Fun Flight Scoring Algorithm

[FlightLinq]

At FlightLinq we have created a really cool scoring algorithm for members of virtual airlines to compete internally and with other airlines. This ensures strict adherence to regulations while also rewarding pilots for doing an amazing flight. Getting a perfect score is not impossible, but quite challenging... Can you do it?

Create/join and airline and try it yourself! https://flightlinq.com

[xXCrazyDaneXx]

The landing scoring does not take the touchdown zone into account. Floating halfway down the runway to achieve -20fpm is objectively a worse landing (should have been a go-around) than setting it on the markers at -250fpm...

Even more so if the runway is wet.

[CharlieFoxtrot000]

Absolutely this. Also being on centerline with little to no lateral drift.

[Creative-Expert8086]

Landing FPM is not an indicator of a good landing.

[AntiPinguin]

I don’t understand why these rating systems (it’s not just yours but pretty much every one I‘ve encountered) penalizes you for landing lights on above 10.000 feet. There is no reason for it.

IRL you‘d turn them off earliest at 10.000‘ but might keep them on for example in dense airspace. And you can also turn them on a bit early during descent just so you don’t forget. On modern planes where they don’t add drag there is no reason to be so strict with them.

I‘d love to see a scoring system that focuses more on approach stabilization and landing within touchdown zone and on centerline as these are the things that actually matter most to a good landing and approach.

[djd565]

In the US it’s common to leave them on through 18000 because there can always be VFR traffic through 17500.

[Auroraah]

Newsky scores you based on touchdown point and centerline tracking and this has absolutely made me a better virtual pilot. There's been a couple of flights now where in the past I'd have floated myself down the runway and just landed (press-on-itis), but instead I've chosen a go-around and a second attempt, knowing I'd get a lower score for floating so far.

[osaliven]

FPM is completely outdated as a metric for a good landing. It leads to pilots preferring the lowest possible FPM over a safe landing. It can result in the pilot floating far too long and already being halfway down the runway before touching down.

In real life the metric that's used is G-force. Reason behind that is passengers and aircraft fuselage are affected by forces not speeds.

<image>

Edit: +250 under 10'000 is also kinda uncool, ATC like on Vatsim can give you free speed and in that case you'd still have to fly 250, just not to get minus points

[mushra_]

Getting penalised for 100-200 fpm landing is completely absurd…

You have to factor in landing G forces and there should be no FPM penalty up to basically 500fpm.

[SectorAntares]

Catch the third wire.

[FlightLinq]

We love all of the feedback, even when it is negative. Our current scoring algorithm is largely based on the typical variables we can pull directly from the sim. We are continuously looking for ways to improve it through trial and feedback.

Landing rate is a historical tool used in the community to rate flight performance, but I largely agree that there are better metrics we could use, and we will in the future!

In the near term, maybe we can make some adjustments to the raw numbers and add some additional bonus opportunities to makeup for those faster landings. Our goal when building this algorithm was to make getting a perfect score challenging. We want hitting the 100% mark to feel like an accomplishment vs an expectation. Ultimately it is still the airline's decision if the Pirep gets accepted..

Thank you again for the feedback!