Events
Events
Events
Events
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 · 25 stages, 23 scored
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.
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 1,850 m of the approach.
Plan view — the first 1,850 m of the 2,914 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
Touched down 782 m past the threshold — beyond the full-score zone. The arrival was smooth.
The rest of the report
Overall, the aircraft landing score of 88.0% indicates a solid performance, but there are definitely areas that can be improved upon to achieve even better results in the future.
Starting with the Approach Phase, the poor descent path above the glideslope limit suggests that there may have been some issues with maintaining the correct descent angle during the approach to the runway. This is an important aspect of the landing process as it directly impacts the smoothness of the landing. It would be beneficial to focus on improving descent path control in future landings to ensure a more precise approach.
Moving on to the Landing Phase, the fact that the threshold height was above target and the landing flare was very poor indicates that there may have been some misjudgment or lack of control in the lead up to touchdown. A proper landing flare is essential for a smooth and controlled touchdown, so practicing this maneuver can greatly improve the overall landing performance.
In the Touchdown Phase, while the touchdown rate was smooth, the touchdown point being 363 m beyond the touchdown zone and the runway touchdown position being 5.6 m from the centerline suggest that there was some misalignment and overshooting during the landing. It is important to focus on achieving a more precise touchdown point and aligning with the centerline to ensure a safe and efficient landing.
Finally, in the Rollout Phase, the runway alignment being 6.5 m from the centerline indicates that there was some drift during the rollout after landing. This can be corrected by practicing maintaining alignment with the centerline throughout the rollout phase.
Overall, while the landing score of 88.0% is a good result, focusing on improving descent path control, landing flare technique, touchdown point accuracy, and runway alignment can help to elevate the landing performance to even higher levels. Keep practicing, stay focused, and continue striving for improvement in each phase of the landing process. Your hard work and dedication will lead to even better results in the future. Well done!
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values