Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
MY FS FLIGHTS
Flight Score
Shorten the long landing
Ground effect becomes significant below about one wingspan of height. A Cessna 172, with a 36 ft span, enters ground effect at flare height - the float it feels in the hold-off is ground effect arriving on cue. An A320, with a span around 117 ft, has been in ground effect since before the threshold and there is no sudden cushion to feel, only a gradual reduction in induced drag that lengthens any float you allow.
Read more in Flare TimingStart to finish · 18 stages, 16 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.
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 1,544 m of the approach.
Plan view — the first 1,544 m of the 3,050 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
Touched down 938 m past the threshold — beyond the full-score zone. The arrival was smooth.
The rest of the report
The flight began with a taxiing period from the parking to the runway, which took 147 minutes and covered a distance of 34 nautical miles. The aircraft, an Airbus A320, then departed from runway 27 at EKBI Billund Airport in Denmark. The takeoff distance was 1,731 meters, which accounted for 62% of the runway. The liftoff speed was 175 knots, and the local weather conditions at the time of departure were a temperature of 8 degrees Celsius, with a wind speed of 3 knots at 189 degrees.
As the aircraft climbed to its cruising altitude, it began its enroute climb from 1,238 feet above sea level to 35,541 feet above sea level, an increase of 34,302 feet in just 13 minutes. This climb covered a distance of 135 nautical miles. The enroute level cruise started 56 miles south of Vestbygd in Norway and lasted for 58 minutes, covering a distance of 787 nautical miles.
As the aircraft began its descent, it started from 14 miles southwest of BISL Hoefn Airport in Iceland. The descent from 33,397 feet above sea level to 1,453 feet above sea level, a decrease of 31,944 feet in 21 minutes, covered a distance of 135 nautical miles. The final approach to runway 28 at BIKF Keflavik International Airport was made from the east, heading 270 degrees at 4 nautical miles and 1,301 feet above ground level.
The landing on runway 28 at BIKF Keflavik International Airport was successful, with a touchdown point 513 meters beyond the touchdown zone. The touchdown speed was 126 knots, which was considered good. However, the touchdown rate was very hard at -511 feet per minute. The runway touchdown position was excessively misaligned by 44.2 meters from the centerline, and the runway rollout alignment was also excessively misaligned by 49.1 meters from the centerline.
The local weather conditions at the time of landing were a temperature of -2 degrees Celsius, with a wind speed of 27 knots at 240 degrees. The crosswind was 13 knots, and the headwind was 23 knots. The total landing distance was 1,454 meters, which accounted for 48% of the runway. After landing, the aircraft taxiied to the parking from the runway, which took just 2 minutes and covered a distance of less than 1 nautical mile. The total flight distance was 1,097 nautical miles, and the flight duration was 105 minutes. The aircraft used 218 kilograms of fuel during the flight.
The Airbus A320 aircraft successfully landed at Keflavik International Airport (BIKF) on runway 28, but the landing was not without its issues. The final approach was initiated from the east, heading 270.0° at a distance of 4 nautical miles and an altitude of 1,301 feet above ground level (agl). The aircraft touched down on the runway, but the touchdown point was 513 meters beyond the designated touchdown zone, indicating a slight deviation from the intended landing spot.
The touchdown speed of 126 knots was within the acceptable range, and the threshold speed of 134 knots was also good. However, the touchdown rate was very hard, with a descent rate of -511 feet per minute (fpm). This could be a concern for the aircraft's safety and the comfort of its passengers. Furthermore, the runway touchdown position was excessively misaligned by 44.2 meters from the centerline, which could have contributed to the hard touchdown.
The local weather conditions at the time of landing were not ideal, with a temperature of -2°C and a wind speed of 27 knots at 240°. The crosswind component was 13 knots, while the headwind component was 23 knots. These conditions would have required the pilots to make adjustments to the aircraft's approach and landing, which may have contributed to the deviations from the intended landing spot.
The total landing distance of 1,454 meters was 48% of the runway length, which is within the acceptable range. However, the runway rollout alignment was excessively misaligned by 49.1 meters from the centerline, which could have made the landing more challenging for the pilots. Overall, while the landing was successful, there were several issues that need to be addressed to improve the safety and efficiency of the aircraft's operations at Keflavik International Airport.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values