A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Owning
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Texas Taildraggers



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 16th 05, 01:41 AM
Robert M. Gary
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Personally, I like the Cessna 140 better.

  #2  
Old August 16th 05, 01:58 AM
K. Ari Krupnikov
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Robert M. Gary" writes:

Personally, I like the Cessna 140 better.


Why's that?

Ari.

--
Elections only count as free and trials as fair if you can lose money
betting on the outcome.
  #3  
Old August 16th 05, 02:09 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Since the 150 was never intended to be a conventional gear airplane,
the rudder is a little small.

That's why the 140 is probably a better tailwheel airplane.

Bill Hale

  #4  
Old August 16th 05, 02:55 AM
Dave Stadt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


wrote in message
oups.com...
Since the 150 was never intended to be a conventional gear airplane,
the rudder is a little small.

That's why the 140 is probably a better tailwheel airplane.

Bill Hale


And the TT looks really goofey with those short gear legs and short prop.
An early 150 converted to a tail dragger with 140 gear legs looks much
better and gets the prop up in the air where it belongs.. Then again, why
buy a fake when one can buy the original. Many 120 and 140s have had O-200s
installed and they quite handily out perform a 150 nose wheel or otherwise.


  #5  
Old August 16th 05, 07:10 AM
K. Ari Krupnikov
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Dave Stadt" writes:

wrote in message
oups.com...
Since the 150 was never intended to be a conventional gear airplane,
the rudder is a little small.


And the TT looks really goofey with those short gear legs and short prop.
An early 150 converted to a tail dragger with 140 gear legs looks much
better and gets the prop up in the air where it belongs..


I hear that straight-tail 150's do better as taildraggers than
swept-tail ones. Is that true?

Ari.

--
Elections only count as free and trials as fair if you can lose money
betting on the outcome.
  #6  
Old August 17th 05, 01:24 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

The TT's gear is the original gear moved forward, so that its
deck angle on the ground is shallow; that raises takeoff and landing
speeds since you can't get the nose higher. Besides, I've flown several
aircraft that use O-200s and I still can't figure out where all that
power goes in a 150. The other airplanes perform much better. Old
straight-tail, no-back-window 150s were faster, lighter and better
overall performers; I think the sharp profile change needed when they
stuck that window in must have hurt the airplane.
Find a real taildragger.

Dan

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
George Jr sent out of Texas by father as a 'drunken liability' WalterM140 Military Aviation 17 September 9th 04 06:26 AM
bush rules! Be Kind Military Aviation 53 February 14th 04 05:26 PM
Texas Soars into Aviation History A Piloting 7 December 17th 03 03:09 AM
Bob Wander at Marfa, Texas Burt Compton Soaring 0 September 16th 03 03:59 PM
good book about prisoners of war Jim Atkins Military Aviation 16 August 1st 03 11:18 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:04 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.