Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
MY FS FLIGHTS
Flight Score
Improve the rollout
A crosswind landing is a geometry problem. The air mass you're flying in is moving sideways across the runway, and you need your ground track down the centreline with your wheels aligned to it at the moment of contact. There are two techniques that will help, the crab and the sideslip.
Read more in Crosswind Landings in the SimStart to finish · 15 stages, 13 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.
The approach, gate by gate
Side view — the last 5,000 ft of the approach.
Plan view — the first 5,000 ft of the 8,901 ft runway, to the same scale as the side view.
Touched down 2,170 ft past the threshold — beyond the full-score zone. The arrival was smooth.
The rest of the report
Taxiing from the parking area to the runway at Orlando International Airport (KMCO) took 15 minutes and covered a distance of 3 nautical miles. Departure roll commenced on runway 18L, with the Boeing 737-800 accelerating down the 6,114-foot runway, utilizing 51% of its length. Liftoff speed was achieved at 160 knots, as the aircraft lifted off into the local weather conditions of 87°F and a 10-knot wind at 247°.
The enroute climb phase began approximately 1 mile southwest of KMCO, with the aircraft ascending from 1,051 feet above sea level to 35,990 feet, a vertical increase of 34,939 feet, in 24 minutes and covering 162 nautical miles. Following a 262-minute cruise at a level altitude, the enroute descent phase commenced 1 mile south of Crosswinds Airport (2CA3), with the aircraft descending from 36,002 feet to 1,423 feet, a decrease of 34,578 feet, in 25 minutes and covering 117 nautical miles. The final approach to runway 24R at Los Angeles International Airport (KLAX) was conducted from the east, with the aircraft maintaining a heading of 263.0° at 4 nautical miles and 1,285 feet above ground level.
The landing on runway 24R at KLAX was executed with a threshold speed of 144 knots, and the touchdown point was 809 feet beyond the touchdown zone, at a speed of 132 knots. The touchdown rate was fair at -210 feet per minute. However, the runway touchdown position was misaligned by 48 feet from the centreline, and the runway rollout alignment was also slightly misaligned by 48 feet from the centreline. Taxiing to the parking area from the runway took 11 minutes and covered a distance of 1 nautical mile. The total flight distance was 1,974 nautical miles, with a total flight time of 337 minutes and a fuel consumption of 30,922 pounds.
The Boeing 737-800 touched down on runway 24R at KLAX Los Angeles International Airport with a good threshold height, allowing the crew to maintain a stable approach. The threshold speed was also well-managed at 144 kt, indicating a smooth transition from the approach to the touchdown phase. The aircraft's touchdown speed of 132 kt was within acceptable limits, and the touchdown rate of -210 fpm was fair, suggesting a controlled descent.
However, the touchdown point was located 809 ft beyond the touchdown zone, which may have been due to a slight over-rotation or a delayed touchdown. The runway touchdown position was also misaligned by 48 ft from the centreline, which could have been caused by a slight drift or a deviation from the intended centreline alignment. Despite this, the crew managed to maintain control of the aircraft during the rollout phase, with the runway rollout alignment only slightly misaligned from the centreline.
The total landing distance of 4,396 ft was 49% of the runway length, which is within acceptable limits. The local weather conditions, with a temperature of 63 °F and a wind of 19 kt at 230 °, contributed to a crosswind of 10 kt and a headwind of 16 kt. Overall, the landing was considered good, with a score of 89.5%, indicating a well-executed approach and touchdown, but with some room for improvement in terms of centreline alignment and touchdown point accuracy.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values