Engine Failure on Initial Climb — Runway 10 Departure
Total power loss at 400 ft AGL over dense Tampa development. No suitable forced-landing site. Decision window: seconds.
The scenario
Departing Tampa International Airport (KTPA), Tampa, FL — Runway 10, initial climb on a 092° heading. Field elevation 26 ft MSL. You are a commercial pilot with roughly 800 hours total, 120 in the SR22. This is a personal cross-country flight in your own SR22; you are familiar with the airplane.
It is a clear, calm morning in early spring: OAT 18°C, light winds from the south (180° at 3 kt), altimeter 30.02. Visibility 10+ SM. Runway 10 is active; you have been cleared for takeoff by KTPA tower. The departure environment off Runway 10 (heading 092°) is dense development — residential neighborhoods, strip malls, wooded wetland. There is no open field, no park, no clear area. If the engine fails on the initial climb heading 092°, your forced-landing options are severely constrained.
Aircraft: Cirrus SR22, loaded for a 4-hour cross-country. Fuel: 75 gallons usable (full tanks), fuel selector on LEFT. Weight and balance: you calculated 3,520 lb loaded — 120 lb over maximum gross weight of 3,400 lb. You rationalized it: the airplane is only slightly heavy, the runway is long (6,999 ft), and the conditions are perfect. You did not offload fuel or cargo.
Preflight: you completed a thorough walk-around. Engine start was normal. Run-up was normal — magnetos checked, prop cycle checked, engine instruments green. You did not notice anything amiss. You are cleared for takeoff.
Pilot: you — commercial pilot, current, 800 hours total, 120 in type. You have flown the SR22 from KTPA before. You are comfortable with the airplane and the field. You did not brief the forced-landing environment off Runway 10. You did not calculate density altitude or review the climb performance penalty of being 120 lb overweight. You did not consider what happens if the engine fails at 400 ft AGL over dense development.
- {'label': 'Field', 'value': 'KTPA · Tampa'}
- {'label': 'Runways', 'value': '10/28 · 19L/01R · 19R/01L'}
- {'label': 'Elevation', 'value': '26 ft'}
- {'label': 'Aircraft', 'value': 'SR22'}
- {'label': 'Dominant phase', 'value': 'Landing / Takeoff'}
The decision
Before we get into the decision tree — what do you know about engine failure on initial climb in the SR22? (Pick all that apply; this records your baseline.)
What the record shows
What the NTSB files show
NTSB ERA24LA007 (2023): A Cirrus SR22 struck trees approximately 1.1 miles from the departure end of the runway during initial climb at night. The pilot was distracted by primary flight display anomalies and terrain alerts. The probable cause was the pilot's failure to maintain a positive climb rate while distracted, with contributing factors including operation over maximum gross weight, which reduced initial climb performance. The airplane was operating at 3,520 lb — 120 lb over maximum gross weight of 3,400 lb. The overweight condition reduced climb performance and increased the energy state, making recovery from the distraction more difficult.
NTSB ERA18LA253 (2018): A Cirrus SR22 on takeoff experienced loss of directional control when the pilot's seat slid backward during rotation. The pilot had not properly secured the seat before flight. The seat slid back as the airplane accelerated, the pilot could not reach the pedals, and the airplane struck trees and shrubs. The probable cause was the pilot's failure to properly secure the seat — a preflight item that was overlooked.
The regional precedents (MIA91LA128, CHI92DER01, CHI92DEM03, CHI89DEM10) all show the same pattern: engine failure on initial climb over congested terrain with no suitable forced-landing site. The pilots attempted to stretch the glide, turn back to the airport, or restart the engine — all of which cost altitude and time. The outcome was impact in trees, buildings, or power lines. None of these accidents involved CAPS deployment; all resulted in fatalities or serious injury.
The real accidents cited above occurred at other airports and in other aircraft — NOT at Tampa International Airport. KTPA has its own accident history (see field dominant patterns: FORCED_LANDING 22.2%, LOSS_OF_CONTROL_INFLIGHT 11.1%), but these specific events happened elsewhere. The scenario is localized to KTPA Runway 10 to make the departure environment real and consequential for you as a pilot here.
The consistent thread across all these events: engine failure on initial climb over unsuitable terrain is an emergency that requires immediate decision-making. The SR22's CAPS is the designed recovery tool when there is no good forced-landing option. Attempting to stretch the glide, turn back to the airport, or restart the engine at low altitude over congested terrain is a trap. The decision must be made quickly and committed to fully.
Key lesson — Engine failure on initial climb over dense development at KTPA Runway 10 is an unforgiving scenario. The departure environment is dense residential neighborhoods, strip malls, and wooded wetland — no suitable forced-landing site. At 400 ft AGL with a dead engine, you have 2–3 minutes of glide time. The decision is binary: attempt to glide back to KTPA (marginal at best, especially if overweight), or deploy CAPS and accept a hard impact in a residential area. CAPS is not a last resort; it is the designed recovery tool for this situation. Operating overweight (120 lb over MGW) reduces climb performance and increases the energy state — it makes the situation worse. The preflight must include a weight-and-balance check and a realistic assessment of climb performance and forced-landing options for the departure runway.
Debrief — teaching points
Operating overweight reduces climb performance and increases the energy state.
The SR22 has a maximum gross weight of 3,400 lb. Operating 120 lb overweight (3,520 lb) reduces climb performance significantly. At KTPA (26 ft elevation) on a warm day, the density altitude can be 500+ ft higher than field elevation, further reducing climb performance. An overweight airplane climbs slower, floats longer on approach, and has less margin for error. The preflight must include a weight-and-balance calculation and a realistic assessment of climb performance. If the airplane is overweight, offload fuel or cargo before flight. Do not rationalize it.
Engine failure on initial climb over unsuitable terrain requires immediate decision-making.
At 400 ft AGL with a dead engine, you have roughly 2–3 minutes of glide time. The decision window is measured in seconds. You must immediately assess the forced-landing options: Is the airport reachable? Is there a suitable field, parking lot, or road? If the answer is no, CAPS is the correct tool. Do not spend time attempting restarts, fuel selector checks, or stretching the glide. Establish 88 KIAS best glide, scan for landing options, and commit to a decision — either the airport or CAPS.
CAPS is the designed recovery tool for engine failure without a suitable forced-landing option.
The SR22's Cirrus Airframe Parachute System (CAPS) is not a last resort; it is the primary response to engine failure, loss of control, or unrecoverable spin when there is no safe landing option. The POH explicitly states this. CAPS is designed to be deployed at any altitude above roughly 300 ft AGL. Deployment increases descent rate to roughly 1,500 fpm, but the parachute distributes the impact energy over the entire airframe, making survival likely. A controlled descent under the parachute is far better than an uncontrolled impact in trees or buildings.
Stretching the glide at low altitude over unsuitable terrain is a trap.
When you raise the nose to stretch the glide, you reduce airspeed below best glide (88 KIAS). At low altitude over unsuitable terrain, this is a trap. You trade altitude for airspeed you cannot afford to lose. You approach stall speed (Vs0 = 59 KIAS) and lose the optimal glide angle. The result is a steeper descent and impact in unsuitable terrain. At 300 ft AGL or below, with no suitable forced-landing site, CAPS is the correct tool. Do not attempt to stretch the glide.
The preflight must include a forced-landing assessment for the departure runway.
Before you line up for takeoff, you must know what the forced-landing environment looks like off the departure runway end. At KTPA Runway 10, the off-field environment is dense development — no suitable landing site. At KTPA Runway 28, the off-field environment is also dense development. At KTPA Runway 19L and 19R, the off-field environment is dense development and pasture/hay — marginal to poor. Know the forced-landing options for the runway you are using. If there is no suitable option and the engine fails on initial climb, CAPS is the correct tool.
A thorough preflight and run-up cannot detect every mechanical failure.
The preflight and run-up are designed to catch obvious problems — loose parts, fuel contamination, magneto issues, prop cycle. But they cannot detect a cylinder head crack that will fail in flight, an ignition system fault that will develop under load, or a fuel contamination that will cause power loss at altitude. The regional precedents (CHI89DEM10, CHI92DEM03) show maintenance failures that escaped detection. If the engine fails in flight despite a normal preflight and run-up, the cause is likely a mechanical failure that was not detectable on the ground. Commit to the forced-landing decision immediately; do not spend time trying to diagnose or restart.
Built from the real accident record
Scenario built from NTSB ERA24LA007 (2023 SR22 engine failure on initial climb, distraction, overweight), ERA18LA253 (2018 SR22 seat-slide loss of control on takeoff), and regional precedents MIA91LA128, CHI92DER01, CHI92DEM03, CHI89DEM10 (engine failure on initial climb over congested terrain). Localized to KTPA Runway 10.
NTSB reports: ERA24LA007 · ERA18LA253 · MIA91LA128 · CHI92DER01 · CHI92DEM03 · CHI89DEM10
ACS tasks: PA.I.F — Weather Information · PA.I.G — Cross-Country Flight Planning · PA.IX.C — Emergency Approach and Landing · PA.I.H — Human Factors · PA.II.B — Engine Starting / Systems Preflight · PA.II.D — Takeoff and Climb
Relevant FARs: §91.3 · §91.9 · §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 Cirrus SR22 scenarios · More scenarios at KTPA