Robin EcoFlyer

[sp6]

Hi

Does anyone have any first hand experience of flying and/or operating the DR400 with the Thielert engine? I've flown 120 & 180 hp DR400's and DA40 TDi's and liked all of them.

According to the Mistral Aviation website, the performance figures for the new 2.0 155hp EcoFlyer are better than the 180hp Lycoming!


Many thanks

sp6

[proctor]

I've flown the (135hp) Ecoflyer a fair bit, and it seems to me that once you've got the hang of starting the thing up, it's just like flying any other DR400. In fact, I seem to remember an Info Pilote article that said the only real problem was that Apex hadn't taken the opportunity to make more changes. When getting checked out on the aircraft, the bigget difference I found was the throttle power lever being on the right - so not really an issue at all. So if you're looking for a combination of the DR400's attributes with FADEC wizzardry and cheaper fuel, I imagine you're looking in the right place.

[sp6]

Thanks Proctor, its does sound like a good combination. I quite like the operation of the Thielert 1.7 in the DA40 but prefer the handling (and service costs) of the DR400.

How do you find the climb performance and take off roll at MTOW?

[BackPacker]

If you fly anything that has the 1.7 Thielert up front, make sure the -by now mandatory- SB with regards to the inspection of the oil nozzles that cool the pistons has been complied with in full. One of our Ecoflyers ended up in a field because of that. Fortunately no casualties, human or airplane-wise. My club has decided to perform this check every 50 hours, exceeding the SB requirements, but giving us piece of mind.

Oh, and anything with a diesel up front needs a careful look at w&b, particularly balance. Easy to exceed forward CofG limits.

I have flown both the DA-40 TDI and the DR400-135CDI and I find the operation of the Robin, with regards to the engine, actually simpler than the Diamond. Less knobs, less dials, less power buses with emergency overrides etc. Although I have to admit our Diamond is IFR and the Robins are NVFR equipped.

[radicalrabit]

new Robins can be ordered full ifr kit though

[A and C]

Having flown most of the Robin DR400 series and owned two the thing that strikes me is that the airframe is too efficent for a fixed pitch propeller.

Aircraft with the cruise prop are slow accelerate up to about 25kt and then the best RoC with the DR400-180 is 91kt so a long time accelerating to best RoC. this is because the best TAS for the prop is 20kt(ish) above the best RoC for the airframe.

With the glider towing prop but without the glider the DR400-180 takes off and climbs very briskly at 60-70 kt but cruise performance is not very good.

So it would seem that the 155 HP deisel gets most of its extra performance from the VP propeller being able to get all of its 155HP turned into thrust most of the time and then as it climbs the turbocharger is able to keep the MP up to a much higher level to enable 75% power cruise way above the FL80 that the lycoming can manage.

They seem to have dropped the wing fuel tanks, I suspect that this is due to C of G issue as these when filled produce a forward moment and ther have decided to keep the "long range" tank under the baggage bay at the back. this is probably for the same C of G reason.

With the two tanks that are fitted I don't see any problems as the aircraft will stay in the air for a long time but I would wan't to fit the deisel to my aircraft and keep the wing tanks to enable a bit of flexibility on picking up fuel. I don't think that I would use the bladder splitting endurance of a four tank Deisel Robin!!

The big question that hangs over all this is the reliability of the engine, as a retrofit it would seem from reports that the DR400-135 is the only aircraft that is enhanced all round by the deisel, the PA28 with the deisel is turned into a two seat aircraft with poor performance.

I am curently looking at a VP prop for my DR400-180, in Europe these are a number or retrofits avalable from MT propellors and with the coming of EASAland the CAA will not be able to get in the way of fitting these and it may be the way to get deisel performance below FL80 without the cost and reliabilty issues.

To those who might think that I am being a little harsh about the performance of the DR400 I should like to point out that the DR400-180 will fly further, faster and with a bigger load than any of the 180HP american factory aircraft and do it from a much shorter runway.

[Rod1]

I to have considerable time on several DR400 versions, including 250 hours on a DR400 / 160 which I operated for some years. I have not flown the diesel but have spoken to several people who have. The 135hp is said to be very good but a little short of HP. I would expect the 155 to be superb! The engine reliability may also be ok. Robin has used the standard Thanet installation, which differs substantially from the Diamond own design one which has caused a lot of problems. The perceived reliability of the 135hp in France is good. This is the only diesel aircraft I would consider at this time.

Rod1

[sp6]

Anecdotal comments about the PA28 Thielert installation seem to confirm that the weight and moment of the gearbox and clutch assembly cause issues.

My own experience of the DA40 Tdi was that if you were two up, you needed a considerable quantity of rear ballast to stay within the cofg range. Even 4 up the DA40 cofg posistion was always quite far foward.

I'd imagine that the DR400's lighter airframe and clever wing would make the diesel perform better than a DA40, so if the loading is better then it really does sound very good.


Just a shame you have to buy a brand new one and neither the 1.7 nor the 2.0 will be available as a certified retrofit. Now where can I get £135k!

[A and C]

I will take a guess that a retro fit will become avalable just as soon as Robin think they have sold all the new deisel aircraft that they can.