Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
MY FS FLIGHTS
Flight Score
Work on the flare
Arrive slow and the sink rate at the threshold is already above schedule, the flare is short because there is no energy to extend it, and the touchdown is hard in a way that feels exactly like a late flare. Diagnosing a slow arrival as a late flare is the catastrophic misread: you respond by flaring earlier, which bleeds more speed, which makes the next one worse. The tiebreaker is threshold speed against VRef, not feel. Never diagnose a flare without it.
Read more in Flare TimingStart to finish · 22 stages, 20 scored
Events
Events
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 5,000 ft of the approach.
Plan view — the first 5,000 ft of the 10,560 ft runway, to the same scale as the side view.
Touched down 2,193 ft past the threshold — beyond the full-score zone. The arrival was smooth.
The rest of the report
The flight in the Vision Jet was conducted from KPRC Prescott International Airport - Ernest A. Love Field to KPHX Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport. The taxi from the parking to the runway took 6 minutes and covered less than 1 nm. The departure roll from runway 21L at KPRC required a takeoff distance of 2,543 ft, which was 35% of the runway. The liftoff speed was 109 knots. The local weather at the time of departure was 54°F with a wind of 17 knots coming from 219°, resulting in a headwind of 17 knots and no crosswind.
The enroute climb started overhead KPRC and involved climbing from 5,826 ft asl to 18,678 ft asl, covering 25 nm in 7 minutes. The enroute level cruise started 2 miles south of 00AZ Cordes Airport and lasted 2 minutes, covering 8 nm. The subsequent descent started 2 miles west of AZ07 Phoenix Area Heliport, descending from 17,337 ft asl to 8,963 ft asl, covering 16 nm in 4 minutes. Another short level cruise segment began 4 miles west of Cave Creek for 2 minutes, covering 7 nm, followed by a descent starting 5 miles south of Cave Creek, descending from 8,969 ft asl to 7,004 ft asl, covering 13 nm in 4 minutes.
The next level cruise segment started 1 mile northeast of Paradise Valley for 15 minutes, covering 9 nm. The final descent of the flight began 1 mile northeast of Mesa, descending from 7,002 ft asl to 2,987 ft asl, covering 6 nm in 2 minutes. The landing was conducted on runway 26 at KPHX, with a threshold height of 84 ft agl and a touchdown speed of 70 knots. The touchdown occurred 1,736 ft from the threshold with a vertical speed indicator reading of -210 ft/min. The total landing distance was 2,032 ft, which was 19% of the runway length of 10,560 ft. The local weather at the time of landing was 72°F with a wind of 14 knots coming from 269°, resulting in a headwind of 14 knots and no crosswind.
Finally, the taxi from the runway to the parking took 2 minutes and covered less than 1 nm. The total flight distance of the journey was 90 nm, taking 61 minutes and using 253 lbs of fuel.
Overall, the aircraft landing score of 83.2% indicates that there were some areas for improvement, but also some strengths in the landing process. Let's break down each phase of the landing to see where adjustments can be made.
First, the Approach Phase. It was noted that the descent path was above the glideslope limit and the speed was slightly below target. Improving the descent path to stay within the glideslope limit and adjusting the speed to be on target can help set a more stable foundation for a successful landing.
Moving on to the Landing Phase, there were a couple of areas that need attention. The threshold height was significantly above target, indicating that the descent was not properly controlled. Additionally, the landing flare was very poor, which can result in a hard landing. Ensuring a proper landing flare will help in achieving a smoother touchdown. Furthermore, the poor bank angle stability during landing suggests that there may have been some inconsistency in maintaining the correct alignment with the runway.
In the Touchdown Phase, while the touchdown rate was fair and the speed was on target, the touchdown point being 301 ft beyond the touchdown zone and the runway touchdown position being 11 ft from the centerline are areas of concern. Working on precision in touchdown point and alignment with the runway can help improve overall landing accuracy.
Finally, the Rollout Phase showed that the runway alignment was very good, indicating that the aircraft was well-controlled after touchdown.
In conclusion, by focusing on maintaining the correct descent path, improving landing flare technique, ensuring precise touchdown and alignment, the overall landing score can be improved. It's important to analyze each phase of the landing process and make adjustments as needed to achieve a smoother and more accurate landing. Keep practicing and paying attention to the details, and the landing performance will continue to improve over time.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values