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 · 18 stages, 16 scored
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 1,756 m of the approach.
Plan view — the first 1,756 m of the 2,292 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
Touched down 603 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 to the runway, which took 8 minutes and covered a distance of 3 nautical miles. The aircraft, a Boeing 737-900, then departed from runway 34R at Seattle–Tacoma International Airport (KSEA). The takeoff distance was 1,277 meters, which was 35% of the runway length. The liftoff speed was 163 knots.
The local weather conditions at the time of departure were characterized by a temperature of 9 degrees Celsius, with no wind at 201 degrees. The aircraft then began its enroute climb, which started overhead KSEA. The climb took 24 minutes and covered a distance of 133 nautical miles, during which the aircraft ascended from 1,432 feet above sea level to 38,034 feet above sea level, an increase of 36,602 feet.
Following the enroute climb, the aircraft entered a level cruise phase, which started 12 miles south east of Port Alberni in British Columbia, Canada. This phase lasted for 55 minutes and covered a distance of 342 nautical miles. The aircraft then began its enroute descent, which started 20 miles east of Kitkatla Seaplane Base in British Columbia, Canada. The descent took 29 minutes and covered a distance of 120 nautical miles, during which the aircraft descended from 37,457 feet above sea level to 1,421 feet above sea level, a decrease of 36,036 feet.
The final approach to runway 11 at Ketchikan International Airport (PAKT) was made from the north west, with a heading of 136.0 degrees at 4 nautical miles and 1,314 feet above ground level. The landing was made on runway 11, which had a length of 2,292 meters. The threshold height at 90 feet above ground level was significantly above the target, and the threshold speed was well above the target at 151 knots.
The touchdown point was 176 meters beyond the touchdown zone, and the touchdown speed was 142 knots, which was a little fast. The touchdown rate was firm at -306 feet per minute. The runway touchdown position was significantly misaligned by 22.2 meters from the centreline. The local weather conditions at the time of landing were characterized by a temperature of 6 degrees Celsius, with a wind of 9 knots at 116 degrees. The crosswind was 3 knots, and the headwind was 8 knots.
The total landing distance was 1,665 meters, which was 73% of the runway length. The runway rollout alignment was misaligned by 22.7 meters from the centreline. The taxiing period from the runway to the parking took 2 minutes and covered a distance of less than 1 nautical mile. The total flight distance was 603 nautical miles, and the flight duration was 119 minutes. The aircraft used 5,514 kilograms of fuel during the flight.
The Boeing 737-900 aircraft successfully landed at PAKT Ketchikan International Airport, but the landing was not without its challenges. The final approach to runway 11 was initiated from the northwest, heading 136.0° at a distance of 4 nautical miles and an altitude of 1,314 feet above ground level. The aircraft touched down on the runway, but the touchdown point was 176 meters beyond the designated touchdown zone, indicating a slight deviation from the intended landing spot.
The touchdown speed of 142 knots was slightly above the target speed, suggesting that the pilot may have been working to maintain control of the aircraft during the landing. The touchdown rate of -306 feet per minute was firm, indicating a relatively smooth and controlled descent. However, the runway touchdown position was significantly misaligned by 22.2 meters from the centerline, which could have been due to a variety of factors including wind, pilot error, or aircraft performance.
The local weather conditions at the time of the landing were relatively calm, with a temperature of 6°C and a wind speed of 9 knots from a direction of 116°. The crosswind component was minimal at 3 knots, while the headwind component was 8 knots. These conditions would not have significantly impacted the aircraft's performance during the landing.
The total landing distance of 1,665 meters was 73% of the available runway length, which is a relatively high percentage. This suggests that the aircraft may have been slowed down more quickly than expected, or that the pilot may have been working to maintain control of the aircraft during the landing. The runway rollout alignment was also misaligned by 22.7 meters from the centerline, which could have been due to a variety of factors including pilot error or aircraft performance.
Overall, while the landing was not perfect, the Boeing 737-900 aircraft was able to safely touch down on the runway and come to a stop. However, the deviations from the intended landing spot and the high percentage of runway used during the landing suggest that there may be opportunities for improvement in terms of pilot technique and aircraft performance.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values