Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
MY FS FLIGHTS
Flight Score
Improve the rollout
Ground control varies with speed, full authority at walking pace, progressively reducing as groundspeed rises. The aircraft becomes twitchy at any speed, every small pedal input swings the nose, which can encourage large-amplitude leg inputs that no real aircraft would accept.
Read more in How to Taxi AnywhereStart to finish · 17 stages, 15 scored
Events
Events
Events
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.
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 5,000 ft of the approach.
Plan view — the first 5,000 ft of the 8,421 ft runway, to the same scale as the side view.
The 751 ft touchdown sits inside the full-score zone. The arrival was smooth.
The rest of the report
The flight in the Cessna CJ4 Citation began with a smooth taxi from the parking area to the runway at CYPR Prince Rupert, which took 10 minutes to cover a distance of 1 nm. The departure roll from runway 13 was successful, with a takeoff distance of 1,944 ft, representing 32% of the total runway length. The liftoff speed was 135 knots.
During the enroute climb, which started 1 mile southeast of CYPR Prince Rupert, the aircraft climbed from 1,026 ft above sea level to 15,472 ft above sea level. This represented an increase of 14,446 ft in just 3 minutes, covering a distance of 9 nm.
After reaching the cruising altitude, the flight continued for 41 minutes in level cruise, covering a distance of 242 nm. The descent began 12 miles north of Angoon, with the aircraft descending from 15,273 ft to 3,264 ft over the course of 7 minutes, covering 33 nm.
Another brief level cruise segment followed, lasting 4 minutes and covering 13 nm. The landing was smooth on runway 08 at PAJN Juneau Intl, with a touchdown point just 753 ft from the threshold. The touchdown speed was 94 knots, with a descent rate of -404 ft/min. The total landing distance was 1,629 ft, which represented 19% of the runway length.
The flight then concluded with a short taxi from the runway to the parking area, which took 2 minutes to cover less than 1 nm. Overall, the flight covered a distance of 305 nm, taking 90 minutes and using 49 lbs of fuel. The local weather conditions at both departure and arrival airports were favorable, with temperatures ranging from 46 to 55 °F, and winds providing minimal crosswind and headwind components.
First of all, it's important to acknowledge that a 64.9% aircraft landing score is below the desired standard, but it presents a valuable opportunity for improvement and learning. Let's break down the different phases of the landing process to identify areas for enhancement.
In the Approach Phase, it is noted that there was a poor descent path above the glideslope limit. This indicates a need for better altitude management during the descent, possibly by adjusting the throttle or pitch to achieve a smoother and more controlled approach. Additionally, the poor heading alignment suggests that there may have been issues with maintaining a consistent course towards the runway. Paying closer attention to navigational instruments and making timely corrections can help improve heading alignment in future landings. Lastly, while the speed was slightly below target, it is essential to ensure that the aircraft maintains an appropriate speed for a safe and efficient landing.
Moving on to the Landing Phase, the observation that the threshold height was above the target indicates a need for better judgment and control during the final moments before touchdown. Ensuring a smoother transition from descent to landing can help achieve the desired threshold height. The fair landing flare suggests that the landing flare, the gradual pitch up before touchdown, was somewhat satisfactory but could be improved for a smoother touchdown. Additionally, poor landing heading and poor bank angle stability during landing highlight the importance of maintaining proper alignment and stability throughout the landing process.
In the Touchdown Phase, the observation of a very hard touchdown rate suggests that improvements can be made in achieving a smoother touch to the runway. Paying attention to the control inputs and adjusting the approach angle can help reduce the impact of the touchdown. While it is positive that the speed was on target and the touchdown distance was within the touchdown zone, there is room for improvement in achieving a more controlled touchdown.
Lastly, in the Rollout Phase, the runway alignment being 101 ft from the centerline indicates a need for better alignment control during the rollout. Making small corrections to ensure proper alignment with the centerline can help enhance the overall landing performance.
In conclusion, by addressing the areas identified in each phase of the landing process, such as descent path, heading alignment, landing flare, stability, touchdown rate, alignment, and speed control, you can work towards achieving a higher aircraft landing score. Remember that each landing is an opportunity to refine your skills and improve your performance. Stay focused, practice consistently, and seek feedback to continue growing as a pilot. Your dedication and commitment to improvement will undoubtedly lead to better landings in the future.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values