https://www.barnstormers.com/classified ... agger.html

I dig the old 150's with the straight tail. They are lighter than the newer ones with the rear window, and because the fuse is basically a cessna 140, you can convert them to tailwheel using 140 parts.

You end up with a C-140 with a metal wing and 100HP that looks like a baby 180.

What is the practicality of using a C-150 for short/soft field operations? Very practical and great fun

So for short grass and/or gravel strips in the hills and mountains of the northeast, can the 150 be a practical (cause it's nice and cheap) bird? Absolutely

What can be done to improve its usefulness? Start with the pilot, lots of practice and learn it's limits

I know there is the Robertson STOL kit with the leading edge cuff, VGs, and drooped wingtips. Fit a Sportsman STOL if you have the $$, otherwise spend the money on avgas and fly it lots

I image a climb prop would be of great help as well (not too worried about speed - or I wouldn't consider a 150!!). Try to find a shop that will repitch as fine as possible within the static rpm limits. (If you inadvertently pitched it a little finer, it could be entirely possible that 2,700rpm static will give significantly better climb performance while still giving 105 knots indicated at 2,500 rpm and 21 lph

What about for tires, how much opportunity is there to upsize the tires for rougher terrain, preferably under an STC. If you have 5" wheels, 15x6.00-5 tyres will fit all round and give you a usefully bigger footprint. Better if you can fit 6" wheels on the mains. You'll need to look in to the certification side

jlacharite wrote: The step stool to get in a 150 has me laughing much harder than it probably should....

I still have the little step ladder that came with my C150/150TD.
I never used it, st least for climbing aboard the airplane, but theyre harder to board than you might think, esp with fat tires mounted. Youll notice that they dont have the boarding step thst most taildraggers are equipped with.

hotrod180 wrote:

jlacharite wrote: The step stool to get in a 150 has me laughing much harder than it probably should....

I still have the little step ladder that came with my C150/150TD.
I never used it, st least for climbing aboard the airplane, but theyre harder to board than you might think, esp with fat tires mounted. Youll notice that they dont have the boarding step thst most taildraggers are equipped with.

I understand all too well, especially without a step on the plane. My 140 can be a pain in the ass to get in and out of for shorter people, and that's just with 8.50s.

For the OP, FWIW, I heard from a friend that an 0-200 with a 71x45 prop climbs beautifully and still cruises just above 100 mph while just BARELY staying inside static rpm limits [emoji6]

.

150's on the lakes

I forgot to mention the mag timing, Glacier is right, it's unlikely the AD affected cylinders will be fitted to most O-200's now. Confirm the timing is 28 degrees BTDC. Although mine seems to creep up to 30 degrees somehow... weird how the flat prop and creeping mags makes mine perform quite well

akschu wrote:
I dig the old 150's with the straight tail. They are lighter than the newer ones with the rear window, and because the fuse is basically a cessna 140, you can convert them to tailwheel using 140 parts.

You end up with a C-140 with a metal wing and 100HP that looks like a baby 180.

I agree!

I owned a 1976 C-150 with the full Horton STOL wing kit, fences, aileron and flap gap seals and drooped wingtips.
It would land in the length of the numbers on a runway, or in about five plane lengths on dirt/gravel. It takes lots of practice to get it slowed down to 20-25 MPH for STOL ops, but it will most definitely do it! I won a lot of bets with that thing... (flying solo).

Don't even think about a C-152. They only have 30 degrees of flaps and that makes all the difference between STOL and scary...

Useful load is limited, but keep the O-200 engine and standard fuel tanks and you will be OK.

Here's a couple poor quality vids of my 150D (and apologies for the language) This is zero wind and longish grass, takeoff 90 meters, landing 25 meters. This was probably 20'c and sea level DA, of course 5,000' DA is a different story, can't expect too much from an O-200!

Trouble with the tailwheel config is I can't rotate it to get enough angle of attack to fly. It'll stall at around 30kias, but I can't get it off at less than 40kias or so. A brutal yank on the wheel and 30' flaps seems to work the best. I've got a sportsman kit and set of VG's that should help a little when I get around to fitting them..

