Bounced Landing, Go-Around, and the Edge of Control
A Cessna 172S at low altitude after a landing bounce — airspeed decay, pitch control, and the stall/spin trap
The scenario
Departing Tampa North Aero Park Airport (X39), Tampa, FL — Runway 14, landing practice. Elevation 68 ft MSL. The runway is 3,541 ft of asphalt, oriented 141°/321° magnetic. Off-field environment: medium development, low-density development, and wooded wetland in all directions — no open fields, no water, no roads. This is a non-towered field; you are on CTAF 122.775. Overlying Class B airspace (Tampa) begins at 3,000 ft MSL.
It is a clear afternoon, light winds from 150° at 4 knots, OAT 24°C. You have been practicing touch-and-go landings for the past 45 minutes. You are solo, within weight and balance, full fuel. The Cessna 172S is equipped with a G1000 glass panel, fuel-injected Lycoming IO-360-L2A, fixed gear, fixed-pitch prop. You are a Private pilot with roughly 180 hours total time, current, and familiar with the 172S.
On your seventh approach to Runway 14, you are on short final at 65 KIAS (Vref), 200 ft AGL, descent rate 300 fpm. The landing looks stable. You cross the runway threshold, reduce power to idle, and begin the flare. At 20 ft AGL, the airplane bounces — a firm landing that pitches the nose up and lifts the airplane back into the air. You are now 30 ft AGL, airspeed decaying, and the airplane is still in a nose-up attitude from the bounce.
You have two choices: (1) slip it back down and land again, or (2) go around. You decide to go around. You push the throttle forward, but in the moment of the bounce and the decision to go around, you have not been as precise with pitch control as you should be. The nose is higher than it should be for a go-around. The airspeed is 55 KIAS and still decaying.
- {'label': 'Field', 'value': 'X39 · Tampa North Aero Park'}
- {'label': 'Runways', 'value': '14/32'}
- {'label': 'Elevation', 'value': '68 ft'}
- {'label': 'Aircraft', 'value': 'C172S'}
- {'label': 'Dominant phase', 'value': 'Takeoff / Landing'}
The decision
Before we enter the decision tree — what do you know about stall/spin recovery in the C172S at low altitude? (Pick all that apply; this records your baseline.)
What the record shows
What the NTSB files show
NTSB CEN25LA128 (2025): A Cessna 172S lost control during landing flare and the pilot initiated a go-around near a tree line at low altitude. The accident resulted from the pilot's failure to maintain adequate airspeed during the go-around, leading to an aerodynamic stall and terrain impact. The probable cause was the pilot's failure to maintain airplane control and adequate airspeed during the go-around.
NTSB CEN14CA322 (2014): A Cessna 172S being flown by a student pilot during landing practice stalled and impacted terrain off the left side of the runway when the student applied excessive back pressure on the control yoke during a go-around after a bounced landing. The probable cause was the student pilot's use of excessive back pressure on the flight controls during the attempted go-around that induced a stall and loss of control.
NTSB CEN13LA348 (2013): A Cessna 172S flown by a solo student pilot stalled during a go-around after a bounced landing at Grand Forks International Airport. The accident resulted from inadequate recovery technique from the bounce, leading to an aerodynamic stall at insufficient altitude for recovery.
NTSB ERA14FA283 (2014, FATAL): A Cessna 172S on an instructional night flight experienced a partial loss of engine power during initial climb after a touch-and-go landing at Daytona Beach. The pilots' decision to turn back to the airport led the aircraft to exceed its critical angle of attack and experience an aerodynamic stall. The probable cause was a partial loss of engine power, with a contributing factor being the pilots' decision to turn back to the airport, which led to the airplane exceeding its critical angle-of-attack and experiencing an aerodynamic stall while maneuvering.
NTSB WPR12FA230 (2012, FATAL): A Cessna 172S stalled during an aggressive pitch-up maneuver shortly after takeoff from St. George Municipal Airport and impacted terrain. The probable cause was the pilot's failure to maintain adequate airspeed during the maneuver.
The consistent thread: a go-around after a bounced landing requires precise pitch and power management. Power must be applied first; pitch must be adjusted to maintain level flight and airspeed, not to climb aggressively. A stall at 30 ft AGL is unrecoverable — there is no altitude for a recovery. At Tampa North Aero Park Airport (X39), the off-field environment is medium development and wooded wetland — a forced landing there is difficult but possible. A spin at low altitude is fatal.
