Transition from 172 to 150

[jsparks]

Recently the FBO where I usually rent from has added a older 150 to the rental fleet. I have done all of my training and renting in a 172N and 172I. What should I expect to be different in transitioning into the 150 other than the obvious size differences? I am trying to maintain flying every week to two weeks and this addition will reduce the rental cost for these 1 hour flights from 130/hr to 85/hr. Scheduled for checkout tomorrow morning.

 

[jordane93]

Not many differences. Just read the POH and you’ll be good. Prepare to go even slower.

 

[Cooter]

Recently the FBO where I usually rent from has added a older 150 to the rental fleet. I have done all of my training and renting in a 172N and 172I. What should I expect to be different in transitioning into the 150 other than the obvious size differences? I am trying to maintain flying every week to two weeks and this addition will reduce the rental cost for these 1 hour flights from 130/hr to 85/hr. Scheduled for checkout tomorrow morning.

Not much, but they're a tight fit. I would plan on mostly flying alone unless one of you is ~150lbs or so.
I switched back and forth between 172&150 during my PP training.

 

[jsparks]

Not many differences. Just read the POH and you’ll be good. Prepare to go even slower.

Thanks. Speed isn't a concern as these flights are purely for keeping the rust knocked off and generally enjoying flight.

Not much, but they're a tight fit. I would plan on mostly flying alone unless one of you is ~150lbs or so.
I switched back and forth between 172&150 during my PP training.

I will definitely need to look into the W&B on the 150.....I'm 240. After my check out with the CFI tomorrow I plan to only solo or take one of my kids with me.

 

[mscard88]

Usually the C150s airspeed indicator and POH speeds are MPH, where as the C172 you fly is marked in knots. Another I recall is you have the hold the flap selector down (no detents). I think if ya count "one thousand" you'll get a 10* increment.

 

[G-force]

A little less climb rate, more sensative controls, more powerfull rudder, less need to trim. All your speeds are basically 5 knots slower.

 

[AKBill]

Not sure what model but the 150 I used during some of my PPL training was susceptible to carb icing even at 70F. 150's are a little tight for larger folks. I do know a fellow who has a 150 here in Juneau, he has a slightly larger tires on it and does a lot of beach landings. Hunts deer off the beaches here in SE Alaska.

 

[James331]

Checkout?
Like a overview of the POH and a couple touch and goes, probably like maybe 1hr all in.

They are a lot more nimble, personally I prefer how they fly

 

[RyanB]

You’ll notice a difference in their handling characteristics. 150/152’s are a bit more snappy than a 172. Other than that, just a lot more cramped with reduced performance.

Enjoy!

 

[Shepherd]

An hour on the Hobbs can be both longer and shorter, at the same time, in a C-150.

 

[jspilot]

I made a similar transition and flew a 152 for about 50 hours of my 350 total. I did not like the 152 for many reasons But that's a different thread.

The transition is a piece of cake. Some major differences is the 152 will feel lighter and more responsive on the controls meaning less yoke movement is required. That will take you about 5 minutes to adjust too I'd imagine. The other main difference is the width of the cabin of the 152 is much narrower than the 172. The other thing is the 152 does not have adjustable seats in anyway( not sure if that's true for every 152 but I think it is!) When I made the transition, my CFI had me do about 5 landings. He actually said, the 152 he nicknamed the "land o matic" because it is so easy to land. Literally by the 5th landing I felt comfortable and so was he and that was it.

The note above about speed is true but I'd say that honestly the 152 is only fractionally slower than the 172. Unless you flew a 180hp 172 and if that's the case than you will see a huge difference in speed.

 

[F01LA]

I did the same transition and found the 150 felt underpowered, but easier to land

 

[GRG55]

The 150 is a lot more fun to spin than the more cumbersome 172.

 

[Pilawt]

A Flying magazine writer years ago had the best description of a C-150: an aluminum-serge suit.

 

[G-force]

The 150 is a lot more fun to spin than the more cumbersome 172.

Indeed. One thing to remember if you go out an do stalls, it will drop a wing into a spin alot more abruptly than a 172 if your wings are not level. But with the rudder authority, its not hard to lift that wing up if your fast on the rudder.

