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 · 28 stages, 27 scored
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 1,524 m of the approach.
Plan view — the full 1,524 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
The 259 m touchdown sits inside the full-score zone. The arrival was smooth.
The rest of the report
Overall, this aircraft landing displayed a mix of both good and poor performance in different phases of the landing process.
During the Approach Phase, the aircraft had a poor descent path below glideslope limit, indicating that the descent was steeper than desired. However, the heading alignment was good and the speed was on target, which are important factors for a successful landing.
In the Landing Phase, the threshold height was slightly too low, which could have led to a harder touchdown. The landing flare was very poor, suggesting that the pilot did not properly adjust the pitch of the aircraft to smoothly transition to the landing.
During the Touchdown Phase, the touchdown rate was perfect, indicating a smooth and controlled landing. The speed was slightly above target, which could have contributed to the harder touchdown experienced in the Landing Phase. However, the touchdown distance inside the touchdown zone was on point, indicating that the aircraft landed where it was supposed to on the runway.
In the Rollout Phase, the runway alignment was a bit off, with the aircraft being 31.6 m from the centreline. This could have been due to factors such as wind or pilot error during the landing.
Overall, this aircraft landing had some areas of improvement, particularly in the descent path, landing flare, and runway alignment. However, there were also some positive aspects, such as the good heading alignment and speed control during the Approach Phase, and the perfect touchdown rate during the Touchdown Phase. By addressing the areas of weakness, the pilot can work towards improving their overall landing performance in the future.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values