Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
MY FS FLIGHTS
Flight Score
Departure
Use smoother, smaller aileron inputs to keep the wings level and hold bank angle near wings-level during the climb.
What happened: During the climb, bank angle rose to 2.4°, more roll than the climb out called for.
Watch for: Attitude indicator: wings level during the climb
Arrival
Fly the flare as one continuous check of the sink rate from 35 ft, holding back pressure steadily rather than adjusting pitch piecemeal.
What happened: The flare drifted away from its intended profile rather than tracking it smoothly from 35 ft down to touchdown.
Watch for: Watch radio altitude and VSI through the flare, aiming to arrest the sink smoothly from 35 ft to touchdown.
See Arrival Landing
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 · 19 stages, 17 scored
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 2,610 m of the approach.
Plan view — the first 2,610 m of the 3,894 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
Touched down 737 m past the threshold — beyond the full-score zone. The arrival was smooth.
The rest of the report
The flight began with a taxiing period from the parking to the runway, which took 11 minutes and covered a distance of 3 nautical miles. The aircraft, a Boeing 737-MAX8, then departed from runway 03 at Eindhoven Airport (EHEH). The takeoff distance was 1,710 meters, which accounted for 68% of the runway. The liftoff speed was 164 knots.
The local weather conditions at the time of departure were characterized by a temperature of 14°C and winds of 4 knots at 147°. The crosswind component was 4 knots, while the tailwind component was 2 knots. The aircraft then began its enroute climb, starting 1 mile south of Batadorp in the province of Noord-Brabant, the Netherlands. The climb took 22 minutes and covered a distance of 122 nautical miles, during which the aircraft ascended from 1,064 feet above sea level to 37,605 feet above sea level, an increase of 36,542 feet.
Following the enroute climb, the aircraft entered a level cruise phase, starting overhead the town of Kell in the German state of Rheinland-Pfalz. This phase lasted for 47 minutes and covered a distance of 388 nautical miles. The aircraft then began its enroute descent, starting overhead the town of Tredozio in the Italian region of Emilia-Romagna. The descent took 20 minutes and covered a distance of 123 nautical miles, during which the aircraft descended from 37,677 feet above sea level to 2,641 feet above sea level, a decrease of 35,037 feet.
The aircraft then entered another level cruise phase, starting 3 miles south of the town of Bracciano in the Italian region of Lazio. This phase lasted for only 3 minutes and covered a distance of 9 nautical miles. The aircraft then began its final approach to runway 16L at Rome–Fiumicino Leonardo da Vinci International Airport (LIRF), approaching from the north at a heading of 163.0° and at an altitude of 1,091 feet above ground level.
The landing on runway 16L was successful, with the threshold height being well above the target. The threshold speed was also good at 149 knots. However, the touchdown point was 301 meters beyond the touchdown zone, and the touchdown speed was a little fast at 142 knots. The touchdown rate was fair at -239 feet per minute. The runway touchdown position was slightly misaligned by 5.7 meters from the centerline. The local weather conditions at the time of landing were characterized by a temperature of 25°C and winds of 5 knots at 100°. The crosswind component was 5 knots, while the headwind component was 2 knots.
The total landing distance was 2,508 meters, which accounted for 64% of the runway. The runway rollout alignment was misaligned by 16.5 meters from the centerline. The taxiing period from the runway to the parking took 5 minutes and covered a distance of 1 nautical mile. The total flight distance was 654 nautical miles, and the flight duration was 109 minutes. The aircraft used 3,767 kilograms of fuel during the flight.
The Boeing 737-MAX8 aircraft successfully landed at LIRF Rome–Fiumicino Leonardo da Vinci International Airport on runway 16L. The final approach was initiated from the north, heading 163.0° at a distance of 3 nautical miles and an altitude of 1,091 feet above ground level (agl). The aircraft maintained a good speed of 149 kt during the approach, meeting the target threshold speed.
However, the touchdown point was slightly beyond the designated touchdown zone, located 301 meters down the runway. The touchdown speed of 142 kt was a bit faster than the desired speed, indicating that the pilot may have needed to apply more braking force upon touchdown. The touchdown rate of -239 feet per minute (fpm) was considered fair, suggesting that the aircraft's descent was somewhat controlled but not perfectly smooth.
Upon landing, the aircraft's runway touchdown position was slightly misaligned from the centerline by 5.7 meters. This misalignment could be attributed to factors such as wind or pilot error. The local weather conditions at the time of landing were favorable, with a temperature of 25°C and a gentle wind of 5 kt at 100°, resulting in a minimal crosswind component of 5 kt and a headwind of 2 kt.
The total landing distance of 2,508 meters was 64% of the runway length, indicating that the aircraft had sufficient stopping distance to safely come to a halt. However, the runway rollout alignment was also misaligned from the centerline by 16.5 meters, suggesting that the pilot may have struggled to maintain a straight course during the rollout phase.
Overall, while the landing was successful, there were some areas for improvement, including a slightly fast touchdown speed and misaligned touchdown and rollout positions. These issues could be addressed through further training and practice for the pilots to refine their skills and ensure safer landings in the future.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values