22 knots. The total landing distance was 1,421 meters, which accounted for 49% of the runway. However, the runway touchdown position was significantly misaligned by 19.6 meters from the centerline, and the runway rollout alignment was also misaligned by 24.6 meters from the centerline.
The taxiing to the parking area from the runway took 6 minutes and covered a distance of less than 1 nautical mile. The total flight distance was 534 nautical miles, and the flight duration was 106 minutes. The aircraft used 3,725 kilograms of fuel during the flight.
The Airbus A320 aircraft successfully landed on runway 24R at LEBL Josep Tarradellas Barcelona-El Prat Airport, but with some notable deviations from the ideal landing parameters. The final approach was initiated from the north east, heading 246.0° at a distance of 4 nautical miles and an altitude of 1,282 feet above ground level (agl). The aircraft's approach speed and threshold speed were both within acceptable limits, at 138 knots, which is considered good.
However, the threshold height at 76 feet agl was significantly above the target, indicating that the aircraft may have been higher than desired at the point of touchdown. The touchdown point itself was 289 meters beyond the designated touchdown zone, which suggests that the aircraft may have been slightly long on the landing. The touchdown speed of 126 knots was still within the acceptable range, and the touchdown rate of -96 feet per minute (fpm) was excellent, indicating a smooth and controlled descent.
The local weather conditions at the time of landing were characterized by a temperature of 13°C and a wind speed of 23 knots from 260°. This resulted in a crosswind of 6 knots and a headwind of 22 knots, which may have contributed to the aircraft's misaligned touchdown position. The runway touchdown position was significantly off-centerline by 19.6 meters, which could have been due to the wind conditions or pilot error.
The total landing distance of 1,421 meters was 49% of the available runway length, which is a relatively short distance. However, the runway rollout alignment was also misaligned by 24.6 meters from the centerline, which could have been a result of the aircraft's initial touchdown position or the pilot's response to the wind conditions. Overall, while the landing was successful, there were some notable deviations from the ideal parameters, which may require further analysis and improvement.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values