Robin - urgh

[n5296s]

Just got checked out in a Robin DR400 in France. Can't say I would really choose to fly this type given a choice (which there isn't, here). Seems very bouncy in flight, quite heavy to control esp in roll yet not very stable either. My instructor's advice was largely to leave it alone and let it sort itself out, and I'm certainly willing to believe he's right. The controls are idiosyncratic, to say the least, and in fact the whole thing rather reminds me of one of the weirder Citroens. Oh, and the airspeed is in km/h. Surprisingly, the altimeter (actually both of them, for some reason this particular plane at least has two of them) is in feet, not metres. Must have been an oversight.

Anyone else have experience in the type and in something rather more mainstream?

n5296s

[TWR]

Heavy to control in the roll ?? With what other ACFT are you comparing ?

[BackPacker]

I regularly fly the DR400-120, DR400-160 and DR400-135CDI. Compared to the PA28 or C172 they feel a lot lighter, even though the DR400-160 has approximately the same payload capacity as a PA-28 or C172.

Personally I prefer the DR400 over a PA28 or a C172 because of the stick. But I'm 1.83m and have to put the seats all the way back. Seats which don't slide but recline, and this gets uncomfortable after 2 hours or so.

On the plus side, the view is far, far better than your average spamcan. Only the DA40 or the R2160 can match the visibility all around. And maybe it's just our fleet, but the PA28s and C172s we have all have a different panel layout so you're always looking for the right switches and things. This is far more consistent across our Robin range.

The inner dial on the ASI is in knots by the way, on our aircraft.

Oh, and if it reminds you of a Citroen you may be right. At least on some models the knob that opens the canopy is actually taken straight from the 2CV.

[Rod1]

I owned DR400 160 on the G reg (250h) and quite a bit of time on Jodels. I find the handling quite good, it was an excellent instrument platform and I vastly preferred it to Mr C and Mr P.

Rod1

[dublinpilot]

What's the problem with Km/h?

When I learnt to fly the aircraft had a scale in Kts. The aircraft I fly now has it in mph. All became very simply when I decided to forget about flying kts or mph, and simply fly the numbers. My approach speed for example is 80, flowing to 75 over the hedge. I needn't concern myself during the approach whether the scale is in kts mph or km/h so long as the needle is pointed at 80.

dp

[xz0npz]

Been flying a DR400 and C172 (syndicate) aicraft for the last 500 hours. (After starting in a PA28). Both are just great for what I want to do (tour) and both have many plusses and a few minuses.

The DR400 is a lovely aircraft with great views and super handling (not as ponderous as the 172), but equally, this very same attribute makes it a little harder in IMC (well that's what I find anyway).

Perhaps when you have a few more hours in the DR400, you will grow to love it?

In the meantime, enjoy what it is, not what it isn't - life's too short....:

['Chuffer' Dandridge]

Would fly a Robin anyday if given the choice between that and a Cessna/Piper...:ok:

[Mike Cross]

I concur with Chuffer.

DR400 is a very nice aeroplane. OK they told the guy making the panel how many holes they wanted and of what size and left him to get on with it. Then the guy fitting the instruments got them out of the box in no particular order and arranged them artistically in whatever holes fitted.

It's delightful to fly. The only gripe I have concerns getting in and out where the tendency is to support oneself using the seatbck. This overstresses the frame which then breaks. Fortunately I had just shut down and was reaching for the canopy catch when dumped unceremoniously into a prostrate position. Could have been a tad tricky on final.

[Cusco]

supine...........

[Echo Romeo]

I've flown Pa28's and a 172s,now flying a DR500,would I voluntarily go back to the spam can's? No way,I find the Robin's handling far superior.

[Jackboot]

I bought a new DR400 Regent in 2000 and loved it. There cannot be many pilots out there who are less than positive about them.

Was yours a high time, tired old dog with a questionable maintenance history? I have heard horror stories.

JB

[Mike Cross]

supine...........

Guilty m'Lud :rolleyes:

[n5296s]

Interesting. I normally fly a TR182 and a Pitts S2C (and a Robinson R44 but I don't think that counts). The Robin feels a lot "bouncier" than the 182 and yet the control movements needed to keep things going reasonably smoothly seem heavy. Of course the Pitts is quite bouncy too but the control movements are very light.

