Bounce and Climb
A destabilized approach, a bounced landing, and the critical decision to go around — in a fuel-injected glass-panel C172S at a non-towered field surrounded by development
The scenario
Departing Clearwater Air Park (KCLW), Clearwater, FL — Runway 16, landing on a VFR afternoon. Elevation 71 ft MSL. The runway is 4,108 ft, asphalt, in good condition. You are a Private pilot with roughly 180 hours total, current and proficient. This is your second visit to KCLW; you are not deeply familiar with the field.
Weather: OAT 26°C, dew point 20°C, wind 180° at 12 gusting to 18 knots. Runway 16 is a magnetic heading of 155°; the wind is roughly a 25° crosswind from the left, gusting. Visibility 10 SM, scattered clouds at 3,500 ft, VFR all the way. The field is non-towered (CTAF 122.8). You are operating under 14 CFR Part 91, VFR.
Aircraft: Cessna 172S, solo, 2,300 lb gross weight, within CG and weight limits. Full fuel. The G1000 glass panel is functioning normally; all systems are green. Fuel-injected Lycoming IO-360-L2A, 180 hp. Fixed gear, fixed-pitch prop. You have 45 hours in the C172S and are comfortable with the airplane.
Approach: You are on a 5-mile final for Runway 16. The approach has been stable until the last 2 miles. The wind is gusting; you are fighting the crosswind correction. At 1,000 ft AGL you are slightly high and slightly fast — 75 KIAS instead of the target 65 KIAS (Vref). You have not yet added full flaps; you are at 20° flaps. The runway is ahead, but the approach does not feel right.
Off-field environment: Runway 16's climb-out end (heading 155°) is surrounded by dense development — residential neighborhoods, low-density development, medium development. There is no open field, no park, no water. Off Runway 34's climb-out end (heading 335°) is similar: low-density development, medium development, and some open developed areas (parks/large lots). Forced landings at KCLW are into development, not open terrain. This is a non-towered field in a built-up area.
- {'label': 'Field', 'value': 'KCLW · Clearwater Air Park'}
- {'label': 'Runways', 'value': '16/34'}
- {'label': 'Elevation', 'value': '71 ft'}
- {'label': 'Aircraft', 'value': 'C172S'}
- {'label': 'Dominant phase', 'value': 'Landing / Approach'}
The decision
Before we enter the decision tree — what do you know about go-arounds in the C172S? (Pick all that apply; this records your baseline.)
What the record shows
What the NTSB files show
NTSB CEN25LA128 (2025): A Cessna 172S lost control during landing flare and the pilot initiated a go-around near a tree line at low altitude. The accident resulted from the pilot's failure to maintain adequate airspeed during the go-around, leading to an aerodynamic stall and terrain impact. The probable cause was the pilot's failure to maintain airplane control and adequate airspeed during the go-around.
NTSB CEN23LA159 (2023): A Cessna 172S on a personal flight experienced a tailwind on final approach and the pilot attempted a go-around when landing appeared long. The aircraft porpoised, the nose landing gear collapsed, and the aircraft departed the runway. The probable cause was the pilot's failure to maintain airplane control during an attempted go-around resulting in abnormal contact with the runway pavement and a runway excursion.
NTSB ERA21LA202 (2021): A Cessna 172S on short final in gusting crosswind conditions was high and slow; the pilot initiated a go-around but improper pitch control resulted in a tail strike and runway excursion to the left into grass. The probable cause was the pilot's improper pitch control during a go-around in gusting crosswind conditions.
NTSB CEN14CA322 (2014): A Cessna 172S being flown by a student pilot during landing practice stalled and impacted terrain off the left side of the runway when the student applied excessive back pressure on the control yoke during a go-around after a bounced landing. The probable cause was the student pilot's use of excessive back pressure on the flight controls during an attempted go-around that induced a stall and loss of control.
NTSB CEN13LA348 (2013): A Cessna 172S flown by a solo student pilot stalled during a go-around after a bounced landing at Grand Forks International Airport. The probable cause was the student pilot's inadequate recovery from a bounced landing, which resulted in an aerodynamic stall during the go-around.
The common thread across all these accidents: the go-around decision itself is not the problem — the execution is. Pilots who recognize the need to go around but then mismanage pitch control, flap retraction, or airspeed during the climb-out induce stalls, porpoises, or loss of control at low altitude where recovery is impossible. At KCLW, the off-field environment is dense development — a forced landing off the runway is into residential neighborhoods, not open terrain. The margin for error is zero.
