Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
MY FS FLIGHTS
Flight Score
Arrival
Keep the back pressure coming once the flare is established, holding the nose up through to touchdown instead of easing it.
What happened: The flare arrested the sink but 561 fpm of it came back before touchdown, and in flights like this one that returning sink usually carries through to a firm or hard touchdown at 310 fpm.
Watch for: Vertical speed indicator: the sink held near zero all the way through touchdown, not allowed to build back up.
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 · 23 stages, 21 scored
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 1,000 ft gate: off the runway's 3° glideslope.
At the 500 ft gate: sink rate above what the glideslope needed and off the runway's 3° glideslope.
The approach, gate by gate
Side view — the last 2,277 m of the approach.
Plan view — the first 2,277 m of the 3,075 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
Touched down 1,659 m past the threshold — beyond the full-score zone. The arrival was smooth.
The rest of the report
The flight began with the Airbus A320 taxiing from the parking area to the runway at Venice Marco Polo Airport, taking approximately 8 minutes and covering a distance of 2 nautical miles. Departure roll took place on runway 04R, with a takeoff distance of 1,879 meters, which accounted for 57% of the runway. The aircraft lifted off at a speed of 163 knots.
As the aircraft climbed to its cruising altitude, it encountered local weather conditions of 6°C temperature and a wind speed of 3 knots at 319°. The enroute climb started approximately 1 mile northeast of the airport, with the aircraft ascending from 1,008 feet above sea level to 34,381 feet above sea level, an increase of 33,373 feet in 23 minutes, covering a distance of 114 nautical miles.
The enroute level cruise began 1 mile west of Umhausen, Austria, and lasted for 27 minutes, covering a distance of 167 nautical miles. The aircraft then started its descent from 34,072 feet above sea level to 13,589 feet above sea level, a decrease of 20,483 feet in 18 minutes, covering a distance of 89 nautical miles. This was followed by another enroute level cruise, which started 1 mile east of Arzfeld, Germany, and lasted for 7 minutes, covering a distance of 30 nautical miles.
The aircraft then began its descent from 12,999 feet above sea level to 6,363 feet above sea level, a decrease of 6,637 feet in 5 minutes, covering a distance of 22 nautical miles. Another enroute level cruise started 1 mile northeast of Oreye, Belgium, and lasted for 2 minutes, covering a distance of 6 nautical miles. The aircraft then started its descent from 6,340 feet above sea level to 1,883 feet above sea level, a decrease of 4,457 feet in 5 minutes, covering a distance of 16 nautical miles.
The final enroute level cruise started 1 mile southeast of Aarschot, Belgium, and lasted for 6 minutes, covering a distance of 11 nautical miles. The aircraft then began its final approach to runway 25R at Brussels Airport, heading 244.0° at 3 nautical miles and 1,707 feet above ground level.
The landing took place on runway 25R, which had a length of 3,075 meters. The threshold height was significantly above the target, while the threshold speed was slightly above the target at 143 knots. The touchdown point was very long, using more than 50% of the available runway. The touchdown speed was 132 knots, which was a little fast, and the touchdown rate was firm at -359 feet per minute. The runway touchdown alignment was perfect.
The local weather conditions at the time of landing were 6°C temperature and a wind speed of 21 knots at 249°, with a crosswind of 2 knots and a headwind of 21 knots. The total landing distance was 2,193 meters, which accounted for 71% of the runway. The runway rollout alignment was perfect.
After landing, the aircraft taxiied to the parking area, taking approximately 3 minutes and covering a distance of less than 1 nautical mile. The total flight distance was 463 nautical miles, taking 108 minutes, and the aircraft used 4,341 kilograms of fuel.
The Airbus A320 aircraft successfully landed on runway 25R at EBBR Brussels Airport, but the landing was not without some notable deviations from the ideal. The final approach was initiated from the north east, heading 244.0° at a distance of 3 nautical miles and an altitude of 1,707 feet above ground level (agl). The aircraft touched down on the runway, but the touchdown point was significantly further down the runway than desired, utilizing more than 50% of the available runway length.
The touchdown speed of 132 knots was slightly above the target speed, indicating that the aircraft may have been slightly too fast during the landing. The touchdown rate of -359 feet per minute (fpm) was firm, suggesting that the aircraft did not experience any significant deceleration during the landing. The runway touchdown alignment was perfect, indicating that the aircraft was properly aligned with the runway during the landing.
The local weather conditions at the time of the landing were characterized by a temperature of 6°C and a wind speed of 21 knots from a direction of 249°. The crosswind component was minimal at 2 knots, while the headwind component was 21 knots, which was beneficial for the landing. The total landing distance of 2,193 meters was 71% of the available runway length, indicating that the aircraft did not have a significant amount of runway remaining for braking after touchdown.
Overall, while the landing was not perfect, the Airbus A320 aircraft was able to safely touch down on the runway and come to a stop without incident. The deviations from the ideal landing parameters were relatively minor, and the aircraft's performance was satisfactory given the weather conditions.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values