Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
MY FS FLIGHTS
Flight Score
Improve the rollout
Ground control varies with speed, full authority at walking pace, progressively reducing as groundspeed rises. The aircraft becomes twitchy at any speed, every small pedal input swings the nose, which can encourage large-amplitude leg inputs that no real aircraft would accept.
Read more in How to Taxi AnywhereStart to finish · 11 stages, 10 scored
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 744 m of the approach.
Plan view — the full 744 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
The 441 m touchdown sits inside the full-score zone. The arrival was smooth.
The rest of the report
The flight began with a departure roll from runway 26 at EG41 Fishburn, a small airfield in England. The DA40-XLS aircraft accelerated down the runway, covering a distance of 419 meters, which was 53% of the total runway length. The liftoff speed was achieved at 52 knots, marking the beginning of the takeoff phase.
As the aircraft climbed away from the airfield, it encountered local weather conditions of 15°C temperature and a wind of 10 knots from a direction of 240°. This resulted in a crosswind of 3 knots and a headwind of 9 knots. The pilot successfully navigated the aircraft through this challenging weather, and the enroute climb started overhead Bishop Middleham, a small town in County Durham, England. The climb phase was characterized by a rapid ascent from an altitude of 259 meters above sea level to 318 meters, an increase of 59.1 meters in less than 1 minute, while covering a distance of less than 1 nautical mile.
Following the climb phase, the aircraft entered a level cruise, which lasted for 2 minutes and covered a distance of 1 nautical mile. This phase was also conducted overhead Bishop Middleham, indicating a stable and controlled flight path.
As the aircraft approached the final approach phase, it was heading towards runway 26 at EGFI Fishburn Airfield from the east, at an altitude of 35.6 meters above ground level. The aircraft was at 0 nautical miles from the runway threshold, and the pilot began the descent. However, the threshold speed was found to be too high at 88 knots, resulting in a longer than expected touchdown point.
The aircraft landed on runway 26, using more than 50% of the available runway, with a touchdown speed of 65 knots, which was considered good. The touchdown rate was also perfect at 1.0 meter per second. However, the runway touchdown position was misaligned by 9.5 meters from the centerline. The local weather conditions during the landing phase were similar to those encountered during takeoff, with a temperature of 15°C and a wind of 3 knots from a direction of 271°, resulting in a crosswind of 1 knot and a headwind of 2 knots.
The total landing distance was 669 meters, which was 90% of the runway length. The runway rollout alignment was slightly misaligned by 8.8 meters from the centerline. Despite these minor issues, the pilot successfully brought the aircraft to a stop, using a total of 43 kilograms of fuel.
In conclusion, the flight was characterized by a smooth takeoff, a rapid climb, and a stable cruise phase. However, the final approach and landing phases were affected by a high threshold speed and a misaligned runway touchdown position. Despite these challenges, the pilot successfully landed the aircraft, using a significant portion of the available runway. The total flight distance was 3 nautical miles, and the flight duration was 4 minutes.
The DA40-XLS aircraft successfully landed at EGFI Fishburn Airfield, but there were some areas for improvement. The pilot achieved a good threshold height, which is a crucial aspect of a safe landing. However, the threshold speed was too high at 88 kn, indicating that the pilot may have been a bit too aggressive in their approach.
Upon touchdown, the aircraft used more than 50% of the available runway, which is a significant portion of the 744-meter runway. This suggests that the pilot may have been a bit too slow in their touchdown speed, as the touchdown speed of 65 kn was good but not ideal. The touchdown rate of 1.0 m/s was perfect, indicating that the pilot had good control over the aircraft during the landing.
One of the notable issues with this landing was the misalignment of the runway touchdown position, which was off by 9.5 meters from the centreline. This could have been due to a variety of factors, including wind or pilot error. The local weather conditions were relatively calm, with a temperature of 15 °C and a wind speed of 3 kn at 271 °. The crosswind was minimal at 1 kn, and the headwind was 2 kn, which should not have had a significant impact on the landing.
The total landing distance of 669 meters was 90% of the available runway, which is a relatively long distance. This could have been due to the slow touchdown speed and the misaligned runway touchdown position. The runway rollout alignment was also slightly misaligned by 8.8 meters from the centreline, which could have been due to the same factors that contributed to the initial misalignment.
Overall, while the pilot demonstrated good control over the aircraft during the landing, there were some areas for improvement, particularly in terms of threshold speed and runway alignment. With some adjustments to their technique, the pilot should be able to achieve a more efficient and safe landing.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values