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 · 17 stages, 16 scored
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.
Two stabilised approach gates, each with seven checks, where the approach path is 1,000 ft and 500 ft above the runway.
The approach, gate by gate
Side view — the last 5,000 ft of the approach.
Plan view — the first 5,000 ft of the 7,641 ft runway, to the same scale as the side view.
The 1,207 ft touchdown sits inside the full-score zone. The arrival was smooth.
The rest of the report
The flight began with a taxiing period from the parking area to the runway, which took 15 minutes and covered a distance of 3 nautical miles. The aircraft, an Airbus A320, then departed from runway 22R at Newark Liberty International Airport. The takeoff distance was 4,620 feet, which was 66% of the runway length. The liftoff speed was 153 knots.
As the aircraft took off, it encountered local weather conditions with a temperature of 62°F and a wind speed of 10 knots from a direction of 190°. The crosswind component was 3 knots, while the headwind component was 10 knots. After departing from Newark, the aircraft began its enroute climb, starting 1 mile northeast of Elizabeth, New Jersey. The climb took 8 minutes and covered a distance of 34 nautical miles, with the aircraft ascending from 1,033 feet above sea level to 21,206 feet.
Following the initial climb, the aircraft entered a level cruise phase, which started 2 miles north of Cos Cob, Connecticut. This phase lasted for 8 minutes and covered a distance of 66 nautical miles. The aircraft then began its first descent, starting 1 mile southeast of Salem, Connecticut. The descent took 16 minutes and covered a distance of 91 nautical miles, with the aircraft descending from 20,739 feet to 4,901 feet.
The aircraft then entered another level cruise phase, which started 11 miles northeast of Scituate, Massachusetts. This phase lasted for 7 minutes and covered a distance of 22 nautical miles. The aircraft then began its second descent, starting 1 mile east of Ipswich, Massachusetts. The descent took 8 minutes and covered a distance of 16 nautical miles, with the aircraft descending from 4,892 feet to 1,236 feet.
As the aircraft approached Logan International Airport, it began its final approach to runway 22L from the north, heading 200.0° at an altitude of 4 nautical miles and 1,212 feet above ground level. The aircraft landed on runway 22L, which had a length of 7,641 feet. The threshold height was good, but the threshold speed was slightly above the target speed at 139 knots. The touchdown point was 743 feet beyond the touchdown zone, and the touchdown speed was 139 knots, which was considered fast. The touchdown rate was also hard at -403 feet per minute. Additionally, the runway touchdown position was slightly misaligned by 12 feet from the centerline.
The local weather conditions at the time of landing were a temperature of 58°F and a wind speed of 27 knots from a direction of 200°. The crosswind component was 0 knots, while the headwind component was 27 knots. The total flight distance was 237 nautical miles, and the flight duration was 56 minutes. The aircraft used 5,312 pounds of fuel during the flight.
The Airbus A320 successfully landed on runway 22L at KBOS Logan International Airport, achieving a score of 96.5%. The aircraft was approaching the runway from the north, heading 200.0° at a distance of 4 nautical miles and an altitude of 1,212 feet above ground level (agl).
The final approach to the runway was executed with a good threshold height, indicating that the aircraft was properly configured for landing. However, the threshold speed was slightly above the target speed of 138 kt, which is a minor deviation. The touchdown point was 743 feet beyond the touchdown zone, which is a moderate deviation from the ideal landing spot.
The touchdown speed of 139 kt was also slightly above the target speed, indicating that the aircraft was touching down with a bit more energy than desired. This resulted in a hard touchdown rate of -403 feet per minute (fpm), which is a significant deviation from the ideal touchdown rate. A hard touchdown can be stressful on the aircraft and its occupants, and it may also indicate that the pilots could have done a better job of managing the aircraft's descent and speed.
In terms of runway alignment, the aircraft touched down slightly off-centerline, deviating by 12 feet from the centerline. This is a minor deviation, but it still indicates that the pilots could have done a better job of aligning the aircraft with the runway.
The local weather conditions at the time of the landing were favorable, with a temperature of 58°F and a headwind of 27 kt. The wind was blowing at 200°, which is directly from the north, and there was no crosswind component. These conditions made the landing relatively straightforward, but they also highlight the importance of proper aircraft configuration and control during the approach and landing phases of flight.
Overall, while the landing was successful, there are several areas where the pilots could have done a better job of executing the approach and landing. With some adjustments to their technique and procedures, they may be able to achieve an even higher score and improve the safety and efficiency of their landings.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values