Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Cessna 150/150 Tailgragger

  1. #1
    Member lab man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Fairbanks
    Posts
    551

    Default Cessna 150/150 Tailgragger

    Anyone have experience in a Cessna 150 taildragger with a 150 horse? I would like to hear any information you guys have to offer.

  2. #2
    Member Float Pilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Kachemak Bay Alaska
    Posts
    4,214

    Default

    I had a 150/150 tric gear for a few years. It was a real hoot to fly. Not very roomy, but it was great for doing mountain flying training.
    My wife called it the Sky-Porsche.
    The down side is that they are right on the edge for being at gross weight once you fuel them up. (I had the long range tanks) And you can also get them into the yellow arc at cruise very easily. The up-engine mod also makes them not approved for spins. I had a student put it into a spin over Ninilchik and we were at VNe during the recover phase.

    There are two STCs out there for the 150 horse upgrade. One gives you a gross weight increase, while the old "Bush" conversion did not.

    The up side is that mine cruised at 125 mph, took off pretty fast and climbed very well.
    Floatplane,Tailwheel and Firearms Instructor- Dragonfly Aero
    Experimental Hand-Loader, NRA Life Member
    http://site.dragonflyaero.com

  3. #3
    Member lab man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Fairbanks
    Posts
    551

    Default

    Thanks! I put some questions up on supercub.org regarding the 150, and a few people seem to have dim views on the aircraft but I haven't gotten any answers on why people don't like them. I'm considering one of these coversions for myself, and just want to find as much information on them as possible.

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Semi-retired in Florida
    Posts
    483

    Default

    Having been a Super Cub owner, I can tell you that most of them believe that no other "real" airplane has ever been developed. Don't pay too much attentnion to the Super Cub drivers. Most of us have put ourseleves upon pedestals where we really don't belong . . . . .

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    chugiak, ak
    Posts
    630

    Default

    iagree with everything FP said, they are a hoot to fly. There are a group of guys at soldotna that have a few 150/150s They are pretty nice little machines, the guys in soldotna really have them tricked out, you should see if you can find some more about them and ask some questions from them, they really know thier stuff!

  6. #6
    Member lab man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Fairbanks
    Posts
    551

    Default

    My buddy attended the VAldez Airshow and got me the numbers of the guys who were flying 150s in the competition. I plan on giving them a call sometime soon.

    Grizzly 1, I'm starting to notice that a lot of the guys on that site have the attitude of "supercub or go home." I have gotten some good advice though, and I hope I can keep asking questions that will receive quality answers. I've been doing a lot of research online and looking through old forums, but that only gets me so far.

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Semi-retired in Florida
    Posts
    483

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lab man View Post
    My buddy attended the VAldez Airshow and got me the numbers of the guys who were flying 150s in the competition. I plan on giving them a call sometime soon.

    Grizzly 1, I'm starting to notice that a lot of the guys on that site have the attitude of "supercub or go home." I have gotten some good advice though, and I hope I can keep asking questions that will receive quality answers. I've been doing a lot of research online and looking through old forums, but that only gets me so far.
    MOST of the "Super Cub or go home" can't operate the standard PA-18 to its capabilities anyway!

    There are no silly questions, lab man, so keep at it. You'll still get a wealth of information on this site. Too bad that the crop of old, mossback pilots is thinning out. Many of the "new guys" have landed off-airport a few times, but not one in a hundred would fly without radios, starters, generators, or HSIs and DGs. Don't take everything you read here as gospel. Most of what you'll learn will be on your own, and that's the best way anyhow!

    Hang in there . . . . .

  8. #8
    Member Float Pilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Kachemak Bay Alaska
    Posts
    4,214

    Default

    I have had some of the Super Cub or nothing folks stay at my place. More than a few of them have not really flown anything in years or they really fly Cessnas 99% of the time.
    I really miss that little 150/150. My non-electric Cub is too cold and slow for much in the winter. Plus she has no lights. Back when I also had the little 150/150 I could zip up to Anchorage in 45-55 minutes for classes or meetings. More than a few times my lovely bride and I zipped up to watch a show and then zipped back down in the middle of the night.. It would get off the ground in about 400 feet with two folks and a full load. (maybe a little over a full load)

    When I sold her (Little Sweetie) to a real estate guy in Nevada, I left Tok without a full load of gas and had to climb over clouds and mountains to make a straight line to White Horse. I was easily able to get up over the legal 12,500 feet ( maybe accidentally over 14,000 in a place or two for 29 minutes) and that really lets you cut corners off the trip. Had I been in a Cub it would have been low and slow the whole way.

