Go-Around Decision at Lakeland
Destabilized approach, gusting crosswind, and the critical decision to push forward or climb — every second counts
The scenario
Departing and landing at Lakeland Linder International Airport (KLAL), Lakeland, FL — Runway 10, elevation 142 ft MSL. You are a Private pilot, roughly 250 hours total, with 45 hours in the C172S. This is a solo local flight; you are practicing approaches and landings.
Current conditions: VFR, scattered clouds at 2,500 ft, visibility 8 SM. Wind is reported as 080° at 12 knots, gusting to 18 knots. Runway 10 is aligned 090° true (magnetic 095°). The crosswind component is roughly 8–10 knots, well within limits, but the gusts are variable and the wind is not aligned with the runway.
You have completed three full-stop landings on Runway 10 this morning. The fourth approach is now in progress. You are on a 3° glide slope, 2 nm from the runway, descending through 800 ft AGL. The approach is stable so far, but the wind is noticeably gusty.
Aircraft: Cessna 172S, solo, 1,800 lb gross weight, within limits. Fuel-injected Lycoming IO-360-L2A, glass panel (G1000), fixed gear, fixed-pitch prop. Flaps are at 0° (clean). You are planning a full-flap landing (30°) after turning final.
Runway 10's off-field environment (climb-out heading 090°): marginal — mostly low-density development, open developed areas (parks/large lots), and dense development. Not ideal for a forced landing, but workable. Runway 28's environment (opposite direction, heading 270°) is poor — medium development, evergreen forest, and low-density development. Runway 10 is the better choice for today's wind.
- {'label': 'Field', 'value': 'KLAL · Lakeland Linder'}
- {'label': 'Runways', 'value': '5/23 · 10/28'}
- {'label': 'Elevation', 'value': '142 ft'}
- {'label': 'Aircraft', 'value': 'C172S'}
- {'label': 'Dominant phase', 'value': 'Landing / Takeoff'}
The decision
Before we get into the decision tree — what do you already know about go-around technique 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 pilot's failure to maintain adequate airspeed during the go-around resulted in 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. 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 the attempted go-around, resulting in abnormal contact with the runway 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 improper pitch control during the 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 the 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 the bounced landing, which resulted in an aerodynamic stall during the go-around.
All of these real accidents occurred at other airports — NOT at Lakeland Linder International Airport (KLAL). However, KLAL's own accident history shows that loss-of-control in-flight (23.7%) and loss-of-control on the ground (19.4%) are the dominant patterns. Runway excursions (8.6%) and hard landings (11.8%) are also common. The go-around accident is a real risk at this field.
The consistent thread across all these events: the go-around is a critical maneuver that demands precise control of airspeed and pitch. Excessive pitch-up, rapid flap retraction, or failure to maintain airspeed above Vs0 (40 KIAS) results in a stall at low altitude — where recovery is impossible. The C172S's best rate of climb (Vy) is 74 KIAS; the stall speed in landing configuration (Vs0) is 40 KIAS. The margin is 34 knots. Lose airspeed during the go-around and you lose that margin.
Key lesson — The go-around decision must be made early — before you are committed to landing. If the approach is unstable (high, slow, drifting, or in gusting crosswind), go around at 600–800 ft AGL when you have altitude and airspeed. During the go-around, maintain airspeed above Vs0 (40 KIAS), reduce flaps gradually (not all at once), and pitch to climb attitude (not to a specific pitch angle). The airplane will climb if you maintain airspeed and power. At KLAL, Runway 10's off-field environment is marginal (low-density development, open areas, dense development) — a stall at 300 ft AGL off the left side of the runway is survivable only if the airplane is under control.
Debrief — teaching points
The go-around decision must be made early.
If the approach is unstable — high, slow, drifting, or in gusting crosswind — the decision to go around must be made at 600–800 ft AGL, when you have altitude and airspeed. At 400 ft AGL or below, a go-around is marginal; at 300 ft AGL or below, a go-around is a stall risk. The NTSB CEN25LA128 pilot initiated a go-around near a tree line at low altitude and stalled. The CEN14CA322 student applied excessive back pressure during a go-around after a bounced landing and stalled. Both accidents were at low altitude where recovery was impossible. Make the decision early.
Airspeed is the priority during a go-around — not pitch attitude.
During a go-around, maintain airspeed above Vs0 (40 KIAS stall speed in landing configuration). Pitch to climb attitude, not to a specific pitch angle. The airplane will climb if you maintain airspeed and power. If you pitch up too aggressively or retract flaps too quickly, the airspeed will drop and you will approach a stall. The C172S's best rate of climb (Vy) is 74 KIAS; the stall speed in landing configuration is 40 KIAS. The margin is 34 knots. Lose airspeed and you lose that margin.
Reduce flaps gradually during a go-around — not all at once.
When you retract flaps suddenly, the airplane pitches up (sudden flap retraction causes a pitch change). If you are slow and in a go-around, this pitch change can push you toward a stall. Reduce flaps gradually: from 30° to 20° to 0° over 10–15 seconds. As you reduce flaps, trim to maintain climb attitude. The airplane will respond smoothly and airspeed will increase.
Gusting crosswind on final approach is a go-around trigger.
The NTSB ERA21LA202 pilot was on short final in gusting crosswind conditions, high and slow. The pilot initiated a go-around but improper pitch control resulted in a tail strike and runway excursion. Gusting crosswind on final approach makes the airplane difficult to control and the landing unstable. If you are high, slow, and in gusting crosswind, go around. The wind may stabilize on the next approach, or you may choose a different runway.
A bounced landing is a go-around trigger — do not try to salvage it.
The NTSB CEN13LA348 pilot stalled during a go-around after a bounced landing. The NTSB CEN14CA322 student applied excessive back pressure during a go-around after a bounced landing and stalled. A bounced landing means the approach was unstable. Do not try to salvage it with a hard flare or a go-around with excessive pitch. Go around early, climb to pattern altitude, and set up for another approach.
KLAL's dominant accident pattern is loss-of-control in-flight (23.7%) and loss-of-control on the ground (19.4%).
Runway excursions (8.6%) and hard landings (11.8%) are also common at KLAL. Most of these accidents are preventable: early go-around decisions, stable approaches, and proper pitch control during the go-around. Know the field's accident history and fly defensively.
Built from the real accident record
Scenario built from NTSB CEN25LA128 (2025 C172S go-around stall), CEN23LA159 (2023 C172S go-around loss of control), ERA21LA202 (2021 C172S go-around tail strike in crosswind), CEN14CA322 (2014 C172S student go-around stall), and CEN13LA348 (2013 C172S solo student go-around stall). Real events occurred at other airports — NOT at Lakeland Linder International Airport (KLAL).
NTSB reports: CEN25LA128 · CEN23LA159 · ERA21LA202 · CEN14CA322 · CEN13LA348
ACS tasks: PA.II.H — Approach and Landing · PA.II.I — Go-Around / Rejected Landing · PA.I.H — Human Factors · PA.IX.C — Emergency Approach and Landing · PA.II.A — Preflight Preparation
Relevant FARs: §91.3 · §91.13 · §91.103
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 KLAL