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 1,524 m of the approach.
Plan view — the first 1,524 m of the 1,974 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
Touched down 855 m past the threshold — beyond the full-score zone. The arrival was smooth.
The rest of the report
The flight in the M500 began with taxiing from the parking to the runway at KMCF MacDill Air Force Base, which took 8 minutes to cover 2 nm. The average speed during the taxi was 10 kn.
After entering runway 05, the departure roll occurred, with a takeoff distance of 1,103 m, representing 32% of the runway. The liftoff speed was 116 kn. The local weather at the time of departure was 25 °C with a wind of 15 kn at 59 °, resulting in a crosswind of 5 kn and a headwind of 14 kn.
The departure climb from runway 05 at KMCF MacDill Air Force Base proceeded to reach an altitude of 400 ft agl, with a gradual increase in altitude.
The enroute climb began over KMCF MacDill Air Force Base Tampa, climbing from 309 ft asl to 1,886 ft asl, covering a distance of 8 nm in 3 minutes.
The subsequent enroute level cruise phase commenced 1 mile northwest of FL72 Mezrah Seaplane Base Tampa, lasting for 52 minutes and covering a distance of 125 nm.
The final approach to runway 09 at 06FA William P Gwinn Airport started from the west at 4 nm and 1,297 ft agl, with a steady descent towards the runway. The approach involved controlled descents from various altitudes and distances to align with the runway for landing.
The landing on runway 09 at 06FA William P Gwinn Airport was notable for exceeding the threshold speed and height, with a slightly misaligned runway touchdown position. However, the touchdown rate was excellent at -71 ft/m.
The total landing distance covered was 1,415 m, representing 72% of the runway with a perfect runway rollout alignment post-landing.
Upon exiting the runway, the average taxi speed was measured at 29 kn. The taxi back to the parking spot was swift, taking less than 1 minute to cover less than 1 nm.
Overall, the flight covered a distance of 140 nm, lasting 65 minutes and consuming 133 kg of fuel.
While the overall aircraft landing score of 73.0% may not be ideal, there are certainly areas for improvement identified in the detailed analysis provided.
Starting with the Approach Phase, the poor descent path above the glideslope limit and heading alignment issues are two key factors that contributed to this phase scoring lower. Ensuring that the aircraft is properly aligned and on the correct descent path will greatly improve the overall landing score. Additionally, addressing the high threshold speed of 121 knots can help make for a smoother touchdown.
Moving on to the Landing Phase, the significantly higher than target threshold height of 93 feet above ground level is a point of concern. This can be improved upon by working on the landing flare and maintaining better bank angle stability during landing. Making these adjustments will help in achieving a more controlled and accurate landing.
In the Touchdown Phase, while the touchdown rate of -71 feet per minute is excellent, the excessively fast touchdown speed of 96 knots and the touchdown point being beyond the touchdown zone are areas that need attention. Slowing down the touchdown speed and ensuring that the aircraft touches down within the designated zone will help improve the overall landing score. Additionally, addressing the slight misalignment from the centerline can contribute to a smoother landing.
Overall, while there are areas in the landing process that need improvement, it is important to focus on each phase individually and make the necessary adjustments. By working on the specific issues identified, pilots can aim for a higher landing score and ensure safer and more efficient landings in the future. With practice and attention to detail, improvements can be made to achieve a higher score on future landing attempts.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values