Tell my why I shouldn't just buy a 150?

Depends on the 150. I'm no expert but I believe there is a difference between a straight tail and a slant tail
 
I've always heard the straight tail 150s made nice little taildraggers, but the swept tails were lackluster at best. Also heard the taller relocated gear was a must.

I think you have a good thought buying a 150. I had one for about 4 years, and loved it. Enough fuel to stay up for 3 hours with two people, stable for its size. Fuel burn was a consistent 5gph average staying under 3,000msl. Cheaper than renting if you fly a lot
 
Really, is a good Warrior or Cherokee 140 beyond reach? Those planes are solid 3 person airplanes, and I can't think they'd be a lot more expensive to run than the tiny C150/152.
 
Yeah, but do you really need a 4 person airplane, I've seen tons of folks buy 4 seat planes and only fly solo or +1 95% of the time, I'd wager once you factor fuel burn, annual time on a bigger plane, hangar options, overhaul costs, most folks would be better off with a little 2 seater and just renting for the odd ball flight where they actually NEED the extra seats.

Not that I'm one to talk on such matters with my larger Cessna flying solo or +1 most of the time.
 
Depends on range or cargo. A150 with 2 aboard, full fuel and a small overnight bag is near or at gross, generally. If you're looking to fly that way most of the time, but going more than 500nm, the 150 is a poor fit due to range. If you're looking to build time, only fly XC occasionally, and solo or +1, the 150 could be a very inexpensive way to do it. I'd rather have more hp and room. I'd look at older 172 models, especially with the Penn Yann 180hp engines (or similar.)
 
For longer range a 2 seater would still be top of my lost, EZ, glasair, lanceair, etc
 
True, how about a Wittman Tailwind, quite fast, quite economical, great little plane, same price as a 150.

2325311.jpg


https://www.barnstormers.com/Experimental, Wittman+Tailwind Classifieds.htm
 
There are no excuses not to buy good aircraft.
 
My very nice basic IFR 67 C-150 F may be for sale in the coming few months. PM me if interested. Search my earlier posts for details on the plane. Had it briefly on the market last year or so. A friend currently finishing up his private with it. As soon as he's done I think it's available.
 
Don't you need a complex plane for your CPL? I know you CAN take the checkride in two planes, but wouldn't it be easier if you're going after your CPL to just spend a few hours in an arrow or something and just knock it out, THEN buy a cheap plane for stuff?
 
I don't have any firsthand experience with them, but I have heard in several different places that the slant-tail Cessna taildragger conversions are generally to be avoided. They lack the rudder authority of their straight-tail predecessors, and, with their nice springy steel leg gear legs, it can make for interesting situations that other taildraggers can more easily deal with.
 
James331 said:
Depends on the 150. I'm no expert but I believe there is a difference between a straight tail and a slant tail
Click to expand...
The first 150s with the straight tail are the same body as a 140A. They basically added a nosewheel. In a lot of the earliest ones, the actually still have the gearboxes for the main gear on a 140, which makes them a good candidate for a tailwheel conversion. They're a tight fit for two bigger guys. I believe the later 150s with the swept tail are a little wider.

Lowe Tailwheel Conversion
9839706af0fe217186eb89b106ef9f21.jpg
 
Lowflynjack said:
I believe the later 150s with the swept tail are a little wider.
Click to expand...

Yes and no. The first model year of the swept tail was 1966 (150F), and though the doors and side windows were enlarged some from before, the cabin was still the same width. For 1967 (150G) the doors were bowed out to create an additional three inches at the elbows.

C-150G_cabinwidth.jpg
 
I trained in the 152 nine years ago. Am not sure how you guys are getting two on board and full fuel. I'm 180 and my CFI was a little heavier. My max fuel was about 14-15 gallons back then ... we also on XC used to add a gallon going over gross counting that for taxi and run-up loss to be at MTOW on departure. Here in West Texas (airport 4000 MSL), climb was 100 on a hot day and 300 with two no board (and that was WITH the sparrowhawk conversion). Fuel burn is supposed to be 6 per hour, but is higher if you have the sparrowhawk conversion so be careful planning long XC.
 
Pilawt said:
Yes and no. The first model year of the swept tail was 1966 (150F), and though the doors and side windows were enlarged some from before, the cabin was still the same width. For 1967 (150G) the doors were bowed out to create an additional three inches at the elbows.

C-150G_cabinwidth.jpg
Click to expand...


I hope you have already made provisions that upon your death , your comprehensive collection of GA advertising goes to a worthy place like a museum or archive.
 
Caramon13 said:
Don't you need a complex plane for your CPL? I know you CAN take the checkride in two planes, but wouldn't it be easier if you're going after your CPL to just spend a few hours in an arrow or something and just knock it out, THEN buy a cheap plane for stuff?
Click to expand...

If you're going to be putting on 250hrs in short order, buying a economical plane to build those hours makes sense.
 
James331 said:
If you're going to be putting on 250hrs in short order, buying a economical plane to build those hours makes sense.
Click to expand...

True, but I have my 250 so just need the complex at this point. Makes sense for those fresh out of PPL pilots to buy a cheap plane to put time on.
 
Lowflynjack said:
The first 150s with the straight tail are the same body as a 140A. They basically added a nosewheel. In a lot of the earliest ones, the actually still have the gearboxes for the main gear on a 140, which makes them a good candidate for a tailwheel conversion. They're a tight fit for two bigger guys. I believe the later 150s with the swept tail are a little wider.

Lowe Tailwheel Conversion
9839706af0fe217186eb89b106ef9f21.jpg
Click to expand...
What's funny is that my 120 was actually put on a nosewheel - I think Cessna 150 style - at one point in it's life and has metal patches to prove it.
 
This sure won't be my last or only airplane, so I have no problem with the limited utility outside of training. My hangar has room for at least two more, so a 150 plus the Pietenpol I'm building would fit fine. If I end up with more need for space I can kick out one of my renters, but one of them is my FIL and he keeps his Arrow there. Kicking him out would severely cramp my plan to borrow his plane for the required complex time I'll need. I haven't heard any big no-nos yet, so I'm going to go take a look at one for sale as soon as the weather clears up and I can get my mechanic/instructor friend to fly with me to look. Thanks for all the mostly on topic feedback, I do appreciate it.

Patrick
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top