Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
MY FS FLIGHTS
Flight Score
Departure
Make small rudder corrections against a point at the far end to hold the centreline.
What happened: During the ground roll you drifted 6.1 m off the runway centreline.
Watch for: Watch runway alignment against the centreline, correcting with small rudder inputs.
See Departure Roll
Arrival
Add power earlier on final to hold VREF of 135 kt by the gates rather than let speed decay.
What happened: The approach was flown too slow through the stabilisation gates, crossing the threshold at 135 kt against a VREF of 135 kt.
Watch for: Airspeed indicator against 135 kt from the first stabilisation gate onward.
See Arrival Approach
Start to finish · 16 stages, 15 scored
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 500 ft gate: speed 6 kt SLOW on the reference speed of 135 kt.
The approach, gate by gate
The rest of the report
Departing from Minneapolis–Saint Paul International Airport, the Airbus A320 began its journey by taxiing from the parking area to the runway, a process that took 10 minutes and covered a distance of 2 nautical miles. As it reached the runway, the aircraft started its departure roll on runway 30L, accelerating to a liftoff speed of 155 knots. The takeoff distance of 1,804 meters was 59% of the runway length, with a local temperature of 26°C and winds of 7 knots at 90°.
As the aircraft climbed to its enroute cruise altitude, it began its ascent 1 mile east of Richfield, Minnesota, reaching a height of 37,198 feet above sea level in 21 minutes, covering a distance of 145 nautical miles. The climb from 1,832 feet to 37,198 feet was a significant increase of 35,365 feet. The aircraft then entered a level cruise phase, lasting 76 minutes and covering 668 nautical miles, before starting its descent 2 miles southwest of Nuremberg, Pennsylvania. The descent from 36,889 feet to 5,245 feet took 17 minutes and covered 115 nautical miles. The aircraft continued to descend and level off multiple times, with the final approach to runway 22 at LaGuardia Airport being made from the northeast, heading 212.0° at 4 nautical miles and 1,272 feet above ground level.
The aircraft landed on runway 22 at LaGuardia Airport, with a total landing distance of 2,508 meters, which was 118% of the runway length. The touchdown point was 52 meters beyond the touchdown zone, and the touchdown speed was a little fast at 132 knots. The runway touchdown position was slightly misaligned by 3.2 meters from the centerline. The aircraft then taxied to the parking area, a process that took 1 minute and covered less than 1 nautical mile. The total flight distance was 1,019 nautical miles, taking 147 minutes, and the aircraft used 6,010 kilograms of fuel during the flight.
The final approach to runway 22 at KLGA LaGuardia Airport from the north east was executed with good quality, with the aircraft maintaining a steady heading of 212.0° at 4 nm and 1,272 ft above ground level. The threshold height was satisfactory, allowing for a smooth transition to the landing phase. The threshold speed of 135 kt was also well within the acceptable range, indicating a well-coordinated approach.
As the aircraft touched down on the runway, the touchdown speed of 132 kt was slightly above the ideal, resulting in a touchdown rate of -275 fpm, which was fair but not optimal. The touchdown point was 52 m beyond the touchdown zone, indicating a slight overrun. However, the runway touchdown position was only slightly misaligned by 3.2 m from the centreline, demonstrating good control during the landing phase. The local weather conditions, with a temperature of 21 °C and wind at 23 kt at 60°, contributed to a crosswind of 11 kt and a tailwind of 20 kt, which may have affected the aircraft's performance.
The total landing distance of 2,508 m was 118% of the runway length, indicating a slightly longer than expected rollout. However, the runway rollout alignment was very good, demonstrating the pilot's ability to maintain control and stability during the critical phase of the landing. Overall, the landing was scored 86.6%, reflecting a good but not exceptional performance.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values