Long and High on Final
Excess approach energy, a tailwind component, and the decision to go around — runway excursion risk at a busy Class B airport
The scenario
Departing Tampa International Airport (KTPA), Tampa, FL — Runway 19L, a VFR personal flight to a nearby field and return. Elevation 26 ft MSL. KTPA is Class B airspace, towered 24 hours, with three parallel runways (19L/19R/10, plus 01L/01R). You are in the landing phase after a 45-minute flight.
Current conditions: OAT 24°C, wind 180° at 12 knots gusting to 18 knots. Runway 19L is the active landing runway (heading 182°). The wind is nearly aligned with the runway — a 2–3 knot headwind component, but with gusts, the effective headwind is variable. Visibility 10 SM, scattered clouds at 3,500 ft, VFR throughout.
You are on a 3° glide slope for Runway 19L, 2 miles out, 1,200 ft AGL. You are configured: gear down (fixed), flaps 20°, airspeed 75 KIAS — slightly above Vref (65 KIAS) but acceptable for the gusting conditions. The runway is 8,300 ft long. You are cleared to land.
Aircraft: Cessna 172S, solo, within limits. Lycoming IO-360-L2A (fuel-injected), fixed-pitch prop, fixed gear, G1000 glass panel with reversionary backup instruments. All systems normal.
Pilot: you — a Private pilot, current, roughly 250 hours total. You have 45 hours in the C172S. You are familiar with KTPA from training flights. The gusts are noticeable but not extreme; you have landed in similar conditions before.
- {'label': 'Field', 'value': 'KTPA · Tampa'}
- {'label': 'Runways', 'value': '10/28 · 19L/01R · 19R/01L'}
- {'label': 'Elevation', 'value': '26 ft'}
- {'label': 'Aircraft', 'value': 'C172S'}
- {'label': 'Dominant phase', 'value': 'Landing / Takeoff'}
The decision
Before we enter the decision tree — what do you know about approach energy management and go-around execution in the C172S? (Pick all that apply.)
What the record shows
What the NTSB files show
NTSB CEN23LA159 (2023): A Cessna 172S on a personal flight experienced a tailwind component on final approach. The pilot attempted a go-around when landing appeared long. During the go-around, the aircraft porpoised (nose up, then down, then up again), 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 pavement and a runway excursion. The C172S's fixed gear and fixed-pitch prop mean that go-around execution is entirely dependent on smooth pitch and power management — there is no gear to raise or prop to adjust.
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. A tail strike in a C172S is a serious structural event; the empennage is not designed to absorb impact loads from the runway. Recovery from a tail strike requires immediate assessment and a controlled landing or divert.
NTSB ERA11LA421 (2011): A Cessna 172S experienced total electrical failure shortly after takeoff from Lincoln Park Airport, rendering the flaps inoperable. The pilot landed long on the runway with high airspeed and inadequate braking performance, resulting in a runway overrun and collision with a guardrail. The probable cause was the pilot's improper touchdown point, resulting in a runway overrun. In the C172S, flaps are electrically actuated; a total electrical failure means no flaps. A no-flap landing requires a longer runway and more careful energy management.
KTPA's dominant accident pattern includes RUNWAY_EXCURSION (22.2% of accidents) and LOSS_OF_CONTROL_GROUND (8.9%). These are not unique to KTPA, but they are the field's most common accident modes. Runway 19L is 8,300 ft long — adequate for a C172S, but a high-and-fast approach that results in a long landing or a go-around that results in a tail strike can quickly consume that runway.
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), but these specific events happened elsewhere. The scenario is localized to KTPA to make the runway environment and off-field reality consequential for you as a student here.
The consistent thread across all these events: approach energy management and go-around execution are critical. A high-and-fast approach that is not corrected early becomes a long landing or a go-around. A go-around that is executed with abrupt pitch control risks a tail strike or porpoise. Smooth, deliberate pitch and power management — especially at low altitude — is the entire lesson.
