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 · 21 stages, 19 scored
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 1,864 m of the approach.
Plan view — the first 1,864 m of the 2,505 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
Touched down 564 m past the threshold — beyond the full-score zone. The arrival was smooth.
The rest of the report
The flight in the Boeing 737-800 began at ZPPP Wujiaba in Kunming, China. The taxi from the parking to the runway took 11 minutes, covering 2 nm. The departure roll from runway 03L covered 2,904 m, with the aircraft reaching a liftoff speed of 161 kn. The local weather at takeoff was 13 °C with a 5 kn wind at 30 °, resulting in a crosswind of 1 kn and a headwind of 5 kn.
The enroute climb began 2 miles north of ZPPP Wujiaba, climbing from 7,882 ft asl to 35,391 ft asl in 21 minutes, covering 126 nm. The enroute level cruise started 10 miles south of Liupanshui in Guizhou Sheng, lasting 217 minutes and covering 1,828 nm.
The enroute descent started 6 miles east of Shimoda in Shizuoka, Japan, descending from 34,873 ft asl to 11,146 ft asl in 16 minutes, covering 93 nm. Another enroute level cruise started 24 miles east of Ohara in Chiba-ken, lasting 4 minutes and covering 20 nm. The descent continued 23 miles southeast of Asahi in Chiba-ken, descending from 11,148 ft asl to 1,925 ft asl in 11 minutes, covering 32 nm.
The landing was on runway 34R at RJAA Narita Intl, with a runway length of 2,505 m. The height at threshold was 63 ft agl, with a speed at threshold of 142 kn. The touchdown occurred 564 m from the threshold at a speed of 136 kn, with a VSI of -189 ft/m. The local weather at landing was 18 °C with a 16 kn wind at 360 °, resulting in a crosswind of 8 kn and a headwind of 14 kn. The total landing distance was 1,781 m, 71% of the runway.
Finally, taxiing from the runway to the parking took 16 minutes and covered 2 nm. The total flight distance was 2,112 nm, taking 308 minutes and using 12,330 kg of fuel.
Overall, the aircraft landing score of 90.9% indicates that the pilot performed well during the landing process. The Approach Phase was particularly strong, with good glideslope alignment leading the aircraft smoothly towards the runway. This is essential for a successful landing, as it sets the foundation for the following phases.
However, there were some areas for improvement in the Landing Phase. The threshold height being above target indicates that the aircraft was a bit high upon approaching the runway. Additionally, the very poor landing flare suggests that the pilot did not execute a proper control of the aircraft's pitch attitude just before touchdown. These factors likely contributed to the touchdown point being 145 m beyond the designated touchdown zone.
In the Touchdown Phase, despite the touchdown rate being good and the speed on target, the deviation in touchdown point from the designated zone and the runway touchdown position being 6.3 m from the centreline are areas of concern. This suggests that the pilot may need to work on precision in touchdown point identification and runway alignment during the final moments of the landing.
Finally, in the Rollout Phase, while the runway alignment was slightly off at 6.2 m from the centreline, this is a relatively minor issue compared to the other discrepancies noted in earlier phases. However, maintaining proper alignment is crucial for a safe and smooth rollout after landing.
In conclusion, while the pilot demonstrated proficiency in certain aspects of the landing, such as glideslope alignment and touchdown rate, there are areas that require improvement, such as threshold height, landing flare, touchdown point accuracy, and runway alignment. With continued practice and attention to detail, the pilot can strive for even higher landing scores in future flights.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values