Changing horses..

Hi @derek

Yes I looked at the Robin too, but only sat in it and did not fly it.

My requirements were:

1. Two-seater.
2. STOL.
3. Roomy and comfortable cockpit.
4. Unobstructed views.
5. VFR.
6. No need for speed: 100-110 KIAS.
7. Modern avionics and a capable A/P.
8. No AVGAS.
9. Parachute.
10. A nice and modern looking aircraft.
11. Continuity of the manufacturer.

Some comments on the above items in relation to the Bristell and the Robin:

Ad 1, Two-seater: Over the past 30 years I have taken lots of people with me, but over the last few years I started to enjoy just to fly by myself, or do group flying. A bit like a motor gang Btw, the Robin may be OK up front, but in the back it’s a little cramped for taller people.

Ad 2, STOL: Both aircraft are fine.

Ad 3, Roomy and comfortable cockpit: I’m quite tall at 1.90 cm and there is still height to spare in the Bristell. The Robin was OK but not excellent. I found the chairs in the Bristell firmer and ergonomically better shaped. And the cabin is wider. Actually wider than a Cirrus or a DA40/42. No need to rub shoulders. See below pic.

Ad 4, Unobstructed views: Both aircraft fit the bill, but the Bristell wins. I really like a full bubble without any pillars.

Ad 5, VFR: I’ve left IFR flying because I don’t need an IMC travel machine any longer. Spain is really wonderful for VFR flying all year round which is what I will mostly do.

Ad 6, Speed: 100-110 KIAS is fine for my kind of flying. Actually, when with the “motor gang” I am the fastest one. So the Robin is clearly quicker, but that does not buy me anything. In general for touring, there is not much utility just being 10-30 knots faster. It becomes an advantage when comparing a 110 Kts C172 vs a 180 Kts Cirrus.

Ad 7, Modern avionics: Both fit the bill but I like the Garmin A/P in the Bristell a bit more.

Ad 8, No AVGAS: I want to be independent from airfield fuel stations and bring fuel by myself to our private field. So the Rotax and the Conti Diesel quality. Well, actually the Rotax can use AVGAS if MOGAS is not available on any field along the way. I would be happy with both, although as smooth as the Diesel is, the Rotax is a little quieter in my perception (flew the DA40 Diesel a few times). In the end the Rotax is likely more economical to operate (certainly goes for the 100 HP version, but probably also the 915 140 HP turbo). Another (secondary) factor is the environment. If I can avoid AVGAS and contribute my grain of sand to a cleaner world I will.
For some further views on the Conti Diesel see below.

Ad 9, Parachute: The Bristell has one, but Robin seems reluctant to offer it. It’s not clear to me whether they really would be prepared to sell one as an option. They do their best to convince buyers that it’s not really needed, but I suspect this has more to do with the fact that it’s hard to integrate with the airframe? A little awkward to discredit the chute that way. I personally like the chute since for me any kind of travel means a 100 NM trip over the Med to start (and end) with. And I also enjoy flying over Mallorca’s main mountain ridge, where you have a least a better change of telling the story of an engine failure afterwards when having pulled the chute.

Ad 10, Looks: The most subjective topic. While I can see the charm of the traditional looks of the Robin, I still prefer the sleeker lines of the Bristell.

Ad 11, Continuity: I don’t know enough about the stability of Robin and its’ responsiveness towards its’ customers to have any opinion. Regarding Bristell I’m impressed.
The financials I asked for looked sound. They were on a level of producing about a hundred aircraft a year although COVID has probably influenced the 2020 production rate. It is run by a devoted family. Milan and his son breathe aircraft. It is a joy to see how Milan Bristela knows how to design, manufacture, and sell his aircraft. It looks like the the company is doing well and re-invest a lot of the revenues in product development and into an impeccable production facility. As to accessibility I was pleasantly surprised. Before I bought the B23 I had bought a used UL version from a private individual and had some questions later. I would call the factory and get him on the line right away, with proper answers. Later, when visiting the facility during my final evaluation I was attended very professionally. No such thing as a pretty receptionist polishing her nails. No, you enter a door and are in the final assembly area. His son Martin was working there, knew I was coming and we had to both go and look for Milan who was tinkering with some sort of a test rig I like such low-overhead companies with owners who know their sh*t.. It feels good sending money in that direction and in general to the Czech aero industry which has a great heritage.

In conclusion, the Bristell is a better fit for me, but may not be for you of course. The Robin could be a great fit for your needs and taste. It certainly looks like a solid aircraft and has a lot of loyal users!

Some further views on the Conti Diesel:

-The first generation was a disaster.
-The second generation (I was lucky) was fine. Although my experience is that, in the end, what you save on fuel costs is roughly spent on extra maintenance so the final costs are the same as a similar AVGAS engine.
- The current generation (both 135 HP and 155 HP) are a lot better cost-wise. Important cost drivers, like the gear box, have a much higher TBR now.

However, in my experience of 10 years of operating two of these engines I did have a few snags, like most of the owners, and this has been discussed various times on this forum. The infamous “ECU failures”. The FADEC engine is very efficient, owing to a multitude of sensors. But these sensors sometimes show spikes out of their limits. This is shown as an ECU failure, usually as a failure of one of the two ECU’s. The engine keeps on running fine, only less optimal because the value of the ‘failed’ sensor reverts to a default value AIUI. But after landing this needs to be remedied, and that requires involvement of an authorized mechanic, typically not available on the field you’ve landed on.

Now, maybe the new generation is better in this regard? There are some forumites here that have experience and could chime in?

The process of diagnosing which sensor tripped and how to reset is dead simple if you have the right tools. Hook up a laptop with a Conti program on it to the engine connector in the cockpit and read a log file. Depending on whether the fault is innocent, just reset and you are done. Of course the determination of what is innocent or what is not, needs to be taken by a knowledgeable mechanic who you would need to get on the phone. Under Part ML in my my view this process would quality under “pilot-owner maintenance”.

I think Conti would be wise to provide such tools to their clients. A marketing move to deal with the rumors that go around. So if you go for a Robin or any other Conti Diesel equipped aircraft I think it is a good idea to demand such a tool. Before you sign at the dotted line while you still have leverage..

Hope this helps.

Crikey, someone just alerted me that my call sign (OKIDO) has a very apt meaning in Japanese!

“A Japanese therapy to enrichen our ability to cure ourselves and strengthen our interior force”

So here’s my curing room:

Sure Romain, let me know when you are here.

Yes, I know the tool exists, seen it in action a few times. But I thought Conti did not allow it to be owned or used by unauthorized mechanics.

Thanks Peter!

Until we hear more from Heron on fuel flows and other vital signs of promise, we’ll keep this one in the “wait and see” category.

Oh, come on Mark, don’t be such a party pooper. The sound of a turbine starting up is the only thing that really counts!