Was yours a high time, tired old dog with a questionable maintenance history?

It was a 1976 DR400-180. I don't know the maintenance history but I've no reason to suppose it has been bad. So "yes" to the first bit and "no" to the second. However the design of the panel and controls is decidedly idiosyncratic. For example the brake is a pull-lever in the middle of the panel. The master switch is a push-in control like an old-fashioned choke. There are no switches, only two-button circuit breakers. And so on.

Of course you can get used to all this. I'm flying it solo this afternoon so perhaps I'll come back a convert.

n5296s

[BackPacker]

For example the brake is a pull-lever in the middle of the panel.

That's likely not the brake itself, but a valve trapping the hydraulic pressure applied by the toe-brakes into the system. So to apply the parking brake, depress the toe brakes and keep them depressed while you pull out the little knob. I don't know what you've flown before and I don't know the TR182/Pitts S2C, but this is decidedly different from the PA28 or C172, where the parking brake lever applies brake pressure all by itself.

Occasionally you do see aircraft like this with the "parking brake" applied before they put pressure on the toe pedals. Useless.

Oh, and if you ever get to fly the DR400-135CDI: the arrangement and location of the knob is exactly the same, but due to the huge power lever you can't see the knob from the usual seating position. Always hilarious to watch people search for it the first time.

The master switch is a push-in control like an old-fashioned choke.

Mmm. Haven't seen that. Sure you're not confused with the carb heat? The ones I fly are all newer than 1976 and have proper master/alternator switches. Although I admit that some switches (particularly the avionics master) do seem to have been added afterwards.

[A and C]

Around the time that this aircraft was built things changed quite a bit, form the description it would seem that this is an "early" aircraft.

This would put the brake in the centre panel and a cable working the electrical master switch that is located on the engine frame near the battery.

Assuming this to be the case I can see how the aircraft is a little strange after the offerings from the USA but persist with it and take the time to understand the aerodynamics of the very simple but sophisticated wing.

In short the DR400 will lift more payload further, faster and off a shorter runway than any of the American aircraft with the same power.

[Rod1]

n5296s will be right about the brake and the Master. There are probably no toe brakes. The hand brake and ruder is used. The more rudder you apply the more brake you get on that side. It is different, but it is not a problem. Apply some handbrake and some rudder and you have quite a lot of braking on one side. It will take you a few flights to get used to its layout, but it is actually a good solution.

Rod1
Ex owner 1973 DR400-160

[A and C]

At the moment I am looking at building a "Super Robin" to address the (few) shortcomings of the aircraft as a long range touring aircraft.

The basic spec would be CS prop, IO-360 engine with LASOR ignition and EFIS.

Other option would be to scrap he vacuum system in favour an alternator on the vac pump pad for a standby electrical system to drive the standby attitude indicator and radio.

This would require an EASA major mod and a lot of work, If I could spread the certification cost across three or four aircraft it would make whole thing more attractive from a cost point of view............. any one interested?

[Echo Romeo]

A&C, have you considered the DR500 it addresses those short comings....it has the io360, vp prop, holds 275 ltrs which can deliver about a 1000 miles.

[IO540]

Other option would be to scrap he vacuum system in favour an alternator on the vac pump pad for a standby electrical system to drive the standby attitude indicator and radio.

This would require an EASA major mod and a lot of work, If I could spread the certification cost across three or four aircraft it would make whole thing more attractive from a cost point of view............. any one interested?

Whose alternator and electric horizon would you be using?

The GAMI alternator is not yet certified. There are some from an outfit called B&C or something like that.

I keep half an eye out for this, to replace the KI-256 vac horizon, but would need an electric horizon which has the KI-256 features i.e. flight director and pitch/roll outputs for the autopilot. Not sure if anybody makes such a thing.

[Rod1]

“but would need an electric horizon which has the KI-256 features i.e. flight director and pitch/roll outputs for the autopilot. Not sure if anybody makes such a thing.”

Could you not use one of the certified retrofit EFIS systems?

Rod1

[IO540]

Thread drift...