These real accidents occurred at other airports and in other circumstances — NOT at KCLW. The scenario is localized to KCLW to make the field's off-field environment real and consequential for you as a student here.
Key lesson — A go-around is the correct decision when the approach is unstable at any point below 500 ft AGL. But the go-around itself is a critical maneuver: full throttle first, then pitch for Vy (74 KIAS), then retract flaps in stages — not all at once. Excessive back pressure on the yoke during the go-around induces a stall at low altitude. A bounced landing is a go-around trigger, not a salvage situation — do not try to recover a bounce with forward pressure and a second touchdown. At KCLW, surrounded by development, the margin for error is zero.
Debrief — teaching points
An unstable approach below 500 ft AGL is a go-around trigger.
If the approach is high, low, fast, slow, or misaligned at any point below 500 ft AGL, the correct decision is to go around. The temptation to salvage a marginal approach is strong — the runway is close, you are committed, and going around feels like failure. It is not. A go-around is the correct decision, and it is always available until the airplane is on the ground. At KCLW, surrounded by development, there is no margin for a marginal landing.
A bounced landing is a go-around trigger, not a salvage situation.
When the airplane bounces on landing, the correct response is to go around immediately — full throttle, pitch for Vy (74 KIAS), and retract flaps in stages. Do not try to salvage the bounce with forward pressure and a second touchdown. Forward pressure on a bounce can induce a porpoise, which can collapse the nose gear or cause a hard landing. The NTSB CEN23LA159 accident is a textbook example: the pilot tried to salvage a bounce, the airplane porpoised, and the nose gear collapsed.
Pitch control during a go-around is critical — excessive back pressure induces a stall.
During a go-around, the pitch control sequence is: full throttle first, then pitch for Vy (74 KIAS). Vy is 74 KIAS in the C172S — not a steep climb, not a shallow climb, but a specific airspeed that maximizes rate of climb. Excessive back pressure on the yoke during the go-around — pulling too hard to climb — decays airspeed below Vy and induces a stall at low altitude where recovery is impossible. The NTSB CEN14CA322 and CEN13LA348 accidents are both stalls induced by excessive back pressure during go-arounds after bounced landings.
Flap retraction during a go-around must be staged, not all at once.
When you retract full flaps (30°) all at once during a go-around at low altitude, the sudden change in wing lift can cause a pitch change — up or down depending on the airplane's trim and the exact moment of retraction. Staged flap retraction — 30° to 20° to 10° to 0° in sequence, with a brief pause between stages — is safer. It allows the airplane to stabilize after each change and gives you time to correct pitch if needed.
Crosswind gusts destabilize approaches and make go-arounds more likely.
In gusting crosswind conditions, the approach is inherently unstable. Wind gusts can push the airplane off centerline, change the descent rate, or cause asymmetric wing loading. The approach at KCLW in 12–18 knot gusts from the left is a classic setup for a bounce or a hard landing. Be more aggressive about going around in gusty crosswind conditions — the margin for error is smaller, and the go-around is the safer choice.
At KCLW, the off-field environment is dense development — there is no margin for error.
Runway 16's climb-out end (heading 155°) is surrounded by dense residential development, low-density development, and medium development. There is no open field, no park, no water. A forced landing off the runway at KCLW is into a neighborhood. This is not a worst-case scenario; it is the geographic reality. The margin for error on approach and landing at KCLW is zero. The go-around is not optional — it is the correct decision when the approach is marginal.
Built from the real accident record
Scenario built from NTSB CEN25LA128 (2025 C172S go-around stall), CEN23LA159 (2023 C172S go-around porpoise), ERA21LA202 (2021 C172S tail strike during go-around), CEN14CA322 (2014 C172S excessive back pressure go-around stall), and CEN13LA348 (2013 C172S bounced-landing go-around stall). Localized to KCLW.
NTSB reports: CEN25LA128 · CEN23LA159 · ERA21LA202 · CEN14CA322 · CEN13LA348
ACS tasks: PA.II.J — Go-Around / Rejected Landing · PA.II.I — Forward Slip to a Landing · PA.II.H — Short-Field Landing · PA.I.H — Human Factors · PA.IX.C — Emergency Approach and Landing
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 172S scenarios · More scenarios at KCLW