Pilot Briefing: AOPA 2015 You Can Fly Sweepstakes

Smiles per gallon

A fly off between two bantamweight trainers is no clash of titans. The Cessna 150 weighs in at just more than 1,000 pounds empty, and its 152 successor is about 25 pounds heavier. Almost all of that weight difference is attributable to the 152’s larger 110-horsepower Lycoming engine, compared to the 150’s 100-horsepower Continental.

But inquiring minds (read: my editor’s and mine) wanted to know the real performance differences between these once-ubiquitous trainers, so we put them to a side-by-side test. And it would be impossible to find two better airplanes for the comparison. Both the 150 and 152 are best-in-class examples that had recently been remanufactured by Aviat Aircraft as part of AOPA’s ongoing Reimagined fleet renewal program.

On a glorious 65-degree-Fahrenheit afternoon, we filled the fuel tanks in both airplanes, added a 180-pound pilot, and prepared for an aerial drag race.

AOPA colleague Mark Evans won the coin toss and elected to fly N152UC, AOPA’s 2015 Sweepstakes Reimagined 152, a 1978 model. I hopped in N150UC—an airplane that’s so much nicer than those in which most GA pilots of my generation learned to fly, it’s almost unrecognizable as a 1976 150M.

Lined up on Runway 5 at Frederick (Maryland) Municipal Airport, we simultaneously added full power and trundled into an 8-knot breeze. The 152 accelerated noticeably faster and pulled ahead by about 50 feet at the time that both airplanes reached rotation speed. The 150 used slightly less runway in both normal and short-field takeoffs, but the 152 accelerates more quickly and its power advantage becomes even more obvious in its greater rate of climb.

The 152 pulled away with a climb rate of more than 800 feet per minute, while the 150 barely did 600. The 152 has a 10-percent power advantage, but its gross weight is only 1.5 percent more than its rival’s—and this is where it comes into play. Advantage: 152.

We climbed together to 4,000 feet and found the two airplanes were in a virtual dead heat in straight-line speed at redline engine rpm, but the 152 was about two knots faster. The 152’s speed advantage was barely noticeable, but it’s consistent, and I’ll have to trust that both tachometers were accurate and Evans was strictly observing the limit. Advantage: 152.

Next, we decelerated together to find out which airplane stalls more slowly. With flaps up and the stall horns blaring in both airplanes, the 152’s wing quit flying first. The lighter 150 managed to hang on. We repeated the process with full flaps, and the 150 (with 40 degrees of flaps, compared to the 152’s 30 degrees) had an even bigger margin. Advantage: 150.

Then we set up a turning contest. We passed head to head, left wing to left wing, and banked 60 degrees in the direction of the other aircraft. The 150 has both a quicker rate of turn and a smaller radius. (Or maybe I was still mad at being left in the dust during the takeoff and climb, and pulled harder in the turn.) But after 360 degrees of turn, the 150 was well inside its rival. Advantage: 150.

We returned to the airport for a series of approaches and landings. Using full flaps and an approach speed of 60 miles per hour, both airplanes had a comfortable 1.3 VS margin above stall. But at its maximum 40-degree flap setting, the 150 had more drag. It requires more power to maintain a 3-degree glideslope, but it also decelerates faster, and drops like a stone the moment the throttle is pulled back to idle. It’s no wonder these are the favored aircraft for spot-landing contests. The 152 is more forgiving because it’s less likely to develop excessive sink rates at full flaps and idle power. Advantage: Draw.

In sum, the 152’s more powerful engine gives it a distinct advantage in acceleration and climb, and a very slight advantage in top speed. The lighter 150 has the edge in slow flight and, with its greater flap travel, short-field and spot landings. Both are highly responsive, honest, mechanically simple, and proven primary trainers.

My main takeaway was how much fun these airplanes are to fly, and the numbers we worked hard to gather really don’t tell the story—or, frankly, matter much. Who cares if one model is two or three knots faster in high cruise? These airplanes were made to teach students to take off and land, and they both do that extremely well. These airplanes were never meant for transcontinental treks, although Evans and I have each done a few in these airplanes (see “Wyoming Transformations,” March 2015 AOPA Pilot).

During many hours of learning to fly in a Cessna 150, taking my first checkride, and giving rides to friends and family members, I never saw one up close from the perspective of another aircraft. So although our 150/152 formation of bright yellow trainers might have looked a bit goofy from the ground, it was a novel experience for both pilots. The radio communications between the two reflected that with more than the normal share of quips, jokes, and laughter.

There are lots of ways to quantify aircraft performance. But in terms of smiles per gallon, these airplanes are in a league of their own.

Email [email protected]

Winners

Takeoff and climb: 152
Max speed: 152
Slower stall: 150
Smaller turn radius: 150
Landing: Draw

Last chance

It’s that time of year again—no, not the holidays, but the final opportunity to make sure the Reimagined 152 can be a gift in your hangar in 2016. The AOPA 2015 Reimagined Sweepstakes is open to all members. You can increase your chance of winning by joining the AOPA Automatic Annual Renewal Program. The final chance for entry is December 31, 2015. Our prize patrol could arrive at your airport sometime in early February. Don’t miss this opportunity to win your own renovated Cessna 152. Go online for final rules and information.

Video: Watch the trainers face off.