Wings and Feathers
A bird strike on approach to Brooksville–Tampa Bay Regional Airport — damage assessment, control authority, and the go-around decision
The scenario
Departing Brooksville–Tampa Bay Regional Airport (KBKV), Brooksville, FL — Runway 09, a clear morning in late spring. Elevation 76 ft MSL. You are a Private pilot with roughly 250 hours total, 40 hours in the C172R. This is a local instructional flight with a safety pilot (another Private pilot, 180 hours). The airplane is within limits, full fuel, no write-ups.
Conditions: OAT 24°C, dew point 18°C, wind 120° at 12 gusting to 18 knots. Runway 09 is a 7,001-foot concrete runway oriented 090° magnetic. The crosswind component is roughly 8–10 knots gusting to 14 knots — within the C172R's demonstrated crosswind capability (around 15 knots), but gusty and requiring attention. Visibility 10 SM, scattered clouds at 3,500 ft. Class D airspace; tower is active (0700–2200).
You have completed a local practice area flight — slow flight, stalls, turns around a point — and are returning to KBKV for landing. You are on a left base for Runway 09, 400 ft AGL, descending at 65 KIAS (Vref, short-field approach speed with full flaps). The runway is in sight. The approach is stable. You are configured for landing: flaps 30°, gear down (fixed), mixture rich, boost pump on.
At 200 ft AGL, on short final, a large bird — likely a vulture or osprey — emerges from the right side of the approach path. It is on a collision course. You have roughly one second to react.
- {'label': 'Field', 'value': 'KBKV · Brooksville–Tampa Bay'}
- {'label': 'Runways', 'value': '3/21 · 9/27'}
- {'label': 'Elevation', 'value': '76 ft'}
- {'label': 'Aircraft', 'value': 'C172R'}
- {'label': 'Dominant phase', 'value': 'Landing / Cruise'}
The decision
Before we get into the decision tree — what do you know about bird strikes in the C172R and crosswind control? (Pick all that apply.)
What the record shows
What the NTSB files show
NTSB CEN24LA025 (2023): A Cessna 172R on an instructional flight collided with a bird during an avoidance maneuver near the airport. The pilot attempted to dodge the bird by maneuvering, but the bird struck the aircraft during the avoidance maneuver. The accident resulted from the in-flight collision with a bird. The outcome and extent of damage are not detailed in the public docket, but the case illustrates that bird strikes can occur even when pilots attempt to avoid them.
NTSB FTW02LA124 (2002): A Cessna 172R on an instructional flight at East Texas Regional Airport sustained damage to the right wing when it struck a large bird during approach on left base for Runway 09. The pilot successfully continued the approach and landed without further incident. The damage was limited to the wing leading edge — a dent and minor skin damage. The pilot's decision to continue the approach and land was appropriate because the damage was minor and the airplane remained controllable.
NTSB ERA21LA119 (2021): A Cessna 172R on a personal flight veered left off the runway during landing in gusting crosswind conditions and struck the ground with the propeller and left wing tip. The accident was attributed to the pilot's failure to maintain directional control during landing in a gusting crosswind. The wind was 160° at 15 gusting to 25 knots — a 25-knot gust exceeds the C172R's demonstrated crosswind capability. The pilot did not recognize the warning signs of loss of directional control (wing lift, yaw) and did not execute a go-around. This accident is a direct precedent for KBKV: the field's own accident corpus shows RUNWAY_EXCURSION (11.5%) and LOSS_OF_CONTROL_GROUND (7.7%) as dominant patterns.
NTSB GAA17CA105 (2016): A Piper PA-46 experienced loss of directional control during landing rollout in gusting crosswind conditions that exceeded the aircraft's demonstrated crosswind capability. The pilot did not recognize that the conditions exceeded the airplane's limits and did not commit to a go-around early. The lesson: recognize when crosswind conditions exceed aircraft limits and commit to go-around early rather than fighting deteriorating control during rollout.
NTSB GAA19CA170 (2019): A Piper PA-11 tailwheel aircraft lost directional control during landing roll in gusting crosswind conditions, veered off the runway, struck a ditch, and came to rest inverted. The accident was attributed to the pilot's failure to maintain directional control during the landing roll in gusting wind conditions. The lesson: in a crosswind, recognize abrupt wing lift as a loss-of-control warning and commit to power reduction and controlled exit (go-around) rather than fighting uncontrollable yaw.
The real accidents cited above occurred at other airports and in other aircraft (or the same type at other fields) — NOT at Brooksville–Tampa Bay Regional Airport. KBKV has its own accident history (HARD_LANDING 26.9%, FORCED_LANDING 11.5%, RUNWAY_EXCURSION 11.5%, LOSS_OF_CONTROL_GROUND 7.7%, BIRD_STRIKE 7.7%), but these specific NTSB cases happened elsewhere. The scenario is localized to KBKV to make the field's real off-field environment (pasture, open developed areas, medium development) and real crosswind conditions relevant to your decision-making.
