Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
MY FS FLIGHTS
Flight Score
Shorten the long landing
Ground effect becomes significant below about one wingspan of height. A Cessna 172, with a 36 ft span, enters ground effect at flare height - the float it feels in the hold-off is ground effect arriving on cue. An A320, with a span around 117 ft, has been in ground effect since before the threshold and there is no sudden cushion to feel, only a gradual reduction in induced drag that lengthens any float you allow.
Read more in Flare TimingStart to finish · 28 stages, 26 scored
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Two stabilised approach gates, each with five checks, where the approach path is 1,000 ft and 500 ft above the runway.
The approach, gate by gate
Side view — the last 1,524 m of the approach.
Plan view — the first 1,524 m of the 3,197 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
Touched down 375 m short of the threshold. The 2.42 G arrival is the firm side of smooth.
The rest of the report
A flight originating from Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport (KPHX) departed runway 25R, utilizing 1,327 meters or 42% of the available runway length to achieve liftoff at a speed of 158 knots. The aircraft encountered a headwind of 22 knots, which contributed to a relatively smooth takeoff. As the aircraft climbed to 6,298 feet above sea level, it began its enroute level cruise, maintaining a steady altitude for 615 minutes while covering less than 1 nautical mile.
The flight's enroute climb phase resumed east of Laveen, Arizona, where the aircraft ascended to 37,000 feet above sea level, an increase of 30,703 feet in 18 minutes. This was followed by a prolonged level cruise phase, lasting 261 minutes, during which the aircraft covered 1,247 nautical miles. The flight then entered a series of descent and climb phases, navigating through Mexican and Guatemalan airspace. Notably, the aircraft descended from 37,018 feet to 1,071 feet above sea level in 26 minutes, covering 157 nautical miles.
The final approach to Monseñor Óscar Arnulfo Romero International Airport (MSLP) was initiated from the southwest, with the aircraft touching down before the threshold at a speed of 125 knots. However, the touchdown rate was heavy at -1,344 feet per minute, and the runway touchdown position was significantly misaligned from the centerline. The total landing distance was 233 meters, or 7% of the available runway length. Following a successful landing, the aircraft taxied to the designated parking area, having completed a total flight distance of 1,824 nautical miles while consuming 18,635 kilograms of fuel.
The final approach to runway 07 at MSLP Monseñor Óscar Arnulfo Romero International Airport was initiated from the south west, heading 70.0° at 4 nm and 975 ft above ground level. The approach quality was satisfactory, with a steady descent rate of approximately 1,344 fpm, which was slightly higher than the recommended rate. However, the touchdown speed of 125 kt was within the acceptable range, indicating good control and management of the aircraft's energy.
The aircraft touched down before the threshold, which may have been a result of the pilot's decision to use the available runway length to their advantage. However, the runway touchdown position was significantly misaligned by 17.9 meters from the centreline, which may have been due to a slight deviation in the approach path or a miscalculation of the touchdown point. The local weather conditions, with a temperature of 30°C and a headwind of 5 kt, were relatively benign, with only a slight crosswind component of 1 kt.
The rollout phase was marked by a slight misalignment from the centreline, with the aircraft deviating by 16.6 meters. The total landing distance of 233 meters was within the acceptable range, accounting for only 7% of the runway length. Overall, the landing performance was satisfactory, with a score of 83.0%. However, the significant misalignment of the touchdown and rollout phases may require further attention and improvement to achieve optimal landing performance.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values