Hi all,

What is the practicality of using a C-150 for short/soft field operations? I live in New England, so our "back country" flying is probably a little tamer than the Flying Cowboys type of stuff (unless someone can show me where to play? ). 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?

What can be done to improve its usefulness? I know there is the Robertson STOL kit with the leading edge cuff, VGs, and drooped wingtips. I image a climb prop would be of great help as well (not too worried about speed - or I wouldn't consider a 150!!). What about for tires, how much opportunity is there to upsize the tires for rougher terrain, preferably under an STC.

Probably just easier to find a taildragger in the same price range, but the 150 is fun as hell to fly, and I think the all metal skin would fair better tied down in New England's constant changing weather.

Thanks for whatever guidance/advice you can provide.

Regards,

I had a C-150 which had larger nose gear right from the factory. Also had a climb prop. They are fun airplanes and cheap to fly. Ok for local hops.

A friend of mine turned a C-150 into a tail dragger and did a beautiful restoration on it. Leather interior and all. Its actually right up the victor hi way from you at KIJD Windham. Its tied down out on the line in neglect waiting for you to make an offer on it.

I have only been/ flown in the west, but I have been impressed with my old straight tail 172. I tell people is is just a big 150 with 2 extra cylinders! Kept light, with just me, I find that it does better than it has any right to, if there was a good pilot in it- it would do better
I have seen a few decent older 172's sell for $15- 22K in the last couple of years, and this is about the same as many 150's. Get a GOOD prebuy, burn auto gas, and have a ball! A LOT of utility for the money!

Might want to look for a 152...little more HP. With a climb prop it was (is?) used extensively for flight training at Prescott, AZ, which is over 5k msl, with SERIOUS density altitude.

I wouldn't spend money on add-ons in the 150 class airplanes, as I doubt they actually add much to performance. Anywhere stock tires wont take you, you don't want to be in that airplane. Cuffs and tips and VG's only work if you have the HP to move them. Probably better to just tear out instruments and interior for a lighter ship.

A 150 is a poor backcountry airplane, but a poor backcountry airplane you can easily afford beats the hell out of a good backcountry airplane you can't.

What Hammer said about add- ons goes for the 172, as well. (with the stock engine) A cuff or VG's or a STOL kit will land slower, and break ground quicker, but after that it is all thrust to gravity ratio. An extra 35 hp (O-360) changes things quite a bit, and more than doubles the price of the plane. I have few complaints about the 172's ability to get in short: getting out is something else again.

I think a STOL cuff and big tires on a 150 or 152 would simply reduce its already meager useful load without much benefit for 99% of the flying you described.
They are great little planes and you’ll be a better pilot for flying one but I’d play the weight game vs Restomod.
Strip out everything that’s not needed and make it as light as possible and put a climb or seaplane prop on her.
Dropping 100 pounds or more out of a 150 will give you better performance all around and is cheaper than a vg kit or cuff.

Ditto what Hammer said. I flew one in Alaska. that’s all a high school kid making a shitty wage could afford at the time. Buddy and me would fill up the back with camping and fishing gear and go fly. Plenty of gravel strips good enough for a 150 up there, some of the best times in my life.

Stock 150, you don’t need all the gadgets that add weight.

One man's slip is another man's gulp.

What do you mean by short/soft field operations? 1000' of gravel? 1800' of grass?

With a 150/152/172, you can operate in/out of gravel, but you will eventually chew up a longer climb prop if you don't already have a bigger nosefork and aren't really careful to land nose up, and taxi with full up elevator. This is one of the reasons why a tailwheel is nice, you get your prop out of the dirt.

So to answer your question, if you are talking about 1500ft of grass, flying solo, without an obstacle, then sure a 150 will work. If you are wanting to buy one, get picky, look for one that's light (the early straight tail ones are very light) and already has bigger tires.

If you want a lot more airplane, look at a piper pacer, or a 170. They are still pretty cheap to own and fly, and are a lot more airplane. I bought my 170 with goodyear 26" tires on it, 185 gear, roberson stol, VG's, and a climb prop. I can operate in 1000' with my wife and light camping gear. It was about $13k more than I would have paid for a 150 and easily double the airplane.

Hope that helps.

This is one of my favorite old-school flying videos.



As for "flying cowboys," I love Kevin, he is a friend and an exciting pilot, but that type of flying long pre-dates that crowd and their Carbon Cubs, and this website for that matter.

Zzz wrote:This is one of my favorite old-school flying videos.

As for "flying cowboys," I love Kevin, he is a friend and an exciting pilot, but that type of flying long pre-dates that crowd and their Carbon Cubs, and this website for that matter.

Now I want a 150.

Zzz wrote:This is one of my favorite old-school flying videos.

Zzz wrote:This is one of my favorite old-school flying videos.

Saw that guy in valdez a number of years ago:

Oh, funny, turns out that's Levi A. I know him, I just didn't add it up because I didn't meet him until after he sold the 150 and bought a 170. So there you go, the really good 150 pilot can do a lot, but eventually upgraded to a 170....

The Cessna 150 makes a great backcountry airplane. It is very practical.
Fly it light. Fly it right, Fly it Tight!

There's an old boy on here that's been flying one short and sweet for a long time.
He's passionate about the backcountry and even though it's underpowered, he's carefully taken it a few places.

