C152 and C150?
 

Hi all,

Does anyone know any major differences between the c152 and the c150 ? handling skills,limitations,technical information,etc

Many thanks in advance,
the Med-pilot:ok:

They are virtually the same to fly, the main difference being flaps.

The C152 goes to 30° flaps, whilst the C150 has 40° - making for much more entertaining short-field landings! Also the flap control switch is ungated on the C150, so needs a little more mental effort to operate.

I *think* that the cockpit is slightly smaller on the C150.


Apart from that, most differences are engineering rather than piloting. It's no effort really to go straight from one to the other so long as you take 2 minutes to think about the flap control - although I'd personally recommend that a less experienced pilot flew a couple of 40° flap approaches with an instructor before trying on their own.

G

It may be psychosomatic, but I was always a bit more cramped in the 150. I was told though that there was no real difference in the cockpit space.

I look at it differently - being something of a shorthouse, I can see over the coaming better in a C150!

G

The 150 is much more prone to carb icing. It's to do with the engine configuration (is that the right word?), and I've been shown why, and instantly forgotten. But from the point of view of the pilot, in the 150 you probably need to apply carb heat about every five minutes, put it on if you have to hold before takeoff, and be constantly alert for any changes in RPM which could possibly mean carb ice. Yes, I know you do that in the 152 as well, but it's much more important in the 150.

The C150 is powered by a Contnental C200 but the C152 has the Lycoming O-235, other improvments on the 152 include 28V electrics and a much better main landing gear mounting structure.

The thing to remember is that the C152 was built with all the problems of the C150 sorted out.

Negative. It still has appalling ailerons and handles like a wet sponge.:}

The C150 evolved over many years from a staight tailed fast back version up to the 150L including 'omni-vision' windows, they had the same 'para flaps' and of course eventually got 'land-o-matic' undercarrige - superb Cessna sales speak!

The fuselage got wider through the years but the last, the 150L and the 152 were pretty much absolutely identical - certainly sizewise. Under the cowlings the engine changed and the volts doubled to 28 whilst the flaps went to 30 degrees max.

Early models of 150 had a different aerofoil section from later models (G onwards and all 152's) which was much more efficient at low speed. I was taught in 'F' models; for short takeoff; 10 flap; full throttle on the brakes; brakes off, rotate at 45 mph, climb at 52 mph. Frightened you to death first time; don't try that in a 152 though!

I must admit I did a proper short field takeoff for the first time in ages in the Archer I usually fly last week and scared myself similarly. The deck angle was truly spectacular and certainly impressed my passenger - last time we flew it was in a DR400 with the small engine (is it 115hp? can't remember).

And yes, I know I should try a Pitts if I think that was spectacular.

Tim

SSS
 

I was only talking about the engineering items in the 152 vs the 150 NOT the way it flys!

I see the C152 as the best "flying economic tool" in the business at the moment and the best way to get new people into flying quickly it is not an aircraft that I would fly for pleasure just a I would not use an Extra 300 for PPL training.

I would if I got the chance! Inverted Nav-Ex's, proper unusual attitudes.... Yes please.

I think I'll have to try an experiment with our Pitts. Any potential PPL students up for it? It might take a few more hours before you solo. I'm not sure our insurance company would like it either!

When I was 4 hrs into my PPL (in 1981) I went up with John Maclean in his ex-Rothmans S2a. He did the whole routine on me. I loved it to bits!!! Didn't know where the hell I was! He taught me how to do a stall turn and a slow roll. £25 for 15 mins! (turned out to be nearer 20.) They gave you little certificates showing how much + & - 'g' you'd experienced.

That afternoon I was so hooked I went up again with Marcus Edwards.

RIP both.

Kev.

Edited to say "apologies to Med-pilot for thread-creep". This doesn't help him much!

The alternator charging systym indication is different. The ASI is in MPH on early C150s.Early C150 s will have Turn Indicators rather than Turn Co Ordinators

The main difference which no one seems to have picked up on is the Go Around with 40 flap. I once flew over a student in a C150 that had just killed himself at Coventry attempting a full flap GA. (Early C150s do not have continuos travel on the electric flaps when switched). Despite old wives tales C150 do climb away with full flap down but only if you fly accurately( i used to teach take off and circuit with full flap selected to demonstrate capability and trim changes etc)

Remember a bad instructor always teaches landing as a priority over going around.

Remember that point too; you had to be very careful with pitch on a full flap go around as when you opened the throttle, there was VERY marked nose up pitch, and as you're trimmed for landing, you need a lot of force on the wheel to avoid overpitching; you were also taught to retract flap in stages rather than all at once so that the wheel force reduced gradually. Think about it; hold wheel forward, re-trim, retract flaps, full throttle to be maintained, and with your fifth hand.........!
But short landings were great! Approach at 55mph steadily dropping full flap; aim for 45-50 at the flare, dab the brakes as the mainwheels touched and you stopped dead - or at least it felt like you did!
I think I recall the flap switch worked this way; for down, you had to hold the switch down until the required setting was reached; release the switch and it returned to neutral (the switch not the flaps); select up, and the switch stayed up so if you wanted to retract fully, you needn't keep your hand on the switch.

Now that *does* sound like fun! If it's possible this is one student who would definately be interested :8

The FRA150 has a Continental O-240 engine. 130hp rather than the Lyc 110.
FYI. The Cessna codes are - eg FRA150L
F = French built
R = RollsRoyce (Continental) O-240 engine
A = Aerobat
L (Last letter) = Is the model - A to M for the 150 from memory.
C150L is approx 1972 USA built
F150L is approx 1972-3 French built
The French aerobat was the only one with the O-240 engine. French built have anti corrosion from new. Check out some of the Cessna club websites for a full code list and model changes.
Personally I still think they are a great first aircraft, build some hours and experience. Not just local. I flew mine to Valencia Spain. Now have 400hrs so moving onto a tailwheel RV7 - learning again!! The 150 may not be the best aerobat, but you will learn about getting speeds correct and flying accuratly - otherwise it won't work!!

cross wind performance
 

If my memory serves me correctly another differance between the 150 and 152 is the demonstrated crosswind performance the 150 being 20mph for take off 15 mph for landing and the 152 12 kts for take off and landing.This factor and 90 deg to the direction of t/off ldg. worth remembering this is not a crosswind limit but the conditions Cessna claim the aicraft can be operated without applying any crosswind piloting teqniques the loads during these conditions accaptable to the undercarrige construction. Ofcourse a competent pilot will be able to operate safely above these conditions if applying correct crosswind T/O and Ldg teqniques................This differance is because of the slightly taller fin and rudder on the 152

Not wishing to be picky but the fin/rudder size on the 150L (the last of the 150s) is identical to the 152.

There is a pretty major difference between the two:

If you are a girl student, of reasonable (or better) looks, you are more likely to end up pregnant after 50hrs in a C150 than after 50hrs in a C152.

Ask any ATPL hour builder, and watch the grin ;)

Both are ghastly planes, and the sooner they vanish from the GA scene the sooner we might move forward into the 20th century (notice I am being very conservative here; best to not over-innovate in this game). It's not as ghastly as the Tomahawk though :yuk: