Club Homepage Forums Classified Ads Buy & Sell - Everything But Airplanes High altitude operations - aircraft selection

I’m new to the club. My name is Dave and I live in Denver CO. I’m a low-time private pilot with about 305 hours total (approx 111 in 150/152s; 90% of the rest in 172s; a few in a 182; and a few in misc other aircraft). I flew the 150/152s when I lived in the Midwest; been flying 172s almost exclusively since I moved to Denver.

I’m considering an aircraft purchase and I would like some help related to aircraft selection. First a little about my mission: 1) I plan to get an instrument rating; 2) I do personal cross-country flying between Denver and Chicago and also between Denver and Phoenix; 3) I hope to possibly use a purchased aircraft to commute to my client sites, on those occasions that my client is located west of the Mississippi.

Here in Denver (to my knowledge), stock 150/152s are really only used in the pattern for landing training. A 172 is normally used to fly anywhere, except into the mountains, where a 182 (or possibly an R172 Hawk XP) is recommended. Of course, planes smaller than 182s are used to cross (or more accurately, go around) the mountains to either the North (the “I-80 route”) or to the South (South to Albuquerque, then West across the desert).

I’ve heard of a 150 with an STC (STC # SA4795SW, now sold by DelAir in Porterville CA) to add a 150 hp engine and also increase the gross weight of a Cessane 150/152 to 1760 lbs.

Here’s my question (sorry it took me so long to get around to it ;-). Would a Cessna 150/152 with the 150 hp engine realistically be able to accomplish my mission as noted above? Please keep in mind I have no intention of flying into (between) the mountains at this time. I would probably use a 182 for that, someday in the future, after more detailed mountain training.

Welcome to the Club, Dave. I've never flown in a 150/150 so I'll let someone more experienced help with your question, but I have heard that a 150/150 will climb like a homesick angel.

David: I live west of you about 300 miles. I fly a C-150/150 and have flown over your mountains a number of times. Usually loaded with myself and the wife along with personal gear and camping gear on the way to the fly in at clinton Iowa. Also I have aux tanks and when I leave home headed East I start out with 50 gals of gas.
I have no problem with flying over your mountains as well as those in my area. My field elev is 5172 asl.
whether or not the 150/150 would serve your needs I can't say but it would be something to look into for you I think.
You have one of our members just north of you. David Rowland up in Erie, Colorado. I am sure he could give you some real good info on the capabilities of the 150/150 since that is what he flies.
Dale Larsen

Yes. But so would a stock 150/152. Denver to Chicago would not be a problem for a stock 150/152. Denver to Phoenix is possible, but would be more challenging and require taking the long way around. A 150HP 150/152 would be able to go through the mountains instead of having to go around them.



Why not? I fly my 150/150 in the mountains every chance I get. I did it just this morning. Flying in the mountains is the reason I converted my 150 to 150HP.


I did my mountain training in my 150/150. I flew into Glenwood Springs, Leadville, and even over Mosquito Pass (elev. 13185MSL).

The 182 is a great plane for our area. There's a reason there are so many of them around. It's got a good combination of performance, range, useful load, is a stable instrument flying platform, and can easily be equipped with all the latest IFR goodies.

The 150/152 is much more limited, even with 150HP. 150HP will boost the performance by quite a bit but doesn't overcome the plane's limitations regarding useful load and range. The Del-Air conversion will increase the maximum gross take-off weight by 160lbs. but over half of that increase will be taken up by the heavier engine and propeller. Extended range fuel tanks can increase the range but at the cost of carrying other payload.

If you fly for fun, the 150/152 is hard to beat.

If you fly for business, the 182 is a better choice.

Look... a NEW guy!!!!

Welcome!!!

David,

Welcome to the club. As a "former" 150/150 owner, I agree with Dale and David, the 150/150 will do as much with two people as a 182, but just not as fast.

If you feel that a 110-115 mph cruise speed (ok, so mine was maybe not as fast as some, but this is a good average) then it is a good choice for your mission as it is economical and they can be had pretty cheap right now.

Another good choice and also very cheap is what my current airplane is. A Cherokee 180....I just got back to KEAT (Wenatchee, WA) from a round trip that took me through BMC, down to Cottonwood, AZ (near Sedona) and back up through Reno area to home. Much of the trip was at or over 14,500 on very non-standard days and my cruise (1963 model) was 130 mph. At altitude, my burn was about 8.4 gph.

The 150/150 brings better short field performance, but flying along side a passel of 150/150's a few years ago out of Page AZ showed the old Cherokee to be a pretty comparable bird...albeit with a bigger motor.

Welcome David


I am not going to be much help on high flying a 150/152. I live in Florida, the highest point is 300 above sea level.

I just wanted to welcome you.

While a 150 can be an adequate IFR training platform, it makes a crummy IFR cross country machine due to the lack of range and consequent alternate limitations. Just flying cross country for recreation is fine in a 150 but due to its limitations, not a good choice for serious cross countries on a tight schedule. You'd be better off with a Piper 180 like Jeff's or the 182 for your mission. Just my opinion.

Many thanks to all who responded! Quick response, warm welcomes, these all make a new member know he joined the right group. I'm sure we'll all share more posts. Thanks again.

Dave!


You did, we will, and welcome!