Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
MY FS FLIGHTS
Flight Score
Departure
Make small rudder corrections against a point at the far end to hold the centreline.
What happened: During the ground roll you drifted 5 m off the runway centreline.
Watch for: Watch runway alignment against the centreline, correcting with small rudder inputs.
See Departure Roll
Arrival
Keep the back pressure coming once the flare is established, holding the nose up through to touchdown instead of easing it.
What happened: The flare arrested the sink but 470 fpm of it came back before touchdown, and in flights like this one that returning sink usually carries through to a firm or hard touchdown at 515 fpm.
Watch for: Vertical speed indicator: the sink held near zero all the way through touchdown, not allowed to build back up.
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 · 24 stages, 22 scored
Events
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.
Two stabilised approach gates, each with seven checks, where the approach path is 1,000 ft and 500 ft above the runway.
The approach, gate by gate
Side view — the last 1,524 m of the approach.
Plan view — the first 1,524 m of the 3,494 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
Touched down 588 m past the threshold — beyond the full-score zone. The arrival was smooth.
The rest of the report
The flight began with taxiing from the parking to the runway at Budapest Liszt Ferenc International Airport, taking 7 minutes and covering a distance of 1 nautical mile. The aircraft, an Airbus A321, then departed from runway 31L, with a takeoff distance of 1,395 meters, which was 46% of the runway length. The liftoff speed was 155 knots, and the local weather conditions were characterized by a temperature of 2°C, with a wind speed of 6 knots at 260°.
As the aircraft climbed, it started its enroute climb 2 miles east of Kispest, Budapest, Hungary, rising from 1,544 feet above sea level to 14,884 feet above sea level, an increase of 13,340 feet in just 5 minutes, covering a distance of 19 nautical miles. The climb was followed by a brief enroute level cruise, lasting 5 minutes and covering 29 nautical miles, which started 1 mile south of Gyúró Airfield, Hungary.
The aircraft then began its enroute descent 1 mile northwest of Ete, Hungary, descending from 14,879 feet above sea level to 5,796 feet above sea level, a decrease of 9,084 feet in 9 minutes, covering a distance of 39 nautical miles. This was followed by another brief enroute level cruise, lasting 2 minutes and covering 5 nautical miles, which started 4 miles south of Janossomorja, Hungary.
The aircraft then climbed again, this time from 5,901 feet above sea level to 6,642 feet above sea level, an increase of 741 feet in 2 minutes, covering a distance of 5 nautical miles, which started 3 miles southeast of Wallern im Burgenland, Austria. The climb was followed by another brief enroute level cruise, lasting 3 minutes and covering 3 nautical miles, which started 4 miles northwest of Farad, Hungary.
The aircraft then began its final descent, which started 4 miles north of Kapuvar, Hungary, descending from 6,651 feet above sea level to 5,462 feet above sea level, a decrease of 1,189 feet in 3 minutes, covering a distance of 4 nautical miles. This was followed by another brief enroute level cruise, lasting 3 minutes and covering 11 nautical miles, which started 3 miles south of Andau, Austria.
The aircraft then began its final descent, which started 1 mile southwest of Gols, Austria, descending from 4,876 feet above sea level to 1,921 feet above sea level, a decrease of 2,956 feet in 6 minutes, covering a distance of 15 nautical miles. The aircraft then began its final approach to runway 29 at Vienna International Airport, flying from the southeast, heading 297.0° at 4 nautical miles and 1,323 feet above ground level.
The aircraft landed on runway 29, with a runway length of 3,494 meters, and a threshold speed that was well above the target at 152 knots. The touchdown point was 164 meters beyond the touchdown zone, and the touchdown speed was 139 knots, which was a little fast. The touchdown rate was hard at -430 feet per minute, and the runway touchdown position was slightly misaligned by 4.2 meters from the centerline.
The total landing distance was 1,419 meters, which was 41% of the runway length. The runway rollout alignment was misaligned by 15.9 meters from the centerline. The aircraft then taxied to the parking from the runway, taking 5 minutes and covering less than 1 nautical mile. The total flight distance was 139 nautical miles, taking 54 minutes, and the aircraft used
The Airbus A321 aircraft successfully landed at Vienna International Airport (LOWW) on runway 29, but with some notable deviations from the ideal landing parameters. The aircraft approached the runway from the southeast, heading 297.0° at a distance of 4 nautical miles and an altitude of 1,323 feet above ground level (agl). The landing was executed with a good threshold height, but the threshold speed was significantly above the target speed of 152 kt, indicating a potential for a hard touchdown.
Upon touchdown, the aircraft landed 164 meters beyond the designated touchdown zone, which is a relatively minor deviation. However, the touchdown speed of 139 kt was slightly faster than the ideal speed, and the touchdown rate was hard at -430 feet per minute (fpm). This could have resulted in a bumpy ride for the passengers and potentially caused some discomfort.
The runway touchdown position was also slightly misaligned by 4.2 meters from the centerline, which may have contributed to the hard touchdown rate. The local weather conditions at the time of landing were characterized by a temperature of 2°C and a wind speed of 24 kt from 289°. The crosswind component was minimal at 3 kt, while the headwind component was 24 kt, which may have affected the aircraft's approach and landing.
The total landing distance of 1,419 meters was 41% of the runway length, which is within the acceptable range. However, the runway rollout alignment was misaligned by 15.9 meters from the centerline, indicating a potential for a longer rollout distance and increased stopping distance.
Overall, while the landing was successful, there were some notable deviations from the ideal parameters, which may have resulted in a less-than-ideal ride for the passengers. The pilots and air traffic controllers will need to review the flight data to identify the causes of these deviations and take corrective action to improve future landings.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values