Cessna 140 Tail dragger

[aLear31pilot]

:laugh:
I recently purchased a 1948 Cessna 140 tail dragger just for fly in breakfasts and to dink around with on the weekends.
It has 1400 hours tt on it, but has been sitting out of annual since 1988.
Anything that anyone knows about to watch out for or take special intrest in checking would be much appreciated.
(or if you know anyone who wants a 46, J-3 cub... let me know

 

[imacdog]

Congrats, that sounds like fun! I have some time in a 140 on floats with a 140hp engine, and it was a fun little plane. Flaps didn't do much though. Wish I could afford the J-3.

 

[LJDRVR]

Great little airplane. If you've got the metalized wings, be on the look out for corrosion. If you're looking for a good project, then drill all those rivets out and cover it in Ceconite. Lighter is better.

If you have the Narco antena on the roof, remove it. If you ever end up on your back, it'll pierce your skull and kill you.

Wheel extensions are for sissies, just stay off the brakes. Again stay off of those brakes. On the 120/140, they're only good for holding the airplane during runup. Take great care to make sure you're only pushing on the bottom of the rudder pedals. It's not easy.

Keep a close watch on the tailwheel attach bracket, and the MLG spring leafs and attach brackets.

Internal damage (cracks) around the inside leading edge of the horizontal stab.

Great airplane. A lot of fun to fly. Challenging to wheel land until you've put some work into it. So, what Cub?

 

[agpilot34]

Definitely challenging to do good wheel landings. Cessna's spring steel gear is pretty bouncy on the lighter planes like the 120 and 140. I will second what was said about staying OFF the brakes and making sure you have your feet ONLY on the bottom of the pedals.

 

[Hand Commander]

Some of the most fun I've had flying has been in a C-140. Tricky little suckers at first (happy feet, no brakes) but a lot of fun. We would take the doors off for a little extra ac and screw around doing t & g's in dry lake beds. Could only deal with it for about an hour in cruise by myself before I'd have to slide my right foot over onto the right rudder pedal on the right side to prevent crampin up (I'm 6'3''). Also had a crappy generator so If you were flying at night and needed the landing light (the one that folds down from inside the wing) you had to choose between be able to see where you're going and talking on the radio. Good times

 

[redd]

There's a good website and forum at http://www.cessna120-140.org/forum/

A friend of mine who's rebuilt several Cessna 140's posts there, lots of other rebuilders and enthusiasts post there too. The last I heard from him he did a dye test on his latest rebuild project, on both the right and left side doorposts, and found cracks they'd never would've found without the dye, he also found rust when he checked under the steps on the gear legs, etc.

Congrats on your recent purchase, my friend gets just as much enjoyment from fixing them up as flying them!

 

[U of I Tweak]

I can only say that I'm jealous. Learned in a 120 and it was a blast to fly.

 

[charlesmelot]

Beware of corrosion in the spar carry through hidden behind the headlines. A great airplane. I sold mine in '69 for $1,900. Saw it for sale recently for $22.900.

 

[de727ups]

Sorry for the hijack but what do you guys think about Luscombes?

By the way, I had a Cessna 140 once and it was a good little plane. We had to rebuild the engine and the C85 cranks are expensive and hard to find. We did the STC to install an O200 crank and that little plane seemed like it would keep up with 172's in the pattern. The 140 was suitable for tailwheel instruction and I did a little. The jury is out on the Luscombe but I'm leaning towards no with the heel brakes only on one side. Maybe on a nice grass strip. Sorry again for the hijack.