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 · 20 stages, 18 scored
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
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.
The approach, gate by gate
Side view — the last 1,547 m of the approach.
Plan view — the first 1,547 m of the 2,985 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
Touched down 549 m past the threshold — beyond the full-score zone. The arrival was smooth.
The rest of the report
The flight began with the aircraft taxiing from the parking area to the runway, a process that took 9 minutes and covered a distance of 2 nautical miles. The Airbus A320 then departed from runway 07R at EBBR Brussels Airport, with a takeoff distance of 1,787 meters, which accounted for 58% of the runway. The liftoff speed was 164 knots, and the local weather conditions at the time of departure were characterized by a temperature of 31 degrees Celsius, a wind speed of 9 knots at 80 degrees, resulting in a 2-knot crosswind and a 9-knot headwind.
As the aircraft climbed to its cruising altitude, it passed over Kortenberg in Flanders, Belgium, and began its ascent from an altitude of 1,195 feet above sea level to 33,720 feet above sea level, an increase of 32,526 feet in 18 minutes, covering a distance of 102 nautical miles. The enroute climb was followed by a level cruise that started over Nampcel in Hauts-de-France, France, and lasted for 72 minutes, covering a distance of 599 nautical miles.
The aircraft then began its descent over Algar in Comunitat Valenciana, Spain, and descended from 34,150 feet above sea level to 5,837 feet above sea level, a decrease of 28,313 feet in 16 minutes, covering a distance of 77 nautical miles. Following this descent, the aircraft entered a brief level cruise that lasted for 5 minutes, covering a distance of 13 nautical miles, before beginning its final descent over La Romana in Comunitat Valenciana, Spain.
The final approach to runway 10 at LEAL Alicante-Elche Miguel Hernández Airport was made from the west, with the aircraft heading 98.0 degrees at 3 nautical miles and 2,060 feet above ground level. The landing was successful, with the touchdown point being 132 meters beyond the touchdown zone, and the touchdown speed was 126 knots, which was considered good. However, the touchdown rate was very heavy at -711 feet per minute, and the runway touchdown position was slightly misaligned by 6.9 meters from the centerline.
The local weather conditions at the time of landing were characterized by a temperature of 32 degrees Celsius, a wind speed of 4 knots at 250 degrees, resulting in a 2-knot crosswind and a 3-knot tailwind. The total landing distance was 1,465 meters, which accounted for 49% of the runway. The runway rollout alignment was very good, and the aircraft was able to taxi to the parking area in 5 minutes, covering a distance of less than 1 nautical mile.
In total, the flight covered a distance of 813 nautical miles, took 131 minutes, and used 5,763 kilograms of fuel.
The Airbus A320 successfully landed at LEAL Alicante-Elche Miguel Hernández Airport, with a score of 88.5%. The aircraft approached the runway from the west, heading 98.0° at a distance of 3 nautical miles and an altitude of 2,060 feet above ground level (agl). The final approach was made to runway 10, which has a length of 2,985 meters.
The threshold height was good, indicating that the aircraft was at the correct height as it approached the runway. The threshold speed was also satisfactory at 132 knots, demonstrating that the pilot had maintained control and was on track for a smooth landing. However, the touchdown point was 132 meters beyond the designated touchdown zone, which may indicate a slight deviation from the intended landing path.
The touchdown speed of 126 knots was within the acceptable range, suggesting that the pilot had managed to slow the aircraft down effectively. However, the touchdown rate was very heavy at -711 feet per minute (fpm), which may indicate that the pilot had not fully utilized the aircraft's braking capabilities. This could be a concern, as a heavy touchdown rate can put additional stress on the aircraft's landing gear and potentially lead to a longer stopping distance.
The runway touchdown position was slightly misaligned by 6.9 meters from the centerline, which may have been due to a slight deviation in the pilot's control inputs. The local weather conditions were relatively calm, with a temperature of 32°C and a wind speed of 4 knots from 250°. The crosswind component was minimal at 2 knots, while the tailwind component was 3 knots.
The total landing distance was 1,465 meters, which is 49% of the runway length. This is a relatively short landing distance, indicating that the pilot had managed to slow the aircraft down effectively. The runway rollout alignment was very good, suggesting that the pilot had maintained control and was able to align the aircraft with the runway centerline during the rollout phase.
Overall, while the landing was not perfect, the pilot demonstrated good control and management of the aircraft during the approach and landing phases. However, the heavy touchdown rate and slight deviation from the intended landing path may require further attention and training to improve the pilot's skills and reduce the risk of accidents.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values