Fantastic write up Tony! I find the 120 to be about the best handling light two-seater around.

Pretty sure none came with the wing root vents, but there is an STC or maybe some were just installed. My 120 does not have them, relying on the little twist ventilators in the windows. Those actually work fairly well.

Do you have the drop-down Grimes landing light still? Those are neat. Mine has the STC for the 150 in-the-wing lights. Work great until the tail drops, then not so much. Somebody installed some newer really nice yokes in yours - no pretzels at all, but still with a nice top piece to rest your hand. Never figured out why they went to rams horns on light airplanes.

The 120 will handle more crosswind than just about any other high-wing Cessna taildragger, and does it with aplomb. A consideration for the those days when the winds pick up from the "wrong" direction.

Your admonition, which will be summed as "never use brakes on a taildragger" is particular relevant to the 1946 C120s with the more rearward hear (unless extended, which has its own issues). Later models had the gear swept forward to help but not alleviate their nose-tippy tendency.

Mine went for a 1300 nm cross-county the last two days. And on the last leg it was nice to have the IFR equipment since the wx got rainy and such. Alas, she's not polished and is more of a flyer than anything.

As far as hovering, well about 1988 took a C150 from ITH to ELM, maybe 30 nm flight on about a 240 heading. On the way there, flew at around 3500' with a terribly low groundspeed due to the southwest flow ahead of a strong front. About ten miles out, started a climb to around 10,000'. Then, while still pointing southwest, and in level (albeit a bit intentionally slow) flight, flew backwards to ITH over about 45 minutes never having pointed the aircraft in the correct direction!

You guys talking about flying these airplanes backwards are making me nostalgic for my parachuting days. Nothing like looking over your shoulder and crabbing to the target! Best get that wing collapsed on touchdown however, otherwise, you’ll get a sense of what a plow must feel like. Ha!

1300 NM is a long way in a C120! Congrats on that. I don’t have the drop down lights. I have those on my Fairchild and Waco YKS 6 cabin. Great when they work and a PITA when they don’t.

BTDT many times, especially as a novive under a Double LL cheapo. I almost always forgot to chop one side and let the canopy collapse (that would be too easy). I would try to jump up and run around it to the downwind side to make it collapse, falling down and getting dragged another 50' several times. Those were the days...

Dan

BTDT many times, especially as a novive under a Double LL cheapo. I almost always forgot to chop one side and let the canopy collapse (that would be too easy). I would try to jump up and run around it to the downwind side to make it collapse, falling down and getting dragged another 50' several times. Those were the days...

Dan

Here I am doing a little hovering in my 120. The Garmin GPS can’t figure what’s going on.
:https://youtu.be/1uMC8yBOXDY?si=jApHQhhHvh5aRFwT

[youtube]https://youtu.be/1uMC8yBOXDY[/youtube]

Nice.

For anyone that hasn’t skydived, that look of the wheel and strut in the foreground and earth in the background with the sound of engine and slipstream is exactly what it looks / feels like before exiting. Throw in a little cold and anxiety and you have the whole package.

Oops. Did it again. Two IFR legs, the remainder VFR.

This is a great thread. Many thanks to Tony for his well written original post. It brought back lots of wonderful, youthful memories. My first adventure in airplane ownership was with a couple of partners in a 1946 C120 back in my college days. Next, was a 1947 C140 (which is still registered and flying today). Both were wonderful airplanes and, as Stan said, the little Cessna really taught me how to fly and much basic airmanship. Kudos to the Cessna 120/140 Asso. as they do a wonderful job in promoting these great little birds.

MM

I would be remiss to allow this thread to remain unchallenged, so here goes...

I have 2 low and slow airplanes, a Taylorcraft L-2M and a Meyers OTW. I will start with the L-2.

I too am a fan of the 120/140s, but they are no match for any of the mighty Taylorcrafts, especially the L-2.

I am often asked, "what is an L-2?" My response is always the same, "It is like a Cub with legroom and they hooked up the ailerons." All the Taylorcraft species have a 23000 series airfoil which they share with a multitude of great flying airplanes including the Bo/Barons, most RV's King Airs, Citation 500s, and the best flying figher of WWII, the Corsair. All of these airplanes are a great compromise of speed and handling vs a little more well defined stall.

The L-2 suffered a bit of a bad rap during WWII, because it was heavier than the BC- series with side-by-side seating, but it retained the 65 hp engine fitted with a wood prop. These airplanes struggled from a performance perspective especially compared to the feather light Cub with it flat bottom fat wing. This deficiency is easily rectified by a common conversion to a C-85-12, which BTW has provisions for a starter.

Further improvement in performance can be gained by relocating the wooden propellor to it's rightful place, above, or in a fireplace and replacing it with a metal one with that is just a bit on the flat side. This costs some cruise speed, and care must be taken to control the RPMs during descent. But remember this is a low and slow airplane.

Unlike the 120/140's the L-2, as God intended for low and slow airplanes, has a ragwing with wood ribs and spars and a tubular steel fuselage. It has a spacious door and entry to either seat is easy even for aging fully developed pilots (such as myself). The front seat is fore and aft adjustable, as it should be, and legroom is not only ample, but comfortable, for even the tallest pilots or passengers.

In it's original configuration the turtle deck is cut down and to allow 360 degree vision. Cessna figured this out decades later in the -150 with 'Omnivision. There were two civil versions of the L-2, the DCO-65 with the observer cockpit and a DC-65 that was a fastback model. The top of the cabin is plexiglas as well, so visibility in nearly all directions is excellent. I routinely fly formation from the rear seat.

