dr 400 160

[Pilot.Lyons]

Hi all,

Its time to try something new... Can anyone give me any tips and pros and cons for the dr400 160?

Im thinking of doing a check out on tatenhills one and wondered if anyone can shed some light or has any advice/tips

I have only flown c152s

[Vone Rotate]

They are far more responsive than a 152. Stick controls too.

My opinion...you'll love it. Once you've got used to the aircraft and stick you'll wish you tried it ages ago!

Great views out of the Robins too!

[tmmorris]

Sounds nice. I sometimes fly a DR400-115 which is lovely but underpowered. The -160 would be nice. Does it have the wing tanks?

Tim

[Pilot.Lyons]

Hi thanks guys... Ill look more into it.

Im not sure about the tanks ill find out more about it when i get up there and can book a slot.

Just wanted to try something different and it looked good compared to the pipers abd cessnas but ive kinda got used to the high wing so not sure how id feel with a low wing... Certainly looking forward to the views though!

[lenhamlad]

Have flown Robins for the last two years. From the 108 - bit underpowered (but will still be in it this afternoon, two up), through to the 160, they are all good. As the others have said, great view out of the cockpit, with the low wing being , in my opinion, an advantage over the Cessnas. The tank is in the fuselage. Only downside, given my low hours experience is that they get affected by thermals and low level wind, possibly because they are made of wood and are so light. Neverlethess, I really enjoy having a stick and manual flaps.

[BackPacker]

They're great. I fly them a lot. The -160 will leap off the ground with four adults and 110 liters (main tank) fuel.

Depending on the exact variant, you may just have a 110 liter main tank in the fuselage, or the version that adds two 40-liter aux tanks in the wing roots. This will give you a bladder-bursting 6 hours endurance at relatively normal cruise speeds. But if you do have the version with the aux tanks, take a good look at the fuel selector: BACKWARDS is main, while FORWARD is off. Not a very ergonomic design.

View is great, cockpit is logically laid out. Most versions have a NVFR setup, but there are IFR models as well.

One disadvantage I find on long flights is that the seats are not very comfy if you're tall. (I'm 1.86.) The seats don't just slide backwards, but tilt backwards a bit as well. A bit too much at its most rearward position, in my opinion.

Another thing to watch out for is that the nosewheel has a center lock, so that it is aligned with the fuselage in-flight. It requires a certain amount of weight on the nosewheel before it unlocks. With a rear CofG and a really smooth landing, you may not put enough weight on the nosewheel to unlock, which means you have no directional control whatsoever. Just pump the brakes briefly and you're sorted.

[robin]

Sounds nice. I sometimes fly a DR400-115 which is lovely but underpowered. The -160 would be nice. Does it have the wing tanks?

Tim

160 should have the wing tanks

Best of the bunch in my opinion. It has almost the same MAUW as the 180 but with greater economy.

Lovely aircraft. Shame they fitted it with a training wheel at the front!

[Vone Rotate]

Was going to add the pay load on the 160 is pretty decent for what it is.

As said my only point I don't like about them is I feel they are slightly under powered. That said upgrading from a 152 you won't notice. More apparent if your used to faster equipment.

[Robin400]

Just pump the brakes briefly and you're sorted.

Take care to keep the rudder in the central position as you unlock the nose wheel or it will get very exciting.:eek:
After landing with the nose wheel on the ground ease the stick forward to unlock, gentle use of the brakes only if needed.

[A and C]

The first thing is to understand how the wing works, once you have this in your mind the Robin is easy to master.

The outboard section of the wing is washed out in terms of Angle of Attack compared to the inboard section, this has the effect of putting the outboard section at zero A of A when in the cruise and so cuts done the indused drag, maximum advantage of this can be taken by cruising at 6-8000 ft.

When slowing down this can be a bit of a problem as it makes the aircraft quite slippery untill the aircraft slows to about 70 kt, this when the outer wing starts to produce lift and drag, as you approach 60 kt the drag increase is very pronounced and as you may have guessed by now the drag rise between 60 & 50 kts is very pronounced so this is a bit of a trap for young players.

My advice is to get the aircraft slowed to 1.3Vs quite early in the final approach untill you have a few hours on the aircraft.

The Robin can carry a lot more Payload than most light aircraft ( in terms of % Weight) so feels almost a different aircraft at MTOW compared with being flown with two people and 80 LTS of fuel. So when you load it up to MTOW don't be surprised at the apparent lack of performance...............it will still be better than a Piper with the same engine!

As backpacker says the nose leg can give troubles but tis is due to incorrect servicing of the landing gear shock struts and should not reflect on the aircraft design. Rather than using the bad practices mentioned above to unlock the nose leg if you have a problem I would take the aircraft back to maintenance and tell them to service the legs in accordance with the maintenance manual.