    Had it been a Texas tail-dragger conversion it might have been even faster.

    The most beat-up looking C-150 that you actually fly is always much better than the tricked out super-cub that you never can afford.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Floatplane,Tailwheel and Firearms Instructor- Dragonfly Aero
    Experimental Hand-Loader, NRA Life Member
    http://site.dragonflyaero.com

  9. #9
    Member Toddler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    556

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Float Pilot View Post
    The most beat-up looking C-150 that you actually fly is always much better than the tricked out super-cub that you never can afford.
    Amen

    Spend 1/2 the money you save buying a 150/150 over a SC on AVGAS and you will likely be able to get into many of the same places your SC friends can.

    Just my nickel
    Drew
    Normal people believe that if something ain't broke, don't fix it. Engineers believe that if it ain't broke, it doesn't have enough features yet.

    Scott Adams

  10. #10
    New member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Kenai
    Posts
    7

    Default

    Hello Folks

    Seeing this thread convinced me to sing up to your group. I've visited before but I guess I'm a member now. I fly the AK Magnum 150 that was seen at this years Valdez Fly In. My hunting partner was flying the other fixed up 150 in the competition. Also, the 170B that took first place was flown by my other hunting partner Shawn.

    I have flown my 150/150 for about 1800 hours and have biult or rebiult 5 of them. For years I have tried to defend the little Cessna from the cruel jokes thrown out by many a bush pilot. My father started converting them up here back in 1976 and completed 14 of them.

    The end result is this. People are entitled to their opinion even if they are wrong. I know what my plane will do. I know were I can safely operate in and out of. Is a Cub better? Yes, in some ways. Just as the Cessna is better in other ways. What Float Pilot said is true. Can you still safely use the 150 as a bush plane? I think so, otherwise I must be using up a lot of luck.

    Thanks for the site.

    Mike

  11. #11
    Member Float Pilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Kachemak Bay Alaska
    Posts
    4,214

    Default

    Mike,
    What do you cruise at with the larger tires? About what do you figure for take-off distance fully loaded and no wind? What do you weigh empty?
    My old C-150/150 with a nose-wheel would do it in 400 feet fully loaded with dead wind. It would land in about 200 feet.
    Mine was a 1967 model and was converted via the BUSH STC. I always thought that it would have been better as a tail dragger since it would loose the extra drag up front. But maybe it would not have stopped as fast.

    I have though about trading in my PA-11 on floats for a 150/150 on floats more than once. Crawling into the rear of the PA-11, plus hand starting 10 times a day is not so much fun at my age and with all my assorted injuries.
    Floatplane,Tailwheel and Firearms Instructor- Dragonfly Aero
    Experimental Hand-Loader, NRA Life Member
    http://site.dragonflyaero.com

  12. #12
    New member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Kenai
    Posts
    7

    Default

    Float Pilot

    Mine is also a 67G. Empty weight is 1208#. With the Borrer prop (82/43) and 31" tires I cruise 100MPH at 2450. With my cruise prop 74/63 I cruise 125MPH. Small tires and the cruise prop will step it up to 145MPH. Max manuvering speed is 130. Do not exceed is 163MPH.

    With the Borrer and big tires I will break ground at 350' no wind, two passengers, full LR tanks and gear. And landing is about the same. With my heavy tail I can get on the breaks much more than the Cubs but I'm also landing faster so it's a wash. The gear is much softer than most cubs but it needs to be because of the faster touch down speed. Big tires and soft gear helps absorbe some very large bumps.

    Many of the 150/150's I've seen have not been set up right for doing bush work. I think that is one of the reasons for the bad wrap.

    Next time I'm home (I'm on the slope) If you would like we can get together and I'll take you for a flight. I know of 2 planes that I biult that are for sale. I can show them to you and mybe fly those as well.

