AOPA "reimagined" Cessna 150/152

Ghery said:
Why would I spend $90k on a 150/152 regardless of condition when I can get a perfectly serviceable 172 or even 182 for that amount of coin? Besides, I can fit in a 172 or 182. Not enough legroom in a 150 (as I recall from my student pilot days).
Click to expand...

One can have a nice TR182 for $90k. Axe me how I know.

WTF is AOPA talking about?
 
A few notes about AOPA's yellow 152:

Not even an LED landing/taxi light

No GPS that I can see (anyone can stuff a handheld in the dash)

Only "6 pack" flight instruments

No engine monitor

Doesn't appear to have wing tip anti-collision lighting (LED or strobe)

Might still have the old crap cessna flashing beacon. I can't find a picture big enough to be sure.

Appears to only have a GTX327 transponder (Did they forget about the 2020 ADS-B thing?)


In their assessment they are spending nearly $3,000 per year on insurance :eek: Buying a cheap 150 and going with a lesser hull value can more than cut that in half.


TOTAL COST/HR $63.88
*Assumes up to 8 pilots per airplane, flying a total of 700 hours per year. Financing is a 12-year loan term at 6% interest with a 30% down payment and purchase by a flying club more than three years old which would not require a personal guarantee.


AOPA has already been working with banks and insurance underwriters to confirm that the Re-imagined Aircraft can be easily financed and insured.

For AOPA financing information, visit finance.aopa.org or call 1-800-62-PLANE (75263). Contact AOPA Insurance Services at insurance.aopa.org or call 1-800-622-AOPA [2672].
 
Last edited:
How about a very nice mooney. A 150 gets real boring after 50 hours ( or less) this kind of dough gets one a real nice 201 . 6 percent is very high if your on good terms with a bank and have a good history with them. If not, rent. Otherwise I'd buy a run of the mill 150 in decent shape 17000-25000 range. Unless your in the inheritence business of course.
 
Last edited:
and probably pay about the same in insurance and burn less gas per mile.
 
A 152 is not going to be "flying around the patch" 700 hours per year, unless 8 very small pilots with no kids own it and live pretty much on the airport. Even then the thing will need decent IFR capability IMHO



There is a private club here that bought a cherokee 180 two years ago. One member is an A&P/IA, all of them have kids. All of them are tired of it and want bigger already. It flew just under 200 hours last year. I think its seven members total.

Lincoln Nebraska is FFFUUUULLLL of mechanics and inspectors, many of whom are private pilots, even some CFIs. Most of them don't fly anymore and aren't interested in starting a club, speaks volumes to me.


Even my dentist marveled at flying 182S and promptly said "its just too expensive to fly"
 
Last edited:
bnt83 said:
A 152 is not going to be "flying around the patch" 700 hours per year, unless 8 very small pilots with no kids own it and live pretty much on the airport. Even then the thing will need decent IFR capability IMHO.
Click to expand...

Unless it's owned by a busy flight school. The 152s I learned in got a 100hr monthly.
 
Henning said:
Unless it's owned by a busy flight school. The 152s I learned in got a 100hr monthly.
Click to expand...

You learned how many years ago?

How ,any investors want to commit a 90K Cessna 152 to the rental?:goofy: When they can buy a cheap one and hang a new engine for less than half.
 
For an idea to flourish and be successful it needs to somehow set itself apart from status quo, it appears to me the only aspect this has is the buy in price.
 
bnt83 said:
You learned how many years ago?

How ,any investors want to commit a 90K Cessna 152 to the rental?:goofy: When they can buy a cheap one and hang a new engine for less than half.
Click to expand...

25, but there are still plenty of schools that busy training foreign students in SoFla and out west. I bet the schools at Deer Valley are that busy still.
 
Everskyward said:
This reminds me of the Tesla thread. People will buy things because they want them. Just because you don't want something doesn't mean others won't. We all (well most of us) spend money on things which make no financial sense. After all, this is a GA aviation forum. :D

Personally, I would not be entertained by buying an older airplane and putting in the upgrades I might want. I like buying things which are already the way I want them. But that is me. I buy new cars too.

That said, I'm not sure how this is going to go for Cessna.
Click to expand...

I just hope they don't paint them all yellow. I mean the best option would be like snow white base only and a vinyl graphic to finish it out. Then when the club sells, its easy to customize for the next owner
 
bnt83 said:
How many investors want to commit a 90K Cessna 152 to the rental? When they can buy a cheap one and hang a new engine for less than half.
Click to expand...
As I mentioned it upthread, committing to a $110k Remos seemes to work fine, as long as the plane flies its hours. If that $90k 152 has little downtime and pulls 300 hours a year, it should be okay. Better if it does 500, which is doable in a major market.
 
