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 · 21 stages, 19 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 1,524 m of the approach.
Plan view — the first 1,524 m of the 3,042 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
Touched down 774 m past the threshold — beyond the full-score zone. The arrival was smooth.
The rest of the report
Overall, a landing score of 79.0% is below average, but there are some positives to take from the analysis.
In the Approach Phase, it is noted that there was a poor descent path above the glideslope limit. This could be improved by maintaining better altitude control and following the correct descent profile. It is important to focus on staying on the correct path to ensure a smooth and safe approach.
Moving on to the Landing Phase, there are a couple of areas that need attention. The threshold height was excessively over the target, which could indicate a late or steep approach. Additionally, the landing flare was described as very poor. This highlights the importance of maintaining proper flare technique to ensure a smooth touchdown.
However, in the Touchdown Phase, there were some positive aspects to note. The touchdown rate was smooth and the speed was on target, which shows good control during this critical phase of the landing. The touchdown point being 300m beyond the touchdown zone and 6.7m off centerline could be improved by focusing on aiming for the correct touchdown zone and maintaining alignment with the runway centerline.
It is also important to highlight that there was a warning for landing with a 10 knot tailwind. It is crucial to always follow proper landing procedures and guidelines, including landing into the wind whenever possible to ensure a safe landing.
Lastly, in the Rollout Phase, there was room for improvement in runway alignment, as the aircraft was 9.6m off centerline. This could be improved by maintaining better directional control during the rollout phase.
Overall, while there are areas that need improvement, there are also positive aspects to build upon. By focusing on proper descent, flare technique, touchdown precision, wind considerations, and runway alignment, future landings can be improved to achieve higher scores. Keep practicing and striving for continuous improvement in all phases of the landing process. You've got this!
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values