Cessna 150/152
 

Hi Smarthawke you are quite correct I was basing my info on earlier models probably all a bit academic anyway. I am more concerned with i0540s contribution not really relivant probably because of contributions like that is the reason I have been away from the site for a couple of years. Firstly a Plane is a carpenters tool dont mind aircraft aeroplane or even airplane or gentlemans/laidies aeronautical carrage. Secondly I suggest Io540 gets out there and designs something to take the place of said aeroplane.Quite a few British, American,French and even Australian bods have tried and failed miserably.At the end of the day they do the job very well.Much like the Tiger Moth and apart form the historical point of view the Tiger Moth aint that brilliant to fly.And yes I have and the Stampe is much better...Bye for now maybe even another two years. Harrah say some

Smarthawke:
Not wishing to be (really) picky, but the last (F)150 was the N model! :) see G-CLUB ... only a very few made, the last quantity model 150 was the M.

Slip

It was a challenging flight, but somehow I managed .... :E :ok:

SlipSlider

Your absolutely correct - my point was supposed to be that the last of the 150s actually had the same tail as the 152s - I did slip in a quick typo, I meant to put 150M not L.... doh. The 150Ls actually had the shorter fin and dorsal fin and didn't have pre-select flaps etc etc.

The Humble Cesspit!
 

A cessna 150 is a good aircraft to introduce abit of everything inasmuch as it will Train, Tour, Aerobat to a certain extent. It kind of does a bit of everything yet excels at nothing. It can get into anywhere and has a relatively short take off ability, it has a robust undercarriage and the nose wheel is bolted into the engine frame (the 172's nose leg is held on by hope alone). It will take some abuse. All conti 0-200's are carb ice prone - i think it is the design of the carb that means you sometimes have to almost fly with a bit of carb heat on continuously in some conditions!
All round good thing - cheap to run - almost all engineers are familiar with them. Designed as a metal trainer they can be repaired and most show signs of several "ocurrances".
Dare say some clever git could design a composite modern looking replacement but i am not sure the long term cost effectiveness and repairability would shame a humble 150 which needs to be "long term" economical with good serviceability.
Reckon 150's are OK for what they are!;)

Gee IO540,

It sounds like you are being held captive flying Cessna 150's! Do you not have the choice to look the other way, and let those of us who really enjoy the reliability, economy and simplicity of the C150, do so free of assault?

My 1975 Cessna 150M is presently sitting happily in its hangar, 300' from where I now sit and type in my home. It was completely paid for in 1987, when I bought it (completely airworthy for $7000), and since, I have flown it 2382 hours, all across Canada, the United States, and into the Bahamas. My wife and I regularly take our two excellent English Brompton bikes in the back, and fly somewhere new for the day. I fly it day and night, summer and winter, from my own 2100' runway, and offer its services free of charge to the community for emergency services. I have actually rescued one injured person from an inaccessable frozen lake, and found 7 others (4 alive, 3 not). These were only a few of the 85+ emergency calls I have flown in the "gastly" C150 in the last 14 years! It has never not flown when I needed it to (100% dispatch reliability).

Do I have any basis for comparison to assert that it is such a good plane? Well, yes, the other half of my 5000+ hours of flying is on 77 other fixed and rotor wing types, including nearly most all propeller Cessna models, flown in 17 countries. Are there better planes than a Cessna 150? sure! For what each was designed for! Could I wish for a few improvements to the C150? Yes! But I'm so damn lucky to be able to get in and fly where I want, when I want, and not have to worry about the cost, you won't hear me saying anything negative - about the C150, or any other type (including a Tomahawk - a fine plane in the environment for which it was designed!).

When you have suceeded in producing and selling tens of thousands of aircraft, most of which remain in service as many as 50 years later, let me know, I'll come for a test flight. Until then, perhaps your efforts are best spent supporting and encouraging your fellow aviators, and assisting them in flying safely, in whatever aircraft type they choose!

Oh, and when an air traffic controller refered to my aircraft to a King Air pilot as "justa 150", I landed, stopped, and cleared the runway on the button, called "clear of the active", and asked him what type he owned and flew? He didn't, and later apologized.

My best wishes for your harmonious reintegration into the private flying peer group...

Pilot DAR

Word up...i learned to fly in C152 and i loved it