Henning said:
The problem as I see it with that method is that people often learn "the bells and whistles" outside of the training environment and that leaves them less than competent at operating them. If they start day one, they have 40hrs to add and understand the features of the radio with the CFI there to assist, and they can go home and practice using it with a sim. What you end up with is it takes some extra effort, but by the time you are signed off by the DE to go forth and aviate, you are competent with equipment that can get very confusing very fast if you have to make it work under stress and you don't know how. If you have the GTN radios, this isn't quite as bad, but with the GNS series it can have you cussing.

Train like you expect to fly. If you expect to always be flying a basic VFR airplane, then train in that. If you are going to be flying glass, train in that.

I think this attitude of train as cheap and easy as possible is a very dangerous one. Train as cost effectively as you can. In my experience that means you're gonna spend more money and work a lot harder to make them count.
Click to expand...


Totally agree.

I look a two aspects of a flight school/FBO when considering renting from them. 1. Equipment is it in good conditions, safe, Am I getting value (cost-wise) 2. People. are the employees/cfi/owner/etc of good character, proficient, competent. I have never been interested in learning/ renting/or riding a pos airplane that the owner can even afford or interested to keep it in decent shape (it is usually an indicator of people doing the minimum maintenance required or penny pinching which in aviation is a no-no). I value my life way more than spending a few thousand dollars more per year to fly a decent airplane with up to date equipment and not the bare minimum.
 
Would be a good idea,if after the remake,it could be classified as a light sport.
 
Hmmmmm.

$90K:




$120k (valued per AOPA sweeps website)


 
Henning said:
25, but there are still plenty of schools that busy training foreign students in SoFla and out west. I bet the schools at Deer Valley are that busy still.
Click to expand...

Oh gawd!! Deer valley, training tower and foreign trainee pilots, just a cluster f@ck if there ever was one, half the time I can't even understand what the oriental students are saying.
 
That 152 panel is a freakin joke! My 1973 150L has way more and can actually do IFR approaches. A VFR only 150 is only worth 90k if they change the LSA weight limit.

The reimagined 150 doesn't even have a 406 elt. Talk about a flop of a promotional tool. They should have stuck to computer images, their prototype killed any chances of success.
 
Last edited:
jetwhine said:
I think you guys are being a little hard on AOPA. They're trying to fix a universal problem here.

Sure you can buy cheaper airplanes that don't look as nice or operate as reliably, but there will always be airplanes for less that will operate just as well if not better.

They're trying to get new people into relatively new airplanes because some of the stuff out there for rent is just pure junk. And let's not forget how few people these days know anything at all about how to purchase an airplane. Most of us do because most of us already know how to fly.

There's a huge knowledge gap in there that AOPA and Aviat are aiming for. What would Pristine Airplanes charge for this effort ... about the same I bet. Just because some of us would be savvy enough to make this all work for less money doesn't make it a bad deal for someone who is new to flying.

A four-person partnership could toss in $7500 each and get a pretty nice machine that they could fly the pants off for their private and commercial certificates.

The industry's in trouble folks. I for one won't take a whack at AOPA for trying to fix the problem.
Click to expand...
Thanks Rob! I just finished listening to your Aviation Minute!
 
n20junkie said:
That 152 panel is a freakin joke! My 1973 150L has way more and can actually do IFR approaches. A VFR only 150 is only worth 90k if they change the LSA weight limit.

The reimagined 150 doesn't even have a 406 elt. Talk about a flop of a promotional tool. They should have stuck to computer images, their prototype killed any chances of success.
Click to expand...

Even if they put $20k in the panel to make up for that lack of usefulness, the useful load will suffer.

Their estimated price seems way high to me.
 
n20junkie said:
A VFR only 150 is only worth 90k if they change the LSA weight limit.
Click to expand...

Changing LSA weight limits to include 150/152 fleet would be real progress.


At $90k this seems more like a political stunt to me.
 
They're trying to make people believe,they are trying to fix the cost problem,of aircraft ownership and entry. For 90 k there are a lot of options in the market ,that can be purchased and upgraded,better than the 150.
 
Yeah, for $90k it should come with a G-500 and a GTN-750 along with a glass engine display. What they are delivering for $90k is backwards from what the market would buy. AOPA just doesn't get it anymore.
 
bnt83 said:
Changing LSA weight limits to include 150/152 fleet would be real progress.


At $90k this seems more like a political stunt to me.
Click to expand...

Unless the drivers license medical passes. Then the entire LSA market is going to tank in my opinion.
 
Grum.Man said:
Unless the drivers license medical passes. Then the entire LSA market is going to tank in my opinion.
Click to expand...

