Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
MY FS FLIGHTS
Flight Score
Departure
Apply small rudder corrections against a point at the far end of the runway to hold the centreline during the roll.
What happened: The aircraft tracked 16 m off the runway centreline during the ground roll, and flights with this pattern usually carry extra bank, around 2°, into the first climb.
Watch for: Heading indicator: wings level, tracking the runway centreline
Ground control varies with speed, full authority at walking pace, progressively reducing as groundspeed rises. The aircraft becomes twitchy at any speed, every small pedal input swings the nose, which can encourage large-amplitude leg inputs that no real aircraft would accept.
Read more in How to Taxi AnywhereStart to finish · 30 stages, 28 scored
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.
Two stabilised approach gates, each with seven checks, where the approach path is 305 m and 152 m above the runway.
The approach, gate by gate
Side view — the last 1,799 m of the approach.
Plan view — the first 1,799 m of the 2,694 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
The 345 m touchdown sits inside the full-score zone. The arrival was smooth.
The rest of the report
The flight began with the aircraft taxiing from the parking area to the runway at Göteborg Landvetter Airport, taking approximately 4 minutes and covering less than 1 nautical mile. The departure roll took place on runway 21, with the aircraft taking off after covering 57% of the runway's length. The takeoff distance was 1,861 meters, and the liftoff speed was 171 knots.
As the aircraft climbed out of Göteborg Landvetter Airport, it began its enroute climb, reaching an altitude of 10,957 meters above sea level. This climb phase covered a distance of 146 nautical miles and took 23 minutes to complete. The aircraft then entered a level cruise phase, maintaining an altitude of 10,957 meters, and covering 128 nautical miles in 16 minutes.
The aircraft continued its journey, entering another enroute climb phase, this time from an altitude of 11,125 meters to 11,585 meters. This climb phase covered a distance of 28 nautical miles and took 3 minutes to complete. The aircraft then entered another level cruise phase, maintaining an altitude of 11,585 meters, and covering 144 nautical miles in 18 minutes.
As the aircraft approached its destination, it began its enroute descent phase, descending from 11,565 meters to 11,271 meters. This descent phase covered a distance of 14 nautical miles and took 2 minutes to complete. The aircraft then entered another level cruise phase, maintaining an altitude of 11,271 meters, and covering 29 nautical miles in 3 minutes.
The aircraft continued its descent, entering another phase from an altitude of 11,197 meters to 4,569 meters. This descent phase covered a distance of 90 nautical miles and took 12 minutes to complete. The aircraft then entered another level cruise phase, maintaining an altitude of 4,569 meters, and covering 8 nautical miles in 2 minutes.
As the aircraft approached its destination, it began its final descent phase, descending from 4,569 meters to 3,465 meters. This descent phase covered a distance of 19 nautical miles and took 3 minutes to complete. The aircraft then entered another level cruise phase, maintaining an altitude of 3,465 meters, and covering 8 nautical miles in 2 minutes.
The aircraft continued its descent, entering another phase from an altitude of 3,352 meters to 1,705 meters. This descent phase covered a distance of 25 nautical miles and took 5 minutes to complete. The aircraft then entered another level cruise phase, maintaining an altitude of 1,705 meters, and covering 7 nautical miles in 2 minutes.
As the aircraft approached its destination, it began its final descent phase, descending from 1,523 meters to 1,215 meters. This descent phase covered a distance of 6 nautical miles and took 2 minutes to complete. The aircraft then entered another level cruise phase, maintaining an altitude of 1,215 meters, and covering 5 nautical miles in 2 minutes.
The aircraft continued its descent, entering another phase from an altitude of 1,219 meters to 520 meters. This descent phase covered a distance of 8 nautical miles and took 3 minutes to complete. The aircraft then began its final approach to runway 08R at Charles de Gaulle International Airport, flying from the west at a heading of 85.0 degrees and an altitude of 407.3 meters above ground level.
The aircraft landed on runway 08R, with a touchdown distance of 346 meters and a touchdown speed of 136 knots. The touchdown rate was firm at -1.6 meters per second. However, the runway touchdown position was significantly misaligned by 16.0 meters from the centerline. The local weather conditions were characterized by a
The Airbus A320 aircraft successfully landed on runway 08R at LFPG Charles de Gaulle International Airport, achieving a score of 92.0%. The final approach was initiated from the west, heading 85.0° at an altitude of 407.3 meters above ground level (agl) and a distance of 4 nautical miles from the runway.
The aircraft touched down on the runway with a speed of 140 knots, which was within the acceptable threshold speed. The touchdown distance of 346 meters was also within the expected range, indicating a smooth and controlled descent. The touchdown speed of 136 knots was slightly lower than the threshold speed, but still within the acceptable limits. The touchdown rate of -1.6 meters per second was firm, suggesting a controlled and stable landing.
However, there were some deviations from the ideal landing performance. The runway touchdown position was significantly misaligned by 16.0 meters from the centerline, which may have been due to factors such as wind shear or pilot error. Additionally, the runway rollout alignment was also misaligned by 15.6 meters from the centerline, which could have been caused by the same factors.
The local weather conditions at the time of landing were characterized by a temperature of 2°C, which may have affected the aircraft's performance. However, the exact impact of the weather on the landing is not specified in the report.
Overall, the Airbus A320 aircraft demonstrated a good landing performance, with a score of 92.0%. However, the deviations from the ideal landing performance, particularly the misaligned touchdown and rollout positions, suggest that there may be areas for improvement in terms of pilot technique and aircraft handling.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values