    Mike

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Fairbanks, Alaska
    Posts
    579

    Default

    Mike

    What is your weight limit for your plane? I watched you at the Valdez Fly-In. Why didn't any of the T-Crafts fly? I would like to buy a plane in the future and have been looking at the T-Craft. When I buy it will be a taildragger so I can use it hunting. Thanks for any info in advance.

    450

  14. #14
    New member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Kenai
    Posts
    7

    Default

    My Empty weight is 1208# and my gross is 1760#so that makes my legal usefull load 552#

    I know for a fact that the air frame can safely haul more but no one is willing to put that in writing and allow a gross weight increase. Its a liability issue.

    I think the reason you did not see any T-Crafts competing is because according the the Valdez STOL class rules the T-craft would be competing against the Cubs. I like many things about the T-Craft. They do very well in the real Bush flying world. The down side of them to me would be: No flaps, poor visability to the side if you are tall and not much room inside. They are faster than most Cubs, great performers if you keep them light and much cheaper to buy.

  15. #15
    Member Float Pilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Kachemak Bay Alaska
    Posts
    4,214

    Default

    If your gross is 1760, you must have had the engine conversion STC that increased the legal gross. Mine was via the BUSH company and they never managed to get the gross weight increase. (The guy died and his wife owned the STC. A gross weight increase was promised for years, but never happened.) So my legal gross weight was 1600 something in my H model.

    There is the Doyn conversion
    The BUSH STC Bush Conversions STC SA572CE
    The AVCON Which I think is the same thing as the BUSH, also do a STOL conversion and tailwheel conversion.
    And ACT Aircraft conversions tech. I am pretty sue they do the gross weight increase.
    The 150-horse STC's (SA4795SW, now sold by DelAir in Porterville CA) also incorporates an increase to the gross weight if it is a D model (1964) or later-- 1600# to 1760#.

    SA1034SW Installation of Lycoming 0-320-E2D engine on Cessna 150D, 150E, 150F, 150G, 150H, 150J, 150K, and 150L.

    SA1052SW Installation of Lycoming 0-320-E2D engine on Cessna 150G, 150H, 150J, 150K, and 150L Floatplane.

    I had the O&N fuel tank which is installed over the cargo bay floor. It holds about 15 gallons and pumps it up into the right wing tank with a little kicker pump. It gave me another 1.5 hours of flight time,,, which at 125 mph means 187 less miles to walk....
    Floatplane,Tailwheel and Firearms Instructor- Dragonfly Aero
    Experimental Hand-Loader, NRA Life Member
    http://site.dragonflyaero.com

  16. #16
    New member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Kenai
    Posts
    7

    Default

    That is correct. My gross weight increase came after a visit with Harry himself. I flew down and had lunch with in in CA. He was and is a wealth of knowlodge.

    One of the planes I rebiult that is for sale here in Soldotna has a gross weight of 1830# one time feild aproval. It also has a rear baggage door and a full float kit. It would work well for your instructing plane.

    Mike

  17. #17
    Member Float Pilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Kachemak Bay Alaska
    Posts
    4,214

    Default

    Sounds like it might...If I could find floats and float rigging for it. The thought of a having a starter and lights makes me all giddy...
    e-MAIL SENT
    Floatplane,Tailwheel and Firearms Instructor- Dragonfly Aero
    Experimental Hand-Loader, NRA Life Member
    http://site.dragonflyaero.com

  18. #18
    Member Float Pilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Kachemak Bay Alaska
    Posts
    4,214

    Default

    Mike , do you see any advantage to removing the electric flaps and going to Manual on these?
    Mine were electric, so for short field i started at zero and hit the flap switch when I stated to roll, then I counted ONE CHUCK YEAGER, TWO CHUCK YEAGER and maybe three.... by then the flaps were at 20 degrees and I was ready to fly.
    Floatplane,Tailwheel and Firearms Instructor- Dragonfly Aero
    Experimental Hand-Loader, NRA Life Member
    http://site.dragonflyaero.com

  19. #19
    New member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Kenai
    Posts
    7

    Default

    Yes, If you are truely going to use the plane for bush work then manual flaps are the only way to go. It is a difficult mod to do but it can be done. I've done 2 conversions back the manuals and about to do a third. Getting them aproved anymore may prove to be tough.

    I flew with the electric flaps for my first few years. It can be done but like you said, it can be tricky. Besides that, the electric motor assembly is very heavy and needs to go.

    Mike

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •