PA28 v DR400
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Ashwell, U.K.
Posts: 323
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the issue is tin Piper versus wooden Robin why don't you get a tin Robin!. I flew a Robin 3000 for the first time yesterday and was very impressed. It's different, which helps the posing factor if that's important, and doesn't lose out a great deal to the DR 400 on speed or payload.
It's a genuine 4-seater and has typical Robin visibilty.There's one for sale on Just Plane Trading BTW.
It's a genuine 4-seater and has typical Robin visibilty.There's one for sale on Just Plane Trading BTW.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not a bad aircraft but it won't even look at short field !.
The Whole thing about the DR400 is that it will fly a good payload out of a short strip , cruise fast and land safely on a short strip.
There has yet to be a modern light aircraft to come close to it ( some Miles aircraft may be able to give it a run for it's money ) and this is why the metal aircraft brigade have not been able to kill the DR400 off !.
I suspect that the DR400 production will end when a new Carbon composite four seater hits the market , I find it no coinsidence that the new "Magnum" looks for all the world like a high tech Robin.
The Whole thing about the DR400 is that it will fly a good payload out of a short strip , cruise fast and land safely on a short strip.
There has yet to be a modern light aircraft to come close to it ( some Miles aircraft may be able to give it a run for it's money ) and this is why the metal aircraft brigade have not been able to kill the DR400 off !.
I suspect that the DR400 production will end when a new Carbon composite four seater hits the market , I find it no coinsidence that the new "Magnum" looks for all the world like a high tech Robin.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Midlands
Age: 71
Posts: 605
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DR400 MMMmmm
I bought my DR400 Regent new in Jan 01 and plan to sell it in 06 for a new one.
I have flown my aircraft for 360 trouble-free hours and it still looks like brand new.
I operate from a farm strip - at MAUW of 1100kg the (unfactored) take off is 320 metres.
Empty is 635kg. The Regent is therefore genuine 4 seater with a 60kg baggage limit in the locker.
Shimmy? Never? They have either sorted this or there is a fault.
Nose wheel steering? Easy to understand and learn to accomodate. Yes it does sometimes fail to engage, usually as a consequence of an aft CofG and a greaser of a landing or loading heavy bags, rear seat passengers and full fuel. In the latter case, the nose can rise beyond the steering mech.
Rather than stamp on the pedals and probably contribute to a shimmy problem in later years, all you need do is gently dab the brakes, the nose will drop and the steering engage. Voila!
If parked, you can pull the nose down by the prop blades or lift the rear fuz..
Parts? Never needed any apart from when the cowling cracked (mine had the new swoopy profile and they have since beefed them up internally to prevent cracks) and guess what?
Within 3 days I had a box with a pot of paint and some new fasteners in it on my doorstep direct from the factory?
Cost?
A big fat zero. Not even the carriage.
Wings falling off? Careful there. In 10 million flying hours (I think I have that right?) not one accident has been postively attributed to defective manufacture.
The in-flight breakup in France - debated extensively here several months back - was indeed due to a broken spar.
The accident aircraft was one of a short production period where better inspection procedures these days would not allow the 'untidy' spar bonding discovered in the accident to happen again.
However, tests conducted proved that even bonded as it was, the spar would still have exceeded its design loading by a significant degree.
Regent speeds similar to the smaller ones? Nah!
The Regent will fly at 135kts - I tend to fly at around 125 for better range (240 litres capacity/ 40 litres ph)
The smaller ones will cruise around 95-100kts - I used to instruct on them.
Hangarage - I have seen inside the wing of a very high time aircraft - rarely hangared. It was beautiful but with a little bit of rot in the wing-tip fillet where an untreated crack had allowed water ingress - it couldn't dry and a bit of rot was the consequence. However, unlike wooden planes where the airframe spares grown in the ground, corrosion in your spammer can write the thing off or cost you big bucks.
Look inside a 30 year old spammer and then do the same with a Robin.