 

[SkyDog58]

My CFI in California when I lived out there owned a 150 and a 172. When flying by myself, I much preferred the 150. I just liked the way it flew plus it was a bit cheaper. Flew it from TOA to AVX a couple of times.

 

[Dan Thomas]

Not sure what model but the 150 I used during some of my PPL training was susceptible to carb icing even at 70F.

Very typical of the small Continentals. A pilot used to the 172's Lycoming would be wise to study up on carb icing before he flies the 150.

 

[Dan Thomas]

I made a similar transition and flew a 152 for about 50 hours of my 350 total. I did not like the 152 for many reasons But that's a different thread.

The transition is a piece of cake. Some major differences is the 152 will feel lighter and more responsive on the controls meaning less yoke movement is required. That will take you about 5 minutes to adjust too I'd imagine. The other main difference is the width of the cabin of the 152 is much narrower than the 172. The other thing is the 152 does not have adjustable seats in anyway( not sure if that's true for every 152 but I think it is!) When I made the transition, my CFI had me do about 5 landings. He actually said, the 152 he nicknamed the "land o matic" because it is so easy to land. Literally by the 5th landing I felt comfortable and so was he and that was it.

The note above about speed is true but I'd say that honestly the 152 is only fractionally slower than the 172. Unless you flew a 180hp 172 and if that's the case than you will see a huge difference in speed.

Adjustable seats, but not much travel to them.

The 152 has the 115-hp Lycoming O-235. Makes it a somewhat different airplane than the 150 the OP plans to fly. The 150 has the O-200, which supposedly puts out 100 HP, but I have had better pull out of a C-90.

 

[jsterner]

I fly both (rentals) in the 150 you are limited in the size of passengers and ones you don't mind being cozy with. Most of my flying is just bumming around so I prefer the 150, I think it is more fun to fly and as a benefit, cheaper.

 

[jsparks]

Follow up: I was told by the CFI pre takeoff that we would need to remain in ground effect after lift off in order to build speed. Like a short field even tho we were on 4k+. He kind of had me apprehensive before we ever crammed into the plane. Said climbing would be slow as I expected he would say, but his whole attitude towards the plane was on the negative side. Therefore, once we were at pattern altitude, I kind of already had it in my mind I wasn't going to enjoy the flight. At one point I think I even said that I couldn't see myself ever renting this thing and thought about ending the checkout right then. We proceeded to do the normal manuvers and slow flight to be expected in a checkout and i felt a little more comfortable with it. By this time, i think my attitude was already deflated enough and i chose to terminate the checkout so I could decide wether or not I really was going to ever rent the thing.

Couple of hours later after thinking about it, I think my head was more interested in how not to crash this perceived death trap instead of learning a new aircraft. I have chosen to give it another try only with a better attitude.

For some reason I let him psyche me out before we ever got in the plane. After the flight, he told me that I was the first student for him in a 150 and after reading into what he was saying he hates 150s.

My conclusion: 150s wouldn't be so popular as trainers if they were really always trying to crash and I was buying into his hate for the plane before I gave It a chance for myself...

 

[mscard88]

I trained in C150s and then taught in them when I became a CFI. Never had to do a ground effect takeoff that your CFI made you do, and never heard of anyone doing that. Sounds like you got ahold of a sourpuss CFI who has insecurity problems if he's afraid of a 150, and yes, sounds like he's "afeared" of a little 150. Hope you can finish the checkout with another CFI.

 

[luvflyin]

The controls are more responsive like said by many above. I did all my primary training in a 150. Then I got checked out in "the big iron," a 172. Controls felt heavy and slugish. About 35 years later I flew a 150. It took a few minutes to get the light touch back.

 

[luvflyin]

Follow up: I was told by the CFI pre takeoff that we would need to remain in ground effect after lift off in order to build speed. Like a short field even tho we were on 4k+. He kind of had me apprehensive before we ever crammed into the plane. Said climbing would be slow as I expected he would say, but his whole attitude towards the plane was on the negative side. Therefore, once we were at pattern altitude, I kind of already had it in my mind I wasn't going to enjoy the flight. At one point I think I even said that I couldn't see myself ever renting this thing and thought about ending the checkout right then. We proceeded to do the normal manuvers and slow flight to be expected in a checkout and i felt a little more comfortable with it. By this time, i think my attitude was already deflated enough and i chose to terminate the checkout so I could decide wether or not I really was going to ever rent the thing.

