Why The Cessna 150 is Perfect for Flight Training

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 23 ม.ค. 2025

ความคิดเห็น • 15

  • @scottpatterson4105
    @scottpatterson4105 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Was in one once at night. I was amazed at how long you could still see the airport behind you through the Omni Vision rear window...lol

    • @FlightZoneAviation
      @FlightZoneAviation  2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Wow, that was a wonderful experience.

  • @skippmclovan1135
    @skippmclovan1135 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    It does suffer from a serious lack of power for shorter 'density altitude' grass strips' safety in taking-off, and climbing-out.
    The Cessna 152 only slightly addressed this deficiency with a further 15 to 25 horsepower, depending upon the version.

    • @FlightZoneAviation
      @FlightZoneAviation  2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Yes, that's very true.

    • @skippmclovan1135
      @skippmclovan1135 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@FlightZoneAviation Having said that.. the Aerobat is still quite a capable little fun machine ..it barrel rolls, loops, and spins very nicely.. 🙃..installing a heavier 160hp 0-320 engine up front for significant take-off and climb-out improvements, increases airframe stressing, and replaces the original factory aerobatic rating with a more regular straight and level type of authorized operation. The 0-240 Rheims Aerobat is probably the sweetheart of all C150/152's.

    • @skippmclovan1135
      @skippmclovan1135 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@FlightZoneAviation Do you also agree that the very first fastback, slimline fuselaged, upright rudder finned version was aerodynamically superior to all later versions. It was narrower, lighter, and produced less drag in flight, corresponding to a faster more fuel efficient flying experience.
      The later heavier, wider fuselaged, omniwindowed, swept back rudder finned versions all produced more drag in flight, than the cute first little C150 honey.

    • @Kaye-v2p
      @Kaye-v2p 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@skippmclovan1135 now you've busted the bot's brain bank

    • @skippmclovan1135
      @skippmclovan1135 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@Kaye-v2p ha-ha🤖🌋⚡💥🔥😹😹😹

  • @andyerwin3535
    @andyerwin3535 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Cessna sure made a mistake stopping production, it was the perfect trainer, at 600 hrs, I would still fly one if I had access to one

    • @FlightZoneAviation
      @FlightZoneAviation  2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Sure it was. But you can still get one from owners who are willing to sell theirs

  • @477BravoJuliet
    @477BravoJuliet 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    How does it compare to the 152?

    • @FlightZoneAviation
      @FlightZoneAviation  2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      The Cessna 150 has a 100 Horsepower engine, while the 152 has a 108 Hp engine, which provides better performance.

    • @FlightZoneAviation
      @FlightZoneAviation  2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      We will make a full video on this comparison. Please stay tune. You may also subscribe and turn on the notification bell, to stay updated on our latest videos

    • @skippmclovan1135
      @skippmclovan1135 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      The very first fastback, slimline fuselaged, upright rudder finned version was aerodynamically superior to all later versions. It was narrower, lighter, and produced less drag in flight, corresponding to a faster more fuel efficient flying experience.
      The later heavier, wider fuselaged, omniwindowed, swept back rudder finned versions all produced more drag in flight, than the cute first little C150 honey.