Just got his CFI a month ago today, same examiner that did his Commercial 5 years ago and his Private 30 years ago. 8.5 hour check ride.

His day job is for a structural repair shop in Montana. Matter of fact, they are fixing to do another 182 to 180 taildragger conversion. Perhaps with the owners permission he will show the process on here start to finish. Hard to say, busy man with a boatload of kids...

His 182 project is supposed to be in Jan, at least that's what he tells the Flying Hawkes. He's looking forward to more horse power and having something to be able to instruct in. Nosing around in the Idaho Backcountry! Meantime he's started teaching his first student in a 172!

He's gotten a little gun shy in public, he's not interested in fighting, not interested in making enemies, but he's been there and done that in a Cessna 150 in the backcountry and he will give you a lot of tips on energy management and share his experiences with you. He certainly doesn't want you to get hurt. 100 HP, fives on the mains, fives on the nose.

And he loves Backcountry Pilot.

Hey CT Pilot,

I am East coast (At a mountain strip) and have a 150 (1967 G) because it's what I can afford to own AND fly. With that said, it's a blast as long as you respect the limitations. I have a climb prop, which is the only mod. It does make a difference, not so much on take-off run as climbing out. As everyone has said here, you really do have to take into account weight, wind and temps and be OK, not flying if conditions aren't right. You also have to not just look at runway length, but also what if any obstacles there are/rising terrain, ect. A 1,500' runway opening up into a river valley might just work fine, where a 3,000' runway heading into rising terrain may not. Getting to know your plane and what it can and can't do in different conditions is key. The nice thing is that you can go out and fly the thing while not breaking the bank. Mine runs on Mo-gas and at 5gph I can go out and fly around for an hour after work and spend less than $20. It's also not a bad little run-about. Would I like a more capable plane - sure, but at this point it's not in the cards. If and when I do up-grade I'm pretty sure I will keep the 150. Speaking of straight tail 172's fshaw (A member here) has had two (Both with 0-300's) and I have flown them both a decent amount. The one he has now has a Horton kit on it and it definitely gets off the ground quicker than the other one did.

Good luck,

Pete

richpiney wrote:The Cessna 150 makes a great backcountry airplane. It is very practical.
Fly it light. Fly it right, Fly it Tight!

There's an old boy on here that's been flying one short and sweet for a long time.
He's passionate about the backcountry and even though it's underpowered, he's carefully taken it a few places.

Just got his CFI a month ago today, same examiner that did his Commercial 5 years ago and his Private 30 years ago. 8.5 hour check ride.

His day job is for a structural repair shop in Montana. Matter of fact, they are fixing to do another 182 to 180 taildragger conversion. Perhaps with the owners permission he will show the process on here start to finish. Hard to say, busy man with a boatload of kids...

His 182 project is supposed to be in Jan, at least that's what he tells the Flying Hawkes. He's looking forward to more horse power and having something to be able to instruct in. Nosing around in the Idaho Backcountry! Meantime he's started teaching his first student in a 172!

He's gotten a little gun shy in public, he's not interested in fighting, not interested in making enemies, but he's been there and done that in a Cessna 150 in the backcountry and he will give you a lot of tips on energy management and share his experiences with you. He certainly doesn't want you to get hurt. 100 HP, fives on the mains, fives on the nose.

And he loves Backcountry Pilot.

Awesome! I hope make it up his way soon.

I think the biggest detractor to a 150 is perception: "It's just a 150." I hear the same about my P172D: "It's just a 172." Fact: They're both real, honest airplanes. Mine's a bit of a hot rod with a 180hp Lycoming and a CS prop, but even stock, both a 150 and a 172 are superb airplanes--and they're forgiving. If you spend the time to learn how to get the most out of them, you'll be a better pilot than those who rely on their 300hp fire-breathing whatever tail draggers to get them in and out of places. That they're trikes isn't generally a problem, except on very rough strips or in the hands of ham-handed pilots who don't land on the mains--but a ham-handed pilot who can't land a trike on the mains is very likely to be the king of ground loopers in a tail dragger.

On tire sizes: unless an airplane is being operated on really rough or really soft terrain, the monster tires that some like to put on their airplanes are just drag in the air, without much benefit on the ground. A little bigger, OK, but a lot bigger, no real benefit for most operations.

I've had a lot of fun with my airplane, and I've had a lot of fun with 150s/152s. When I've flown 152s, I honestly can't see much difference over 150s. However, a 150 I flew a few times that had a 125 hp conversion in it was spunkier on climb out at the altitudes around here, which made it a bit more pleasant to fly with a passenger.

Cary

Thanks all. Just got signed off in a 67 G model yesterday, so I can start taking that out once in a while (closer to home than my club's 172 that I fly more often) to see how I like it. Guess I can start with the longer grass strips up this way (CT24, etc.) and get comfortable then start working my way down. Maybe a taildragger will be better in the end, who knows. Will be fun finding out along the way!

This looks fun as hell:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1xTMKVBMU0Y

Or this:



Of course, both prob have an O-320 in them.

I received my tail wheel endorsement in a 152 taildragger at Nampa, ID. Very solid aircraft. But, W/B has to be respected. Definitely a “Like Button” for training. Cost effective and beefy.

Zzz wrote:This looks fun as hell:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1xTMKVBMU0Y

Or this:



Of course, both prob have an O-320 in them.

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