Budget Buy

Flying great distances at slow speeds

Although Cessna developed the two-place model 150 as a primary trainer, many AOPA members own 150s for personal flying. Howard Paul, AOPA 1299930, of Scottsdale, Arizona, who owns the 1975 Cessna 150M photographed for this article, says, "It's a very capable airplane." As any flight instructor will attest, it and its 152 cousin also are very durable and reliable.

Many different models

The first 150s were parts-bin airplanes. The wings — with huge Fowler-style flaps, which deployed downward 40 degrees — had been developed by Cessna for an improved version of the two-seat Cessna 140. These and a new empennage and larger rudder were bolted to a 140 fuselage.

Cessna constantly upgrades its airplanes and the 150 was no exception. The initial configuration is called the "Fast-Back 150" because the fuselage tapers in a straight line from the aft edge of the wing to the tail. That simple shape was abandoned in 1965 (the 150D model) with the introduction of Omni-vision; the straight fuselage top line was notched to add wraparound rear windows. Because of the additional structure needed to compensate for the windows, the empty weight increased. This, in turn, necessitated a significant bump in the maximum gross weight from 1,500 to 1,600 pounds. Increasing the gross weight and changing the fuselage shape took a performance toll, with service ceiling dropping from 15,600 feet to 14,000 feet.

Two years later the vertical stabilizer was slanted to match the look of the other airplanes in Cessna's line. The public must have liked the new look, which was combined with a slightly larger baggage area and electric flaps, because 1966 was the year Cessna set a production record for 150s by pushing 3,067 of the two-seaters out the door.

In 1970 Cessna introduced the 150 Aerobat, an aerobatic version of the 150. Structural beef-ups were added to comply with the plus 6 Gs and minus 3 Gs required for aerobatic certification. Aerobat production continued through into the 152 line. Cessna licensed production of regular and 150 and 152 Aerobats to Argentina and Reims in France. Reims turned out 215 150 Aerobats from 1972 through 1977 with 130-horsepower Rolls-Royce O-240-A engines and 1,650-pound maximum gross weights.

A four-cylinder, carbureted Continental Motors O-200A engine generated 100 horsepower for a McCauley all-metal two-blade, fixed-pitch propeller.

In 1959 the first of more than 30,000 Cessna 150s was sold. During the 26 years of production Cessna made 31 changes in the 150. The biggest change took place in 1978 when the 150 was replaced by the 152, which had a slightly wider fuselage and a four-cylinder, carbureted, 110-horsepower Textron Lycoming O-235 engine.

Members' 150s

"My first airplane was a 1966 150F. It was inexpensive to fly and maintain, and had a very high fun index," says Stan Cooper, AOPA 1222905, of San Francisco.

Many 150s and 152s have slogged for years earning their keep in the tough and tiring world of flight training. According to Vref, an aircraft valuation service (available for members on the AOPA Web site), an average 1975 150 has 5,580 flight hours. How many hours does it take to wear out a 150 airframe? No one knows for sure. According to Royson Parson, who has managed the Cessna 150-152 Club Web site for the past nine years, there has never been a case of an in-flight breakup of a 150 or 152 airframe.

Parson knows of one regularly flown 150 airframe with more than 20,000 hours, which has been modified by the installation of a 150-horsepower engine. The airframe is tough and durable, and there are few airframe and powerplant (A&P) technicians who are not familiar with the engines and airframes. This translates into low operating and maintenance costs. This is one of the big factors for the many pilots who have researched ownership costs and their airplane needs to find that 150s are the ideal airplane.

Paul, who has recently moved his business and his 150 from Torrance, California, to Scottsdale, Arizona, began flying in 1996 and soon afterward got his private pilot certificate. "I flew a rental [Piper] Turbo Arrow to service my business accounts. When the biggest account got bought out I put my flight bag away," said Paul. A little less than a year ago Paul got the flying itch again. "I got current in less than three hours, but the price of flying had gone up — I was paying $100 an hour for a Cessna 172 and $39 an hour for an instructor. I thought to myself, this is crazy, I ought to buy an airplane," said Paul.

He found the 150 he now owns on his home airport. It has only 3,931 hours' total airframe time, new red and white paint had been applied in 1999, and the interior seat upholstery and carpeting were redone in 2005. The engine has 284 hours since a major overhaul.