OK - they are best hangared but it is always best to keep your aircraft under cover anyway.
Mine is not only hangared but is always washed after every flight and then completely cloaked in Cambrais finest.
I dont know what it is but there is such a feelgood factor in the Robin cockpit. The transparencies are fantastic, plenty of legroom and none of this high panel/ letter box screen with the Robin - I agree that you seem to sit on it rather than in it.
A wonderful aircraft. I cannot imagine owning any other tourer.
I dont fancy the corpulent 500 - a compromise indeed just to achieve a cockpit width increase of 4 inches. You dont need it.
There is a lot to be said for buying new.
They keep their values well and sell easily. Finance companies love them.
If you want to discuss the aircraft with a satisfied owner and not a salesman - PM me and I'll call you.
A flight in mine (I am near Banbury) is a possibility too.
All the best
HP
I have flown my aircraft for 360 trouble-free hours and it still looks like brand new.
I operate from a farm strip - at MAUW of 1100kg the (unfactored) take off is 320 metres.
Empty is 635kg. The Regent is therefore genuine 4 seater with a 60kg baggage limit in the locker.
Shimmy? Never? They have either sorted this or there is a fault.
Nose wheel steering? Easy to understand and learn to accomodate. Yes it does sometimes fail to engage, usually as a consequence of an aft CofG and a greaser of a landing or loading heavy bags, rear seat passengers and full fuel. In the latter case, the nose can rise beyond the steering mech.
Rather than stamp on the pedals and probably contribute to a shimmy problem in later years, all you need do is gently dab the brakes, the nose will drop and the steering engage. Voila!
If parked, you can pull the nose down by the prop blades or lift the rear fuz..
Parts? Never needed any apart from when the cowling cracked (mine had the new swoopy profile and they have since beefed them up internally to prevent cracks) and guess what?
Within 3 days I had a box with a pot of paint and some new fasteners in it on my doorstep direct from the factory?
Cost?
A big fat zero. Not even the carriage.
Wings falling off? Careful there. In 10 million flying hours (I think I have that right?) not one accident has been postively attributed to defective manufacture.
The in-flight breakup in France - debated extensively here several months back - was indeed due to a broken spar.
The accident aircraft was one of a short production period where better inspection procedures these days would not allow the 'untidy' spar bonding discovered in the accident to happen again.
However, tests conducted proved that even bonded as it was, the spar would still have exceeded its design loading by a significant degree.
Regent speeds similar to the smaller ones? Nah!
The Regent will fly at 135kts - I tend to fly at around 125 for better range (240 litres capacity/ 40 litres ph)
The smaller ones will cruise around 95-100kts - I used to instruct on them.
Hangarage - I have seen inside the wing of a very high time aircraft - rarely hangared. It was beautiful but with a little bit of rot in the wing-tip fillet where an untreated crack had allowed water ingress - it couldn't dry and a bit of rot was the consequence. However, unlike wooden planes where the airframe spares grown in the ground, corrosion in your spammer can write the thing off or cost you big bucks.
Look inside a 30 year old spammer and then do the same with a Robin.
OK - they are best hangared but it is always best to keep your aircraft under cover anyway.
Mine is not only hangared but is always washed after every flight and then completely cloaked in Cambrais finest.
I dont know what it is but there is such a feelgood factor in the Robin cockpit. The transparencies are fantastic, plenty of legroom and none of this high panel/ letter box screen with the Robin - I agree that you seem to sit on it rather than in it.
A wonderful aircraft. I cannot imagine owning any other tourer.
I dont fancy the corpulent 500 - a compromise indeed just to achieve a cockpit width increase of 4 inches. You dont need it.
There is a lot to be said for buying new.
They keep their values well and sell easily. Finance companies love them.
If you want to discuss the aircraft with a satisfied owner and not a salesman - PM me and I'll call you.
A flight in mine (I am near Banbury) is a possibility too.