The 160 is the most economical of the DR400 series and can almost match the 180 for cruise speed but not in climb and take off performance.

I highly recomend the type as a touring aircraft and have taken my 180 as far as Crete, the Robin is best enjoyed on long trips so my advice would be to do the check out on the aircraft and then take it to the sunny end of Europe.

[Pilot.Lyons]

Thanks guys some really good advice...

Ill pop back and let you know how i get on.... The nosewheel issue im not looking forward to!

[BackPacker]

Don't worry about that nosewheel issue too much. It only manifests itself, like I said, with aft CofG landings which are very smoothly on the mainwheels and put no weight on the nosewheel whatsoever. If you then keep the stick pulled it may bite you. But as soon as you put weight on the nosewheel, either by putting the stick forward or by braking, it's over.

It's only when you don't know about this that it may bite. Like it did to the pilot of our -160 a few weeks ago. He landed, lost directional control, rolled off the runway and hit the PAPI with the wing. Both the PAPI and the aircraft U/S. The PAPI was repaired in a matter of days, the aircraft will take a little longer.

[Pilot.Lyons]

True! Thanks for the heads up... Im the sort of person that "lady luck" takes a swipe at every now and then too!
Thats why i asked for tips and advice.. I like to be prepared

[lenhamlad]

As a low hours PPL I have had no issues with the nosewheel on landing. Compared to the taildraggers I started on - Cub followed by Jodel - it is a positive joy to land a Robin. I must add however that my home airfield is grass, although I have landed it on hard runways as well.

[dash6]

You are having a check ride.Its an aircraft. Simple. Don't worry about it,enjoy!

[wigglyamp]

Gama Engineering at Fairoaks will have the new DR400 diesel with Garmin G500 glass cockpit on display with Mistral Aviation during their open day on 15 September.

[A and C]

I am totally amazed and a little worried that you seem to think that the "nose wheel issue" as you call it is acceptable.

It is ONLY if the landing gear has not keen properly serviced that there is an issue with the nose gear unlocking at any C of G position.

You should not accept sloppy maintenance, the manual is very specific about the quantity of oil and the air pressure that is required to be put in the shock strut and this differs between DR400 types, the oil quantity is critical in setting the spring rate so must be checked.

Spring rate in the main gear is the controlling factor in the attitude that the aircraft sits on the ground and therefore the weight that is taken by the nose gear, if the spring rate is to low in the main gear or to high in the nose gear then it will become more difficult to disengage the nose gear centering when the aircraft lands.

This is the second tine I have heard of a DR400 hitting the PAPI's, the other incident hid not end so well, the aircraft caught fire and burnt out.

One of the best ways to stop a DR400 on a slippery runway is to hold the stick to the rear and use aerodynamic drag to slow the aircraft, indeed it was the technique that I used when operating into a 340m grass strip in the winter when the grass was slippery, you simply never had to use the brakes. Bad servicing of the legs would stop the use of such techniques and so is another reason that badly serviced landing gear should not be accepted.

All that having been said don't be put off flying the DR400 it is a great aircraft and has far better performance than most.

[Pilot.Lyons]

Thanks.... To be honest tatenhill are very hot on maintenance so i think it will be in top condition anyway.
Im excited to give it a go.... Cessnas getting a bit boring and boy does it feel slow after you qualify!

[A and C]

I have had some dealings with Tatenhill and would agree with your opinion about he maintenance.

[Pilot.Lyons]

Thanks for your advice a and c... Appreciate it

[Whopity]

As everyone has said lovely aeroplanes. One odd thing, like many French aircraft is the way the seat moves when you move it aft, it tilts the seat rearward and if you are tall you can finish up in an "unusual attitude".

When stalling this range I have found that if you maintain the aircraft in balance it is quite benign however; with a little inbalance it drops a wing, nothing exciting but enough for the aircraft to tell you if you were in balance or not.

[tmmorris]

True but on the other hand, when you bring the seat forwards it also comes up, which my 8 year old is grateful for!

Tim

[BackPacker]

A & C, I was approached by an instructor today and she told me that in the last three months there have been nine (!) runway excursions due to this issue. eight ended with no drama, and it was only our -160 which ended up against the PAPI. And this was not just within our club, but across the Netherlands, and across a variety of maintenance organizations. New club policy is, apparently (I have not seen it in writing), to only allow one adult or two children in the back. Not two adults, even if that falls within the W&B envelope.

Like I said, I still consider it something that you need to know about, and apparently not enough pilots do. With the proper technique (either keeping the nose off the ground and using aerodynamic steering, or making sure there is sufficient weight on the nose wheel) it is a complete non-issue. But if you use a sloppy technique, maybe bred from flying PA28s or C172s, it may bite you so you need to be aware of this.