The consistent thread across all these events: bird strikes are unpredictable, but the response is not. If a bird strike occurs and you are uncertain about damage or control authority, a go-around is the correct decision. If you are in a crosswind and you feel the airplane drifting or the aileron response sluggish, recognize that as a loss-of-control warning and commit to a go-around or runway change before touchdown. The NTSB data shows that pilots who recognize the warning signs early and commit to a go-around or diversion survive; pilots who fight deteriorating control during landing do not.
Key lesson — At KBKV, bird strikes are a known hazard (7.7% of the field's accident corpus). If a bird strike occurs on approach, assess the damage calmly, request a runway that minimizes control demands (especially in a crosswind), and land the airplane. If you are uncertain about control authority, go around or divert. In a gusting crosswind (14+ knots), recognize the warning signs of loss of directional control (wing lift, sluggish aileron response) and commit to a go-around or runway change before touchdown. The field's dominant accident pattern (RUNWAY_EXCURSION 11.5%, LOSS_OF_CONTROL_GROUND 7.7%) shows that loss of directional control during landing is a real hazard here — do not attempt to land a damaged airplane in a marginal crosswind.
Debrief — teaching points
Bird strikes on approach are unpredictable, but the response is not.
A bird strike can occur at any altitude, any time. The NTSB cases show that birds can be struck during avoidance maneuvers (CEN24LA025) or during a stable approach (FTW02LA124). The key is to recognize the strike, assess the damage calmly, and make a deliberate decision about whether to land or go around. Do not attempt to land a possibly-damaged airplane in a marginal crosswind. The FTW02LA124 pilot successfully continued the approach after a bird strike because the damage was minor and the airplane remained controllable — but that pilot had time and altitude to assess. If you are uncertain, go around or divert.
After a bird strike, request a runway that minimizes control demands.
At KBKV, if a bird strike damages the right wing or aileron, landing on Runway 09 in a 14-knot gusting crosswind is asking for trouble. The right aileron may be sluggish or damaged; the crosswind will demand full aileron authority. Request Runway 27 (downwind, reduced crosswind) or divert to a nearby airport with calmer winds. The ERA21LA119 and GAA17CA105 precedents show that pilots who attempt to land in marginal crosswind conditions with damaged or sluggish controls lose directional control during rollout. Recognize the warning signs early (wing lift, sluggish aileron response) and commit to a go-around or runway change before touchdown.
Loss of directional control in a crosswind is a common accident mode at KBKV.
KBKV's accident corpus shows RUNWAY_EXCURSION (11.5%) and LOSS_OF_CONTROL_GROUND (7.7%) as dominant patterns. The regional precedents (GAA17CA105, ERA21LA119, GAA19CA170) all involve loss of directional control during landing in a gusting crosswind. The warning signs are: (1) wing lift — a gust lifts the upwind wing; (2) sluggish aileron response — you correct with aileron but the response is slow or weak; (3) yaw — the nose drifts downwind. If you feel any of these, reduce power and execute a go-around. Do not attempt to land a damaged airplane in a marginal crosswind.
The C172R's demonstrated crosswind capability is around 15 knots.
At KBKV, a wind of 120° at 12 gusting 18 knots gives a crosswind component of roughly 8–10 knots gusting to 14 knots — within limits, but gusty. A 25-knot gust (as in ERA21LA119) exceeds the C172R's capability. Know your airplane's limits and your personal minimums. If the gusts exceed your comfort level, request a runway with reduced crosswind or divert. There is no shame in diverting after a bird strike and marginal crosswind conditions — it is the correct decision.
Go-around is the correct decision when uncertain about damage or control.
If a bird strike occurs and you are uncertain about damage or control authority, execute a go-around immediately. Climb to 500 ft AGL, circle the field, and assess the situation. The control feel in a climb may be different from the control feel on approach — a go-around gives you time and altitude to think. If the control feel is sluggish or asymmetric, request a runway with reduced crosswind or divert. The FTW02LA124 pilot landed successfully after a bird strike because the damage was minor; the ERA21LA119 pilot lost directional control because the damage (or the crosswind) exceeded the airplane's capability. Know the difference.
Built from the real accident record
Scenario built from NTSB CEN24LA025 (2023 C172R bird strike during avoidance maneuver) and FTW02LA124 (2002 C172R bird strike on approach, successful landing). Localized to Brooksville–Tampa Bay Regional Airport (KBKV). Regional crosswind precedents: GAA17CA105 (2016 PA-46 crosswind loss of control), ERA21LA119 (2021 C172R crosswind landing excursion), GAA19CA170 (2019 PA-11 tailwheel crosswind loss of control).
NTSB reports: CEN24LA025 · FTW02LA124 · GAA17CA105 · ERA21LA119 · GAA19CA170
ACS tasks: PA.II.A — Preflight Inspection · PA.III.A — Normal Takeoff and Climb · PA.IV.A — Normal Approach and Landing · PA.IV.B — Forward Slip to a Landing · PA.IV.C — Go-Around / Rejected Landing · PA.IX.C — Emergency Approach and Landing · PA.I.H — Human Factors
Relevant FARs: §91.3 · §91.13 · §91.185
Step through the full decision tree, make the calls, and see where each choice leads — then debrief it with your CFI.
Open the interactive scenario →All sample scenarios · More Cessna 172R scenarios · More scenarios at KBKV