I keep hearing this assertion and it seems to make sense superficially, but in the same time I know 2 people who traded their GA iron for LSA. One sold a Cirrus and bought a Sky Arrow 600, another sold a Baron and bought an Evektor. The former Baron driver even keeps 2nd Class. I also flew with a guy who I do not know so well who has a tricked-out pressurized Cessna twin. We went to an LSA airshow to check out wares because he wanted to trade down to an LSA. I do not know if he actually did it though.

Now these people are not likely to support the whole LSA market and the competition with the 152 is going to have an effect. Just probably not as dramatic as many seem to imagine.

The thing is, a modern plastic-fantastic LSA is an amazing machine. It has the newest glass and it's faster than a whole bunch of basic singles. In fact top of the line CTLSi is about as fast 200 hp Arrow, while burning half the fuel in a single-lever, start every time, engine. And it has a chute. A problem for LSAs is the miniscule payload, although CTLSi easily permits 2 people to travel with reasonable baggage. A bigger problem for those LSAs is their insane cost, of course, but look at the market for Carbon Cub: that thing costs 50% more than CTLSi and someone buys a ton of them. I don't think that market is as simple as poor pilots think. There's definitely cash sloshing about that buys at a different set of criteria than most "reasonable" pilots think.
 
Last edited:
Henning said:
Why not, there's a turbine Luscombe flying.
Click to expand...

There is one but it's not flying. Damn near killed the original owner on account of a caterpillar taking up residence in the fuel vent. If there is one thing a turbine engine needs, it's a bunch of fuel.

One thing about the internet, most web pages have no date and nothing ever seems to get removed or even updated. It all just resides out there in perpetuity. The SpeedBird stuff is at least 10 or 15 years old and it's been for sale for about that long too.

3083.jpg
 
So it never flew? Huh. Yeah, I've been coming across a add for it here and there for a long time.
 
Wow! The Poor 152 is sure thrashed by so many. I love the plane. Inexpensive, easy to maintain, makes you use the rudder, and a joy to fly well. New paint, new windows, a well-cared for set of bones, new interior, and an up-to-date avionics makes this plane the plane that can still teach the world to fly.

I use mine in my flight school. I love punching up an approach on the Garmin GTN650 and flying it to LPV mins, and the new metal panel with dual Aspens makes this great plane a great foundation trainer. The PFD makes approaches a snap and the situational awareness provided by the MFD is tremendous. The linked 330 gives us Mode S traffic and we can't wait for ADS-B to be installed next month.

Cheaper than a LSA, can do more, and we didn't have to spend $400,000 for a 172. Nope, I'll keep the 152. Great plane, great trainer. Thank you AOPA for trying to keep GA alive. Welcome to the party.
 
Last edited:
Grum.Man said:
The main problem with this concept is this...

http://allegrolsa.com/products-we-are-proud-of/

More room, better panel, more range, better performance, and the same price.
Click to expand...

The contemporary Allegro (e.g. the Americanized and locally produced 2007) is a very strong performer in the air, but it comes at a price. The POH limits the cross-wind to 12 mph (10 knots) and prohibits tail-wind operations entirely. It probably is one of the closest to a motorglider S-LSAs that you could buy without going full Phoenix.

It is also rumored to be built exceptionally cheaply. Personally, I don't mind that, as long as they don't skimp on safety related things like ending the rudder cables right. But some PoA members were really maaaad about Allegro "taking all the misconceptions about junk LSAs and making them true" (it was the model 2000, for the record).

Did you call them for price? The website wasn't updated since 2012. Over that period prices gone up quite a bit for other aircraft. For example, Champ's price rose 7%.
 
zaitcev said:
The contemporary Allegro (e.g. the Americanized and locally produced 2007) is a very strong performer in the air, but it comes at a price. The POH limits the cross-wind to 12 mph (10 knots) and prohibits tail-wind operations entirely. It probably is one of the closest to a motorglider S-LSAs that you could buy without going full Phoenix.

It is also rumored to be built exceptionally cheaply. Personally, I don't mind that, as long as they don't skimp on safety related things like ending the rudder cables right. But some PoA members were really maaaad about Allegro "taking all the misconceptions about junk LSAs and making them true" (it was the model 2000, for the record).

Did you call them for price? The website wasn't updated since 2012. Over that period prices gone up quite a bit for other aircraft. For example, Champ's price rose 7%.
Click to expand...

Every airplane is going to have it's own specific limitations. Allegro's can't have a tailwind and have limited cross wind capability. Cessna 150's can barely haul two modern sized men and any reasonable amount of fuel. For training new pilots I would imaging the weight limit would be the bigger concern as new pilots typically sit out days of heavy cross winds.

I have been in one before and my old home airport was a sales site as well. To pass the certification process I'm not sure the being built cheap comment is that valid. I know they have been instructing our of them for many years locally and no known accidents to my knowledge especially due to structural failure.