But apart from this I agree that it's a lovely aircraft to fly. I got 40 minutes in the Ecoflyer (with the 2.0 Thielert/Centurion) today again and it was a reminder of what this aircraft is really capable of. Quiet, comfortable, excellent view, really docile handling even in turbulence. Very slippery at cruise speeds, but with full flaps and speeds below 80 or so knots, very draggy, so very useful when you've got to fly short circuits due to other traffic.

[A and C]

I think you may need to get the aircaft looked at and the landing gear checked to make sure that it is serviced in accordance with the manual or the nose gear centering cam needs to have the rigging checked, if it s an Eco-flyer a re-weighed Might be in order.

We were asked to cover the mechanical side of an Avionic upgrade on a quite new Eco-flyer and found that the factory weight & balance calculations were a mile out (that's 1.852Km your side of the ditch). We had to re-weigh the aircraft twice to make sure that we got it all correct.

We assumed that this was an isolated incident but if you have evidence that these aircraft are departing the runway on a regular basis then it might be a good time to check that the W&B paperwork issued by the factory is correct, this can only be done by reweighing the aircraft.

The loading rules that your club are applying are useless if the information that you base your loading calculations on are incorect or the landing gear is wrongly serviced, such club rules are made as a knee jerk reaction by those who have not taken the time to fully understand the problem.

There is no reason why a properly loaded and rigged DR400 should not fly safely, misguided club rules like these just cover up more fundamental defects that will come home to bite someone.

[FirstOfficer]

Greetings,

I had a short go in flying a DR400 which is based in Redhill.

At first I was a bit sceptical, wooden frame and cranked wing, but soon after lift off (and it was like a bullet), I was converted.

Loved the bit of flying, very responsive, finger tip flying just like playing the piano hehehe. The aeroplane has great performance and excellent visibility.

[Stampe]

I own a DR400/180..just an example of the amazing capability of the type took the family on holiday to La Rochelle this year 4 adults 40 kg baggage 140lts.(4 hours) of fuel all within correct weight and balance. Take off ground roll from the poh 320m at that weight(1100kg) and it achieved it.I,ve been flying Robins for nearly 40 years...just superb.VBR Stampe

[Jude098]

Not long qualified ppl on a C152 and also recently checked out on a C150.

I have booked a "lesson" on a DR400/120 but have been told that I'm getting a brief get to know it before going through a checkride. He's confident!

I realise the main differences: (low wing, stick not yoke, no toe brakes [thats going to be novel!], fuel pump & 4 seater not 2).

OK any and all advice will be gratefully received on what I should be aware of; think about; handling.

Many thanks

Jude

[robin]

...Much lower nose down attitude in the cruise than you'd be used to in the Cessna. Get that right or you'll not get the performance.

On take-off you need to make a positive 'break' once the speed gets to 60kts.

Direct 2-stage flap - none of that electrical rubbish. Get your speed control right for the approach and the flaps really are effective, though small

Oh - and be careful climbing in. The seats are quite vulnerable so don't abuse them by putting your full weight on the seat back when climbing in and out.

Also, the undercarriage is not as forgiving a a Cessna or Piper. It is strong, but good well held-off landings are what you should be aiming for.

The 120 is rather under-powered, but a good introduction to the type.

[A and C]

Be prepared to be underwhelmed by the performance of the DR400-120, it is very short on power but the cruise speed is not bad.

The braking system depends on the age as toe brakes became standard in about 1985, a retrofit kit is also avalable for older aircraft.

The aircraft may have four seats but you can't fill then with adults, before putting anything in the back of a 120 take a sharp look at the W&B.

The optimum DR400 Is the 160 in terms of load/fuel burn/speed. The 180 offers better take off and climb performance, in the UK this is not too much of an issue but when you get into southern Europe and get hot and high the extra 20HP really shows.

Enjoy the 120 it is a much nicer aircraft to fly than the Cessna but the performance is more or less the same.

[A and C]

I seem to have posted about the same time as ROBIN and would agree with all he has said except for the comments about the landing gear, a properly serviced landing gear has a "ride" that is about the same as most light aircraft.

Any DR400 with soft and wallowing landing gear that suddenly transmits very hard bumps through the airframe has too much air pressure and not enough oil in the legs. These aircraft almost always sit tail low when loaded.

[robin]

A & C

I agree. Though when I spoke to a French engineer about the time of the spar AD he made the point I repeated.

Don't bang it down like you can a PA28. The basic structure is wood, after all.

[FullWings]

I'd agree with most of the comments - it's a really nice aircraft and you'll be finding fault with most other types once you been spoilt by the DR400.

I've never had a problem with the nosewheel but I was flying well-serviced examples. You'd think it would be a fragile aircraft with all that wood, fabric and nosewheel but we've been operating a brace of them out of probably the roughest, most undulating grass strip in the UK for 20+ years and have never had a problem. Keeping the oleos adjusted correctly appears to be key.

