Ever since it came out, I have felt the look of the Asobo Robin was not quite right. No matter what angle it is viewed from, when compared with the real thing, something is off. I think it’s the proportions and angle of the nose and canopy. Maybe the Asobo canopy is too short from the middle pillar to the front. Maybe the Asobo nose is too long. Maybe the angles of both these elements are therefore wrong. Compare the Asobo model with almost any picture
of a DR400 on the net (with the same canopy, not the full bubble) and see if you agree. Maybe Asobo as a French company needs to re-work this iconic French aircraft.
2 Likes
Maybe you need to look at a few more real-world variants first! The Robin was built to plan.
Thank you for the reply. I still contend it is wrong. I have spent hours looking at pictures, and it is just not right. But, show me images to correct me and I will happily admit my error. When I owned a flight sim company, this sense of detail served us well. Let’s see what others think though.
The 2 pictures appear to be taken at approximately the same distance away from the aircraft.
Something does not look quite right in respect to dimensions with those 2 pictures. The length from the nose to cockpit glass appears to be different along with wing tip edges. Something does not look quite right but it will take other photos to be sure. The only people that can shed dimensional design info on this aircraft is the actual design team.
Dont worry about any small differences, just sit in it any enjoy flying it, what it really needs is just one more nav radio.
2 Likes
Yes Julian. Doctor prescription noted from a fellow Star Trek fan. Lol.
I do enjoy the Robin, but that look just gets me. From inside it is fine. Thanks for the reply.
1 Like
My feeling exactly. Thank you for the input.
To be honest: with those two photos directly next to each other I can see minimal differences. The most noticable is the engine cowling. Without the direct comparison I would never ever have noticed.
Also this plane has been built since 1972 and I am reasonably sure there have been slight design changes and improvements on the way as well. A 1960s C172 also looks slightly different in some details than a C172 built today. The difference in the engine cowlings could be in relation to different engines being used for example.
All in all I would say the differences are so miniscule that I personally don’t care. I am not that perfectionist. In addition it is my opinion, that there currently are still far more basic things that need fixing.
1 Like
i have one question, is stabilizer fixed or can be with changed angle, depend of cargo weight and position?
The only difference I can see between these two picture is the nose wheel is pressed down on the ground…
because the real plane has a real engine in the front.
Fortunately there are mods for that.
The entire stabilizer moves when using the stick’s pitch.
The little bits at the rear are trim tabs
is it viper or hornet? are you sure this aircraft have tailerons instead standard elevators in the stabilizer?
Not sure about the translation for “taileron” but : the whole rear horizontal plane is moving with the stick in the pitch axis.
The Dr400 isn’t like these jets though… the whole thing is made of a single piece, so it cannot provide roll authority. The structure moves through the tail, when you pull or push hard on the stick, the holes required to allow the movement become uncovered.
There are plenty of pictures of that plane with the stabilizer at many angles.
yes, i just checked it in the sim, surprise:) tailerons use fighter jets, they have two functions, three btw… stabilizer, elevator and ailerons(as used with classic ailerons in opposite each other direction)
No tailerons since the left and right ones are connected, hence no aileron function.
The DR 400 has an ‘all flying tail’ like e.g. the F-84F.
1 Like
yes, robin haven’t lol, but this is surprise, all stabilizer moving like tailerons
Definitely not built to plan.
One obvious error is the reversed wing incidence angle of the wing tips.
The real one has a noticeable negative incidence angle.
This bug is even more obvious from the VC when looking to the left/right, if you know the real DR400.
1 Like
The real plane also has seats in the back… Because it actually has the horsepower to lift more than 2 people 
1 Like
Nope. 2 seats is correct, because it doesn’t have enough horsepower for four people.
I have an issue with all of Asobo’s planes that the nose seems to high both while taxing and during level flight. This isn’t something simply related to the default camera position as that doesn’t improve things either.
I don’t know if that’s something I’m imagining or if other sims like X-Plane and FSX are not realisitic but level flight is a lot different viewing scenery and the horizon in the same apparent planes in MSFS and X-Plane/FSX where the nose appears more sunken down during level flight.
Looking at your screenshot - it would appear to support my claim but I’ve not said anything until now for want of being called an idiot 
as I’m not a real world pilot.