Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
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 · 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 1,971 m of the approach.
Plan view — the first 1,971 m of the 3,058 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
Touched down 1,234 m past the threshold — beyond the full-score zone. The arrival was smooth.
The rest of the report
Overall, the aircraft landing score of 79.0% indicates room for improvement in various phases of the landing process. Let's break down the analysis of each phase to identify areas that can be worked on to achieve a smoother and more precise landing in the future.
In the Approach Phase, it is noted that there was a poor descent path above the glideslope limit. This suggests that the aircraft may have descended too steeply or too slowly, affecting the overall approach towards the runway. It is essential to maintain a stable descent path within the glideslope limits to ensure a smooth transition to the landing phase.
Moving on to the Landing Phase, it was observed that the threshold height was significantly above the target, indicating a deviation from the optimal approach height. Additionally, a very poor landing flare was noted, which can impact the touchdown and rollout phases of the landing. Practicing proper flare technique and ensuring correct threshold height can help improve the landing phase performance.
In the Touchdown Phase, the analysis reveals a hard touchdown rate, suggesting a lack of smoothness during the landing process. While the speed was on target, the touchdown point being 985 meters beyond the designated touchdown zone is a significant deviation. Furthermore, the runway touchdown position was 10.5 meters from the centerline, indicating a need for improved alignment during touchdown.
Finally, in the Rollout Phase, runway alignment was noted to be 10.4 meters from the centerline, highlighting the importance of maintaining straight alignment during the rollout. Consistent practice and attention to detail can help improve runway alignment and overall landing performance.
In conclusion, while the landing score of 79.0% indicates some areas that need improvement, it is important to approach these areas with positivity and a willingness to learn and grow as a pilot. By focusing on refining descent path, flare technique, touchdown precision, and runway alignment, you can work towards achieving a higher landing score and enhancing your overall flying skills. Keep practicing, stay focused, and don't be discouraged by setbacks – every landing is an opportunity to improve and become a better pilot. Good luck!
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values