Gusts Over the Numbers
Crosswind landing in deteriorating conditions — when to go around, and what happens when you don't
The scenario
Departing St. Petersburg Clearwater International Airport (KPIE), Pinellas Park, FL — Runway 18, a 9,730-foot concrete runway aligned 171° true. Elevation 11 ft MSL. You are a Private pilot with 280 hours total, 45 hours in the Piper Cherokee 180. This is a local flight — a 1.5-hour round trip to a nearby field and back.
The weather briefing this morning showed light winds, VFR conditions, and a ceiling of 3,500 ft scattered. You filed no flight plan. You are flying solo, full fuel (36 gallons usable), within weight and balance limits. The airplane is airworthy; nothing was written up.
You depart Runway 18 at 1430 local, climb to 2,500 ft, and cruise for 45 minutes. The flight is smooth. On descent into KPIE, you contact the tower at 1520 local. Tower clears you to enter the Class D airspace (ceiling 1,600 ft MSL, towered part-time 0600–2300) and advises: 'Winds 180 at 12 gusting to 22 knots. Runway 18 in use. Caution, wind shear reported on approach.'
You are now on a 5-mile final for Runway 18. The wind is a crosswind — roughly 12 knots from the right, gusting to 22 knots. The Piper Cherokee 180's demonstrated crosswind capability is 13 knots. You are at the limit, and the gusts are exceeding it. The runway is in sight. The tower is expecting you to land.
Aircraft: Piper Cherokee 180, solo, full fuel, within limits. Fixed gear, fixed-pitch prop, carbureted Lycoming O-360, steam panel. Fuel selector is on LEFT tank (you switched from RIGHT on descent). Best glide 65 KIAS. Approach speed (Vref) 70 KIAS.
Pilot: you — Private, 280 hours total, 45 hours PA-28-180. You have landed in crosswinds before, but not in gusts this strong. You are tired from a morning of errands; you have not eaten since breakfast. You want to get this flight done.
- {'label': 'Field', 'value': 'KPIE · St. Petersburg Clearwater'}
- {'label': 'Runways', 'value': '4/22 · 18/36'}
- {'label': 'Elevation', 'value': '11 ft'}
- {'label': 'Aircraft', 'value': 'PA-28-180'}
- {'label': 'Dominant phase', 'value': 'Takeoff / Landing'}
The decision
Before the decision tree — what do you know about crosswind landings and go-around decisions in the PA-28-180? (Pick all that apply.)
What the record shows
What the NTSB files show
NTSB CEN09CA208 (2008): A Piper PA-28-180 made a hard landing on Runway 22 after ballooning and becoming airborne again. The nose landing gear collapsed, and the wing main spar was damaged. The probable cause was the pilot's improper flare during landing, resulting in a bounced landing. The airplane was a total loss.
NTSB LAX08CA035 (2007): A Piper PA-28-180 encountered a downdraft on approach, landed hard and short of Runway 18, then lost its left wheel and strut during the return flight to the home base airport. The probable cause was the pilot's misjudged distance and altitude that led to an undershoot and failure to obtain the proper touchdown point. The landing gear was damaged beyond repair.
NTSB DFW07CA213 (2007): A Piper PA-28-180 experienced thermal lift upon crossing the runway threshold and drifted off-center due to crosswind, resulting in a hard landing on the nose gear and a nose-over. The probable cause was the pilot's failure to compensate for existing wind conditions during a crosswind landing. A factor was the crosswind itself.
NTSB NYC04CA091 (2004): A Piper PA-28-180 flown by a student pilot on her first unsupervised solo flight made a high approach and hard landing on Runway 18 at a nearby airport. The aircraft bounced, porpoised, and the propeller struck the runway, causing nose gear collapse. The probable cause was the student pilot's failure to recover from the bounced landing. A contributing factor was the student pilot's lack of solo flight experience.
Regional precedent 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 commit to a go-around early; instead, fought the deteriorating control throughout rollout. The outcome was a runway excursion.
Regional precedent NTSB ERA17CA149 (2017): A North American T-6G landed hard during a go-around attempt in gusting crosswind conditions; the right wingtip contacted the runway, the aircraft pivoted right, and nosed over. The pilot failed to maintain directional control during the landing roll and go-around in gusting wind conditions.
The real accidents cited above occurred at other airports and in other aircraft — NOT at KPIE. KPIE's own dominant accident pattern (from its accident corpus) shows LOSS_OF_CONTROL_INFLIGHT (21.2%), LOSS_OF_CONTROL_GROUND (15.2%), and STALL_SPIN (12.1%) as the top three categories. Crosswind loss-of-control events are a known hazard at this field, particularly on Runway 18 when winds are gusty from the east (180°).
The consistent thread across all these events: a crosswind landing in gusty conditions that exceed the airplane's demonstrated crosswind capability is a trap. The airplane's control authority is not guaranteed. The decision to go around — committed early, before the approach becomes unstable — is the one that saves the airplane and the pilot. Fatigue, hunger, and the desire to 'get it done' are powerful factors that degrade decision-making. Recognize them and make the conservative choice.