The L-2M model was equipped with spoilers which were a carryover from TG-6 glider version of the airplane which had the engine replaced with a third seat and ridiculously short stubby landing gear. TG-6s that were converted to powered planes required that the spoilers be disabled, but L-2Ms can retain their spoilers. The spoilers are a cool addition, but serve little useful purpose. Slipping a Taylorcraft can result in breathtaking descent rates.

While the entry and exit of the L-2 is superior to any other low and slow airplane, other than a Breezy, where all the Taylorcraft shine is in their flying characteristics.

Most low and slow airplanes have excessive control friction combined with heavy aerodynamic forces, poor harmony, and that is capped off with sluggish response. (C-120/140 and Luscombes excepted) The L-2 is light on the stick, perfectly balanced, and delightfully crisp. It is pure joy to fly.

Like most airplanes of the era, the Taylorcraft gives adequate warning of an impending stall, but unlike most, it breaks clean and will spin effortlessly if desired and recover instantaneously.

Cabin ventilation is good and flying with the windows open is mandatory, not for ventalation, but "just because." The heater is excellent in the front seat and adequate in the rear. We fly year-around in Iowa. If the temps are mid-teens and the sun is shining a winter time formation flight is comfortable. Giving kids rides on skis off the lake is a highlight of the year for me. I just stop and offer a ride, and soon, there is a line.

Back in the pattern, The L-2 is easy to land, but there is one caveat. It has very stiff gear. Greasers are elusive and most arrivals on pavement are announced with a "Thud." Both 3 point and wheel landings work well and the effectiveness of the ailerons make crosswind landings easy as well. These too can be 3 point or 2 point. It doesn't care. If you keep the aileron into the wind it will track straight in ridiculously strong winds. I have landed in 20 knot crosswinds several times.

The low maintenance of a metal airplane is appealing, and the L-2's Shinn brakes are almost worthless. The brakes are not really a problem because, after all, brakes are for runups nd f-ups. And it has just enough brakes for a runup, if you push really hard.

I regularly fly everything from WWII fighters to turbo-props and jets, and nothing provides more pure joy than a sunset formation flight in our L-2M. I am not trading it for a C-120.

Doug,

I enjoyed your report! I don't know that you so much challenged what I, and others, reported on the Cessna 120 as gave all of us another airplane to dream about flying!

You may have been commenting a bit tongue in check about rag wings and wooden ribs and spars but I'm curious what the advantage is?

Tony

Great thread. My low and slow bird is a 46 j-3 with a 85 stroker by don's dream machines(104hp). I bought it from a now deceased friend that owned it since 51 or so. We rebuilt it about 30 years ago. Front seat is crowded but i usually fly from the rear. Have some tundra tires on it but really don't need them. When we rebuilt it the ribs had the signature and date written in pencil by the person that built it new. On a different front the gentleman i bought i from had a p51 that he used to fly in the airshows in glh in late 50's and early 60's. He got a divorce and sold it to the confederate air force for around 8k i think, it had about 500hour on it at the time.

Fabulous post, Tony.
When i was in training in Galveston, i flew a 140 up and down the Texas Gulfcoast on weekends to moonlight in emergency rooms. I made what I thought was fabulous money, and most of the work revolved around suturing head lacerations on oil rig dudes that got into fights with pool cues.
The awesome thing about the 140 was that it was IFR certified. I thought nothing of filing a solo night flight from Baton Rouge to GLS, shoot the VOR approach at 1 AM, and go make preop rounds at the hospital for the Monday morning cases.
As for the polishing, it is a personality disorder that we both share.
Best,

Tom

It was tongue in cheek. I like the 120, but the Tcraft is a magnificent airplane.

If you buy a 120 or 140 or own one now check the wing strut lengths for setting the wing washout.

If you look at the many online photos of the N76075 before the fatal accident during a STOL contest you can see the wings are twisted with wash In at the tips. There should be wash out. "tip trailing edge higher than leading edge". If they did this intentionally trying to get shorter takeoff or if it just was reassembled incorrectly I don't know. But I have found others rigged this way.

The problem is the measurement is given as a wing strut length not as degrees of washout that can be measured somehow. Over the years the struts get screwed in and out during painting, maintenance etc. Flying hands off in cruise does not tell the whole story. They still may be rigged wrong.

This can make a difference in cruise speed and handling but it can also make for nasty stall characteristics or spin recovery. I think it was a contributing factor totally overlooked in that accident.

Some info from 120-140 forum below.

https://www.cessna120140.com/Forum2018/ ... .php?t=372

CESSNA SERVICE LETTER SLN-49

DATE: 09-26-47

SUBJECT: Instructions Wing Rigging

The dihedral and angle of incidence on the Cessna 120 and 140 wings are set up originally at the factory by the pre-determined position of the fuselage wing fittings and wing strut lengths which are set up in a jig. For informational purposes, the dihedral on the wings is 1 degree, and the angle of incidence is 1 degree in relation to the thrust line. These small angles would be difficult to measure with a protractor, and therefore, the setting up of the struts is the best and simplest way to arrive at proper wing rigging. The length of the front strut from centerline to centerline of the bolt holes is 98 13/64". The rear length measured the same way it 109 13/16".

The wing can then be set in place with the strut installed, and any additional rigging required due to wing heaviness after test flight should be rigged out by lengthening the rear strut on the light wing one rotation at a time. In doing this, there is one caution; namely, double check the length of the thread engagement in the strut adjustment. This can be done by the use of the safety hole in the fitting made for that purpose. If a wire will not go in the hole, the thread length is satisfactory.