Couple of hours later after thinking about it, I think my head was more interested in how not to crash this perceived death trap instead of learning a new aircraft. I have chosen to give it another try only with a better attitude.

For some reason I let him psyche me out before we ever got in the plane. After the flight, he told me that I was the first student for him in a 150 and after reading into what he was saying he hates 150s.

My conclusion: 150s wouldn't be so popular as trainers if they were really always trying to crash and I was buying into his hate for the plane before I gave It a chance for myself...

Sounds like he does have some negative waves about 150's. But you did say you were 240. What did he weigh. What was the Density Altitude? The FBO I rent at has 3 of them. They have a 'no dual rule' when the temperature is over, 85 I think it is. Period. So now I'm coming in with negative waves, lol. Anyway, treat it with due respect. Have fun.

 

[jsparks]

Sounds like he does have some negative waves about 150's. But you did say you were 240. What did he weigh. What was the Density Altitude? The FBO I rent at has 3 of them. They have a 'no dual rule' when the temperature is over, 85 I think it is. Period. So now I'm coming in with negative waves, lol. Anyway, treat it with due respect. Have fun.

I'm 240 and I'm guessing he is about 150-160. Had 18 gal fuel and it was 65 outside.

 

[Cap'n Jack]

A little less climb rate, more sensative controls, more powerfull rudder, less need to trim. All your speeds are basically 5 knots slower.

^^^^^ This agrees with my experience as well

Usually the C150s airspeed indicator and POH speeds are MPH, where as the C172 you fly is marked in knots. Another I recall is you have the hold the flap selector down (no detents). I think if ya count "one thousand" you'll get a 10* increment.

Oddly, the only plane I recall flying as yet with the airspeed indicator in MPH was a C-172. I've flown C-150, C-152, C-172, and a Cherokee 180. Perhaps I got the odd ones

 

[edo2000]

Sounds like he does have some negative waves about 150's. But you did say you were 240. What did he weigh. What was the Density Altitude? The FBO I rent at has 3 of them. They have a 'no dual rule' when the temperature is over, 85 I think it is. Period. So now I'm coming in with negative waves, lol. Anyway, treat it with due respect. Have fun.

I taught in 150's for several hundred hours, years ago. If your runway is above 3000 ft or so, and you have two people aboard, it is definitely a good idea to stay in ground effect until reaching Vy, then climbing. I remember a few students pitching up too much after takeoff and the airplane would just mush along with the stall horn beeping until they got the nose down a bit, then it would climb OK. I think they are a great trainer, fun, pretty good visibility out, great in crosswinds, etc. If one is available for a reasonable rental rate, fly it a few hours, I'm sure you will come to like it. Many people, including me, would prefer a 172 for the extra speed and comfort, but they cost more and burn fuel faster.

 

[G-force]

OP: get checked out, it is a whole different feeling plane when when solo, climbs so much better.

 

[champ driver]

Sounds like the instructor should never get in a 65 HP Cub or Champ.
The Cessna 150 is a great flying little plane, just like the 152 and it's bigger brother the 172. Being only 100 HP, it's climb performance is nothing to write home about, but a plane fly's on it's wing, not it's engine.
Give it another chance and ignore the instructors bad attitude.

 

[Salty]

I started training in a 152 and switched to a 172 because I could raise the seat up and see a lot better. Otherwise I really couldn't tell any difference between them as a student. I tried to rent a 152 for a lesson in Tucson and they wouldn't even consider it with 6000 feet density altitude.

 

[somorris]

Hi Jsparks.

