The extra ponies make a noticeable difference in performance.

@@skywagonuniversity5023 I fly the A-152 and it makes all the difference especially when climbing.

Yes that instrument display is very cool, someday tell us how you do that

It is taken from the telemetry from the GPS in one of the GoPro's Don does it in the editing. He's a genius about that sort of thing.

Kudos to Don and to your of course thanks Mark. 😊

Why not bring your Ercoupe to us for an owner interview? It'd be fun!

It's a a great plane.

Thanks.

You are welcome, Steve!

Thanks for sharing

Perfectly stated.

Glad you liked it!

Thank you for the compliment, TheBarzook!

Please tell your teenage daughter to keep going and don’t quit. It’s the greatest career in the world! I was lucky enough to have parents like you who allowed their teenager to learn to fly. I’m retired now after 42 years, and my last flight was as much fun as my first one. Never lose that pure love of flying, ok? Take care, fly safe and best of luck! Enjoy every nanosecond of it!

We couldn't have said it better. Thanks for the compliment, Nomar and for your great story, Georgia! You two should meet for coffee!

Maybe we could have a “virtual coffee”? I’m retired in Thailand. I love talking to anybody about aviation and airplanes! You may only be young once, but I’m still like a little kid with airplanes! Just can’t help it…😃

(continued) Alcor TCP reduced the frequency of spark plug cleaning. Although I also owned several other planes (Stearman, T-6, T210, Baron and 310) during the time I had the 152, I flew it frequently just for the fun of it. I called it my aluminum psychiatrist, after a long day at the office I would go to the airport and just fly the 152 for an hour or two, returning in a much better frame of mind. It was perfect if you just wanted to get off the ground and just fly for a while, whereas any of the bigfer, faster, more complex planes made you feel like you were not using them properly without going somewhere. I still miss my little 152. BTW, the SparrowHawk mod also included replacing the 152's McCauley propeller with a different prop (I believe it was a Sensenich, but don't remember for sure) which allowed an increase in RPM, along with remarking the tachometer. Several years ago, a business associate wanted to learn to fly, and we bought a 152 with that conversion. It really made a difference, with the airplane having no problems at our 6656' MSL home base, and near Super Cub takeoff and climb performance at lower elevations. Overall, they are neat little birds.

Thanks for sharing that story, James.

Thanks for highlighting the 152! They are fun little planes that are usually accorded little respect.

You are not alone.

Thanks for sharing

Good to know!

Bring your 162 out and we'll do an owner interview! Texas isn't that far away!

@@skywagonuniversity5023 I think the farthest trip done and it was 600 miles, and I am in East Texas so I was still 100 miles from the Texas border going west🤣.

Spins can be entertaining.

If you keep watching, we'll keep making them ... unless we run out of planes!

That's some high praise. Thank you.

It's a good one.

Thanks for sharing

Glad you enjoyed it

You know, that would actually be a catchy name for a new model.

If Cessna built it and it were an under performer, the nickname would be ... obvious?

@@skywagonuniversity5023 One thing's for sure: You can't have too high expectations with an entry level model. At one point, there was the Skycatcher but unfortunately, it didn't catch up.

*traumahawk

@@cluelessbeekeeping1322 We called them that too! Lol

@@ESHANABROOK Nothing against them, I just think it's a funny name. I call my brother's Scarecoupe, well, Scarecoupe (it's easy & super safe to fly). A friend's Bearhawk ChickenHawk.

Thanks. Great planes.

Wow, thanks! I try not to get calls but you know, it happens. :-)

Agree. They are fantastic videos.

Aww ... shucks. Yer making us blush!

What is the asking price?

They are asking 49,500

They are a great trainer.

My first was N94949 in 1983 at Osan AB, Korea. Later, it was moved to Hawaii and has since been deregistered. I remember how FAST it felt! - Don the Camera Guy.

Thanks.

More to come.

In AZ I think now.

If one becomes available, we'll make the video.

We're always trying to improve our product. Thanks for noticing!

That is where I learned. Fullerton, in 1991.

@@skywagonuniversity5023 Small world! I trained at AFI. Great instructor. He left for the airlines right after I got my cert.

Worked for me. I was fortunate enough to get a few hours in a 150 TD conversion. THAT was the best trainer I ever flew. Why don't you prefer the Cubs?

Piper tomahawk is way better imo

Thanks!

If the lawyers had not caused the end of production in 1986, the 152 may have been produced for many more years.

@@skywagonuniversity5023 Well said, I'd forgotten about that. All sorts of issues with manufacturing costs etc having to cater for possible litigation etc etc in the US too, such a shame. In the UK I think that "Cherokees" outnumber C150/152's or so it seems at airfields I sometimes visit. 😕😕🤔

You are welcome, Scotabot!

How do bi-focal contact lenses not rotate on your eye so that you have to strand on your head to read?

You hit the trifecta!

I don’t have any videos of it up on my KZfaq yet, I will shortly.

If you bring it up, we'll do an owner interview with you. - Don the Camera Guy.

Thanks Jim.

