Events
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 · 16 stages, 14 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.
At the 1,000 ft gate: off the centreline and speed above the reference speed.
At the 500 ft gate: off the centreline and speed above the reference speed.
The approach, gate by gate
Side view — the last 1,244 m of the approach.
Plan view — the full 1,244 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
The 38 m touchdown sits inside the full-score zone. The arrival was smooth.
The rest of the report
This flight was conducted on an Airbus A320 aircraft, departing from runway 23 at EHLE Lelystad Airport. The taxiing process from the parking area to the runway took approximately 5 minutes and covered a distance of less than 1 nautical mile. The aircraft then began its departure roll, taking off from runway 23 and achieving a liftoff speed of 133 knots.
The local weather conditions at the time of takeoff were characterized by a temperature of 13 degrees Celsius. The takeoff distance covered 46% of the runway, indicating a relatively smooth and efficient departure. Following takeoff, the aircraft initiated an enroute climb, starting approximately 1 mile southwest of the airport and rising from an altitude of 1,456 feet above sea level to 1,555 feet above sea level, an increase of 100 feet in less than 1 minute and covering a distance of less than 1 nautical mile.
The enroute level cruise phase began 2 miles southwest of the airport and lasted for 5 minutes, during which the aircraft covered a distance of 7 nautical miles. The final approach to runway 23 was conducted from the northeast, with the aircraft heading 208.0 degrees at an altitude of 1,481 feet above ground level and a distance of 4 nautical miles from the runway.
The landing on runway 23 was executed with a threshold speed slightly below the target at 125 knots. The touchdown distance was good at 38 meters, and the touchdown speed was also within acceptable limits at 123 knots. However, the touchdown rate was heavy at -661 feet per minute, indicating a slightly rough landing. The runway touchdown position was slightly misaligned from the centerline by 6.1 meters.
The total landing distance covered 53% of the runway, and the runway rollout alignment was also slightly misaligned from the centerline by 10.9 meters. The local weather conditions remained the same, with a temperature of 13 degrees Celsius. The total flight distance was 14 nautical miles, and the flight duration was 12 minutes, during which the aircraft consumed 98 kilograms of fuel.
The Airbus A320 successfully landed at EHLE Lelystad Airport, with a score of 89.7%. The aircraft approached the runway from the north east, heading 208.0° at a distance of 4 nautical miles and an altitude of 1,481 feet above ground level (agl). The final approach was executed with a good threshold height, which is a critical factor in ensuring a safe landing.
Upon touchdown, the aircraft's threshold speed was slightly below the target speed of 125 knots, which is a relatively minor deviation. However, the touchdown distance of 38 meters was considered good, indicating that the aircraft was able to slow down effectively after touchdown. The touchdown speed of 123 knots was also within acceptable limits, further indicating a smooth landing.
Despite the good touchdown speed and distance, the touchdown rate was heavy at -661 feet per minute (fpm). This suggests that the aircraft may have experienced a slight bounce or hard landing, which could have resulted in a higher impact on the landing gear and potentially caused some discomfort for the passengers.
The runway touchdown position was slightly misaligned by 6.1 meters from the centerline, which may have resulted in some uneven wear on the runway surface. However, this deviation was relatively minor and did not appear to have any significant impact on the landing.
The local weather conditions at the time of the landing were characterized by a temperature of 13°C, which is relatively mild and should not have had any significant impact on the aircraft's performance.
The total landing distance of 661 meters was 53% of the runway length, which is a relatively short distance considering the aircraft's size and weight. However, the runway rollout alignment was slightly misaligned by 10.9 meters from the centerline, which may have resulted in some uneven wear on the runway surface and potentially caused some difficulties for the pilots during the rollout phase.
Overall, the landing was considered successful, with a score of 89.7%. However, there were some minor deviations from the target parameters, including a heavy touchdown rate and some misalignment during the rollout phase.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values