I would reinforce the point about the load carrying capacity. You can fill them up with fuel, people and luggage and they still go very well but remember to accelerate the aircraft before trying to climb away when heavy, as you're really on the back end of the drag curve when it's just unstuck. You can feel the increase in wing loading through the controls and airframe but it's that 'feel' that makes it such a delight to fly.

[A and C]

While I would agree that the DR400 should not be landed hard this goes for all aircraft, the wooden structure in the adding gear area is massive and in an accident it is usually the landing gear legs Normaly fail before the wing structue ( we have a number of broken airframes that are a testament to that fact).

To my mind the thing that is likely to cause the most damage to the structure would be the continual hammering it would get from badly serviced shock struts, the post above from full wings seems to back up my opinion on the critical nature of correct servicing of the shock struts.

[D120A]

I learned to fly on the DR400-120 and that happy experience spoiled me for many other types. What I found remarkable was that, with full landing flap, attitude really did control speed and throttle really did control rate of descent. Unlike on many other types, the two weren't coupled together. So you could set 70 knots and trim out the stick force, then achieve your landing point entirely with the throttle - and the airspeed would stay firmly nailed at 70. Closing the throttle just before the flare would achieve the sweetest of landings. Try it!

[Pilot.Lyons]

Hey all,

Finally got round to doing it and my god is it brilliant!

What people said was true....

It is faster (probably feels quicker than it actually is) and the nose down attitude compared to c152 is strange but I got used to it.
Much better response from controls (amazed me the difference) much easier to fly.
The flap lever kept getting caught on the change and my keys in my pocket as its like a handbrake! But they were very effective. Brakes on the hand i thought would be odd but its easy really when you get used to it. So much easier to trim, more feel to every control.
The differential braking could catch people out if they are a bit heavy with the control... Maybe thats what causes people to veer off? Landings were smooth and easy... Man i love it! A new lease and love has developed for flying again.... Shame my wallet hasnt grown any!
Thanks for all the advice guys and girls, appreciate it

Fly safe
Pilot lyons

[Piper.Classique]

.On take-off you need to make a positive 'break' once the speed gets to 60kts.

No. Set the attitude with the nosewheel off the ground as soon as possible (Just like the landing attitude) let the aircraft fly itself off the ground, and allow it to accelerate to climb speed. Don't keep the nosewheel on the ground longer than you have to, the aerodynamic steering works just fine and saves hammering the gear. Please. You don't need to watch the airspeed on take-off once you have established that the ASI works, just feel the aircraft wanting to fly and keep your eyes outside. If you need to make a positive break it is because you are belting down the runway with all three wheels firmly on the ground. You can feel the transition from nosewheel steering to aerodynamic as the nose leg extends.

[lenhamlad]

and the nose down attitude compared to c152 is strange but I got used to it.

Took a newbie to our club up last week in a DR400-140. He has only flown Cessnas to date and he made the same comment as you. Once he had identified it he really enjoyed his virgin flight in a Robin.

[Pilot.Lyons]

Yeah... Now i know what type cast is!

[Jude098]

I found the stick so much lighter than the C152/C150 yoke and more responsive. Wierd not having toe brakes but quickly got used to it and the brake handle flaps......so different from electric especially as teh seat was as far forward as it could get so flap handle not directly under the hand.

I've got to do 3 touch and go's to complete the checkride, otherwise all the handling and the unexpected PFL pulled on me went well.

Wind on the day was 310/14 which would have been fine on Runway 27 but it was closed for number painting so on 22. Nailed the glide at 70kts, looked much steeper and faster than the C152/C150 but flared a bit too early and pulled back a bit too hard and bounced it! Power in

Got told "Cessna landing, dont pull back so hard"

Booking the circuits this week or next.

[BackPacker]

Wierd not having toe brakes

Must be an old model. All the ones I have flown have conventional toe brakes.

brake handle flaps......so different from electric

I find them especially useful during a PFL. I used the last 50% of their travel as an airbrake, continuously adjusting them to keep the airspeed just right, while keeping the nose pointed to my aiming spot. Works a treat.

[stevelup]

Must be an old model. All the ones I have flown have conventional toe brakes.

Just to be contrary, I've never flown one -with- toe brakes!

[Flyin'Dutch']

Great aeroplanes.

The difference between the 160 and 180 is really only noticeable if you want to operate at MAUW from grass.

With the 160 you want to do the calks; the extra 20 bhp makes the bigger one a bit more comfortable at shorter strips when operating at or near MAUW.

The nosewheel bit is not an issue as long as you know what the score is.

[lenhamlad]

Just to be contrary, I've never flown one -with- toe brakes!

Me neither!