After purchase Paul installed a second radio with glideslope, and got the pitot/static system and altimeter checks current before obtaining his instrument rating in his new airplane. "One of the best things we did was to tune up the flight control system. We replaced worn parts, set cable tensions, and rigged the flight controls. It flies like a big airplane now," said Paul.

Flying the Cessna 150

Cessna 150s are not big load haulers. The maximum gross weight of 1959 150 through 1963 150C models was 1,500 pounds before it was boosted to 1,600 pounds for the 150D and subsequent models in 1964. Pre-1964 empty weights averaged 1,030 to 1,060 pounds, with later versions averaging between 1,100 and 1,130 pounds. Add a full load of 26 gallons of fuel — extended-range 38-gallon tanks are installed on some models — and the useful load usually ranges from 345 pounds to 325 pounds. Typical fuel consumption numbers range from 4.5 gallons per hour at low cruise to six gallons per hour at full-throttle low-level cruise. For those who seek only to enjoy the magic of a flight around the neighborhood once a week, such as Harold Fickel, AOPA 1173795, of Clinton, Missouri, fuel loads are of little importance.

"I'm not a hot-shot pilot," said Fickel, "so I don't really have any flying stories. I'm 83 years old and like to take my wife up about once a week for an hour or so. We live near the Lake of the Ozarks, and when the weather is nice we both like to fly over the lake."

Fickel bought his 1975 150 after selling a SkyStar Kitfox. His 150 has 5,620 hours and has been a trainer. Although the engine had only 51 hours since a major overhaul, it had sat for three or four years before Fickel bought it. "I've had some valve-sticking problems in two cylinders and a loose valve guide in another. But now it's running good," said Fickel. By the time you read this, the Fickels will have completed more of the good-weather, late-afternoon scenic flights they both enjoy — because of their 150.

The economical and affordable 150

There seems to be an unwritten rule that shared flying adventures are always more memorable when great distances are traveled at slow speeds. Austin Taylor, AOPA 2838423, of Oxford, Maine, and his father set out to fly their Cessna 150A from Santa Fe, New Mexico, to their home airport near Oxford during Christmas vacation in 2002. Weather along their route dictated layovers in Columbia, Missouri, and Parkersburg, West Virginia. The weather didn't open up for days. "Nothing was open so our Christmas dinner was burritos from a 7-Eleven," said Taylor. In spite of that memory, Taylor flew his 150 for "a couple hundred more hours" within the state before he finally sold it on Father's Day 2006. "It was a very good airplane and very economical," Taylor went on. "We never paid more than $750 for an annual."

Common troubles

Cessna 150s have a short list of trouble areas. They include:

Leaky pushrod tube seals on the O-200 engines. A modification by Real Gaskets Tennessee, of Elizabethton, replaces the oil-leak-prone swaged pushrod tubes with tubes that can be resealed in the field. Expect to spend $160 per cylinder plus labor.

Starter clutch failures. Two problems here. Both the early pull-type and the later key-type starters utilized sprag-type clutches, which failed with little warning. In addition, the needle bearings supporting the forward end of the drive shaft of the key-type starter were very poorly lubricated until 1979 when a mod was incorporated. Niagara Air Parts in New York sells replacement clutch assemblies that cost from $160 to $300. Sky-Tec, Granbury, Texas, and B&C Specialty Products, Newton, Kansas, both sell excellent lightweight starter systems that completely replace the TCM starters and the troublesome clutch systems. Expect to pay from $550 to $800 for the new starter. Both companies sell kits to convert from the pull-type starter to a key-type starter.

Airworthiness directive (AD) 96-12-06, which superseded AD 77-13-03. This AD mandated that owners of 150s retard the engine ignition timing from 28 degrees before top dead center to 24 degrees BTDC. This adjustment lessened the cylinder combustion chamber pressures, thus preventing cylinder-to-barrel leaks. It also detracted from aircraft performance and increased vibration. If new-style cylinders (TCM part numbers of 641917 or higher; or Engine Components Inc. and Superior Air Parts O-200 replacement cylinders) are installed the timing can be reset to 28 degrees BTDC. This change reduces vibration and yields more power.

Cracked stabilizer attach brackets. These are caused by ignorant or lazy airplane handlers who aren't aware of exactly how (and where) to push down on the tail to raise the nose gear off the ground when moving the airplane around on the ground.

