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 · 24 stages, 22 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.
The approach, gate by gate
Side view — the last 1,713 m of the approach.
Plan view — the first 1,713 m of the 2,649 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
Touched down 855 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 7 minutes and covered a distance of 1 nautical mile. The aircraft, a Boeing 737-800, then departed from runway 10 at Princess Juliana International Airport (TNCM) in Saint Martin. The takeoff distance was 1,542 meters, which was 67% of the runway length. The aircraft lifted off at a speed of 165 knots.
The local weather conditions at the time of departure were characterized by a temperature of 35°C, with a wind speed of 9 knots at 70°. The crosswind component was 2 knots, while the headwind component was 9 knots. As the aircraft climbed to a higher altitude, it encountered a significant increase in temperature and wind speed.
The enroute climb started 1 mile south of Marigot, Saint Martin, and lasted for 15 minutes. During this period, the aircraft climbed from an altitude of 974 feet above sea level (asl) to 31,785 ft asl, an increase of 30,812 feet. The distance covered during this climb was 69 nautical miles. The aircraft then entered a level cruise phase, which lasted for 2 minutes and covered a distance of 11 nautical miles.
The next enroute climb started 3 miles southwest of Virgin Gorda Airport (TUPW), British Virgin Islands. This climb lasted for 5 minutes and covered a distance of 40 nautical miles. The aircraft climbed from an altitude of 32,316 ft asl to 36,769 ft asl, an increase of 4,453 feet. The aircraft then entered another level cruise phase, which lasted for 157 minutes and covered a distance of 1,156 nautical miles.
The enroute descent started 6 miles southwest of Laurel Hill Farms Airport (2SC7), South Carolina, and lasted for 7 minutes. During this period, the aircraft descended from an altitude of 37,518 ft asl to 27,666 ft asl, a decrease of 9,852 feet. The distance covered during this descent was 50 nautical miles. The aircraft then entered another level cruise phase, which lasted for 3 minutes and covered a distance of 20 nautical miles.
The next enroute descent started 2 miles south of Lamar, South Carolina, and lasted for 17 minutes. During this period, the aircraft descended from an altitude of 27,024 ft asl to 3,103 ft asl, a decrease of 23,921 feet. The distance covered during this descent was 90 nautical miles. The aircraft then entered another level cruise phase, which lasted for 5 minutes and covered a distance of 8 nautical miles.
The final enroute descent started 4 miles southeast of Lowesville, North Carolina, and lasted for 2 minutes. During this period, the aircraft descended from an altitude of 3,045 ft asl to 2,025 ft asl, a decrease of 1,021 feet. The distance covered during this descent was 5 nautical miles.
The aircraft then began its final approach to runway 18L at Charlotte Douglas International Airport (KCLT). The approach was made from the north, with a heading of 176.0° and an altitude of 1,280 feet above ground level (agl). The local weather conditions at the time of landing were characterized by a temperature of 31°C, with a wind speed of 11 knots at 330°. The crosswind component was 5 knots, while the tailwind component was 10 knots.
The aircraft landed on runway 18L, which had a length of 2,649 meters. The threshold height at 58 ft agl was slightly above the target, while the threshold speed was slightly above the target at 147 knots.
The Boeing 737-800 aircraft successfully landed at Charlotte Douglas International Airport (KCLT) on runway 18L, but the landing was not without some issues. The final approach was initiated from the north, heading 176.0° at 4 nautical miles and 1,280 feet above ground level (agl). The aircraft touched down 454 meters beyond the touchdown zone, which is a significant deviation from the intended landing spot.
The touchdown speed of 148 knots was slightly above the target speed, indicating that the pilot may have been unable to fully arrest the aircraft's descent before touching down. Furthermore, the touchdown rate of -919 feet per minute (fpm) was extremely heavy, suggesting that the aircraft was experiencing a high rate of descent at the moment of touchdown. This could be a result of the pilot's inability to control the aircraft's rate of descent or a failure to properly configure the aircraft for landing.
The runway touchdown position was also misaligned by 12.1 meters from the centerline, which could have been caused by a combination of factors including crosswind, tailwind, and pilot error. The local weather conditions at the time of landing were characterized by a temperature of 31°C and winds of 11 knots at 330°. The crosswind component was 5 knots, while the tailwind component was 10 knots, which could have contributed to the difficulties experienced during the landing.
The total landing distance of 1,647 meters was 62% of the available runway length, which is a relatively high percentage. This suggests that the aircraft may have been unable to stop within the available runway length, which could have been a result of the high touchdown speed and heavy touchdown rate. The runway rollout alignment was also slightly misaligned by 10.6 meters from the centerline, which could have been caused by the same factors that contributed to the initial touchdown position misalignment.
Overall, while the aircraft was able to land safely, the landing was not without some issues. The pilot may have benefited from additional training or experience in handling the aircraft in challenging weather conditions. Additionally, the aircraft's performance may have been affected by factors such as weight, center of gravity, and airframe configuration, which could have contributed to the difficulties experienced during the landing.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values