I have a C-150 that I have owned for over 10 years. My previous airplane was a C-172. The 150 is much lighter on the controls, more responsive, and more fun to fly. Based on my experience, it will handle more cross wind than a C-172. It is a little limited weight wise. Ours, with full fuel will haul 386 pounds of pilot and passenger. My suggestion is to finish the checkout, even with a less-than-knowledgeable CFI, then fly it solo for a few hours and see how you like it. There is plenty of room when you are solo. For those times when you need to carry more weight, you can always rent the 172. C-150's are no more dangerous than any other airplane and safer than a lot of them.

 

[Dan Thomas]

...but a plane fly's on it's wing, not it's engine.

A pilot relies on power to keep him out of trouble. An underpowered airplane can get dangerous if he expects too much of it. The 150, as others have pointed out, is not a good high-DA airplane. We used to use them in the flight school at a 3000ASL airport, and on warm days they ate up a lot of runway and took forever to get to pattern altitude or to climb to stall/spin altitudes. They cost a measly $10 less per hour than the 172s and weren't a good deal for the students, who got fewer circuits or other maneuvers in an hour, so we sold tham and got more 172s. The cost per hour reflected the usual need for cylinder work at mid-time or thereabouts compared to the Lycoming's habit of making TBO without any hassles.

We also had a 100-HP Champ. Same O-200A as the 150. That Champ would run circles around the 150.

 

[BillTIZ]

A pilot relies on power to keep him out of trouble. An underpowered airplane can get dangerous if he expects too much of it. The 150, as others have pointed out, is not a good high-DA airplane. We used to use them in the flight school at a 3000ASL airport, and on warm days they ate up a lot of runway and took forever to get to pattern altitude or to climb to stall/spin altitudes. They cost a measly $10 less per hour than the 172s and weren't a good deal for the students, who got fewer circuits or other maneuvers in an hour, so we sold tham and got more 172s. The cost per hour reflected the usual need for cylinder work at mid-time or thereabouts compared to the Lycoming's habit of making TBO without any hassles.

We also had a 100-HP Champ. Same O-200A as the 150. That Champ would run circles around the 150.

That’s why a lot have been upgraded to 150HP engines.

I learned in brand new 150 Commuter 100hp, and Commuter II 110hp at sea level airport, well 200MSL. 1974.
Don’t do well out here in the SW in the summer. 150hp is much better.

 

[SkyHog]

Rear view mirror.

 

[luvflyin]

^^^^^ This agrees with my experience as well


Oddly, the only plane I recall flying as yet with the airspeed indicator in MPH was a C-172. I've flown C-150, C-152, C-172, and a Cherokee 180. Perhaps I got the odd ones

I think it was around 1976 that they started putting Knot ASI's in planes

 

[Pilawt]

Rear view mirror.

A few 172s had 'em, too.

I think it was around 1976 that they started putting Knot ASI's in planes

For years the manufacturers resisted switching from mph to knots. The marketing departments thought 150 mph would sell more airplanes than 130 knots. Finally GAMA members agreed to switch over once and for all. Cessna made the switch for the 1976 model year, which would include some built in late calendar year 1975. Piper and Beech switched a year later.

 

[GRG55]

That panel brings back memories...especially the microphone and those radios.

 

[Sundancer]

Quicker handling than a 172, but not at all twitchy. Many decades ago, going from a 150 to a 172, I found the 172 seemed to handle like a truck in comparison. The visibility is standard Cessna awful, maybe slightly worse than a 172, but not nearly so bad as a 182. If you're heavy, you'll find a go around interesting, especially on a hot and humid day in the SE, or any other high DA situation. They'll spin if you want to, and recover easily.

A real whiffle ball in turbulence, and a pretty tight fit for even two "standard" adults. Solo, no worries; with two folks, someone needs to move a seat back. . .

 

[frfly172]

the 150 makes for a fun flight,if the wind is calm,and your not in a hurry.always enjoyed an hour or two,when flying alone.

 

[Pilawt]

150 has a special place in my heart ... first solo, private checkride, commercial checkride, instrument checkride, CFI checkride ... and the biggest test of all, first date with my wife!

 

[Dan Thomas]

They'll spin if you want to, and recover easily.

Cessna published a Supplement to the 150 POH outlining spin recovery. They can end up in a flatter spin that is reluctant to recover and it's best to know the technique. Not at all like the 172.