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 · 15 stages, 15 scored
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 for a circuit: five checks where the approach path is 500 ft above the runway. The 1,000 ft gate is an instrument-approach check and does not apply.
The approach, gate by gate
Side view — the last 1,177 m of the approach.
Plan view — the full 1,177 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
Touched down 933 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 28 at N94 Carlisle, where the aircraft, a Cessna 152, took off with a takeoff distance of 71 meters, which accounted for 6% of the runway. The liftoff speed was 44 knots. At the time of takeoff, the local weather conditions were characterized by a temperature of 16 degrees Celsius and a wind speed of 1 knot from a direction of 270 degrees, resulting in a negligible crosswind and a slight headwind.
As the aircraft entered the left-hand pattern from runway 28, it covered a distance of less than 1 nautical mile in 18 seconds. The subsequent left-hand pattern crosswind leg was completed in 25 seconds, covering a distance of less than 1 nautical mile. The pattern downwind turn was executed with a distance of 1 nautical mile and an angle to the runway of 65.5 degrees. The downwind leg itself covered a distance of 2 nautical miles in 69 seconds.
The base leg turn was completed with a distance of 2 nautical miles and an angle to the runway of 56.3 degrees. The base leg itself was covered in less than 1 nautical mile in 38 seconds. The final turn was executed in less than 1 nautical mile in 26 seconds. The aircraft then began its final approach to runway 28 from the east, heading 272.0 degrees at a distance of 1 nautical mile and an altitude of 448 feet above ground level.
The landing on runway 28 was characterized by a threshold speed that was excessively high at 92 knots. The touchdown point was excessively long, using more than 75% of the available runway. The touchdown speed was 48 knots, which was considered fast. However, the touchdown rate was perfect at -37 feet per minute, and the runway touchdown alignment was perfect. The local weather conditions remained the same, with a temperature of 16 degrees Celsius and a wind speed of 1 knot from a direction of 270 degrees.
The total flight distance was 7 nautical miles, which was completed in 8 minutes, and the aircraft used 2 kilograms of fuel during the flight.
The Cessna 152 aircraft successfully landed at N94 Carlisle, but the landing was not without its issues. The pilot achieved a score of 70.2%, indicating room for improvement in their technique. The final approach was made from the east, heading 272.0° at 1 nm and 448 ft above ground level (agl), which is a standard approach procedure.
Upon landing, the pilot touched down on runway 28, which has a length of 1,177 meters. The threshold height was good, but the threshold speed was excessively high at 92 kt, which is above the recommended speed for landing. This indicates that the pilot may have been able to flare the aircraft more effectively to reduce the touchdown speed.
The touchdown point was also excessively long, using more than 75% of the available runway. This suggests that the pilot may have been able to extend the landing roll by using a more effective flare or by adjusting the approach path to touch down closer to the threshold. The touchdown speed of 48 kt was also fast, which can increase the risk of wheel damage and make the aircraft more difficult to control.
However, the touchdown rate was perfect at -37 fpm, indicating that the pilot was able to control the descent effectively. The runway touchdown alignment was also perfect, which suggests that the pilot was able to maintain a stable and aligned approach path.
The local weather conditions at the time of the landing were favorable, with a temperature of 16 °C and a wind of 1 kt at 270°. The crosswind was negligible, and the headwind was minimal at 1 kt. These conditions would have made the landing relatively straightforward, but the pilot's technique still needs improvement to achieve a higher score.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values