To cut a long story short, the KFC225 autopilot can be fed only from two certified pitch/roll sources: the KI-256 hirozon, or the KVG350 remote gyro. The latter is a cool US$25k.

Aspen are talking about certifying a version of their popular thingy to emulate the KI-256, which will be a useful option.

Of course the advantage of a vacuum horizon is that it will always work even if everything else has stopped (assuming an engine / vac pump failure not coinciding with a total loss of all other systems, which is a reasonable assumption) so if one replaced the KI-256 with something else, and fitted an electric horizon, that electric horizon would need to be powered from its own alternator.

If one fits the Aspen, and loses one's electrics, one will lose all gyro instruments, which is not acceptable.

Technically 100% feasible and very easy but legally tricky. A stupid situation. On a homebuilt you would just stick in a little alternator screwed to the vac pump accessory drive and drive one of the £1500 electric horizons from that.

[Rod1]

I have stuck with one alternator and added an extra battery, which is charged via the EFIS. If the alternator fails (very unlikely on a Rotax) then I have main aircraft power. When this drops below 6.5v the system auto switches to the backup. Total power drain for the full EFIS plus probes etc is 0.9A. Total backup power should give 2.5 – 3 hours. For a VFR only aircraft I deemed this ok.

Rod1

[A and C]

Echo Romeo

I have looked at the DR500 but it offers very little more than a standard DR400, I think that for cruise performance all that is needed is 160HP but for lifting loads from short strips 180HP is required at take off.
The best compromise that I can see would be a CS prop on a 180HP engine, 200HP is too much power for the airframe in the cruise and the engine costs about £4000 more to overhaul than the 180HP

IO-540

B & C build an alternator that will fit onto the vac pump pad, I think that they have also an STC to replace the vac system on the PA32 with electrical gyros.
Solid state electrical gyros (both AI & DI) with battery back up will soon be available from major American manufactures fully certified.

My ideas for a "Super Robin" are based round the availability of Robin airframes that are coming up for major overhaul (re-covering) and have 1970's instrument fits, I would intend to junk all the engine indicators and fit a modern American indication system that would have product support into the foreseeable future

[n5296s]

Well, today I completed 4.6 hours in the DR400, 2 dual and the rest solo or with passengers. I guess it does kind of grow on you, by the end we were getting on pretty well together and the weird controls have a certain kind of charm, juggling the throttle, stick and pull-out brake on Biarritz's up-and-down taxiways. I continue to think that it's not very stable in roll, although it's true I'm comparing it to my TR182 which is extremely stable in roll, even in mod-sev turbulence. My wife (who isn't a pilot but is an experienced passenger) commented on this too, so it can't be *entirely* my imagination.

It's true that the view is excellent, up to the point where the wing gets in the way - generic problem with low-wing aircraft of course. It's also true that the low wing makes landing easier (imo) - just hold a landing attitude and wait for the wheels to start to turn.

When I did the DA40 transition, I soloed in about 1.5h (from memory) AND did the radio in French, whereas this time I gave up on French (everything worked perfectly in English anyway, the Biarritz tower and approach controllers are really a pleasure to work with). But the first session of dual didn't go very well partly because of a misunderstanding - the instructor had somehow got the message I was an experienced Robin pilot and was getting increasingly irritated by the fact that I evidently wasn't until he finally put two and two together and asked "how many Robin hours do you have?". Once we got that straightened out and did a bit of ground stuff before the second session, things went a lot better.

btw I strongly recommend the Aeroclub Basque at Biarritz as a nice place to fly from (as long as you don't mind the Robin of course! - though they do have a couple of Tecnams too). Nice people, nice atmosphere, only drawback (as everywhere in France) is that you have to pay around E250 for an annual subscription to do more than take a trial lesson. That adds quite a lot to the hourly rate if you only plan on flying a few hours on a holiday. But then nobody expects flying to be a cheap hobby anyway.

n5296s / f-gahr

[IO540]

Solid state electrical gyros (both AI & DI) with battery back up will soon be available from major American manufactures fully certified.

I have seen a leaflet on a Sandel solid state gyro which is claimed to replace (mounting wise and connections wise) the very common Bendix/King mechanical one. No idea if it is certified.

