Touring in a C152

[Okavango]

I read an old article about a couple touring around Scotland in a 152. How is this possible for two adults? I can't see how you could take much more than a toothbrush unless my M&B figures are wrong?

[DX Wombat]

Depends on the size of the adults. They DO have washing facilities in Scotland. ;) Soap too. :ok:

[dont overfil]

Friends of mine took a C152 with only a nav com from Edinburgh to Tangiers and back whilst hour building.
Loose some weight!
DO.

[Captain Smithy]

I don't see the problem if you're small like me :)

Christina Belton has done quite a few articles in Pilot over the years about touring in her C150. She went all the way to Italy and the Balkans and back in the 150. A trip around Scotland seems small fry compared to that!

I take issue with your comment however DX Re: washing facilities. You have obviously never been to Glasgow :uhoh:

Captain S

[kalleh]

The 152 haven't read the POH, and will therefore happily fly above MTOW.

[Okavango]

I'm a slim 12 stone and my wife 9 stone which puts us about on the limit with full tanks. The chap in the photo doesn't look particularly light so is this last comment true that it can be flown above the POH MTOW?!

[Gertrude the Wombat]

The 152 haven't read the POH, and will therefore happily fly above MTOW.
Yes. Folklore has it that the POH was written for a short grass strip belonging to a mid-western farmer at 8,000' and 30 degress C, so on 2km long tarmac runways at sea level in Scotland's normal summer temperatures you get a different answer.
is this last comment true that it can be flown above the POH MTOW?!
If by "can be flown" you mean "will it fly" the answer is "yes". It's not legal, of course, and the insurance won't be valid.

[flybymike]

150/152 regularly flown overweight in the training environment. At least they certainly were when I was a lad.

[Piper19]

yes alot of them fly in overweight most of the times the students don't even know. I checked my last trip; the a/c empty weight was 100lbs above empty weight in the manual due to GPS installed, different equipment,...
We were two adults, one of which a big guy, both had our packs for 4 days and the two long range tanks (39 gals instead of the standard 24)were topped up. Which would put us overweight of about 200lbs. No difference was felt in handling or runway length.
But normally we have some bigger cessnas with us on trips or a car, so they can take the baggage.

[KeesM]

We did a 4 day trip last week in a 150. Two adults, 20 kg luggage and full fuel.
Still a few kg below MTOW.

The trouble with 150/152 W&B is fat people and a fat plane.
Keep both light and you have a nice, small altough slow tourer.

[Gertrude the Wombat]

From my experience at some airfields a lot of people seem to have the attitude of "well it was ok on the other flights with that much fuel, so it must be ok this time".
What, like "three adults, a small child, full fuel, no luggage is OK 'cos I did the sums once", but if the child wants to sit in the front I don't know what the balance will be so do a W&B, and for a larger fourth person or any luggage at all I do the W&B? Isn't this what everybody does?
Ok, so maybe the C152 will fly grossly over-weight, but put your new PPL holder in a PA28 or similar and then maybe weight calculations will be a whole lot more significant!
Yes, certainly the comments I made about an overweight C152 were specific to the C152.

[S-Works]

It is not difficult to do a mental W&B if it is an aircraft you are familiar with.

My own Cessna is a good example, I know exactly what the max weight per seat and the max fuel is before I have to re do a formal W&B. At those max figures I know I am inside the envelope, anything less and I am inside the envelope. Simples!!!

[KeesM]

My own Cessna is a good example, I know exactly what the max weight per seat and the max fuel is before I have to re do a formal W&B. At those max figures I know I am inside the envelope, anything less and I am inside the envelope. Simples!!!


Yep, I do(did) the same. W&B for my standard configurations. Anything else and I run the numbers.
Same with landing and take-off distances. 400m grass or tarmac is good enough when <2000ft AMSL and < 25C with no wind or slope. Otherwise I run the numbers again. For fuel burn I've measured it for a while. Now I know it is 18.5 l/hr(using 20l/hr to avoid headaches) @2450rpm giving me 85kts.

-Kees

[Duchess_Driver]

@ 2450rpm unless you are seriously overweight then you should get more that 85kts in a '52.

I'm not small and with a reasonable passenger and some fuel (think egg up!) I get 85 at 2150rpm.

[KeesM]

I fly a 150(Conti O200), those run at a higher rpm than the 152 Lycoming.

-Kees