Float and Climb at Tampa North
A balked landing, improper flap configuration, and a low-altitude stall — the SR22's high energy state turns a fixable mistake into a critical moment
The scenario
Departing Tampa North Aero Park Airport (X39), Tampa, FL — Runway 14, returning to your home base after a 1.5-hour local flight. Elevation 68 ft MSL; the runway is essentially at sea level. It is a hazy Florida afternoon in early summer: OAT 32°C, density altitude approximately 1,800 ft. Winds calm to light, visibility 10 SM. A typical hot, humid Gulf Coast day.
You are on final approach to Runway 14 (heading 141°), 500 ft AGL, configured for landing: flaps 50%, airspeed 77 KIAS (Vref, short-field approach speed), descent rate 300 fpm. The runway is made; the approach is stable. The SR22's constant-speed prop is in high RPM, the fuel selector is on RIGHT (you switched to the right tank 20 minutes ago), and the glass Perspective panel shows a clean descent.
At 200 ft AGL, 100 ft short of the runway threshold, the airplane begins to float — the nose pitches up slightly, the descent rate slows, and the touchdown point drifts. You are no longer descending; you are drifting forward in ground effect. The runway is still ahead, but the float is eating distance. You have roughly 2,000 ft of runway remaining — plenty of room — but the float is noticeable and the approach is no longer stable.
Aircraft: Cirrus SR22, solo, 3,200 lb (within limits). Continental IO-550-N fuel-injected engine, constant-speed prop, fixed gear, glass Perspective panel. The airplane was airworthy at departure; no squawks.
Pilot: you — a Private pilot, current, roughly 300 hours total. You have 40 hours in the SR22. You are familiar with the airplane's tendency to float on landing due to its high wing loading and energy state, but you have not yet developed a deep instinct for managing the float or the go-around.
- {'label': 'Field', 'value': 'X39 · Tampa North Aero Park'}
- {'label': 'Runways', 'value': '14/32'}
- {'label': 'Elevation', 'value': '68 ft'}
- {'label': 'Aircraft', 'value': 'SR22'}
- {'label': 'Dominant phase', 'value': 'Takeoff / Landing'}
The decision
Before we get into the decision tree — what do you already know about the SR22's landing characteristics and go-around procedures? (Pick all that apply; this records your baseline.)
What the record shows
What the NTSB files show
NTSB WPR11LA169 (2011): A Cirrus SR-22 on return to its home base at Falcon Field (Arizona) encountered excessive float during landing flare. The pilot aborted the landing and retracted flaps to climb out, but the aircraft stalled at low altitude and lost control. The aircraft struck the runway, veered left, and collided with a parked Cessna 172. The probable cause was the pilot's attempt to correct a landing float by adding power, followed by his premature attempt to climb the airplane out of ground effect during a balked landing, which resulted in an aerodynamic stall. Contributing to the accident was the pilot's failure to properly configure the flaps for the balked landing attempt.
NTSB WPR20FA019 (2019, FATAL): A Cirrus SR22 stalled during landing approach while maneuvering in the traffic pattern at low airspeed and descended into a residential area. The accident was attributed to the pilot's exceedance of the airplane's critical angle of attack while maneuvering for landing. The pilot did not deploy CAPS.
NTSB CEN18FA204 (2018, FATAL): A Cirrus SR22 on a personal flight stalled during initial climb at 200 feet and entered an uncontrollable descent, impacting terrain. The accident was attributed to an inadvertent stall, with contributing factors including high density altitude and the student pilot's limited experience. The pilot did not deploy CAPS.
NTSB ATL06LA035 (2006): A Cirrus SR22 on a business flight encountered icing conditions while climbing to 9,000 feet in an area where the aircraft was not certified to operate. The accident resulted from inadequate preflight planning, failure to obtain current weather information, and continued flight into known icing conditions, leading to ice accumulation, airspeed decay, stall, and spin.
The real accidents cited above occurred at other airports (Falcon Field, Arizona; Ruidoso, New Mexico; and others) — NOT at Tampa North Aero Park Airport (X39). X39 has its own accident history (see field dominant patterns: LOSS_OF_CONTROL_INFLIGHT 27.3%, LOSS_OF_CONTROL_GROUND 18.2%), but these specific SR22 events happened elsewhere. The scenario is localized to X39 to make the off-field environment (wooded wetland and development off Runway 14) real and consequential for you as a student here.
The consistent thread across all these events: the SR22's high energy state (310 hp, constant-speed prop, high wing loading) means it floats on landing and requires active management. A float is not a failure — it is normal. But the response to a float must be deliberate: either push forward to re-establish descent, or go around with proper flap staging. The fatal error is full flap retraction at low altitude during a go-around, which causes a sudden pitch-up and airspeed decay. At 150 ft AGL, that stall is unrecoverable by conventional controls. CAPS deployment is the designed recovery system — but it must be deployed before the stall develops into a spin.
