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 · 16 stages, 14 scored
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 1,103 m of the approach.
Plan view — the full 1,103 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
Touched down 718 m past the threshold — beyond the full-score zone. The arrival was smooth.
The rest of the report
The flight began with a departure roll from runway 18 at HSEU Al Hawatah Airport, where the Beechcraft King Air 350 took off after covering 74% of the 669-meter runway. The aircraft lifted off at a speed of 108 knots, and the local weather conditions at the time were characterized by a temperature of 32 degrees Celsius and a wind speed of 10 knots from a direction of 343 degrees.
As the aircraft climbed away from the airport, it began to ascend from an initial altitude of 2,446 feet above sea level to a cruising altitude of 10,637 feet. This climb phase covered a distance of 10 nautical miles and took approximately 4 minutes to complete, resulting in an increase of 8,191 feet in altitude. The enroute level cruise phase that followed lasted for 110 minutes and covered a distance of 345 nautical miles.
As the aircraft approached its destination, it began its descent from a cruising altitude of 11,523 feet to a final approach altitude of 5,471 feet. This descent phase took approximately 8 minutes to complete and covered a distance of 28 nautical miles. The final approach to runway 31 at HATP Tippi Airport was made from the south east, with the aircraft heading 311.0 degrees at an altitude of 1,349 feet above ground level and 2 nautical miles from the runway threshold.
The landing on runway 31 was characterized by a touchdown point that was very long, using more than 50% of the available runway. The touchdown speed of 97 knots was slightly fast, but the touchdown rate was smooth at -143 feet per minute. However, the runway touchdown position was misaligned by 8.0 meters from the centerline, and the runway rollout alignment was also misaligned by 21.8 meters from the centerline.
The local weather conditions at the time of landing were characterized by a temperature of 21 degrees Celsius and a wind speed of 3 knots from a direction of 31 degrees. The total landing distance was 924 meters, which was 84% of the runway length. The total flight distance was 386 nautical miles, and the flight duration was 104 minutes. The aircraft used a total of 731 kilograms of fuel during the flight.
The Beechcraft King Air 350 aircraft successfully landed at HATP Tippi Airport, but the landing was not without its challenges. The final approach to runway 31 from the south east, heading 311.0° at 2 nm and 1,349 ft above ground level (agl), was executed, but the aircraft touched down at a point that used more than 50% of the available runway. This indicates that the pilot may have been a bit too aggressive with the landing, resulting in a longer than necessary rollout.
The touchdown speed of 97 kn was slightly above the recommended speed, which could have contributed to the longer rollout. However, the touchdown rate was smooth at -143 fpm, indicating that the pilot maintained control of the aircraft during the landing. The runway touchdown position was also misaligned by 8.0 m from the centreline, which could have been due to a slight deviation in the pilot's approach path.
The local weather conditions were relatively calm, with a temperature of 21 °C and a wind speed of 3 kn at 31°. This meant that the pilot did not have to contend with strong crosswinds or headwinds, which could have made the landing more challenging. However, the pilot still managed to achieve a total landing distance of 924 m, which is 84% of the available runway length.
The runway rollout alignment was also misaligned by 21.8 m from the centreline, which suggests that the pilot may have had difficulty maintaining control of the aircraft during the rollout. This could have been due to a combination of factors, including the slightly high touchdown speed and the misaligned touchdown point.
Overall, while the landing was not perfect, the pilot was able to bring the aircraft safely to the ground. However, there are areas for improvement, particularly in terms of maintaining a more precise approach path and controlling the touchdown speed. With some practice and refinement, the pilot should be able to achieve a more precise and controlled landing.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values