Engine Failure on Initial Climb — Water Ahead
Total power loss at 400 ft AGL departing Runway 22 over Tampa Bay. The SR22's ballistic parachute is your lifeline.
The scenario
Departing Peter O Knight Airport (KTPF), Tampa, FL — Runway 22, initial climb on a 217° heading. Elevation 8 ft MSL. You are a commercial pilot with 800 hours total, 120 hours in the SR22. This is a local proficiency flight in your own aircraft.
Conditions are favorable: clear skies, light winds from the south at 4 kt, visibility 10 SM, OAT 26°C, altimeter 29.96. The Gulf of Mexico and Tampa Bay lie to the southwest and south of the field. Runway 22's climb-out environment is open water — the off-field option off that runway end is ditching, not a field landing.
You are at 400 ft AGL, climbing at 101 KIAS (Vy, best rate of climb), heading 217°, when the engine loses all power. The tachometer drops to zero. The prop is no longer turning. You have roughly 30 seconds of useful altitude before the water is below you.
Aircraft: Cirrus SR22, solo, full fuel (84 gallons usable), within CG and weight limits. The airplane was preflight-checked and airworthy at departure. Engine: Continental IO-550-N, 310 hp, fuel-injected. Fuel selector: LEFT tank selected. No mechanical anomaly was noted during run-up.
You have one tool that no other single-engine airplane in this scenario set has: the Cirrus Airframe Parachute System (CAPS) — a ballistic recovery parachute that can be deployed at any airspeed up to 133 KIAS (Vpd, max demonstrated CAPS deploy speed). At 400 ft AGL with zero engine power and open water ahead, CAPS is your primary recovery option. The question is not whether to deploy it — the question is how to manage the descent and ditching to maximize survival.
- {'label': 'Field', 'value': 'KTPF · Peter O Knight'}
- {'label': 'Runways', 'value': '4/22 · 18/36'}
- {'label': 'Elevation', 'value': '8 ft'}
- {'label': 'Aircraft', 'value': 'SR22'}
- {'label': 'Dominant phase', 'value': 'Landing / Approach'}
The decision
Before we get into the decision tree — what do you already know about engine failure on initial climb in the SR22 and the role of CAPS? (Pick all that apply; this records your baseline.)
What the record shows
What the NTSB files show
NTSB ERA19TA120 (2019): A Cirrus SR22 on a cross-country flight experienced total loss of engine power due to oil pressure loss at 8,000 feet. The pilot deployed the ballistic recovery parachute and ditched the aircraft in the Atlantic Ocean in a controlled manner. The pilot and passenger survived. The probable cause was loss of oil pressure and subsequent total loss of engine power for undetermined reasons. The CAPS deployment and controlled ditching were the correct response to an unrecoverable engine failure at altitude.
NTSB WPR15LA089 (2015): A Cirrus SR22 on a transpacific repositioning flight was unable to transfer fuel from the aft auxiliary tank to main tanks. The pilot diverted to a cruise ship and deployed the ballistic recovery parachute for a controlled ditching. The pilot survived. The probable cause was the pilot's inability to transfer fuel from the aft auxiliary fuel tank to the main fuel tanks for reasons that could not be determined because the airplane was ditched and not recovered. The CAPS system proved to be the lifeline in a fuel-management emergency.
NTSB WPR13WA197 (2013): A Cirrus SR-22 with Chinese registration experienced loss of engine power and made a controlled ditching near Zhuhai Sanzao Airport, Guangdong Province, China. The investigation is being conducted by the Civil Aviation Administration of China (CAAC); no probable cause has been determined. The controlled ditching under CAPS was the correct response.
Regional precedents (ATL97LA099, NYC03LA109, BFO91LA069, ANC13LA048) show that engine failure on initial climb over water is survivable when the pilot commits decisively to ditching, executes a controlled descent (whether via CAPS or best glide), and prepares the cockpit for water impact. The common thread: early recognition, decisive action, and controlled descent.
Peter O Knight Airport (KTPF) is a non-towered field with three of its four runway ends opening onto water or low-density development. Runway 22's climb-out (217° heading) is over open water — Tampa Bay. An engine failure on the Runway 22 departure at 400 ft AGL is a ditching, not a field landing. The off-field environment is the defining constraint.
The SR22's CAPS system is the primary recovery tool for loss of control, unrecoverable spin, and engine failure without a safe landing option. At 400 ft AGL with total engine power loss over water, CAPS deployment is the correct first action. The parachute provides a stable, controlled descent at roughly 1,500 ft/min — giving the pilot time to prepare the cockpit for water impact and manage the ditching. Attempting a glide-back from 400 ft AGL is marginal; attempting a water landing without CAPS is high-energy and dangerous.
The real accidents cited above occurred at other airports and in other regions — NOT at Peter O Knight Airport (KTPF). KTPF has its own accident history (see field dominant patterns: FORCED_LANDING 19.4%, LOSS_OF_CONTROL_INFLIGHT 16.7%, DITCHING 11.1%), but these specific NTSB cases happened elsewhere. The scenario is localized to KTPF to make the off-field environment real and consequential for you as a pilot based here.
