Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
MY FS FLIGHTS
Flight Score
Settle the descent rate
Preparing for a stable approach will give you time to decide on whether to attempt the landing or going around. Too much altitude with a high sink rate will result in carrying too much speed onto the runway. Configuring flaps and the gear late also won't help the speed decay.
Read more in The Stabilised ApproachStart to finish · 15 stages, 13 scored
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: seven checks where the approach path is 300 ft above the runway. The 1,000 ft gate was not assessed, because the approach did not join final that far out. These checks are the approach's score.
At the 300 ft gate: sink rate 2,796 fpm, more than the glideslope needed, glideslope 9.3° against the runway's 3° and speed 44 kt FAST on the reference speed of 81 kt.
The approach, gate by gate
Side view — the last 519 m of the approach.
Plan view — the full 519 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
The 241 m touchdown sits inside the full-score zone. The arrival was smooth.
The rest of the report
Taxiing from the parking area to the runway at Sutton on Rogue Airport took approximately one minute, covering less than one nautical mile. The departure roll commenced on runway 26, with the aircraft lifting off at a speed of 64 knots. Local weather conditions at the time of departure included a temperature of 11 degrees Celsius, with a wind of 2 knots at 240 degrees, resulting in a headwind component of 2 knots.
The enroute climb phase began overhead Sutton on Rogue Airport, with the aircraft ascending from 1,353 feet above sea level to 1,980 feet, an increase of 627 feet in one minute, covering a distance of two nautical miles. The climb was followed by a brief level cruise phase, lasting two minutes and covering two nautical miles. A second climb phase commenced one mile southwest of the airport, with the aircraft ascending from 1,644 feet to 6,669 feet, an increase of 5,025 feet in six minutes, covering a distance of 13 nautical miles. The aircraft then entered a level cruise phase, lasting two minutes and covering three nautical miles. The enroute descent phase began overhead Ruch, with the aircraft descending from 7,130 feet to 1,874 feet, a decrease of 5,256 feet in two minutes, covering a distance of five nautical miles.
The final approach to runway 17 at OG13 Fly By Night Airport was initiated from the north, with the aircraft heading 191.0 degrees at zero nautical miles and 235 feet above ground level. The landing was completed on the runway, with a total landing distance of 563 meters, exceeding 108 percent of the available runway length. The touchdown speed was 79 knots, slightly above the recommended threshold speed, and the touchdown rate was -594 feet per minute, indicating a hard touchdown. The runway touchdown position was slightly misaligned from the centreline, and the runway rollout alignment was also slightly off-centre. The total flight distance was 26 nautical miles, taking approximately 14 minutes, and the aircraft consumed 5 kilograms of fuel.
The final approach to runway 17 at OG13 Fly By Night Airport from the north was initiated at 0 nm and 235 ft above ground level, heading 191.0°. The approach quality was satisfactory, with a good threshold height achieved. However, the threshold speed was too high at 94 kt, indicating a slight deviation from the recommended landing speed.
As the aircraft touched down, it used more than 50% of the available runway, resulting in a touchdown point that was further down the runway than desired. The touchdown speed of 79 kt was a little fast, and the touchdown rate of -594 fpm was very hard, indicating a potential for a bumpy ride for passengers. The runway touchdown position was slightly misaligned by 3.6 m from the centreline, which could have contributed to the long touchdown point.
The total landing distance of 563 m was 108% of the runway length, indicating that the aircraft could have stopped safely within the available runway. However, the runway rollout alignment was slightly misaligned by 9.5 m from the centreline, which could have been a result of the initial touchdown position. Overall, the landing performance scored 79.1%, indicating room for improvement in terms of speed management and alignment.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values