Off Runway 14's climb-out end (heading 141°), the off-field environment is wooded wetland and medium/low-density development — no clear alternate landing surface. A forced landing off-field in this terrain is survivable only if the airplane is under control (CAPS deployment, or a stable glide). An uncontrolled descent into the trees is not.
Key lesson — The SR22's float on landing is normal and manageable — push forward to re-establish descent, or go around. If you go around, retract flaps in stages (50% → 25% → 0°) as airspeed increases, and maintain a shallow climb attitude. Never retract flaps fully at low altitude; the sudden pitch-up and airspeed decay at 150 ft AGL will result in a stall. If a stall develops at low altitude, lower the nose immediately to recover airspeed. If the stall develops into a spin, deploy CAPS. CAPS is not a backup — it is the designed recovery system for unrecoverable stall/spin at low altitude.
Debrief — teaching points
The SR22 floats on landing — this is normal, not a failure.
The SR22's high wing loading (310 hp, constant-speed prop, fixed gear) means it carries energy into the landing flare. A float of 100–200 ft is common and expected. The float is not a sign of a bad approach; it is a characteristic of the airplane. Active management is required: push forward on the yoke to lower the nose and re-establish descent, or slip the airplane to increase drag. If the float is excessive or the approach becomes unstable, go around. Do not attempt to 'stretch' the float by holding the nose up — that leads to a stall.
During a go-around, retract flaps in stages — never all at once.
When you retract flaps fully at low altitude, the sudden loss of flap-induced lift causes a sharp pitch-up. At 150 ft AGL with an airspeed of 77 KIAS, that pitch-up will cause an immediate airspeed decay toward stall. The correct procedure: retract flaps in stages (50% → 25% → 0°) as airspeed increases and altitude increases. Maintain a shallow climb attitude. This allows the power to take effect and the airspeed to increase before the next flap retraction. The climb is slower initially, but it is stable and safe.
Never attempt to climb out of ground effect at insufficient airspeed.
Best rate of climb (Vy) in the SR22 is 101 KIAS. If you are climbing at 77 KIAS (approach speed) with flaps at 50%, the airplane is not climbing efficiently and the airspeed is marginal. After a go-around, establish a climb at Vy (101 KIAS) or higher before attempting to gain altitude. If the airspeed is decaying, lower the nose to recover airspeed — do not attempt to climb. A stall at 150 ft AGL is unrecoverable by conventional controls.
Stall speed changes with flap configuration.
In landing configuration (full flaps, 50%), stall speed (Vs0) is 59 KIAS. In clean configuration (flaps 0°), stall speed (Vs) is 70 KIAS. During a go-around with flaps at 50%, you must maintain at least 59 KIAS. As you retract flaps, the stall speed increases — at 25% flaps, stall speed is roughly 65 KIAS; at 0° flaps, it is 70 KIAS. Be aware of this change and ensure the airspeed is increasing as flaps are retracted.
CAPS is the designed recovery system for unrecoverable stall/spin at low altitude.
The SR22's whole-airframe parachute (CAPS) is not a backup or a last resort — it is the POH's primary response to an unrecoverable stall, spin, or loss of control at low altitude. If you find yourself in a stall at 150 ft AGL with a high pitch attitude and decaying airspeed, and you cannot recover by lowering the nose, deploy CAPS. The parachute will stabilize the airplane and allow a controlled descent at roughly 1,500 fpm. Deployment at 120–150 ft AGL is survivable. Waiting for a spin to develop or attempting conventional recovery at this altitude is not.
Off Runway 14's climb-out end, the off-field environment is wooded wetland and development — no clear alternate landing surface.
The USGS NLCD data for X39 shows that off Runway 14's departure end (heading 141°), the terrain is wooded wetland and medium/low-density development. There is no open field, no road, no park. A forced landing off-field in this terrain is survivable only if the airplane is under control (CAPS deployment, or a stable glide). An uncontrolled descent into the trees is not. This is the geographic reality of X39 — know it before you line up on Runway 14.
Built from the real accident record
Scenario built from NTSB WPR11LA169 (2011 SR22 balked landing stall/spin at Falcon Field), WPR20FA019 (2019 SR22 stall during landing approach), CEN18FA204 (2018 SR22 stall on initial climb), and ATL06LA035 (2006 SR22 icing/stall). Anonymized and localized to Tampa North Aero Park Airport (X39).
NTSB reports: WPR11LA169 · WPR20FA019 · CEN18FA204 · ATL06LA035
ACS tasks: PA.I.F — Weather Information · PA.VIII.D — Approaches and Landings · PA.VIII.E — Go-Around / Rejected Landing · PA.IX.C — Emergency Approach and Landing · PA.I.H — Human Factors
Relevant FARs: §91.3 · §91.13 · §91.9
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 X39