Owners report that the Continental O-200 is "the most [carburetor] ice-prone engine known to man." Detection by installing a carburetor temperature gauge or Iceman carburetor ice-detection system, or the disciplined use of carburetor heat, is the only solution.

Mods

Popular modifications range from converting the airplane to conventional (tailwheel) landing gear, flying on and off water by installing a set of floats, installing a larger engine (up to 150 horsepower), adding vortex generators or drooped-wingtip and leading-edge short-takeoff and landing kits, and adding long-range fuel tanks to minor improvements such as oil filters, flap and aileron gap seals, and clutchless starters. The 150s and 152s are approved for auto fuel use after obtaining the applicable supplemental type certificate from the Experimental Airplane Association or Petersen Aviation.

You gotta believe

In the April 2006 issue of Pilot, contributor Rick Durden described a 1,100-mile round-trip flight — part of which was flown in IFR conditions — in a Cessna 150 (see " IFR in a Modest Airplane"). Durden wrote, "I cannot help but think that while I'm working a lot harder and stopping more frequently than I would have in the Bonanza, I am making the trip for well under half the cost and getting much more of a feeling of accomplishment." He continues, "Modest airplanes have the ability to get us where we want to go, for modest sums of money, for a healthy percentage of the time, as long as we are willing to do a little careful planning, as well as accept a higher workload, the limitations of the craft — and a certain lack of respect from the class conscious."

The Cessna 150-152 Web site contains the story by Leo Stoman, a pilot who ferried a 150 from the United States to South Africa. Equipped with long-range ferry fuel tanks, this mini-Cessna lifted off from St. John's, Newfoundland, and flew a direct routing for 14 hours before landing at Santa Maria in the Azores. The FAA granted a special maximum gross weight increase to 2,050 pounds — 30 percent above maximum takeoff weight — to accommodate the needed fuel.

These divergent tales of ownership help illustrate what many 150 owners have known for years — when shopping for a dependable, affordable, easy-to-maintain airplane that will reliably deliver both fun flying and slow-but-steady cross-country performance, the ubiquitous Cessna 150 and 152 are hard to beat.

For more information on Cessna 150s and 152s, one of the best sources of model-specific information is available on the Web site of the 150-152 Club. Two other organizations — the Cessna Pilots Association and the Cessna Owner Organization also are very helpful.

E-mail the author at [email protected].

Links to additional information about Cessna 150s and 152s may be found on AOPA Online.

The 152 Advantage

After cranking out nearly 30,000 Cessna 150s during an 18-year period, Cessna replaced the 150 with the Cessna 152 in 1978. The 152 had a slightly wider fuselage, the maximum takeoff weight had been boosted by 70 pounds to 1,670 pounds, and the 100-horsepower Continental engine had been replaced with a 110-horsepower Lycoming O-235-L2C engine. The Lycoming was supposed to tolerate the increase in lead in the 100-octane avgas better than the little Continental.

More than 7,000 152s and more than 400 A152 Aerobats were produced before production was suspended in 1986. Nearly 40 percent of the total 152 production was produced in the introduction year.

Production never again reached those levels. Part of the reason was because the Lycoming engine initially proved to be much worse at scavenging the lead in 100-octane avgas than the engine it replaced. The problem was so bad that in order to get the engine to run smoothly, mechanics had to learn a new skill — chiseling globules of lead off the spark plugs — at 25-hour intervals. Not only that, the engine was reluctant to start smoothly, and equally hard to shut down because of hot combustion-chamber deposits that caused the engine to continue to kick over after the mixture control was pulled.

Starting problems were solved by resetting the magneto impulse-coupling lag angle and installing a slower-turning starter. Champion developed extended-electrode spark plugs that were more resistant to lead fouling and easier to clean. Another service bulletin recommended shutting down the engine after running it up to 1,500 rpm to activate lead scavenging additives in the fuel. In 1983 the O-235-L2C engine was replaced by the -N2C engine, which had a slightly lower compression ratio (8.1-to-1 vs. 8.5-to-1) and produced 2 less horsepower. These measures have drastically reduced lead-fouling problems.

The bugs are ironed out now and the 152 has several advantages over the 150. The engine time between overhauls is a whopping 2,400 hours — 600 hours more than the TBO of the O-200 in the 150 — the cabin is wider, the instrument panel layout is modern, there is more room for avionics, and performance is slightly better because of the horsepower increase. — SWE

SPEC SHEET