There are various issues in this department because for example if I fit the Aspen unit, I still need the B/King mech gyro for the KFC225 - or something like that. Very few if any avionics people genuinely understand this stuff, and while I have collected a vast quantity of installation manuals, I don't have to patience to read through them unless I need to know :) Also the manuals for new equipment are tightly distributed. It's very possible to get into a "certification blind alley" from which the only way out is a load of £££.

[tow1709]

I had a two or three lessons over in France a couple of years ago in a 180hp DR-400. I had only had about 6 hours dual at the time. The instructor asked me to climb to x,000 feet, so remembering PAT, I immediately increased the throttle to full, and started to ease back on the stick.

No! I shouldn't have done that - he wanted attitude first, then immediately afterwards the full throttle. I got the impression he was worried about overspeeding the engine.

Robins have dual throttle controls coupled together, one at the left hand end of the panel and one in the middle. I think you are expected to fly it with right hand on stick and left hand on throttle. The Right Hand Seat has no choice of course, but instructor seemed amused by my flying left hand on stick and right hand on "co-pilot's" throttle.

This aircraft has just a single fuel tank, and the filler is on the vertical hull wall, so you can't verify the fuel level by looking in. You have to trust the gauge, and trust the previous person to correctly log the amount of fuel added and used if you want to fly with anything less than a full tank.

Overall a very nice aircraft indeed.

[E-n-i-g-m-a-8-3]

With regard to the fuel gauges, how accurate do people find that these are? The last ac I flew was the C152, the tanks on which could of course easily be dipped to check levels. I don't feel overly comfortable with the Robin because I can't physically check how much is there.

If I knew how reliable my fuel gauges are I'd feel much happier! I dont understand the point in fitting an innacurate gauge anyway - if it isn't accurate, why bother?

E

[BackPacker]

Wing tanks are relatively wide but not very high. This means that if the aircraft is a few degrees off-level (on the ground) or not quite in balance (in the air), then this will lead to a relatively large level change at the point of the fuel level measurement probe. This makes them relatively inaccurate.

With a fuselage tank, you'll find that it is not as wide for its height, making fuel probes somewhat more accurate and less error prone due to being out of balance.

But it's never a good idea to hop in a strange aircraft and then fly it to the limits of its theoretical endurance straight away. Be conservative.

[Rod1]

My DR400 had three tanks, two in the wings giving just over an hour each, and one large one in the fuselage. The gage in the fuselage tank was very good, and the low level warning light was also spot on, but with 2 hours visually checked fuel in the wings it never caused me a concern. The fuel pressure waning light will allow you to run the rear tank to empty without the donkey missing. This also gives a known level to fill up from which allows a good check on the gauge.

Rod1

[wigglyamp]

For all keen Robin owners out there, Lees Avionics at Wycombe Air Park are just completing an EASA STC for installing the Garmin G500 EFIS into the DR300/400/500 series. The initial aircraft is an EcoFlyer diesel variant and will be the demonstrator for new aicraft sales on behalf of Finch who now manufacture the aircraft.
The STC covers both new factory installations and retrofits for existing aircraft. If all goes to plan, the STC should be completed by 22 April.

[Katamarino]

To add to a very old debate, I find our club Robin's to be absurdly easy to pull off great landings in, but uncomfortable to ride in; particularly for any back seat passengers who are taller than a small child. The stick is also annoying as it gets in the way of a kneeboard/map, and I can't mount my GPS on it.

[IO540]

What is the retrofit autopilot situation like for Robins?

Or come to think of it for anything else, using the GFC700 or whatever?

[wigglyamp]

There are certified S-Tec 30 and 55X systems for the Robin aircraft. The data is owned by CEAPR (TC holder) and it may not prove easy to buy a copy and the hardware kit. The demo aircraft for the G500 has a System 30 and we'll be including the G500 roll-steeering funcion. Power went on today!

The Garmin GFC700 is not a retro-fittable autopilot except as part of a retrofit G1000 system (KingAir only at present) - there is no dedicated autopilot computer as this function is within the GIA63s, and the control is by buttons on the G1000 MFD.

[A and C]

Airtest next week?

[CISTRS]

Glad you seem to appreciate the Robin.

Did a bit in the late seventies in a DR400-160.

