Robin aircraft- wood v metal
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: London
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Robin aircraft- wood v metal
Dear all
Has anyone got a view as to the better airframe on a robin. wood or metal. Please could you back up your opinion for me. Thanks in advance Pete...
Has anyone got a view as to the better airframe on a robin. wood or metal. Please could you back up your opinion for me. Thanks in advance Pete...
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: very west
Age: 65
Posts: 262
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Robin wood vs metal
ZoomZoom,
My opinions only, not necessarily shared by the rest of the aviation community, but from the pilot and engineer perspective.
Wooden Robin's:
Superb value for money. Cost, on average, 1/3 more than the equivelently powered spamcan but perform more than 1/3 better in climb, load lugging, cruise faster, T/O and land in shorter distances, easy to control in crosswinds etc. Fantastic visability. Need hangaring in a non-heated building. Fabric lasts a long time as does the wood if cared for properly.
Metal Robin's:
Lovely aircraft to fly. Perform better than equivelent engined spamcans. Fantastic visability.
but
They do suffer badly from corrosion, especially structrially.
In a nutshell, they are both wonderful aircraft to fly. Advise you ask around some maintenance facilities and get their opinions as well.
Hope this helps.
camlobe
My opinions only, not necessarily shared by the rest of the aviation community, but from the pilot and engineer perspective.
Wooden Robin's:
Superb value for money. Cost, on average, 1/3 more than the equivelently powered spamcan but perform more than 1/3 better in climb, load lugging, cruise faster, T/O and land in shorter distances, easy to control in crosswinds etc. Fantastic visability. Need hangaring in a non-heated building. Fabric lasts a long time as does the wood if cared for properly.
Metal Robin's:
Lovely aircraft to fly. Perform better than equivelent engined spamcans. Fantastic visability.
but
They do suffer badly from corrosion, especially structrially.
In a nutshell, they are both wonderful aircraft to fly. Advise you ask around some maintenance facilities and get their opinions as well.
Hope this helps.
camlobe
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have to agree with camlobe on all points about Robin aircraft, but for those of you who who are put off wood aircraft because you think hangarage is expensive I can tell you that if your aircraft lives in a shed the paint will last more than twice as long and your maintenance bills will be about 20% lower in the airframe & engine and the avionic bill will be about 40% lower, I cant understand why people park aircraft outside it is cost neutral compaired to hangarage.
As for the DR400 it is the best four seat fixed pitch & gear touring aircraft on the market, what other aircraft in it's class could do LFMP to EGTB non-stop with a 15 kt headwind ?
As for the DR400 it is the best four seat fixed pitch & gear touring aircraft on the market, what other aircraft in it's class could do LFMP to EGTB non-stop with a 15 kt headwind ?
IO540, what Robin is made of carbon fibre?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: London
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Has anyone flown or have experience in a Robin Regent DR253. How does it handle etc and compare to similar types. Heard a new group is forming and would be very thankful of any advice.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: S Warwickshire
Posts: 1,214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've not flown a 253, but as it's just a DR250 with the wrong undercarriage, it should be a good and capable aeroplane.
The fuel tank possibilities seem quite varied. I've seen DR200 series with variously 1,2,3 or 4 fuel tanks. The two 40 litre wing tanks allow easy inspection. The rear tanks are less easy to double check.
Not as light on the controls as the 2-seaters (esp. D150), but better than most of the US offerings.
Quite reasonable on instruments too, though an hour or more of solid IMC would be very tiring without at least a wing leveller.
The hinged canopy doors are lighter and cheaper than the sliders, and perfectly ok - unless taxying on a hot day.
The fuel tank possibilities seem quite varied. I've seen DR200 series with variously 1,2,3 or 4 fuel tanks. The two 40 litre wing tanks allow easy inspection. The rear tanks are less easy to double check.
Not as light on the controls as the 2-seaters (esp. D150), but better than most of the US offerings.
Quite reasonable on instruments too, though an hour or more of solid IMC would be very tiring without at least a wing leveller.
The hinged canopy doors are lighter and cheaper than the sliders, and perfectly ok - unless taxying on a hot day.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are the wooden Robins objectively better performers than metal aircraft (MTOW versus fuel flow rate at a given speed) or is it just a cult following? They don't look particularly aerodynamic.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: S Warwickshire
Posts: 1,214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As an example:
The one that I occasionally fly has an O235 engine similar to the Cessna 152.
The CEA aeroplane carries 350kg payload at 110knots at 2400RPM typically (i.e. 3 adults, baggage and 135l of fuel at 24l/h)
The similarly engined Cessna carries 250kg at 95 knots (i.e. 2 people and 90 litres, similar fuel burn)
The one that I occasionally fly has an O235 engine similar to the Cessna 152.
The CEA aeroplane carries 350kg payload at 110knots at 2400RPM typically (i.e. 3 adults, baggage and 135l of fuel at 24l/h)
The similarly engined Cessna carries 250kg at 95 knots (i.e. 2 people and 90 litres, similar fuel burn)
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Wor Yerm
Age: 68
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And from memory, the best all-round glider tug I've ever seen was a DR400 with a C/S prop on a 200 (ish) HP engine with silencer. Went up and down damn quick and was capable of an "economic" cruise at 145 kts. Only one problem, it caught fire whilst starting (MOGAS) and was totally destroyed in two or three minutes. However, the standard DR400 with a 140HP engine (180 even better) is a superb aircraft.