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 · 20 stages, 18 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.
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 1,934 m of the approach.
Plan view — the first 1,934 m of the 2,944 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
Touched down 1,011 m past the threshold — beyond the full-score zone. The arrival was smooth.
The rest of the report
The flight on the Boeing 737-MAX8 began with a smooth taxi from the parking area to the runway at ENCN Kristiansand Airport, Kjevik, covering a distance of 2 nm in 8 minutes. The departure roll on runway 21 involved a takeoff distance of 1,505 m, with a liftoff speed of 171 kn under local weather conditions of 18 °C temperature, 1 kn wind at 270 °, resulting in a 1 kn crosswind and headwind.
The departure climb from runway 21 saw the aircraft reach 50 ft, 400 ft, and 1,000 ft above ground level before initiating the enroute climb. The climb started 1 mile southeast of Justvik, ascending from 1,015 ft to 23,996 ft in 10 minutes, covering a distance of 44 nm.
Enroute, the aircraft maintained level cruise for 2 minutes over Myra, covering 16 nm, before starting the descent 7 miles north of Kil. The descent from 24,008 ft to 11,109 ft took 9 minutes, covering 53 nm. A brief 4-minute level cruise over Hyggen followed before another descent commenced 4 miles southwest of Sundvollen, dropping from 10,672 ft to 1,948 ft in 8 minutes, covering 26 nm.
The final approach to runway 01R at ENGM Oslo Airport, Gardermoen involved descent from 1,265 ft to touchdown at 90 ft above ground level. The landing on the 2,944 m runway saw the aircraft overshoot the touchdown point by 597 m, landing at 131 kn with a touchdown rate of -201 ft/m. The landing distance covered 1,856 m, with the runway rollout slightly misaligned by 14.2 m from the centerline.
After touchdown, the aircraft exited the runway with an average speed of 21 kn and a short taxi to the parking area. The total flight distance covered was 166 nm over 45 minutes, using 1,841 kg of fuel. Overall, the flight in the Boeing 737-MAX8 was efficient and successful, demonstrating the aircraft's capabilities in various flight phases.
Firstly, it's important to acknowledge the positive aspects of the landing score, with a threshold speed of 141 knots and a touchdown speed of 131 knots being within acceptable limits. It demonstrates good control and management of the aircraft during the approach and touchdown phases.
However, there are some areas that need improvement. The approach phase displayed a poor descent path above the glideslope limit, indicating a need for better altitude management and adherence to standard procedures. Additionally, the threshold height of 76 feet above ground level was significantly higher than the target, suggesting a lack of precision and possibly instability in the final approach.
The landing phase was also subpar, with a very poor landing flare identified. A smooth and controlled flare is essential for a successful touchdown, indicating a need for better timing and technique during this critical phase of flight. Furthermore, the touchdown point being 597 meters beyond the touchdown zone is a significant deviation that could pose safety risks and requires further attention to landing accuracy.
Despite these shortcomings, the runway touchdown alignment being very good is a positive sign of expertise in maintaining the correct path during the final stages of landing. This suggests that with some adjustments to altitude management, flare technique, and touchdown point accuracy, overall landing performance could greatly improve.
Overall, while the landing score of 82.0% indicates room for enhancement, it also highlights areas of strength such as appropriate touchdown and threshold speeds. By focusing on improving descent path, flare technique, and touchdown accuracy, pilots can strive for more consistent and successful landings in the future.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values