Key lesson — The PA-28-180's demonstrated crosswind capability is 13 knots. Gusts exceeding that limit mean the airplane's control authority is not guaranteed. A go-around committed early (before touchdown) is always safer than fighting a deteriorating approach to the runway. Fatigue and the desire to complete the flight are powerful factors that degrade decision-making. Recognize your limits and make the conservative decision — divert to a runway with a better wind alignment, or to a nearby airport with calmer conditions. The airplane will thank you.
Debrief — teaching points
Demonstrated crosswind limits are design limits, not suggestions.
The PA-28-180's demonstrated crosswind capability is 13 knots. This is the maximum crosswind component the airplane was tested to handle during certification. Gusts exceeding this limit mean the airplane's control authority is not guaranteed. When tower reports winds of 12 gusting to 22 knots, the gusts are exceeding the airplane's design envelope. The correct response is to recognize this and either divert to a runway with a better wind alignment or go around if the approach becomes unstable. Exceeding demonstrated limits is not a sign of skill — it is a sign of poor judgment.
A go-around committed early is always safer than fighting a deteriorating approach.
The NTSB data on crosswind landing accidents is clear: pilots who commit to a go-around early (before touchdown, ideally before 200 ft AGL) survive. Pilots who fight a deteriorating approach all the way to the runway often do not. The decision to go around is not a failure — it is airmanship. At 200 ft AGL with a drifting airplane and gusts exceeding demonstrated limits, the correct response is to advance the throttle, raise the flaps, and climb away. The runway will still be there after the winds moderate or you divert to a better runway.
A bounced landing is a warning, not an opportunity to land again.
When an airplane bounces on landing, it is a sign that the approach was unstable or the landing technique was poor. The correct response is to go around — advance the throttle, raise the flaps, and climb to pattern altitude. Never try to land again after a bounce. The NTSB NYC04CA091 case shows a student pilot who bounced, tried to land again, and porpoised. The propeller struck the runway, the nose gear collapsed, and the airplane was destroyed. The lesson: a bounce is a go-around signal.
Fatigue and hunger degrade decision-making and stick-and-rudder skills.
The scenario setup notes that you had not eaten since breakfast and were tired from a morning of errands. These are real factors in landing accidents. Fatigue degrades judgment, reduces reaction time, and impairs fine motor control — all critical for a crosswind landing. Hunger adds to the fatigue. The desire to 'get it done' and get home is a powerful motivator that overrides good judgment. Recognize these factors in yourself and make the conservative decision. If you are tired and hungry, divert to a nearby airport with calmer conditions. Your safety is more important than schedule pressure.
The nose gear is vulnerable to hard landings and crosswind loads.
The PA-28-180's nose gear is not as robust as the main landing gear. Hard landings, bounces, and crosswind loads can exceed its design limits. The NTSB CEN09CA208 case shows a hard landing that collapsed the nose gear. The DFW07CA213 case shows a crosswind landing that resulted in a hard landing on the nose gear and a nose-over. The NYC04CA091 case shows a bounced landing where the propeller struck the runway and the nose gear collapsed. The lesson: treat the nose gear with respect. Smooth landings, proper crosswind technique, and a go-around when the approach is unstable are the ways to protect it.
Runway selection matters — use the runway that gives you the best wind alignment.
KPIE has two runways: Runway 18/36 (9,730 ft, concrete) and Runway 04/22 (6,000 ft, asphalt). When the wind is 180° at 12 gusting to 22 knots, Runway 18 is a 180° crosswind. Runway 36 is roughly 30° off the wind — a much better option. Runway 04/22 would be even better if the wind were from a different direction. Always ask yourself: is there a runway with a better wind alignment? If so, request a divert. The tower will clear you. A runway with a better wind alignment is worth the extra time.
Built from the real accident record
Scenario built from NTSB CEN09CA208 (2008 PA-28-180 hard landing / nose gear collapse), LAX08CA035 (2007 PA-28-180 undershoot / hard landing), DFW07CA213 (2007 PA-28-180 crosswind loss of directional control), NYC04CA091 (2004 PA-28-180 student solo bounced landing), and regional precedents GAA17CA105, ERA17CA149, GAA16CA149, CHI02TA149 (crosswind loss-of-control events in similar aircraft). Localized to KPIE.
NTSB reports: CEN09CA208 · LAX08CA035 · DFW07CA213 · NYC04CA091 · GAA17CA105 · ERA17CA149 · GAA16CA149 · CHI02TA149
ACS tasks: PA.I.F — Weather Information · PA.I.G — Cross-Country Flight Planning · PA.III.A — Preflight Preparation · PA.III.B — Preflight Procedures · PA.IV.A — Normal Takeoff and Climb · PA.IV.B — Normal Approach and Landing · PA.IV.C — Go-Around / Rejected Landing · PA.I.H — Human Factors
Relevant FARs: §91.3 · §91.13 · §91.175
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 Piper Cherokee 180 scenarios · More scenarios at KPIE