Any old C150 experts around?

Lachlan

Lachlan

En-Route
Joined
Sep 23, 2015
Messages
3,823
Location
North Creek, NY
Display Name
Display name:
Lachlan
I'm looking at a '61 150A and I would love to hear from anyone who owns or has owned one. Tell me things to look for, to avoid, deal breakers, etc. I've joined the 150-152 club and am waiting for my account to be activated. I'll take as much knowledge as I can find, if anyone has anything to tell me.
 
I have some great memories of a fastback straight tail 150. Those make good tailwheel conversions, bt the way.
 
Stewartb said:
I have some great memories of a fastback straight tail 150. Those make good tailwheel conversions, bt the way.
Click to expand...

I’m thinking that exact thing. Gotta go with real 140 gear, though. Otherwise they look like low riders. The Lowe conversion is the best one.
 
Check to see whether the engine is leaking or leaking badly. What do you call an 0-200 that isn't leaking oil? Empty.

Other than that there isn't that much to fret about, any decent mechanic can check one over in a couple hours.
 
The two most frequent first questions on the 150-152 site:

Fuel is flowing unevenly from the wing tanks, is that a concern, what can I do? Ans: It's normal, and you can do nothing.

When the plane sits after fueling, fuel drips from the vent tube. Ans: Yes it does. Better to have a few drips than fail to fill your tanks.
 
Last edited:
Many years ago I owned a M model. The C150-152 group is very knowledgeable. Ask them lots of questions. Check that all of the AD's on your new plane have been complied with. If I owned another one, it would probably be a well maintained low mileage broomie. I like the way they look.

By the way, the seat rails and roller assemblies on these old planes wear out. A seat that won't stay put can get you dead. There's a "go, no go" gauge for them. Seat rails are easy to replace, however, the roller assemblies hardened lips that hold the seat frame to the track wear out, and are not repairable. It's difficult to find serviceable used seat frames. And, be aware, the O-200's, in the right conditions, because of the Continental intake design, can be excellent carb ice machines.
 
Art Rose said:
Many years ago I owned a M model. The C150-152 group is very knowledgeable. Ask them lots of questions. Check that all of the AD's on your new plane have been complied with. If I owned another one, it would probably be a well maintained low mileage broomie. I like the way they look.

By the way, the seat rails and roller assemblies on these old planes wear out. A seat that won't stay put can get you dead. There's a "go, no go" gauge for them. Seat rails are easy to replace, however, the roller assemblies hardened lips that hold the seat frame to the track wear out, and are not repairable. It's difficult to find serviceable used seat frames. And, be aware, the O-200's, in the right conditions, because of the Continental intake design, can be excellent carb ice machines.
Click to expand...

(What’s a “broomie”?) o_O
 
Google up a picture of a corn broom, and a picture of an early C-150. Place the pictures side by side. Do you notice the similarity between the corn broom and the rudder of the Cessna? That's why they're called Broomies. It's the best tail to use for a Texas Tail Dragger conversion. Add an O-320 and you've got yourself a baby C-180. Trouble is, because the way the stc's were written, you can't carry the fuel and cargo it can handle, and still stay legal.
 
Art Rose said:
Google up a picture of a corn broom, and a picture of an early C-150. Place the pictures side by side. Do you notice the similarity between the corn broom and the rudder of the Cessna? That's why they're called Broomies. It's the best tail to use for a Texas Tail Dragger conversion. Add an O-320 and you've got yourself a baby C-180. Trouble is, because the way the stc's were written, you can't carry the fuel and cargo it can handle, and still stay legal.
Click to expand...

Gotta get re-cert as Experimental. I’m sure that’s really easy... ;)
 
Fixed stab. It's no 180 but with it's gross it won't matter. It should be an honest, fun airplane. Enjoy it!
 
Lachlan said:
Gotta get re-cert as Experimental. I’m sure that’s really easy... ;)
Click to expand...

You can not do that, but you can place it in the Restricted Category for testing, but no one can ride with you.

Study type certificates in FAR
21.25 Issue of type certificate: Restricted category aircraft.
 
Last edited:
Tom-D said:
You can not do that, but you can place it in the Restricted Category for testing, but no one can ride with you.

Study type certificates in FAR
21.25 Issue of type certificate: Restricted category aircraft.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that was an attempt at humor.
 
Tom-D said:
You can not do that, but you can place it in the Restricted Category for testing, but no one can ride with you.

Study type certificates in FAR
21.25 Issue of type certificate: Restricted category aircraft.
Click to expand...

Rumor is they cracked down on that if you can’t prove you’re a bona fide manufacturer.