These real accidents occurred at other airports and in other contexts — NOT at X39. The scenario is localized to X39 to make the landing environment and the go-around decision real for you as a student here.
Key lesson — A go-around after a bounced landing is a critical maneuver at low altitude. The correct technique is: (1) Apply full power immediately. (2) Adjust pitch to maintain level flight and airspeed — aim for 74 KIAS (Vy, best rate of climb). (3) Climb to a safe altitude (500+ ft AGL) before re-entering the pattern. Do NOT pitch up aggressively to climb away from the ground — this induces a stall. Do NOT turn steeply at low airspeed — this increases the stall speed and risks a spin. At 30 ft AGL with a stall, there is no recovery. The decision to slip the airplane back down and land again, rather than attempt a marginal go-around, is always defensible.
Debrief — teaching points
A bounced landing is not an automatic go-around.
When the airplane bounces on landing, you have two options: (1) slip it back down and land again, or (2) go around. The go-around is the correct choice if you have sufficient runway remaining and the airplane is in a stable configuration. But if the bounce occurs late in the landing (short final, flare), and the airplane is nose-up with decaying airspeed, the safer option is often to slip it back down and land again. A go-around at 30 ft AGL with 55 KIAS is marginal. A landing from 30 ft AGL at 50 KIAS is uncomfortable but survivable. Know your limits.
Go-around technique: power first, pitch second.
The correct go-around technique is: (1) Apply full throttle immediately. (2) Adjust pitch to maintain level flight and airspeed. The goal is to maintain 74 KIAS (Vy, best rate of climb) in level flight, not to pitch up aggressively and climb away from the ground. A steep pitch-up at low airspeed induces a stall. Power provides the energy to climb; pitch control maintains the airspeed. Get the power in first, then manage the pitch.
Stall speed increases with bank angle.
In level flight, the C172S stalls at 48 KIAS (Vs, clean). In a 15° bank, the stall speed rises to roughly 49 KIAS. In a 25° bank, it rises to roughly 50 KIAS. In a 30° bank, it rises to roughly 52 KIAS. A steep turn at low airspeed (65 KIAS) leaves a thin margin above the stall speed. At 30 ft AGL, a stall in a bank is a spin — and a spin at 30 ft AGL is unrecoverable. Keep the bank angle shallow (15° or less) during a go-around at low altitude and low airspeed.
Stall recovery is pitch-down, not pitch-up.
When an airplane stalls, the wing has exceeded its critical angle of attack. The only way to break the stall is to lower the nose (reduce the angle of attack) — pitch down. Pulling back on the yoke will deepen the stall. At 30 ft AGL, a stall recovery requires an immediate pitch-down, even if it means losing altitude. There is no altitude to waste on a gradual recovery. Pitch down, break the stall, then climb.
A spin at low altitude is unrecoverable.
A spin requires roughly 500–1,000 ft AGL for a full recovery (depending on the airplane and the pilot's technique). At 30 ft AGL, there is no altitude for a spin recovery. A stall in a bank at low altitude transitions to a spin, and the spin impact is fatal. The way to prevent a low-altitude spin is to prevent the low-altitude stall: maintain airspeed, keep the bank angle shallow, and avoid uncoordinated control inputs.
Off-field environment at X39: medium development and wooded wetland.
Tampa North Aero Park Airport (X39) is surrounded by medium development, low-density development, and wooded wetland. There is no open field, no water, no road. A forced landing off Runway 14 or Runway 32 is difficult but possible — the airplane would impact trees or structures. This is not a ditching scenario (like an airport on the coast), but it is a serious off-field landing. The runway is your best option. A go-around at marginal airspeed and altitude is riskier than a firm landing on the runway.
Built from the real accident record
Scenario built from NTSB CEN25LA128 (2025 C172S stall during go-around after landing flare), CEN14CA322 (2014 C172S stall from excessive back pressure during go-around), CEN13LA348 (2013 C172S stall after bounced landing), ERA14FA283 (2014 C172S stall during turn-back after partial power loss), and WPR12FA230 (2012 C172S stall during aggressive pitch-up after takeoff). Localized to Tampa North Aero Park Airport (X39).
NTSB reports: CEN25LA128 · CEN14CA322 · CEN13LA348 · ERA14FA283 · WPR12FA230
ACS tasks: PA.II.E — Approach and Landing · PA.II.F — Go-Around / Rejected Landing · PA.III.A — Stall Prevention · PA.III.B — Spin Awareness · PA.I.H — Human Factors
Relevant FARs: §91.3 · §91.13 · §91.119
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 X39