Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
MY FS FLIGHTS
Flight Score
Work on the flare
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 · 10 stages, 9 scored
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.
The approach, gate by gate
Side view — the last 1,524 m of the approach.
Plan view — the first 1,524 m of the 3,518 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
The 185 m touchdown sits inside the full-score zone. The 1.78 G arrival is the firm side of smooth.
The rest of the report
The Airbus A320 Neo departed from Burbank (Brisbane, Queensland, Australia) at an elevation of 0 ft asl. The aircraft performed a take-off roll of 0 m, lifted off at 147 kt, and the recorded duration of the roll was 0 seconds. Ambient conditions were 8 °C with a wind of 2 kt from 270°, a cross-wind component of 1 kt and a head-wind component of 1 kt.
En-route, the descent began overhead Burbank, descending from 3,486 ft asl to 1,866 ft asl. The altitude loss of 1,620 ft was achieved in 2 minutes while covering 4 nm.
The final approach to runway 01R at YBBN Brisbane International was executed from the south-west, on a heading of 27.0° at 2 nm and 310 ft agl.
Landing was made on runway 01R, which is 3,518 m long. The threshold speed was recorded as 137 kt. Touchdown occurred 184 m down the runway at a speed of 132 kt, with a heavy touchdown rate of minus 626 fpm. The touchdown point was offset 4.3 m from the centreline. Local weather at the time was 17 °C with a wind of 2 kt from 270°, a cross-wind of 2 kt and a tail-wind component of 1 kt. The total landing distance measured 760 m, representing 22 % of the runway length.
During rollout the aircraft remained slightly misaligned, with the centreline deviation measured at 8.0 m.
In total the flight covered 10 nm, took 5 minutes, and consumed 76 kg of fuel.
The Airbus A320 Neo successfully landed on runway 01R at YBBN Brisbane International Airport, achieving an overall score of 80.8%. The aircraft approached the runway from the southwest, heading 27.0° at 2 nautical miles and 310 feet above ground level (agl). The pilot maintained a good threshold height, which is a critical aspect of a safe landing.
Upon touchdown, the aircraft's threshold speed was within the acceptable range at 137 knots. However, the touchdown speed of 132 knots was slightly faster than desired, which may have contributed to a heavier touchdown rate. The touchdown rate of -626 feet per minute (fpm) was considered heavy, indicating that the aircraft may have touched down with a higher than ideal rate of descent.
The aircraft landed on the runway with a touchdown distance of 184 meters, which was within the acceptable range. However, the runway touchdown position was slightly misaligned by 4.3 meters from the centerline, which may have required the pilot to make some adjustments during the rollout phase.
The local weather conditions at the time of the landing were relatively calm, with a temperature of 17°C and winds of 2 knots at 270°. The crosswind component was minimal at 2 knots, and the tailwind component was 1 knot. These conditions were favorable for a safe landing.
The total landing distance of 760 meters was 22% of the runway length, which is a relatively short distance. However, the runway rollout alignment was slightly misaligned by 8.0 meters from the centerline, which may have required some adjustments by the pilot to maintain directional control during the rollout phase.
Overall, the landing was considered safe, but there were some areas for improvement, particularly with regards to the touchdown speed and rate, as well as the runway touchdown position and rollout alignment.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values