c-152 rudder???

On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 07:49:38 GMT, "The Rebel"
wrote:



"houstondan" wrote in message
roups.com...
the c-152 seems like a pretty sensible way to get into my first
airplane. the way i see the g.a. business overall, especially with the
feds helping so many people decide that commercial flight just ain't
worth the trouble, a good condition c-152 should at least hold it's
value (adjusted for engine-time) and may actually appreciate in the
future. there's parts & mechanics everywhere you land . i'm just
getting started thinking about buying so my mind isn't anywhere near
made up but that's what seems to be the best idea at the moment.

i'm certainly open for suggestions. probably months away but certainly
not a year.

dan


There's not a thing wrong with a C-152; if you are going to be flying alone
or with an occasional passenger, it's the perfect plane for you. It's
almost idiotproof, has very gentle stall characteristics, sips fuel at a
modest 8-9 gph, is a proven design and can be bought for a song in
comparison to other aircraft.

I hope to purchase a C-150 in 2006 because that's all the airplane that I
need - anything more is a waste of money in my opinion.

--
www.geocities.com/ralphsnart2004/index.html


The plane that flys the most by far at our local airport is a 150
owned by a retired guy

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:QxBvd.191887$V41.53370@attbi_s52...

My advice: Buy the biggest, fastest plane you can afford -- cuz you WILL
want/need something bigger/faster than a 150 in a surprisingly short
timeframe.

Well, a few year back I bought a Baron 58 and wound up trading down to a
B36TC because it didn't make sense running all that hardware for two or
three people at most. :~(


--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

G.R. Patterson III wrote:
The Rebel wrote:

..... sips fuel at a modest 8-9 gph, .....

If your 152 is burning this much gas, either someone stuck an O-320 in it or you
need to learn what that red knob is for.

In our C152 (which BTW is faster than our 172) I planned 7 but averaged
5 gph...

I think the original concern regards tail corrosion/cracks on
C150/1502's, I don't think the FAA has formerly released an AD but its
an advised inspection during an annual/service inspection. If the plane
has always been hangered its of less of a factor than if its always
outside in the weather. This came about after several 150's lost their
tails in flight or cracked brackets and corroded parts where found (4 in
the 1970s, 6 in the 1980s, and 12 in the 1990s)...

http://avweb.com/newswire/9_41b/briefs/185836-1.html
http://www.eaa.org/communications/ea...30924_acs.html

AD's:
http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAD.nsf/CurrentADFRMakeModel!OpenView&Start=1&Count=200&Ex pand=104.5#104.5
http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAD.nsf/CurrentADFRMakeModel!OpenView&Start=1&Count=200&Ex pand=104.18#104.18

I was recently at OMNI near Baton Rouge and there was a C150 for $12k
there...

On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 14:09:20 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote:

Another friend bought a PA-28 after earning his PPL and his family has
never been in it.

That says more about your friend's marriage than about his choice of
airplane, Deb.

Sadly, it doesn't seem to be uncommon at the airport.

Geez, Jay. I looked hard for a smiley and couldn't find it. While it
"could" say something about the marriage, that is certainly not a
given. A right-seat (or left-seat) wife is not a prerequisite to a
good marraige. I was married for 28 years before I learned how to
fly. My wife is very apprehensive about it, although she is gettting
more and more tolerant as time goes by. We now take short flights for
lunch and that sort of a thing. The fact that most of my flights are
solo says nothing about my marriage. If anything, my wife should be
commended for putting up with such an expensive activity that she
derives so little pleasure from. You have an ideal situation but give
the guy a break.
Rich Russell

Richard Russell wrote:

On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 14:09:20 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote:


Another friend bought a PA-28 after earning his PPL and his family has
never been in it.

That says more about your friend's marriage than about his choice of
airplane, Deb.

Sadly, it doesn't seem to be uncommon at the airport.


Geez, Jay. I looked hard for a smiley and couldn't find it. While it
"could" say something about the marriage, that is certainly not a
given. A right-seat (or left-seat) wife is not a prerequisite to a
good marraige. I was married for 28 years before I learned how to
fly. My wife is very apprehensive about it, although she is gettting
more and more tolerant as time goes by. We now take short flights for
lunch and that sort of a thing. The fact that most of my flights are
solo says nothing about my marriage. If anything, my wife should be
commended for putting up with such an expensive activity that she
derives so little pleasure from. You have an ideal situation but give
the guy a break.

very well put.

Jay,

His marriage is great! However, he has a school teacher wife and two small
kids. They just haven't developed a love for flight. He actually bought the
PA-28-180 because his dad was large. His dad flew with him one day, liked it
and has never returned. He would like to go to fly-ins with us, do
flour-bombing and spot landings at one of the private fly-ins we attend. His
needs are simple.

I think he's working toward a Citbatria. It will fit his flying mission
better.

That said, we all know you fly with your whole family. Go for it! I think
it's grand.

Since we have inherited a new child along with two grandkids, my husband may
have to speed up his work on the C-195!

Deb

--
1946 Luscombe 8A (His)
1948 Luscombe 8E (Hers)
1954 Cessna 195B, restoring (Ours)
Jasper, Ga. (JZP)

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:kuCvd.498151$wV.177403@attbi_s54...
Another friend bought a PA-28 after earning his PPL and his family has
never been in it.

That says more about your friend's marriage than about his choice of
airplane, Deb.

Sadly, it doesn't seem to be uncommon at the airport.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Your forgeting one important use of the rudder.
SPINS!
Makes flying a little more fun.



Ron Natalie wrote:
Dave S wrote:

A non-scientific review of NTSB records for a few years done moments
ago by me looking for C152 AND "rudder" shows no cases of rudder
failure or cracking of the rudder structure/attach points in any of
the accident synopses.

Doubt that even if the rudder fell off a 152 it would cause an accident.
Most 152 pilots don't do anything with those pedals other than taxi.

This came about after several 150's lost their tails in flight
No C-150's EVER lost their tails in flight.

Michael

you're right about not using the rudder much. i did all my training in
a 172 and didn't fly a 152 till after i got my ppl. suprised the heck
out of me that the poor little gerbil engine couldn't muster enough
turque to pull it to the left on take-off. but it did get the job done
and, solo, it runs about the same speed as the 172s, maybe 5k slower
and probably a good 2 g.p.h. gas saving.

it managed to lift me and my instructor (400lbs of meat) plus full gas.
i mean, it didn't jump into the air but it did clear the trees.

eventually.

naturally, we headed for the oddball airport (weiser) for my first 152
landing. prevailing wind here is from the southish and it was
prevailing at 15kt that day. the runway at weiser is 9-27. nailed
it.. one wheeling with all the rudder the bird had but it worked.

some people i know call the 152 "kitish" but i think of it as
"responsive". but not so responsive i'd try putting down with that much
crosswind solo at half tanks. well...maybe i would. i need more hours
in the type.

thanks for those tail crack/inspection links. that's exactly what i was
looking for. great!

considering that i've done cross countries in volkswagon bugs and
motorcycles over the years, the 152 seems pretty comfy. but i'm still
open for suggestions. thanks for all the help.

dan

If I unwound the multi-level quoting right, Ron Natalie wrote:
Doubt that even if the rudder fell off a 152 it would cause an accident.
Most 152 pilots don't do anything with those pedals other than taxi.

I assume you're joking when you say that. My guess is that if a 152
lost its rudder, it would be completely uncontrollable. Having a
rudder and not using it is a whole different ball game from having it
fall off. Even if it's just hanging on the back of the plane unloved
and unused, it's contributing to lateral stability.