Some dude around here had some insane turboprop conversion of a Bo that wasn’t one of the usual ones you see STCd and had it Restricted and was flying himself all over the country in it “demoing” the capabilities... to nobody other than talking to curious pilot’s about it when they saw it on the ramp at one of his trips.
 
Art Rose said:
By the way, the seat rails and roller assemblies on these old planes wear out. A seat that won't stay put can get you dead.
Click to expand...

Not really, unless you're 3ft tall. I'm 5'10" and I fly it seat as far back as possible.
On a 172 different situation, 150/152 the seat just wont roll far back enough even if loose to cause any problems. (unless you are 3ft).
 
What's good to know about/look out for on those monstrous mills commonly referred to as the venerable O-200? It was mentioned that if it's not leaking then it's probably out of oil. What else?
 
If it's a newer vintage O-200-A, I'd prefer to have one where the cylinders have been overhauled or reworked by someone other than Continental. I've been told that somewhere along the way the factory changed the valve seat angle, and not for the better. I bought a factory-new Sport Cub with a O-200-A in 2007. It needed a top overhaul at 125 hours TT because of leaking/burned exhaust valves, a problem experienced by a number of other customers. After the rework it was fine.
 
Pilawt said:
If it's a newer vintage O-200-A, I'd prefer to have one where the cylinders have been overhauled or reworked by someone other than Continental. I've been told that somewhere along the way the factory changed the valve seat angle, and not for the better. I bought a factory-new Sport Cub with a O-200-A in 2007. It needed a top overhaul at 125 hours TT because of leaking/burned exhaust valves, a problem experienced by a number of other customers. After the rework it was fine.
Click to expand...

Cool- thanks! It got new Conti cylinders with a major overhaul in 2002, 315 hours since. Compressions seem to be rather solid, in the mid to high 70s. (Doesn't necessarily mean a thing, though.) I belive it's the original case from the factory.
 
Lachlan said:
I'm looking at a '61 150A and I would love to hear from anyone who owns or has owned one. Tell me things to look for, to avoid, deal breakers, etc. I've joined the 150-152 club and am waiting for my account to be activated. I'll take as much knowledge as I can find, if anyone has anything to tell me.
Click to expand...
Fun little airplane (my first) - with the emphasis on Little. It fit me fine 40 years ago, but when I looked at a '64 a few years ago, I could hardly fit, Not enough shoulder room,
either (for two normal-size men). I joined a partnership of aspiring pilots (already had mine). When the others got their tickets, we were all ready to move up to a 182 (which
I still have).

Dave
 
Nice pic! The spinner looks bullet-shaped in the first pic and correct diameter in that pic. I’m certainly NOT an expert. I was thinking that maybe, in addition to the tw conversion, it had received a bigger engine, too. Either way, nice airplane.
 
Lachlan said:
Nice pic! The spinner looks bullet-shaped in the first pic and correct diameter in that pic. I’m certainly NOT an expert. I was thinking that maybe, in addition to the tw conversion, it had received a bigger engine, too. Either way, nice airplane.
Click to expand...

Didn’t someone say it was a 150/150? (150 HP conversion?)

Maybe two different thoughts going on in the thread but I thought that was a photo of a double converted airplane... both a taildragger and 150 HP engine... when I first saw it.
 
denverpilot said:
Didn’t someone say it was a 150/150? (150 HP conversion?)

Maybe two different thoughts going on in the thread but I thought that was a photo of a double converted airplane... both a taildragger and 150 HP engine... when I first saw it.
Click to expand...
It does have a big engine -- the big spinner and the single Lycoming exhaust stack give that away. Compare to the original 150D:

Screen Shot 2018-04-20 at 6.17.13 AM.png

One thing to think about with the 150/150 or 150/180 conversions is where the battery goes. Some of them move the battery to the tailcone, where the distribution of weight can make for flatter spin characteristics.

Hard to tell from the photos, but it looks like the wing leading edge has also been modified on that airplane as well. The 150/152 and the 207 were the only strutted piston Cessna singles that did not get the recontoured leading edge from the factory in the 1970s. The factory just didn't want to incur the flight-test and related expenses for the specialized, low-volume 207; but they did try it on a 150. Bill Thompson, Cessna's Manager of Flight Test and Aerodynamics, wrote,

"A prototype was so fitted, and all flying qualities and performance checks proceeded routinely. Then came spins. Right out of the box, a 2-turn spin took 13 turns to recover! Variations on the full span camber-lift airfoil, such as an outboard-droop-only and increased wing twist, were tested, and unacceptable spin behavior was noted."​
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top