Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
MY FS FLIGHTS
Flight Score
Departure
On the roll, make small rudder corrections against a point at the far end of the runway to hold the centreline within 13 m.
What happened: The takeoff roll drifted off the centreline by 13 m, and excess bank then carried through all three climb segments. A drifted roll like this usually leads into wandering bank angle through the climb.
Watch for: Watch the heading indicator and runway centreline during the roll, and the attitude indicator for wings level through the climb.
See Departure RollDeparture Climb 1Departure Climb 2Departure Climb 3
Arrival
Hold the aim point and wait for the speed to bleed before raising the nose, starting the flare within the normal band instead of 59 ft.
What happened: The flare began at 59 ft, 14 ft earlier than the normal band.
Watch for: Radio altimeter: start the flare within the normal flare band
See Arrival Landing
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 · 27 stages, 25 scored
Events
Events
Events
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.
Two stabilised approach gates, each with seven checks, where the approach path is 1,000 ft and 500 ft above the runway.
At the 500 ft gate: sink rate above what the glideslope needed and speed below the reference speed.
The approach, gate by gate
Side view — the last 1,524 m of the approach.
Plan view — the first 1,524 m of the 2,186 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
Touched down 675 m past the threshold — beyond 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 13 minutes and covered a distance of 3 nautical miles. The aircraft, a Boeing 737-800, then departed from runway 15R at Logan International Airport (KBOS) in Boston, Massachusetts. The takeoff distance was 1,711 meters, which accounted for 61% of the runway length. The aircraft lifted off at a speed of 165 knots.
As the aircraft climbed to a higher altitude, it encountered local weather conditions with a temperature of 29°C and winds of 18 knots at 110°. The crosswind was 8 knots, while the headwind was 16 knots. The enroute climb started 1 mile south of Winthrop, Massachusetts, and reached an altitude of 12,507 feet above sea level (asl) after climbing 11,492 feet in 7 minutes and covering 27 nautical miles.
The aircraft then entered a level cruise phase, which started 4 miles north of Rockport, Massachusetts, and lasted for 3 minutes, covering 18 nautical miles. However, the flight was not without its challenges, as the aircraft encountered several descent phases. The first descent started 12 miles southeast of York Harbor, Maine, and descended from 12,736 feet asl to 12,045 feet asl, a decrease of 691 feet in 2 minutes and covering 9 nautical miles.
The aircraft then entered another level cruise phase, which started 12 miles east of York Beach, Maine, and lasted for 2 minutes, covering 9 nautical miles. However, the flight continued with another descent phase, which started 11 miles southeast of Kennebunkport, Maine, and descended from 11,744 feet asl to 6,909 feet asl, a decrease of 4,835 feet in 5 minutes and covering 21 nautical miles.
The aircraft then entered another level cruise phase, which started 11 miles southeast of South Portland, Maine, and lasted for 3 minutes, covering 9 nautical miles. However, the flight continued with another descent phase, which started 7 miles southeast of ME33 Farr Field Harpswell, Maine, and descended from 6,905 feet asl to 1,303 feet asl, a decrease of 5,602 feet in 3 minutes and covering 13 nautical miles.
The final approach to runway 29 at Portland International Jetport (KPWM) was from the east, heading 275.0° at 4 nautical miles and 1,197 feet above ground level (agl). However, the aircraft was required to perform a go-around at 564 feet agl and again at 2,212 feet agl. Eventually, the aircraft landed on runway 29, which had a length of 2,186 meters. The touchdown point was 188 meters beyond the touchdown zone, and the touchdown speed was 130 knots, which was good. However, the touchdown rate was very hard at -529 feet per minute (fpm).
The runway touchdown position was misaligned by 8.7 meters from the centerline, and the runway rollout alignment was misaligned by 26.4 meters from the centerline. The total landing distance was 1,278 meters, which accounted for 58% of the runway length. The local weather conditions at the time of landing were a temperature of 27°C and winds of 9 knots at 360°. The crosswind was 9 knots, while the headwind was 1 knot.
The total flight distance was 132 nautical miles, and the flight took 42 minutes. The aircraft used 2,174 kilograms of fuel during the flight.
The Boeing 737-800 aircraft successfully landed at KPWM Portland International Jetport, but the landing was not without its issues. The final approach to runway 29 from the east, heading 275.0° at 4 nm and 1,197 ft above ground level (agl), was executed with a score of 70.6%. This indicates that while the landing was not perfect, it was still considered satisfactory.
One of the notable issues with the landing was the excessive height at the threshold, which was 118 ft agl, significantly above the target height. However, the threshold speed was slightly below the target at 130 kt, which is a good speed for landing. The touchdown point was 188 m beyond the touchdown zone, indicating that the aircraft touched down slightly further down the runway than intended.
The touchdown speed of 130 kt was within the acceptable range, and the touchdown rate of -529 fpm was very hard, which may have contributed to the aircraft's misaligned runway touchdown position. The runway touchdown position was misaligned by 8.7 m from the centreline, which could have been caused by the hard touchdown rate.
The local weather conditions at the time of the landing were relatively calm, with a temperature of 27 °C and a wind speed of 9 kt at 360°. The crosswind was 9 kt, and the headwind was 1 kt, which may have contributed to the aircraft's misaligned touchdown position.
The total landing distance was 1,278 m, which is 58% of the runway length. This is a relatively short landing distance, but it may have been influenced by the hard touchdown rate and the misaligned runway touchdown position. The runway rollout alignment was also misaligned by 26.4 m from the centreline, which could have been caused by the aircraft's initial misaligned touchdown position.
Overall, while the landing was not perfect, it was still considered satisfactory, with a score of 70.6%. However, there are areas for improvement, particularly in terms of the aircraft's touchdown rate and alignment with the runway centreline.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values