Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
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 · 25 stages, 24 scored
Events
Events
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 1,951 m of the approach.
Plan view — the first 1,951 m of the 2,233 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
Touched down 1,454 m past the threshold — beyond the full-score zone. The arrival was smooth.
The rest of the report
Firstly, it's important to acknowledge that a landing score of 74.0% is a decent starting point, but there are definitely areas that can be improved upon to achieve a higher score in the future. Let's break down the analysis of each phase of the landing and provide some helpful tips for improvement.
Starting with the Approach Phase, it's noted that there was a poor descent path above the glideslope limit. This indicates that the aircraft may have been descending too steeply or not at the correct rate during the approach, which can lead to difficulties in properly lining up for the landing. To improve this, pilots should focus on maintaining a consistent descent rate and staying within the glideslope limits as much as possible.
Moving on to the Landing Phase, there were a few key areas for improvement. The threshold height was well above target, indicating that the aircraft may have been too high upon approaching the runway. Additionally, a very poor landing flare and poor landing heading were noted. To address these issues, pilots should practice their landing techniques, ensuring a smooth and controlled flare before touchdown and maintaining proper alignment with the runway throughout the landing process.
In the Touchdown Phase, the touchdown rate was rated as fair, with the speed being on target. However, the touchdown point was noted as very long, using more than 50% of the available runway. Additionally, the runway touchdown position was 6.0 m from the centerline. To improve in this phase, pilots should focus on landing at the designated touchdown point, utilizing less runway for a more efficient landing, and striving for better alignment with the centerline.
Finally, in the Rollout Phase, it was observed that the runway alignment was 15.1 m from the centerline. To improve in this area, pilots should work on maintaining better alignment with the centerline during the rollout phase, ensuring a smooth and controlled exit from the runway.
Overall, while there are areas for improvement in each phase of the landing, it's important to remember that practice and continuous learning are key to improving landing performance. By focusing on these specific areas and implementing appropriate strategies, pilots can work towards achieving a higher landing score in future assessments. Keep up the hard work and dedication to improving your skills, and you will see progress over time. Remember, every landing is a learning experience, and with determination and practice, you can achieve excellence in your landings.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values