After only taildraggers, just couldn't believe how it lands itself....

[CherrytreePilot]

I finished my training on a 400/100. It was absolutely delightfull to fly.

The only thing which is odd is the centre pivotted joystick. Only other thing is being wood they must be hangared.
Wonderfull visibility.

[wigglyamp]

EASA approved the STC for the Garmin G500 EFIS in all Robin DR300/400 aircraft today!
Demonstrator should be in the air in about a weeks time.

[vee-tail-1]

And when you want to experience the ultimate Robin... try an ATL "L" (with Limbach engine)
12.5 litres per hour, 75 knts cruise, helicopter visibility, ridiculously easy to fly. :)

[WaspJunior]

Totally agree with you vee-tail-1 the ATL could have been the default club trainer in europe. But in a similar way to TVR cars they were trying to develop about a dozen models at once. They had the proven DR 400's, HR 100/*** series, HR 200/*** series and the R3000 series on the go at one time. All on a development budget that wouldn't pay for Piper or Cessna's spend on bog rolls.

[A and C]

At the moment the production rights to Robin aircraft are split between two companies who can't agree on who owns what.

Finch own the rights to make aircraft but the remnants of the old company hold the rights to make the parts, the result is one hell of a squble in the French courts that is doing no one any good.

[Lister Noble]

I did 40 mins aero training in a Robin and found it delightful to fly:)

[robin]

At the moment the production rights to Robin aircraft are split between two companies who can't agree on who owns what.

Finch own the rights to make aircraft but the remnants of the old company hold the rights to make the parts, the result is one hell of a squble in the French courts that is doing no one any good.



Its actually more of a mare's nest than that. There is a network of companies that are run or owned by chums of the old Apex CEO. These companies are completely independent of Apex/CEAPR - yeah, right. He is still heavily involved in the business and defends his property with some vigour in the courts.

But alongside that is the major growth of Dyn'Aviation run by the son of the Robin founder that has taken over parts of the CEAPR empire.

They are both on the Dijon-Darois airfield but the hostility is plane (sic) to see.

It's been 4 years now since Apex went down the pan, and it is still on-going to a greater or lesser extent.

What a shame, as the Robins are a fantastic aircraft. The Dyn'Aviation DR2 proposal looks very interesting

http://www.aerodif.fr/en/iso_album/aerodifviigb_indd.pdf

[wigglyamp]

The finished article:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3256/5741016110_7d82b9b7e0_b.jpg

DR400 G500 complete | Flickr - Photo Sharing! (http://www.flickr.com/photos/63197924@N08/5741016110/)

[FirstOfficer]

Greetings,

I have flown the DR400 not so long ago for the very first time on a trip to Popham, with a friend of mine that normally rents this a/c:

JetPhotos.Net Photo » G-CONB (CN: 2176) Private Robin DR400/180 Régent by Brian Whitelegg (http://jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=5804209)

I have to admit that of all the types I have flown the robin is up there (I still love the TB10 more :E ).
Going back to the robin, it has a great performance and excellent visibility from the cockpit, and might (considering several options) even continue my PPL on one of them.

wigglyamp,

Great finish, I love it!!!

[nzflygirl]

Love flying the Robin, having trouble finding an aero club that has one as a trainer near London - grateful to anyone with advice here. Thanks!

[stevelup]

The finished article!

Looks amazing. I am very envious of whoever owns that.

[Genghis the Engineer]

Wigglyamp - thanks, lovely looking cockpit. Out of interest, how did you/somebody go about designing the instrument layout? It looks really excellent, but I'm just curious as to how the decisions were made.

G

[A and C]

All the avionic work and panel layout are the work of Lees Avionics, who built it with the inital input from the customer.

Lees Avionics - Home (http://www.leesavionics.co.uk)

What you cant see is the structual work that had to be carried out for the mounting of the avionic boxes and flux detector, this was done by Flight Composites.

