Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
MY FS FLIGHTS
Flight Score
Maintain the centreline
A small uncorrected heading error at 40 knots becomes a metre of offset per second by 100 knots, noticed only at rotation, producing a crabbed liftoff. Root cause is nearly always eyes on the tape instead of the far end of the runway. Small heading changes displace a distant point visibly long before the nearby centreline stripes look wrong.
Read more in Improve Your Take-OffsStart to finish · 19 stages, 17 scored
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 1,524 m of the approach.
Plan view — the first 1,524 m of the 4,265 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
The 232 m touchdown sits inside the full-score zone. The arrival was smooth.
The rest of the report
The flight on the Boeing 737-MAX8 started with a 14-minute taxi from the parking area to the runway at CYWG Winnipeg / James Armstrong Richardson International Airport. The departure roll was from runway 13, with a takeoff distance of 1,530 meters, covering 58% of the runway. The liftoff speed was 155 knots. The local weather at the time of departure was 5°C with a 12 knot wind coming from 30°, resulting in a crosswind of 11 knots and a tailwind of 4 knots.
The enroute climb began 1 mile southeast of CYWG Winnipeg, climbing from 1,806 feet above sea level to 34,908 feet above sea level, covering a total of 133 nautical miles in 19 minutes.
Once at cruising altitude, the aircraft traveled for 34 minutes and covered 418 nautical miles before starting the descent 13 miles east of Hanna, Alberta. The descent took the aircraft from 34,114 feet above sea level to 5,402 feet above sea level, covering a distance of 95 nautical miles in 16 minutes.
The landing was on runway 17L at CYYC Calgary International Airport, with a runway length of 4,265 meters. The height at the threshold was 34 feet above ground level, with a speed at threshold of 147 knots. The touchdown occurred 230 meters from the threshold at a speed of 146 knots and a vertical speed indicator reading of -483 feet per minute. The local weather at the time of landing was -10°C with an 11 knot wind coming from 130°, resulting in a crosswind of 9 knots and a headwind of 7 knots. The total landing distance was 1,093 meters, covering 26% of the runway.
After landing, a 3-minute taxi from the runway to the parking area covered less than 1 nautical mile. The total flight distance was 658 nautical miles, with a total flight time of 83 minutes and fuel consumption of 4,142 kg.
Overall, an aircraft landing score of 94.6% is very impressive and indicates a high level of proficiency in various aspects of the landing procedure. Let's break down each phase of the landing process to provide a detailed analysis.
During the Approach Phase, it is commendable that the glideslope alignment was excellent, which shows that the pilot maintained a steady descent path towards the runway. However, it is noted that the speed was slightly above target, which could potentially lead to a harder touchdown in the later phases of the landing. It is important to ensure that the speed is kept within the desired parameters to facilitate a smoother landing.
Moving on to the Landing Phase, it is positive to see that the threshold height was good, indicating that the aircraft was aligned with the runway at an appropriate height for landing. The landing flare, although described as fair, could potentially be improved to further cushion the touchdown and reduce the impact force on the landing gear.
In the Touchdown Phase, there are a few areas that could be addressed for enhancement. The very hard touchdown rate suggests that the aircraft made contact with the runway with excessive force, which may not only be uncomfortable for passengers but also increase wear and tear on the aircraft components. Additionally, the speed being above target during touchdown could contribute to the hard landing. It is also worth noting that the touchdown distance inside the touchdown zone was positive, indicating that the landing occurred within the designated landing area, which is crucial for safety.
Lastly, in the Rollout Phase, the runway alignment being 7.5 m from the centerline is within an acceptable range, although it could be further improved for precision. Maintaining a stable alignment with the runway centerline is essential for a smooth rollout and safe taxiing off the runway.
In conclusion, while the landing score of 94.6% is a commendable achievement, there are areas identified for potential improvement in the landing phases. By focusing on maintaining target speeds, improving landing flare technique, and ensuring a smooth touchdown, the overall landing performance can be further enhanced. Keep up the good work and continue striving for excellence in aircraft landings!
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values