Events
Events
Events
Events
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 · 22 stages, 21 scored
Events
Events
Events
Events
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 1,561 m of the approach.
Plan view — the first 1,561 m of the 3,406 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
Touched down 595 m past the threshold — beyond the full-score zone. The arrival was smooth.
The rest of the report
Overall, the aircraft landing score of 85.4% suggests a solid performance with room for improvement. Let's break down the different phases of the landing to see where adjustments can be made to enhance future landings.
During the Approach Phase, it is commendable that the glideslope alignment was good. This indicates that the pilot was able to maintain the correct descent angle, leading to a stabilized approach. Continued focus on maintaining this aspect will contribute to consistent and smooth landings in the future.
Moving on to the Landing Phase, there were a couple of areas that could be improved upon. Firstly, the threshold height being above target suggests the need to ensure a more precise altitude control during the final approach to achieve a smoother touchdown. Additionally, the very poor landing flare indicates that there may have been insufficient flare before touchdown, resulting in a firmer landing. By practicing and refining the flare technique, future landings can be executed with more finesse.
In the Touchdown Phase, it is encouraging to note that the touchdown rate was fair and the speed was on target. However, the touchdown point being 179 m beyond the designated zone and the runway touchdown position being 8.4 m from the centreline indicate a need for better alignment and positioning. Working on improving accuracy in these areas will contribute to safer and more precise landings.
Lastly, in the Rollout Phase, the runway alignment being 15.1 m from the centreline suggests the need for better control during the rollout after touchdown. Maintaining proper alignment throughout the rollout will help ensure a smooth and controlled exit from the runway.
Overall, this analysis provides valuable feedback on the various phases of the landing process. By focusing on improving altitude control, flare technique, alignment, and positioning, future landings can be executed with greater precision and finesse. Keep up the good work and continue to strive for excellence in all aspects of aircraft handling. Your dedication to continuous improvement will undoubtedly lead to even better landing scores in the future. Keep practicing and never stop aiming for perfection. Well done!
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values