Thanks, Jen-Pierre! We got a new mount that allows us to put the 360 camera on the outside of the plane without worrying that it will come off during flight. We think it adds a bit to the videos as well and we're glad you like it!

It's Placerville airport. Northern California. KPVF, 2500ft high and 3900ft long. On top of a hill.

"Every journey begins with the first step." - Abraham Lincoln

We appreciate the compliment, Aniel.

Not a bad idea, John.

It already is.

I don't believe so, I actually just bought the STC yesterday and I'm waiting on the paperwork to come in

It comes from the telemetry of the Go-Pro GPS

I just heard that the TBO was reduced from 2400 to 2000 because of the extra power.

Gotcha. Thanks for the quick response. Would still be curious to know if anyone has a 337 they wouldn’t mind sharing that documents this.

I'm just under 6ft and there was headroom for more.

It is a GoPro Max. - Don the Camera Guy.

Yes, it has lap belts.

👍🏼👍🏼 👍🏼👍🏼. 👋🏼.

Probably the 152. No particular reason.

@@skywagonuniversity5023 thanks Mark. Finished up my ticket in a 64’ 150 straight tail with rear glass/omnivision. (N4364U)

Hi Tyler. I use a program called Telemetry Overlay to generate the gauges. It extracts the GPS data and converts it into visual representations. It isn't perfect, and often the turn coordinator looks like it enjoys central nervous system stimulants, but it gives an overall idea of what is happening in the plane. - Don the Camera Guy.

I am 6'2", and owned a 152 for 7 years. I flew it all over the Soutthwest and was never uncomfortable. Plenty of headroom, never hit my head even in strong turbulence over the Arizona desert in summer. It is a bit tight with two big guys in it, but not as bad as a Mooney IMHO. Give it a try, I think you may find it to be much more fun to fly than that Piper with it's mushy controls.

Hi Molon! Yup. Early morning the wind favors Rwy 5, but changes about the time the sun comes up. Rwy 23 is also the published calm wind runway.

Yes, if I had one here, it's random.

Different planes for different people.

I think if you Google the Sparrowhawk STC you'll find it. It's just higher compression.

@@skywagonuniversity5023 I literally have been looking for over a year. I cannot find anything. Maybe I'm just bad at googling. Any help would be appreciated.

​@@skywagonuniversity5023 Thank you Mark. I have tried finding something for over a year to no avail. Perhaps I'm not adept at googling. Any help appreciated.

Thank you.

No rudder trim needed. Not enough P factor, not enough power.

@@skywagonuniversity5023 I understand , but on a long x-country with a quarreling wind it sure would help my legs on the peddels... jmo... thanx for the reply

Placerville in Northern California, KPVF.

It's because "Aviation" was placed in front of "battery."

Must have been a depression era kid growing up.

@@skywagonuniversity5023 yeah, he was 70 something at the time and that was 30 years ago.

Thank you but I do. It's like an axe or a hammer or a chainsaw or a gun. It won't do anything unless it is mistreated. I'm very familiar with all those machines and know how to be around them and understand what is going on behind the scenes and what the potential is.

It's the name a 152 gets when it has the 125 HP Sparrowhawk STC. A word-play on Skyhawk, the 172 I suppose.

Cessna has never built a 125HP Version of the 152. Nearest is the Reims built Aerobat with a 130HP RR O-240A Engine. Only the French ever gave it a name. Looks like your "Sparrowhawk" is a one-off and I assume operated on experimental registration.

@@MENSA.lady2 It's not a "one off" and it's not experimental. It is a normal 152 with an upgraded engine. Upgraded from 115 HP to 125 HP under the STC that calls it the Sparrowhawk. Just like a 172 can go from 150 HP to 160 HP or from 150 HP to 180 HP. You get the STC (Supplemental Type Certificate) and put it on it. Sparrowhawk is the name of a 152 that has had this done. It has higher compression cylinders. You can get the same STC for a Tomahawk.

@@skywagonuniversity5023 Who did the upgrade ? It certainly was not Cessna. Certification costs would make it unviable.

@@MENSA.lady2 No it was not Cessna. STC's are never the manufacturer. The 125 HP sparrowhawk conversion is an STC for this engine. It makes it 125 HP, up from 115 HP as I said in the video. It is an STC, which is a Supplemental Type Certificate, so it is "supplemental" to the Type Certificate, which means it was done afterwards, not by Cessna. The name of the 125 HP conversion for this engine is a 152 is the "Sparrowhawk" Conversion. That is the name of the STC. Cessna did not call it that. Any after-market, non manufacturer modification to an aircraft has to be invented by someone, then approved by the FAA then sold to a consumer, then put on his plane. You cannot do it unless you have bought the STC (permission) from the inventor. Cessna did not do it. It an STC that is done afterwards to 152's that gives them more power. Not experimental, not illegal, not a "one off" I hope that clears it up. I explained that in the video.

No ... it's more of a serious CNS stimulant addiction. Or, it's a representation created using GPS data and gets a little excited to be in our videos. Gotta be one or the other. - Don the Camera Guy