Flight Composites (http://www.flightcomposites.co.uk)

[wigglyamp]

A and C is almost correct! Lees designed the instrument panel and the complicated shelf assy between the panel and firewall which carries the AHRS, ADC, autopilot pitch computer and a few minor peripherals. Flight Composites produced and installed the magentometer bracket which is mounted 1/2 span in the starbaord wing, and they also arranged wooden mounts in the aft fuselage for the emergency attitude battery and traffic processor and fitted a nylon conduit in the starboard wing to support the wire harness. Lees draw and approved the Flight Composites work as part of the EASA STC. The instrument panel fabrication was farmed-out to a specialist sheet metal shop who also dealt with paint match and silk-screen printing - far better than the sticky labels on the factory-standard panel.

Panel layout has to conform to guidance in FAA AC23-1311-1b so this dictates the position of standby instruments. 2" versions were used as insufficient panel space was available for standard 3" instruments when an autopilot is fitted. Options exist for non-autopilot aircraft to retain the original instruments as standbys, which will reduce the cost significatly.
The customer wanted 2" standbys in the glareshield in a horizontal arrangement but this wasn't possible due to existing structure constraints.

The aircraft will be on show with Mistral Aviation/SJ Aviation at the Goodwood Festival of Speed aviation event and you can meet us there as well!

[MichaelJP59]

That cockpit looks very good - one could sit for hours in that playing with the toys and not even bother flying!

What was the budget for it btw? Presumably more than the airframe value:)

[IO540]

I was going to ask the same Q.... how much was that plane worth before the job was done, and how much is it worth afterwards?

I was quoted 48k euros for installing a G500 in my panel (http://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m74/peterh337/tb-panel-big.jpg), by Socata. This included a GNS430W. UK installed prices are not much lower by the time everything is taken into account. With my plane being worth about 140k euros (not the 200-250k euros asked for in the typical "in denial" advert ;) ) it might be worth doing - if it made it go faster :)

[wigglyamp]

The development aircraft for the G500 STC is almost new - it's the demonstrator Diesel-powered version with the 155 CDI engine, so the cost of the mod against the hull value is not as bad as you might imagine.

A typical G500 in the average American metal aircraft will go from £22K to £27K depending on whether you have an existing GNS430W or not - this is the minimum GPS spec that must be installed. An existing 430 or 530 can be upgraded to a WAAS unit if needed - cheaper than fitting a new box. Beyond that, you can add options for traffic (as in the Robin), Synthetic vision, Jeppeson charts, live datalink weather (in a month or so).

[IO540]

Does that include all the current paperwork i.e. PRNAV, LPV approach approval, etc?

[wigglyamp]

The single GNS430W installation is not included within the STC and is a separate EASA minor change, which includes BRNav and GPS non-precision approach. As mentioned on other threads, PRNav and APV are STCs in their own right and this was not part of the spec for the Robin project.

[Final 3 Greens]

The 172/PA28 will never suffer from woodworm :-)

[IO540]

How much would PRNAV and APV cost extra?

[stevelup]

The 172/PA28 will never suffer from woodworm :-)

Nor will they ever suffer from great visibility and being a joy to fly!

[VOD80]

What you can't see can't worry you ;) Ignorance is bliss :)

[Final 3 Greens]

being a joy to fly!

Blasting a light PA28-236 out of a short field is some of the most fun I've had in a aeroplane.

Likewise, landing a 172 with flaps forty into a tight space, safely.

Depends what turns you on.

People like you are bores, frankly, if you cannot get enjoyment out of a pastime that was not available to people a few generations ago. I'd quite happily fly anything, rather than nothing - the pure joy of flight appears to pass some by.

BTW, I have the Regent in my logbook and found it like a Citroen, quirky, but ultimately rewarding.

[stevelup]

People like you are bores, frankly, if you cannot get enjoyment out of a pastime that was not available to people a few generations ago.

Er... Did you take an overreaction pill with your breakfast this morning.

[verticalhold]

I owned shares in a DR300/140 and a DR400/160. They were both astonishingly capable with a build quality I've yet to see on a light aircraft outside the Beech factory. I enjoyed having a stick rather than a yoke, but that may be due to the fact I fly Helicopters as well. I do remember that the nose attitude in the cruise seemed very low, but that just enhanced the view.. IFR they were a delight, and the left hand throttle felt very right with a stick.

I flew the 400/160 to the Atlas mountains and regularly took it to Greece. These days its a 182, and while I like it I would go for one of the new Robins any day.

VH