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 · 19 stages, 17 scored
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Two stabilised approach gates, each with five checks, where the approach path is 1,000 ft and 500 ft above the runway.
The approach, gate by gate
Side view — the last 1,722 m of the approach.
Plan view — the first 1,722 m of the 3,194 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
Touched down 922 m past the threshold — beyond the full-score zone. The arrival was smooth.
The rest of the report
The flight departed from Manchester Airport runway 23L on an Airbus A321 and took off with a distance of 1,709 meters, which is 60% of the runway. The aircraft lifted off at a speed of 175 kts, with local weather conditions of 15 °C and winds blowing at 7 kts from 170 °.
Following a 26-minute climb from 1,222 ft asl to 36,047 ft asl, the aircraft leveled off en route after passing over Mobberley in Cheshire East, England. After cruising for 297 minutes and covering 1,485 nm, the flight entered its final descent stage, starting 70 miles north of the Canary Islands. The steep descent took 26 minutes, during which the aircraft reduced its altitude from 37,691 ft asl to 2,972 ft asl and moved 112 nm closer to its destination.
The en route level cruise resumed for a short period of 5 minutes over GCGM, La Gomera Airport, and then the aircraft descended once more in a 4-minute period from 2,983 ft asl to 1,503 ft asl, decreasing its altitude by 1,480 ft. It then headed towards Tenerife Sur Airport.
Approaching runway 07 at GCTS from the southwest, heading 69.0 ° at 4 nm and 1,296 ft agl, the aircraft landed on the designated runway with a length of 3,194 meters. Although the threshold height was good, the touchdown point was 505 meters beyond the touchdown zone. The aircraft landed at a speed of 124 kts, with a firm touchdown rate of -348 fpm.
Post-landing, the aircraft touched down 18.3 meters off-centerline, with the runway touchdown position being significantly misaligned from the centerline. The total landing distance covered 1,640 meters, representing 51% of the runway. Moreover, on taxing to the parking, the rollout alignment turned out to be 18.4 meters off-centerline. Taxiing to the parking took less than one minute.
In total, the flight traveled 1,767 nm, using 11,067 kg of fuel in the process, and took a total of 286 minutes from departure to landing.
The Airbus A321 aircraft successfully landed at GCTS Tenerife Sur Airport, achieving an overall score of 81.1%. The final approach to runway 07 was conducted from the south-west, with a heading of 69.0° at a distance of 4 nautical miles and an altitude of 1,296 feet above ground level.
The landing was executed with good threshold height and threshold speed, reaching 139 knots. The touchdown point was located 505 meters beyond the touchdown zone, which is a relatively significant deviation. However, the touchdown speed of 124 knots was within the acceptable range, and the touchdown rate of -348 feet per minute was firm, indicating a controlled descent.
The local weather conditions at the time of landing were favorable, with a temperature of 18°C and a gentle wind of 4 knots at 30°. The crosswind component was minimal at 2 knots, while the headwind component was 3 knots. These conditions likely contributed to the successful landing.
Despite the good overall performance, there were some notable issues with the landing. The runway touchdown position was significantly misaligned by 18.3 meters from the centerline, which may have been due to factors such as wind shear or pilot error. Additionally, the runway rollout alignment was also misaligned by 18.4 meters from the centerline, which could have been caused by the same factors.
The total landing distance of 1,640 meters was 51% of the runway length, which is within the acceptable range. However, the misalignment issues during the landing and rollout phases may have contributed to a slightly longer than ideal landing distance.
Overall, the landing was successful, but there are areas for improvement, particularly in terms of maintaining alignment with the runway centerline during the landing and rollout phases.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values