Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
MY FS FLIGHTS
Flight Score
Get the gear down before the gate
Preparing for a stable approach will give you time to decide on whether to attempt the landing or going around. Too much altitude with a high sink rate will result in carrying too much speed onto the runway. Configuring flaps and the gear late also won't help the speed decay.
Read more in The Stabilised ApproachStart to finish · 8 stages, 8 scored
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. They are the approach's score: the checks passed out of the checks that ran.
At the 1,000 ft gate: gear still up, no landing flap set, glideslope 5.2° against the runway's 3°, centreline 4.0° off, against a 1° limit, wings 74° of bank, against a 10° limit and speed 229 kt FAST on the reference speed.
At the 500 ft gate: gear still up, no landing flap set, sink rate 2,373 fpm, more than the glideslope needed, centreline 3.4° off, against a 1° limit and speed 26 kt FAST on the reference speed.
The approach, gate by gate
Side view — the last 1,524 m of the approach.
Plan view — the first 1,524 m of the 2,923 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
Touched down 341 m short of the threshold.
The rest of the report
Departure roll from runway 30 at CYHM John C. Munro Hamilton International Airport was smooth, with the Experimental Darkstar accelerating rapidly down the 1,473-meter runway, which was utilized at 60% of its length. Liftoff speed was achieved at 244 knots, marking the beginning of the climb phase. Local weather conditions at the time of departure featured a temperature of 14 °C and a moderate wind of 10 knots from a direction of 30°, resulting in a crosswind component of 10 knots and a tailwind component of 2 knots.
As the aircraft transitioned into the enroute climb phase, it began to ascend from an initial altitude of 1,928 feet above sea level to a final altitude of 1,857 feet above sea level, a net increase of 71 feet over a period of 3 minutes. This climb phase covered a distance of 17 nautical miles, demonstrating a steady and controlled rate of ascent. The aircraft's performance during this phase was satisfactory, with a climb rate that met or exceeded expectations.
The final approach to runway 30 at CYHM John C. Munro Hamilton International Airport was initiated from the east, with the aircraft tracking a heading of 269.0° at an altitude of 1,032 feet above ground level and a distance of 2 nautical miles from the runway threshold. Touchdown was achieved before the threshold, with a speed of 106 knots. However, the touchdown rate was somewhat heavy, at -2,648 feet per minute, and the runway touchdown position was significantly misaligned from the centerline by 18.3 meters. The total flight distance was 20 nautical miles, and the aircraft utilized 406 kilograms of fuel over the 3-minute duration of the flight.
The final approach to runway 30 at CYHM John C. Munro Hamilton International Airport was initiated from the east, with the Experimental Darkstar aircraft aligning with the runway heading of 269.0° at 2 nautical miles and 1,032 feet above ground level. The approach quality was satisfactory, with a stable and controlled descent. However, the touchdown was premature, occurring before the threshold, which may have been a result of the pilot's decision to land early.
Upon touchdown, the aircraft's speed of 106 knots was within the acceptable range, indicating a good touchdown speed. However, the touchdown rate of -2,648 feet per minute was excessively heavy, suggesting that the pilot may have been unable to arrest the descent effectively. This heavy touchdown rate may have contributed to the significant misalignment of the runway touchdown position, which was 18.3 meters off the centreline. The local weather conditions, with a temperature of 14°C and a 10-knot wind at 30°, may have also played a role in the aircraft's performance.
The rollout phase was likely affected by the heavy touchdown rate and the misaligned touchdown position. The centreline alignment was not maintained, which may have resulted in a longer rollout distance. The overall score of 78.7% reflects the satisfactory approach quality, but the premature touchdown, heavy touchdown rate, and significant misalignment of the runway touchdown position detracted from the performance.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values