I did not inquire about prices, but I read something here recently where you can still get into a new one for under 100K. Obviously that is dependent on options. Don't get me wrong, I am not a fan of the airplane nor trying to defend any of it's short comings. But if I was in the market for a 90K trainer it would be hard for me to look at a cramped reworked C150 with stem gauges and sluggish performance over one of the many light sport options around the same price point.
 
Grum.Man said:
I have been in one before and my old home airport was a sales site as well. To pass the certification process I'm not sure the being built cheap comment is that valid. I know they have been instructing our of them for many years locally and no known accidents to my knowledge especially due to structural failure.
Click to expand...

Good to hear. They also have one example in the fleet which went through 3 engines without any major repairs to the airframe.

Grum.Man said:
I did not inquire about prices, but I read something here recently where you can still get into a new one for under 100K.
Click to expand...

Yeah, well... Do you know anything about deliveries in 2014? They had a major problem standing up local manufacturing in 2013, due to Czech engineers not being granted visas and other reasons. They even stopped taking orders at some point. The end-of-2013 data by Dan Johnson shows Allegro registrations declining from 55 to 51 (there was no sales reporting supplement this year).

At this point I think that realistically the only sub-100k LSA that you can count on is Aerotrek 240, if you buy one without radios.

Well, maybe one can get that South African thing too. And, there's also the bastardized P92 that Tecnam desperately decontented to keep under $100k (they removed one of 2 wing tanks, installed smaller wheels, etc.).

Aaaaand, there's also Pipistrel Alpha. Not heard of anyone buying that one.

There was a Groppo Trail announced at $80k at Oshkosh, but I bet you dollars to donuts that they won't keep the price or will fail to deliver on orders.

The reason why AOPA assigned a $90k price to their remans is precisely to undercut all realistically available S-LSAs.
 
Last edited:
FastEddieB said:
Last I heard, the latest version of the Sky Arrow comes nicely equipped at just under $100k.
Click to expand...
Are you talking about the posting by Mike Hansen that quoted $99.6k for the new-production Sky Arrow by 3I? That was back in 2010. Time flies!
 
zaitcev said:
Are you talking about the posting by Mike Hansen that quoted $99.6k for the new-production Sky Arrow by 3I? That was back in 2010. Time flies!
Click to expand...

I saw one of the new models at Oshkosh last year. New owner - a large conglomerate, Magnaghi (sp?). More fuel (in the wings now), allegedly more robust wheels and brakes (Berlinger in place of Marc Ignegno*), gap seals, different tail attachment hardware, maybe a few other small changes as well. I thought they were still coming in at less than $100k then, if only just barely. As a data point, mine in 2007, decently equipped, was $75.5k.

Still too heavy, still kinda slow (95k cruise). But still a great little plane - love the tandem seating, quality construction, nice handling and a view to kill for.

If I ever had to replace mine, it would probably still be my first choice, though an E-LSA RV12 would be high on my list as well.


*My Marc's, though much maligned on the CT forum, have performed well for 7 years and 400 hours, still on the original pads and no wheel issues.
 
Pilotgil said:
Wow! The Poor 152 is sure thrashed by so many. I love the plane. Inexpensive, easy to maintain, makes you use the rudder, and a joy to fly well. New paint, new windows, a well-cared for set of bones, new interior, and an up-to-date avionics makes this plane the plane that can still teach the world to fly.

I use mine in my flight school. I love punching up an approach on the Garmin GTN650 and flying it to LPV mins, and the new metal panel with dual Aspens makes this great plane a great foundation trainer. The PFD makes approaches a snap and the situational awareness provided by the MFD is tremendous. The linked 330 gives us Mode S traffic and we can't wait for ADS-B to be installed next month.

Cheaper than a LSA, can do more, and we didn't have to spend $400,000 for a 172. Nope, I'll keep the 152. Great plane, great trainer. Thank you AOPA for trying to keep GA alive. Welcome to the party.
Click to expand...


I think you might have missed the boat. The 150/152s are great airplanes. I had an old old 1962 150B for about 5 years. They hold their own and are quite good for what they were built for.


I am questioning how pricing refurbished ones at $90k could possibly be successful without a fully loaded panel like you just described.
 
Last edited:
If AOPA really wanted to use their money wisely to push flying clubs and shared flying, they'd just go buy a bunch of 50k Cherokees/Cessnas with their millions and help facilitate setting up flying clubs throughout the country (with the new club members then taking on the ongoing costs).

A 152 is nothing more then a $100 hamburger machine, and that's if everyone is skinny. People that just want to do $100 hamburgers rent and 152s are cheap. You can get them for $85 an hour here. People don't buy into clubs, risking capital, to fly 152s around the block for lunch.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top