5 thoughts on “This Incredible Plane: Cessna 140

  1. Well what was wrong with 150. every thing has a lineage & the 150 was grate plane. I like it a lot. I tried taildraggers’ & had a little ruff of a time trying them after starting out with tricycle geared planes I think every one has there like & dis likes.

  2. Nothing wrong with a 150, but it’s a development of the 140. I remember transitioning to tri-gear (Piper Colt after years in Champs & Chiefs), the instructor said “just put the mains on, let go of the yoke and then just drive home! Last thing you’d want to do in a taildragger, where the stick’s always firmly back when on the ground until take-off

  3. There is nothing wrong with a 150. I think the author means it went very well! According to an article on Wikipedia it had the 5th highest production of any civilian plane. It was a great little trainer. I first flew one at Jeffco airport in Broomfield, Colorado where I started taking flying lessons. That was in 1966 if I remember correctly. Taking off from that altitude of 5,669′ it climbed at, maybe, 200′ to 300′ per minute. I took my check ride for PP in a different one in 1973 at Burlington International Airport (BTV). I belonged to a flying club at that airport and I remember that the rental for the 150 wet was $7/hr! It was also $20 a month for fixed costs. Oh, and my instructor charged $5/hour. Amazing how times have changed yet, from what I understand, there are still a lot of 150s and 152’s around!

  4. I have many fond memories of 120s and 140s. Started lessons at 15, 1959, in a J-3 but soloed in a 120, doing cross countries in a 140. One of the 140s was converted to tricycle gear and, as a result, I learned that crosswind landings can be accomplished without bending the rudder pedals.
    One of my favorite memories happened during a long cross country in the 140 trike. On the way to Lincoln, NE, the 2nd of the three landings, a T-33 pulled up beside me, at an amazingly high angle of attack, and stayed there for a couple of minutes. Then he saluted and pulled quickly away. I always wondered if he could see my beaming eyes through my mirrored military style sunglasses.
    I only had one problem in a 140. I lost oil pressure and made a precautionary landing in a farmer’s field within sight if the farmstead. Got a ride to the house on a tractor and called the FBO. My instructor flew a mechanic to the same field. Thought I was in trouble but my instructor said it was the right thing to do. He hinted that landing with the engine running was preferable to when it’s not. Turned out to be a bad gauge, so I was off again. Had a real engine failure and emergency landing in a Beaver in Northern Japan just a few years later. That was less fun but I still didn’t get into trouble so it was all good.
    I started taking my son flying with me when he turned two. We flew a lot of different aircraft, 150s, 172/182s, J-3s, Super Cubs, Champs, Beaver, L-19, L-5, Bonanzas, T-34, Comanche, Tri-Pacer, and . . . enough of that. Taking my son flying and he ended up a military pilot. Who’d a thunk it. I also dragged him around the world while served 31 years in the Air Force so being a military brat may have been an influence as well.
    The bottom line: the 140 has a special place in my heart. 16 years old and flying in formation with a jet. Can it get any better than that?
    Gary

  5. I’d like to emphasize how nearly the Cessna company came to failure in the late 1940s, when the “obvious” after-war market for lightplanes failed to materialize. The Hutchinson (KS) factory was converted to making furniture and farm equipment (it never returned to airplane involvement), while the Wichita factory (the “Pawnee Plant”) cranked out 120s, 140s, 190s, and 195s, and management sweated over every payday.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *