Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
MY FS FLIGHTS
Flight Score
Hold the approach angle
Preparing for a stable approach will give you time to decide on whether to attempt the landing or going around. Too much altitude with a high sink rate will result in carrying too much speed onto the runway. Configuring flaps and the gear late also won't help the speed decay.
Read more in The Stabilised ApproachStart to finish · 18 stages, 16 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: seven 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 903 m of the approach.
Plan view — the full 903 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
The 386 m touchdown sits inside the full-score zone. The arrival was smooth.
The rest of the report
The Kodiak 100 aircraft embarked on a flight from KCQM Cook Municipal Airport, taking off from runway 31. The initial taxiing to the runway took 4 minutes and covered less than a nautical mile. With liftoff speed reached at 76 knots, the aircraft departed the Cook Municipal Airport. The local weather at the time of departure was characterized by a temperature of 18 degrees Celsius, wind at 6 knots from 140 degrees, providing a 6-knot tailwind.
As the aircraft progressed through its enroute climb, it started 1 mile south west of Cook and rose from an altitude of 2,345 feet above sea level to 6,731 feet, covering a total of 11 nautical miles in 4 minutes. The enroute level cruise phase followed, commencing 1 mile south of KORB Orr Regional Airport, and lasted for 7 minutes, covering 24 nautical miles.
During the descent phase, which started 14 miles north of Nett Lake, the aircraft decreased its altitude from 6,470 feet to 2,321 feet in 5 minutes, covering 15 nautical miles. Subsequently, the aircraft transitioned to a brief level cruise segment, flying 1 mile east of KINL Falls International Airport for 2 minutes, covering 2 nautical miles.
The final approach to runway 22 at KINL Falls International Airport began from the north east at a heading of 215.0 degrees, 2 nautical miles away, and at an altitude of 555 feet above ground level. The aircraft landed on the 903-meter-long runway 22, with the threshold speed being well above the target speed of 75 knots at 75 knots, while the touchdown speed was slightly fast at 64 knots.
Post-landing assessments revealed that the touchdown distance was good at 385 meters, with a touchdown rate of -158 feet per minute. However, the runway touchdown position was slightly misaligned by 3.3 meters from the centreline. The local weather during landing was characterized by a temperature of 17 degrees Celsius, wind of 8 knots from 159 degrees, resulting in a 7-knot crosswind and a 4-knot headwind.
Taxiing to the parking area after landing took 1 minute, covering less than a nautical mile. Overall, the flight covered a total distance of 55 nautical miles, with the aircraft consuming 59 kilograms of fuel and taking a total of 24 minutes to complete.
The Kodiak 100's landing at KINL Falls International Airport was evaluated with a score of 94.6%, indicating a nearly flawless execution of the landing procedure. The aircraft approached runway 22 from the north east, following a heading of 215.0 ° at 2 nautical miles from the threshold and 555 feet above ground level. The pilots demonstrated a good understanding of the airport layout, taking advantage of the favorable approach path to minimize the risk of errors.
Once the aircraft reached the threshold, the pilot executed a touchdown at a speed of 75 kt, which was above the target speed. However, the touchdown speed of 64 kt was slightly faster than desired, potentially indicating that the pilot might have been working too aggressively to maintain control. Despite this minor deviation, the aircraft was able to execute a safe touchdown at a rate of -158 feet per minute, which is considered acceptable.
One notable aspect of this landing was the positioning of the aircraft on the runway. The pilot misaligned the runway touchdown position by approximately 3.3 meters from the centerline, which may not pose a significant risk but still indicates a need for improvement in terms of precision. Additionally, the total landing distance of 648 meters, accounting for 72% of the runway, was longer than might have been expected, given the aircraft's weight and performance.
In terms of environmental factors, the pilots were faced with a moderate wind of 8 kt, blowing from 159 °. The crosswind was around 7 kt, while the headwind was 4 kt, both of which were manageable within the aircraft's capabilities. The temperature was at a relatively cool 17 °C, which would have required the pilots to adjust the aircraft's airspeed accordingly.
The overall rollout of the aircraft was reported to be very good, with proper alignment along the runway. This is a testament to the pilots' skill and experience in executing smooth and controlled rollouts. Overall, the landing was a success, with a high score indicating that the pilots executed the approach and landing procedure in a safe and efficient manner.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values