All the best
HP
"Trust Me"
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Egham, UK
Posts: 424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Blimey Hairy -you have justy taken the words out of my mouth -saved a bit of typing, anyways.......
Will be at Sandown Sunday if anybody wants a look at Dijon's finest!!
No, not the mustard, but it's still as hot.....
DOC
Will be at Sandown Sunday if anybody wants a look at Dijon's finest!!
No, not the mustard, but it's still as hot.....
DOC
Last edited by DOC.400; 28th Jun 2004 at 19:08.
Guest
Posts: n/a
So then its the Robin. Glad thats settled
At least there will be hundreds available to choose from as opposed to the lesser Cherrytree which no-one in their right mind would buy.
oooo er? something wrong. Lots of American metal not much French wood.
What am I missing?
Apart from a reality check
Sir George -I love Jodels - Cayley
At least there will be hundreds available to choose from as opposed to the lesser Cherrytree which no-one in their right mind would buy.
oooo er? something wrong. Lots of American metal not much French wood.
What am I missing?
Apart from a reality check
Sir George -I love Jodels - Cayley
Last edited by Sir George Cayley; 28th Jun 2004 at 20:29.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2002
Location: London
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks everyone for your very imformative replies. I think I am making progress in persuading the group to go for the Robin.
I have been told by a Robin owner, that the 160hp version is the best varient to go for, as the performance figures are very similar to the 180hp, but the fuel burn is less. Do other owners concur with this ? Could anybody advise what the cruise speed is for a 160hp and how many litres per hour it would burn. (HairyPlane - I'm assuming yours is a 180hp ?)
One other point brought to my attention is the brakes. Apparently they are hand operated, and very poor. Can anyone elaborate on this ?
As always, any help appreciated.
TO
I have been told by a Robin owner, that the 160hp version is the best varient to go for, as the performance figures are very similar to the 180hp, but the fuel burn is less. Do other owners concur with this ? Could anybody advise what the cruise speed is for a 160hp and how many litres per hour it would burn. (HairyPlane - I'm assuming yours is a 180hp ?)
One other point brought to my attention is the brakes. Apparently they are hand operated, and very poor. Can anyone elaborate on this ?
As always, any help appreciated.
TO
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Home
Posts: 329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I plan on 125kts and 32 litres / hour. It's possible to coax 130kts out of one of the 160hp DR400's I fly. That one, however, has a differently profiled cowling to its slower brethren. I'm not a DR400 expert, but something was changed in the mid 1990s, and the newer ones go faster.
As for the brakes, they've had toe brakes for years. The early ones had a handbrake, which was carried over from the DR300. In the DR300, it works well enough once you get used to it, and differential braking is available at full rudder deflection, so you can manouver in tight spaces without any trouble.
As for the brakes, they've had toe brakes for years. The early ones had a handbrake, which was carried over from the DR300. In the DR300, it works well enough once you get used to it, and differential braking is available at full rudder deflection, so you can manouver in tight spaces without any trouble.
"Trust Me"
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Egham, UK
Posts: 424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We average 8.8 imp. gallons an hour on a 180. That's with 2500rpm set to give an indicated 120-135kts depending on weather, height, QNH, how clean the prop is (honest -a quick scrape off of grass and bugs is another five kts!!!) and how well one leans off!!
Skip the 160 and get the best you can.
And the hand brake went years ago........Mind you, made slowing down interesting whilst juggling stick, throttle and brake.....
Current toe brakes amongst the best and certainly entertaining on wet grass and snow.......
DOC
Skip the 160 and get the best you can.
And the hand brake went years ago........Mind you, made slowing down interesting whilst juggling stick, throttle and brake.....
Current toe brakes amongst the best and certainly entertaining on wet grass and snow.......
DOC
Last edited by DOC.400; 30th Jun 2004 at 15:51.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Enniskillen
Age: 67
Posts: 479
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the 160hp version is the best varient to go for, as the performance figures are very similar to the 180hp
Go for the 180
Tony
