A_and_C wrote:
I would be interested in the view of Neal CS about using the G500 / GTN750 combination, do you find yourself with a lot of the same data displayed on both the G500 ND and the GTN750
Short answer is yes, mostly I have maps on both the MFD and the GTN750 but a different zoom level -one I use basically for TCAS traffic avoidance the other for navigation.
Longer answer is:
The GTN750 is fantastic because the four corner fields on the map are user definable so I have that showing time to destination, time to next waypoint plus miles to next (see picture much higher in this thread). You often lose the map while you’re entering transponder codes, frequencies and flight plans on the touchscreen of the GTN 750 so having a permanent display on the MFD is good for traffic and situational awareness.
Also I’m still a bit lazy about using skydemon for airfield and approach plates -it’s on my kneeboard-iPad – eventually I think I’ll get in the habit of using the MFD for this as they are ALL loaded in there whereas skydemon is only as good as what you downloaded before flight. I’ve also ordered a Flightstream gizmo which will effectively add the iPad as an additional screen to the GTN750. (As well as allowing easier syncs of flight plans and plates etc).
Finally, I fly a lot with my non-pilot partner who now has a mutually valued role on “their” Screen (the GTN750) entering the flight-plan, direct-tos, transponder codes, frequencies etc and watching for traffic – the basic data entry is familiar to anyone who has an iPad. This takes a lot of workload away even with a non pilot and with a fellow pilot means a real division of labour is possible. i like that as PIC I can always refer to ’my" screen if I want to see where we are/where traffic is while the other one is in use. So I am getting to like the setup, even though at first I thought the MFD was basically a waste of space if you have the 750.
PS: I find the touchscreen of,the 750 SO much more useful,than all the twiddling and clicking of previous generation Garmins which I had but seldom used because of workload.
Ok, some more on the Robin DR401… We think this could be a great machine for a small syndicate.
It’s a capable and well-thought out aircraft with low maintenance costs, reliable dummy proof turbo engine, avionics with LPV capability and synthetic vision, decent autopilot. Price is about 30% lower than a DA40.
Talking with other people about the Robin, this is what you hear quite often:
You’ll get this from people that actually have never flown the Robin, or at least not in the new DR401.
Here are some facts we have gathered so far:
Silvaire wrote:
I decided not to land with my little normally aspirated O-320 at 9000 ft density altitude yesterday
Big Bear ?
[thread drift\]
Our Family owns a DR250-160 for over 30 years now and the first four “claims” are total nonsense. And there is no arguing about the building material, but I think wood is an advantage. The only design choice I would question is the use of drum brakes which are a pita to set up but work well if maintained properly. With the fixed cruise prop we see 136 KTAS in FL75 easily at around 36 liters per hour and if you throttle her back to just 110 or 120 KTAS you get away with 30 liters. Mogas that is (so it is more economical than an SR22..) The 253 sips a little more I guess for the third wheel but they are all very capable tourers and we have been from Scandinavia to Africa with that plane, so considerably more than a local burger run.
I guess the use of the Remo version in Clubs with a very fine pitch prop has done a bit to the reputation, but you often see mechanically sound aircraft with way over 40000 aero tows and far north of 10000 hours. It’s a very robust aircraft.
And what’s the spare supply from Robin like?
I know a flying school that operated one and they had very poor service. Have to have an account. Never get in touch with the office. Place shuts down for the month of august.
lenthamen wrote:
It’s gives a completely smooth upper surface, and decreases drag.
lenthamen wrote:
The Swiftwing / MT Scimitar propellor combination gives a 5kts cruise speed improvement and better climb performance.
Bathman wrote:
Never get in touch with the office. Place shuts down for the month of august.
They have a skeleton staff there during the shutdown and do once a week deliveries on a Wednesday if you have an urgent requirement. There is an extra charge for this.
Factory is great – e-mails are answered within a few days in perfect English.
Website is (er… how to put this politely) eclectic, as are things like the IPC and other tools which are entirely in French.
It is what it is, yes you might have to work just a little bit harder, but it is worth it. The performance and utility you get from these aircraft is unparalleled.
With regard to the panel layout, I must be a shortarse because I don’t have any problem seeing either the warning lights or the top of either of the Garmin units in the current demonstrator that Mistral are running.
@mh wrote:
The only design choice I would question is the use of drum brakes which are a pita to set up but work well if maintained properly
YES… The biggest constant niggling hassle I’ve got with mine. Any tips?
stevelup wrote:
Any tips?
If we find enough owners to split certification costs, we could change to Beringer or Cleveland disk brakes. However, in the Capitaine they must to be set up too harsh, I have no intention of nosing her over or groundlooping the aircraft due to intense brake forces.
They have a skeleton staff there during the shutdown and do once a week deliveries on a Wednesday
Which to me isn’t good enough.
Bathman wrote:
They have a skeleton staff there during the shutdown and do once a week deliveries on a WednesdayWhich to me isn’t good enough.
Better than Piper, and Cessna on the out of production models