I'm very fortunate to own a few planes, and fly a lot of different types on a regular basis, but I'm always happy with my 150, it is what it is, a low powered little Cessna that costs very little to operate. It has no real vices, gets in and out of places it was never designed to go and always puts a big grin on my dial

CT_Pilot wrote:Hi all,

...I live in New England, so...

There are plenty of challenging places here in NE. I'm just up at KPYM if you are up this way.

As far as a 150/2 goes, yes, you can get a 150 to operate in the backcountry, and yes, it can be fun, but by the time you get it set up to be slightly ok off airport, you are so far beyond what its worth its funny. This is the hard lesson in aviation.

I assume you are looking at 150s because of cash? If you are on a budget, look for a nice 170B and toss a sportsman and 8042 on. Keep her light, and you will have an unending smile.

Others have suggested a Pacer, not as good for slow ops, but this too will NET the same results.

PM me if you want to come up and do some flying...

Good luck!

Bigrenna wrote:I assume you are looking at 150s because of cash? If you are on a budget, look for a nice 170B and toss a sportsman and 8042 on. Keep her light, and you will have an unending smile.

Very true. Just take that 20k you were gonna spend on a 150 and double it so you can get a 170B. Then add ~$7500 for a 8042 and sportsman and you’ll be set.

akschu wrote:https://www.barnstormers.com/classified_1095566_c150+taildragger.html

I dig the old 150's with the straight tail. They are lighter than the newer ones with the rear window, and because the fuse is basically a cessna 140, you can convert them to tailwheel using 140 parts.

You end up with a C-140 with a metal wing and 100HP that looks like a baby 180.

I had exactly that when I joined this forum in 2013. A David Lowe conversion (NOT a "Texas Taildragger"). Beautiful 1959 Baby 180. Square tail, fastback. Flew it for over a year and sold it for a bit more than I paid, to the local CAF wing to train tailwheel drivers for their N3N. I did spin training and used to have a blast spinning it. Very docile and predictable recovery.



I added VG's. In retrospect, though I like the VG's, it was kind of a waste. At least at the elevations around here, with just a little practice, you can already land a 150 on a shorter field than you can take off from. I swapped out the high pitch cruise prop for the lowest pitch approved on the TCDS and that got the RPM's up on that smooth running little O-200, but with my home field at 4723' MSL, it stil took around 7-800' to get off the ground on the asphalt runway.

So, unless you have the money right now for a more powerful plane, go ahead and get an old airworthy 150, fly it, and then later, if you do the Lowe tailwheel conversion, you might sell it at a profit when you're ready to move up.

Pierre

robw56 wrote:Very true. Just take that 20k you were gonna spend on a 150 and double it so you can get a 170B. Then add ~$7500 for a 8042 and sportsman and you’ll be set.

Not trying to take anything away from a 150, but in order to get the 150 fun off airport, you need to really mod it. The cost of the sportsman and the prop is relatively the same regardless of being for the 170 or the 150. In a 170 (if you buy it right,) you will get a little better return on the mods than in a 150.

Buying a $12k C150, then spending $10k to hang a Sportsman, VGs and a climb prop doesn't make much sense to me... I have been traveling all around the country the past two months looking at birds. Some were really really rough, but if you keep your eyes/ears peeled, there are still hidden treasures 170Bs out there.

I guess it really comes down to budget... If the 150 is where its at, than I'd say at least your flying!

Buy the 150 and don't worry about "backcountry" flying, just buy it, fly it a couple hundred hours and then you will have a good idea what you want / need to do the flying you want to do, the back country flying will happen soon enough. You can do a heck of a lot in a good 150! Buy if fly it and have fun. If you cant be with the one you love then love the one your with!

Kurt

Bigrenna wrote:I assume you are looking at 150s because of cash? If you are on a budget, look for a nice 170B and toss a sportsman and 8042 on. Keep her light, and you will have an unending smile.

If it's about money, get a 170A. They are a bit cheaper, and I would put my A against any B with the same engine. I think the flat wing helps them get off faster, and they already land in 1/2 the distance they need to take off.

Sure, the B is much more refined and flies better, but the A works if you are on a budget.