Key lesson — Total engine failure on initial climb over open water in the SR22 is survivable when you deploy CAPS immediately at a safe altitude (400 ft AGL is well within the safe envelope), execute the ditching checklist, and manage a controlled descent to water impact. The parachute system is not a last resort — it is the primary recovery tool for this scenario. Attempting a glide-back from 400 ft AGL over water is marginal and depends entirely on perfect execution; CAPS deployment is reliable and gives you time to prepare. Off Runway 22 at KTPF, the off-field environment is open water — commit to the ditching decision early.
Debrief — teaching points
Total engine failure on initial climb is unrecoverable — commit to ditching immediately.
When the engine quits at 400 ft AGL over water, there is no restart, no restart attempt, and no glide-back. The altitude is too low and the distance to the airport is too far. Attempting to restart or troubleshoot costs critical seconds. Attempting a glide-back from 400 ft AGL is marginal and depends entirely on perfect execution — any turn tighter than expected, any miscalculation, and you will not make it. The correct response is to recognize the failure, accept that you are ditching, and deploy CAPS immediately. The parachute gives you time to prepare the cockpit and manage a controlled descent.
CAPS deployment at 400 ft AGL is safe and reliable — it is not a last resort.
The Cirrus Airframe Parachute System (CAPS) is designed and tested for deployment at any airspeed up to 133 KIAS (Vpd, max demonstrated CAPS deploy speed). At 400 ft AGL, the parachute has time to fully deploy and stabilize before water impact. The descent rate under CAPS is roughly 1,500 ft/min — at 400 ft, that gives you approximately 16 seconds to prepare for water contact. This is not a desperate last resort; it is the primary recovery tool for loss of control, unrecoverable spin, and engine failure without a safe landing option. Deploy it early and use the time it gives you.
The ditching checklist must be executed before water impact.
Before water contact, execute the ditching checklist: fuel selector OFF (prevents fuel spillage on impact), mixture IDLE cutoff (stops fuel flow), master switch OFF just before impact (prevents electrical fire), doors unlatched (allows egress after impact), flaps at 50% (Vfe 119 KIAS) for slowest possible touchdown speed. Impact energy rises with the square of touchdown speed — the slowest possible speed matters most. The checklist is not optional; it is the difference between a survivable ditching and a catastrophic one.
Off Runway 22 at KTPF, the off-field environment is open water — there is no alternate landing surface.
Runway 22's climb-out heading is 217° over Tampa Bay and open water. There is no field, no road, no park. The water is the off-field environment. An engine failure on the Runway 22 departure at low altitude is a ditching, not a field landing. This is not a worst-case scenario; it is the geographic reality. Know this before you line up on Runway 22. If you are uncomfortable with the ditching scenario, use Runway 04 or Runway 36 instead — both have better off-field options (dense development, low-density development) than open water.
The SR22's fuel selector is LEFT / RIGHT with no BOTH position — tank selection matters.
Unlike some single-engine airplanes, the SR22 has a LEFT / RIGHT fuel selector with no BOTH position. Fuel starvation from improper tank selection is a real failure mode. In this scenario, the fuel selector was on LEFT and the engine failed for an undetermined reason — possibly oil starvation, possibly fuel contamination, possibly an electrical failure. The point is: an engine failure on initial climb is unrecoverable regardless of the cause. CAPS deployment is the correct response.
Glide-back from 400 ft AGL over water is marginal — CAPS is the reliable option.
Best glide speed for the SR22 is 88 KIAS. At 400 ft AGL with zero engine power, best glide gives you roughly 2.5 nm of range. If the airport is 0.8 nm away, the math suggests you can make it. But the turn is tight, the altitude is marginal, and any deviation costs you. A 2–3° turn steeper than expected, a slight descent rate higher than calculated, and you will not make it. CAPS deployment at 400 ft AGL is the reliable, conservative option. It gives you a controlled descent and time to prepare for ditching. Glide-back is possible but marginal; CAPS is reliable.
Built from the real accident record
Scenario built from NTSB ERA19TA120 (2019 SR22 total engine failure, oil pressure loss, controlled ditching with CAPS deployment), WPR15LA089 (2015 SR22 fuel transfer failure, controlled ditching), WPR13WA197 (2013 SR22 loss of engine power, controlled ditching), and regional precedents ATL97LA099 (1997 P210N engine failure on climb, ditching), NYC03LA109 (2003 C175A partial power loss, ditching), BFO91LA069 (1991 C177RG engine failure at 300 ft, ditching), ANC13LA048 (2013 PA-16 engine failure, controlled ditching). Real events occurred at other airports and regions — NOT at Peter O Knight Airport (KTPF).
NTSB reports: ERA19TA120 · WPR15LA089 · WPR13WA197 · ATL97LA099 · NYC03LA109 · BFO91LA069 · ANC13LA048
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.VIII.C — Engine Failure After Takeoff
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 Cirrus SR22 scenarios · More scenarios at KTPF