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 · 21 stages, 19 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 1,777 m of the approach.
Plan view — the first 1,777 m of the 2,996 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
Touched down 880 m past the threshold — beyond the full-score zone. The arrival was smooth.
The rest of the report
Overall, the aircraft landing score of 87.8% shows that there were some areas that could be improved upon, but there were also some strong points to build upon.
Starting with the Approach Phase, it is noted that the descent path was above the glideslope limit. This indicates that the aircraft was not descending at the optimal rate during this phase of the landing. Improving the descent path will help to ensure a smoother and more efficient approach.
Moving on to the Landing Phase, it is highlighted that the threshold height was above target and there was a very poor landing flare. Adjusting the approach angle and ensuring a proper landing flare will help to improve the touchdown and overall landing smoothness.
In the Touchdown Phase, it is commendable that the touchdown rate was perfect and the speed was on target. However, the touchdown point being 462 m beyond the touchdown zone and the runway touchdown position being 5.2 m from the centerline shows room for improvement in terms of accuracy and precision.
Lastly, in the Rollout Phase, it is noted that the runway alignment was slightly off at 4.9 m from the centerline. Fine-tuning the alignment during this phase will help to ensure a straight and smooth rollout.
Overall, while there were some areas that need improvement, there were also areas of strength such as the perfect touchdown rate and on-target speed. By focusing on adjusting the descent path, improving the landing flare, enhancing accuracy in touchdown positioning, and fine-tuning runway alignment, the overall landing score can be improved and a smoother, more precise landing can be achieved. Keep up the good work and continue striving for excellence in each phase of the landing process.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values