Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
MY FS FLIGHTS
Flight Score
Improve the rollout
A crosswind landing is a geometry problem. The air mass you're flying in is moving sideways across the runway, and you need your ground track down the centreline with your wheels aligned to it at the moment of contact. There are two techniques that will help, the crab and the sideslip.
Read more in Crosswind Landings in the SimStart to finish · 17 stages, 15 scored
Events
Events
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 1,054 m of the approach.
Plan view — the full 1,054 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
Touched down 523 m past the threshold — beyond the full-score zone. The arrival was smooth.
The rest of the report
The flight in the Douglas DC-3 began with a 4-minute taxi from the parking area to the runway at CYRT Rankin Inlet Airport. The departure roll took place on runway 13, with a takeoff distance of 316 meters, which accounted for 17% of the runway length. The liftoff speed was 64 knots. The local weather at the time indicated a temperature of 0°C, with a wind speed of 13 knots at 79°, resulting in a crosswind of 10 knots and a headwind of 9 knots.
The enroute climb commenced overhead Rankin Inlet in Nunavut, Canada, ascending from 940 feet above sea level to 2,948 feet above sea level, an increase of 2,008 feet over 3 minutes and covering a distance of 6 nautical miles. Following the climb, the aircraft entered a level cruise phase 5 miles northeast of Rankin Inlet, lasting 15 minutes and covering a distance of 39 nautical miles.
The landing took place on runway 12 at CYCS Chesterfield Inlet Airport, which had a runway length of 1,054 meters. The height at the threshold was 62 feet above ground level, with a speed of 77 knots at the threshold. The touchdown occurred 522 meters from the threshold, with a touchdown speed of 60 knots and a Vertical Speed Indicator (VSI) of -149 feet per minute. The local weather conditions at the time included a temperature of 1°C, a wind speed of 13 knots at 79°, resulting in a crosswind of 9 knots and a headwind of 9 knots.
The total landing distance covered was 854 meters, which accounted for 81% of the runway length. The entire flight distance amounted to 58 nautical miles, taking a total of 36 minutes and consuming 135 kilograms of fuel.
Firstly, let's address the positive aspects of the aircraft landing score. The Touchdown Phase showed that the touchdown rate was smooth and the speed was on target. This indicates that the pilot was able to control the aircraft effectively during this critical phase of the landing. Additionally, the touchdown point being very long suggests that the pilot utilized more than 50% of the available runway, which could be beneficial in terms of safety margins and ensuring a successful landing.
However, there are several areas that need improvement in order to increase the overall landing score. In the Approach Phase, the descent path was above the glideslope limit. This indicates that the vertical profile of the approach was not ideal, which could lead to a less stable and controlled descent towards the runway.
Moving on to the Landing Phase, it is noted that the threshold height was above the target and the landing flare was very poor. The threshold height being above target could result in a less optimal touchdown point and potentially put the aircraft at risk of landing short of the runway. A poor landing flare suggests that the pilot may not have executed the correct technique for transitioning from descent to touchdown, which can result in a harder landing and increased stress on the landing gear.
Lastly, in the Rollout Phase, the runway alignment was 13.8 m from the centerline. This suggests that the pilot may have had difficulty maintaining a straight path during the rollout after touchdown, which could pose a risk of veering off the runway or losing control of the aircraft.
Overall, while there are some positive aspects to be acknowledged in the landing score, there are clear areas for improvement in terms of descent path, threshold height, landing flare, touchdown point, and runway alignment. By focusing on these areas and practicing proper landing techniques, the pilot can work towards achieving a higher landing score and ensuring safer and more efficient landings in the future.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values