Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
MY FS FLIGHTS
Flight Score
Shorten the long landing
Ground effect becomes significant below about one wingspan of height. A Cessna 172, with a 36 ft span, enters ground effect at flare height - the float it feels in the hold-off is ground effect arriving on cue. An A320, with a span around 117 ft, has been in ground effect since before the threshold and there is no sudden cushion to feel, only a gradual reduction in induced drag that lengthens any float you allow.
Read more in Flare TimingStart to finish · 19 stages, 17 scored
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 1,779 m of the approach.
Plan view — the first 1,779 m of the 2,404 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
The 410 m touchdown sits inside the full-score zone. The arrival was smooth.
The rest of the report
The flight in the Airbus A320 began with a 6-minute taxi from the parking area to the runway at LFLL Saint Exupery. The departure roll took place on runway 35L, with a takeoff distance of 1,868 meters, covering 46% of the runway. The liftoff speed was 167 knots. The local weather at the time of departure was 15°C, with a wind of 12 knots at 23° resulting in crosswind of 6 knots and headwind of 10 knots.
The enroute climb started over Pusignan in Auvergne-Rhone-Alpes, France. The aircraft climbed from 1,788 feet above sea level to 33,322 feet, an increase of 31,535 feet over 21 minutes, covering a distance of 121 nautical miles.
Upon reaching cruising altitude, the aircraft flew over Campouriez in Occitanie, France, beginning an 88-minute level cruise covering 625 nautical miles.
The descent phase of the flight commenced 1 mile northwest of Punta Umbria in Andalusia, Spain. The aircraft descended from 33,228 feet to 1,802 feet, a decrease of 31,425 feet over 16 minutes, covering a distance of 54 nautical miles.
The landing occurred on runway 10 at LPFR Faro, with a runway length of 2,404 meters. The aircraft was at a height of 36 feet above ground level at the threshold, with a speed of 142 knots. The touchdown point was 413 meters from the threshold, with a touchdown speed of 140 knots and a Vertical Speed Indicator (VSI) reading of -417 ft/min. The local weather at Faro was 24°C, with a wind of 13 knots at 100°, resulting in a headwind of 13 knots.
The total landing distance covered was 1,702 meters, which represented 71% of the total runway length.
After landing, the aircraft taxied from the runway to the parking area in 4 minutes, covering less than one nautical mile.
Overall, the flight covered a total distance of 809 nautical miles over a duration of 143 minutes and consumed 6,075 kg of fuel.
First, congratulations on achieving a landing score of 96.8%! This is a fantastic accomplishment and demonstrates a high level of skill and proficiency in aircraft operations.
Looking at the approach phase, it is commendable that the glideslope alignment was excellent. This indicates a high degree of precision and accuracy in maintaining the correct descent path towards the runway. Although the speed was slightly above target, this is a minor deviation that can easily be adjusted for in future landings.
Moving on to the landing phase, it is great to see that the threshold height was good, indicating that the aircraft was at the correct altitude as it neared the runway. Additionally, a good landing flare suggests that the aircraft was properly transitioning from descent to touchdown, leading to a smooth and controlled landing.
In the touchdown phase, there were a few areas for improvement. The very hard touchdown rate may have been a result of the speed being slightly above target. It is important to ensure that the aircraft is descending at an appropriate rate to achieve a softer touchdown. Additionally, while the touchdown distance inside the touchdown zone was on point, the runway touchdown position being 2.5 m from the centerline suggests a slight deviation in alignment that could be further refined in future landings.
Lastly, in the rollout phase, the runway alignment being 3.4 m from the centerline indicates another minor deviation that could be corrected through closer attention to maintaining alignment during the rollout.
Overall, this landing performance demonstrates a high level of proficiency with room for minor adjustments to further enhance precision and accuracy in future landings. Keep up the great work and continue striving for excellence in all aspects of aircraft operations. Your dedication to improvement and attention to detail will undoubtedly lead to even higher landing scores in the future.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values