Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
MY FS FLIGHTS
Flight Score
Know your rotation speed
A typical trainer rotates in the mid-50s of knots - a 172 at around 55 KIAS, climbing out at a Vy in the low 70s, though check your own POH rather than memorising Cessna's numbers - and the transferable rule is that Vr sits just above the stall speed in takeoff configuration. Rotate early because "it felt ready" and the aircraft lifts off inside ground effect, where induced drag is reduced, then climbs out of it into more drag. On a marginal-performance day the result is an aircraft that lifts off and then refuses to climb, sagging back towards the runway.
Read more in Improve Your Take-OffsStart to finish · 19 stages, 17 scored
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 5,000 ft of the approach.
Plan view — the first 5,000 ft of the 8,007 ft runway, to the same scale as the side view.
The 984 ft touchdown sits inside the full-score zone. The arrival was smooth.
The rest of the report
The flight in the Vision Jet began with a taxi to runway 10R at KORD Chicago-O'Hare International Airport, covering a distance of 3 nm and lasting 11 minutes. The departure roll on runway 10R saw a takeoff distance of 2,321 ft, covering 31% of the runway, with a liftoff speed of 109 kn. The local weather at the time of departure was 74 °F with a wind of 5 kn at 100 °, resulting in a crosswind of 1 kn and a headwind of 5 kn.
The enroute climb started overhead Schiller Park, climbing from 1,673 ft above sea level to 17,463 ft above sea level, covering a distance of 38 nm in 12 minutes and finishing overhead Kenosha. The enroute level cruise began 1 mile north of Kenosha, covering a distance of 58 nm in 14 minutes and finishing 2 miles northwest of 2T5 Hahn Sky Ranch West Bend.
The enroute descent commenced 2 miles northwest of 2T5 Hahn Sky Ranch West Bend, descending from 17,303 ft above sea level to 2,634 ft above sea level, covering a distance of 38 nm in 14 minutes and finishing 2 miles south of 79C Brennand Neenah.
The landing took place on runway 18 at KOSH Wittman Regional Airport, which has a runway length of 8,007 ft. The approach saw the aircraft at a height of 54 ft above ground level, with a speed of 90 kn at the threshold. The touchdown occurred 977 ft from the threshold, at a speed of 82 kn and a vertical speed indicator of -680 ft/min. The local weather at the time of landing was 67 °F with a wind of 8 kn at 170 °, resulting in a crosswind of 2 kn and a headwind of 8 kn. The landing rollout on runway 18 covered a distance of 463 ft, with the total landing distance being 1,692 ft, accounting for 21% of the runway.
After landing, there was a taxi to parking from runway 18 at KOSH Wittman Regional Airport, covering a distance of less than 1 nm and lasting 7 minutes. The total flight distance for this journey was 149 nm, with a total flight time of 61 minutes and fuel usage of 366 lbs.
Overall, it is clear that the aircraft landing score of 92.9% indicates a relatively successful landing, but there are areas for improvement that could help to further improve the score in future landings.
Starting with the Approach Phase, it is evident that the glideslope alignment was excellent, which shows that the pilot had good control over the vertical descent of the aircraft. Additionally, having the speed slightly below target is a positive sign, as this suggests that the pilot was able to manage the approach speed effectively.
Moving on to the Landing Phase, it is concerning to see that the landing flare was very poor. This phase of the landing is crucial for ensuring a smooth touchdown, and a poor landing flare can result in a heavier touchdown and potentially even damage to the aircraft. Additionally, the poor landing heading and bank angle stability during the landing indicate that there may have been some difficulties in maintaining the correct alignment and stability of the aircraft during the landing phase.
In the Touchdown Phase, the heavy touchdown rate is a clear area for improvement, as a heavy touchdown could potentially lead to structural damage to the aircraft. The fact that the speed was slightly above target and the touchdown distance inside the touchdown zone were also not ideal, as these factors could indicate a lack of precision in the landing process.
Lastly, in the Rollout Phase, the runway alignment being 12 ft from the centerline is another area where improvement can be made. Maintaining a straight and centered rollout is important for safe taxiing and can also impact the overall safety and efficiency of the landing.
Overall, while the aircraft landing score of 92.9% is a solid result, there are specific areas, such as the landing flare, touchdown rate, and runway alignment, that would benefit from focused attention in order to improve future landing performances. By addressing these areas of weakness, the pilot can work towards achieving even higher landing scores and ensuring smoother and safer landings in the future. Keep up the good work and remain focused on continuous improvement in all aspects of the landing process.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values