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 · 16 stages, 15 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.
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 1,524 m of the approach.
Plan view — the first 1,524 m of the 2,598 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
Touched down 559 m past the threshold — beyond the full-score zone. The arrival was smooth.
The rest of the report
The flight in the DA40-NG began with a departure roll from runway 14 at SB38 Ceara Mirim. The takeoff distance was 300 m, which accounted for 25% of the runway length. The liftoff speed was 82 kn. Local weather conditions at the time of departure included a temperature of 16 °C and a wind speed of 1 kn coming from 270 °, resulting in a crosswind of 1 kn and a headwind of 0 kn.
The enroute climb began 1 mile southeast of SNOG Ceará-Mirim Airport and involved climbing from 1,213 ft asl to 2,209 ft asl, achieving an altitude increase of 996 ft in 1 minute while covering a distance of 1 nm. The level cruise portion of the flight commenced 3 miles southeast of SNOG Ceará-Mirim Airport and lasted 6 minutes, covering a distance of 10 nm.
The landing took place on runway 16L at SBNT Natal Air Force Base, which has a runway length of 2,598 m. The aircraft approached the threshold at a height of 65 ft agl with a speed of 77 kn. The touchdown occurred 558 m from the threshold at a speed of 50 kn, with a vertical speed indicator reading of -105 ft/m. Upon landing, the local weather conditions were recorded as 15 °C temperature and a 1 kn wind coming from 270 °, resulting in a crosswind of 1 kn and a headwind of 0 kn. The total landing distance was 843 m, representing 32% of the total runway length.
After landing, the aircraft taxied to the parking area from the runway in 2 minutes, covering less than 1 nm. The total flight distance was 17 nm, with a duration of 16 minutes and fuel consumption of 3 kg.
Overall, the aircraft landing score of 90.9% indicates a successful landing with some room for improvement in certain areas. Let's break down the analysis of each phase of the landing to better understand the strengths and weaknesses observed.
In the Approach Phase, the descent path was found to be above the glideslope limit. This indicates that the aircraft may have been descending at a steeper angle than necessary, which could have led to a less stable approach and potentially affected the overall landing quality. Improving the descent path to stay within the glideslope limit can help enhance the approach phase of future landings.
Moving on to the Landing Phase, the threshold height was above the target, indicating that the aircraft was higher than desired when crossing the runway threshold. Additionally, a poor landing flare was noted during this phase. A proper landing flare is crucial for a smooth touchdown and can help reduce the impact forces on the landing gear. Working on achieving the correct threshold height and executing a better landing flare can contribute to a more precise and comfortable landing experience.
In the Touchdown Phase, the touchdown rate was excellent and the speed was on target, which are positive indicators of a well-controlled touchdown. However, the touchdown point was 117 meters beyond the touchdown zone, and the runway touchdown position was 7.6 meters from the centerline. Improving the touchdown point accuracy and runway alignment can help optimize the landing touchdown and ensure the aircraft is positioned correctly on the runway.
Lastly, in the Rollout Phase, it was observed that the runway alignment was 8.2 meters from the centerline. Maintaining proper runway alignment is crucial for a safe and smooth rollout after touchdown. Adjusting the aircraft's alignment to be closer to the centerline can enhance the overall landing quality and ensure a stable rollout.
In conclusion, while the aircraft landing score of 90.9% indicates a successful landing overall, there are specific areas within each phase that can be refined to further improve the landing performance. By addressing the descent path, threshold height, landing flare, touchdown point accuracy, runway alignment, and centerline positioning, pilots can strive for even higher landing scores in future flights. Remember to focus on continuous skill development and attention to detail to achieve consistently excellent landings.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values