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 · 18 stages, 16 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.
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 1,547 m of the approach.
Plan view — the first 1,547 m of the 2,193 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
Touched down 951 m past the threshold — beyond the full-score zone. The arrival was smooth.
The rest of the report
The flight on the Airbus A320 began with a smooth taxi from the parking area to the runway at Bergen Airport, Flesland. The taxi took approximately 5 minutes and covered less than 1 nm. The departure roll on runway 35 was successful, with a takeoff distance of 1,229m, using 50% of the runway. The liftoff speed was 162 knots. The local weather at the time of departure was 4°C with a 6 knot wind coming from 130°, resulting in a crosswind of 4 knots and a tailwind of 4 knots.
The enroute climb began 1 mile north of Flesland and reached an altitude of 17,730 ft above sea level, covering 38 nm in 8 minutes. The enroute descent started 3 miles northwest of Langevag, descending from 16,651 ft to 3,096 ft in 7 minutes, covering 35 nm. The level cruise phase started 5 miles southeast of Skudeneshavn and lasted 4 minutes, covering 11 nm.
The final approach to runway 10 at Stavanger Airport, Sola, was from the west at a heading of 106.0°, at 4 nm and 1,329 ft above ground level. The landing on runway 10 went well, with a touchdown point 528m beyond the designated zone. The touchdown speed was slightly fast at 135 knots, with a hard touchdown rate of -409 ft/m. The runway touchdown position was misaligned by 16.7m from the centerline. The total landing distance was 1,458m, using 67% of the runway. The runway rollout alignment was misaligned by 24.7m from the centerline.
Taxiing back to the parking area from the runway took 1 minute and covered less than 1 nm. The total flight distance was 92 nm, lasting 26 minutes and consuming 131 kg of fuel. Despite some minor discrepancies during landing, the flight overall was successful and completed safely.
Firstly, let's address the positive aspects of the aircraft landing. The threshold speed of 134 knots during the Approach Phase is commendable as it indicates that the aircraft was approaching at an appropriate speed for landing. Additionally, maintaining a good threshold height during the Landing Phase shows that the pilot was able to closely monitor the descent and make adjustments as needed.
However, there are several areas where improvement is needed. The poor descent path above the glideslope limit during the Approach Phase suggests that there may have been issues with maintaining the correct trajectory during the descent. This could be addressed through closer attention to altitude control and communication between the pilot and air traffic control.
During the Landing Phase, the very poor landing flare and poor bank angle stability are concerning as these factors are critical for a smooth and safe touchdown. It is important for the pilot to work on timing and coordination in order to execute a proper landing flare and maintain the correct bank angle.
The Touchdown Phase reveals multiple areas of concern. The hard touchdown rate of -409 ft/m indicates that the landing was rough and could potentially lead to damage to the aircraft. The slightly fast touchdown speed of 135 knots may have contributed to this hard landing and should be monitored more closely in future landings. Furthermore, the touchdown point being 528m beyond the touchdown zone and the significant misalignment of 16.7m from the centerline of the runway are signs of poor precision and could pose safety risks.
In conclusion, while there were some positive aspects to the aircraft landing, such as the appropriate threshold speed and height, there are clear areas for improvement in descent path control, landing flare execution, bank angle stability, touchdown rate and speed, as well as precision in touchdown point and alignment with the runway. By focusing on these areas and practicing proper techniques, the pilot can strive for a smoother and safer landing in the future.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values