Key lesson — In the C172S at KTPA, a high-and-fast approach must be corrected early — by 1.5 nm out — using slip, power reduction, or flap extension. If you are still high at 0.5 nm out, commit to a long landing (the runway is 8,300 ft) or execute a smooth, controlled go-around with gradual pitch and staged flap retraction. Abrupt pitch control during a go-around at low altitude risks a tail strike and runway excursion. Off Runway 19L, the off-field environment is dense development and pasture — not a soft field. A runway excursion into that environment is serious.
Debrief — teaching points
Approach energy management must begin at 2 nm out.
By 2 nm out on final, you should be on glide slope, at Vref or Vref + gust correction (65 KIAS + 3 knots for 6-knot gusts = 68 KIAS in this scenario), and configured with flaps 20°. If you are high at 2 nm out, correct it immediately using slip, power reduction, or flap extension. A high approach at 1.5 nm out is still manageable; a high approach at 0.5 nm out forces a choice between a long landing and a go-around. Correct early.
A long landing on an 8,300 ft runway is acceptable; a runway excursion is not.
Runway 19L at KTPA is 8,300 ft long. A landing at 2,000 ft down the runway leaves 6,300 ft for rollout and braking — plenty of distance. A long landing is not a failure; it is a consequence of a high approach. However, if braking is inadequate or the runway is shorter, a long landing becomes a runway excursion. Know the runway length and plan your landing distance accordingly. For a C172S at gross weight, landing distance is roughly 1,500–1,700 ft in calm conditions; add 50% for gusting winds.
A go-around requires smooth, staged pitch and power management.
In a go-around from low altitude, apply full throttle smoothly, pitch up gradually (5–8° nose-up attitude), and raise flaps in stages (20° → 10° → 0°), not all at once. Abrupt pitch control at low altitude risks a tail strike (the tail of the C172S strikes the runway if pitch is too aggressive) or a porpoise (nose up, then down, then up again). Smooth control inputs are essential. Once you are climbing at Vy (74 KIAS) and altitude is safe (500 ft AGL), you can assess the situation and plan the next approach.
A tail strike in a C172S is a serious structural event.
The empennage of the C172S is not designed to absorb impact loads from the runway. A tail strike during a go-around damages the tail section and can make the airplane unstable (porpoise). If a tail strike occurs, reduce pitch immediately to level flight, establish a shallow climb at Vy (74 KIAS), and assess the damage. If the airplane is still controllable, climb to a safe altitude and request an emergency landing. If the airplane is unstable, land immediately on the remaining runway. A tail strike is not a minor event; it requires an emergency landing and a post-flight inspection.
Gusting winds require a slight airspeed addition on approach.
In gusting winds, add half the gust speed to Vref. For example, if the wind is 12 knots gusting to 18 knots (6-knot gust), add 3 knots to Vref (65 KIAS) for a target of 68 KIAS. This provides a small margin of airspeed to absorb wind shear on short final without stalling. Do not add more than half the gust speed; excessive airspeed leads to a long landing and runway excursion risk.
Off Runway 19L at KTPA, the off-field environment is dense development and pasture.
A runway excursion off Runway 19L (heading 182°) puts you into dense development and pasture/hay. This is not a soft field or an open area; it is built-up terrain with trees, structures, and obstacles. A runway excursion in this environment is serious. Stay on the runway. Correct high approaches early, and execute go-arounds smoothly.
Built from the real accident record
Scenario built from NTSB CEN23LA159 (2023 C172S go-around porpoise / nose gear collapse), ERA21LA202 (2021 C172S improper pitch control in go-around / tail strike), and ERA11LA421 (2011 C172S electrical failure / long landing / runway overrun). Anonymized and localized to KTPA.
NTSB reports: CEN23LA159 · ERA21LA202 · ERA11LA421
ACS tasks: PA.I.F — Weather Information · PA.I.G — Cross-Country Flight Planning · PA.VIII.A — Approaches and Landings · PA.VIII.B — Go-Around / Rejected Landing · PA.I.H — Human Factors
Relevant FARs: §91.3 · §91.13 · §91.121
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 KTPA