Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
ModelsRailroadsRockets
Radio Controlled
Air ModelsHelicoptersLand ModelsWater Models
ModelGeeks.com
Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map

Model Forum / Radio Controlled / Air Models / July 2009



Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Spinner

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
lagman - 12 Jul 2009 17:51 GMT
Is a spinner really required for electric park flyers?  I keep losing
mine.. Just wondering what will happen if I try to fly without one.

Thanks,
Dan
Vance - 12 Jul 2009 18:37 GMT
> Is a spinner really required for electric park flyers?  I keep losing
> mine.. Just wondering what will happen if I try to fly without one.
>
> Thanks,
> Dan

The spinner is not absolutely necessary. The spinner contributes to
aerodynamics. you will lose some efficiency and fly slower, but the best
way to find out is to just try it. 99% chance it will fly just fine.

Signature

To reply by email: vhoward1122 at gmail dot com

Lee B - 12 Jul 2009 20:40 GMT
I say 100% chance of OK and you likely will not be able to detect any speed
drop.

Lee
Morgans - 13 Jul 2009 03:55 GMT
> The spinner is not absolutely necessary. The spinner contributes to
> aerodynamics. you will lose some efficiency and fly slower, but the best
> way to find out is to just try it. 99% chance it will fly just fine.

I have flown glow fuel planes without spinners, also.  I even use electric
starters with the rubber insert flipped around the other way.  The prop nut
centers the starter insert on the engine shaft.  I .could not tell any
difference in the performance of the plane.
Signature

Jim in NC

Bob - 13 Jul 2009 06:10 GMT
> Is a spinner really required for electric park flyers?  I keep losing
> mine.. Just wondering what will happen if I try to fly without one.
>
> Thanks,
> Dan

Depending on the weight of the spinner it could effect the balance to
leave it off.   Not much, but the plane may be more pitch sensitive
(need less up and down control to manuver).    I would just give it a
try.
Bob
Vance - 13 Jul 2009 14:46 GMT
>> Is a spinner really required for electric park flyers?  I keep losing
>> mine.. Just wondering what will happen if I try to fly without one.
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> try.
> Bob

If removing the spinner is enough to effect the balance to that degree,
just glue a piece of a popsicle stick to the front of the plane to add
the weight in again.

Signature

To reply by email: vhoward1122 at gmail dot com

Blarp - 13 Jul 2009 13:29 GMT
>Is a spinner really required for electric park flyers?  I keep losing
>mine.. Just wondering what will happen if I try to fly without one.
>
>Thanks,
>Dan

Spinners:

+    Look Good
+    Slight increase of aerodynamics in large models

-    Hamper cooling of motor
-    Cause imbalance
-    Add weight
-    Add rotational mass (wears bearings during violent 3D
maneouvres)

On my SkyArtec Cessna 182 I use a prop saver and no UC. (bellylandings
on grass)
It looks ugly, but the prop lives forever and motor axis never bends.
Vance - 13 Jul 2009 14:43 GMT
>>Is a spinner really required for electric park flyers?  I keep losing
>>mine.. Just wondering what will happen if I try to fly without one.
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
>
> -    Hamper cooling of motor
not always. True, it blocks airflow over electric motors. But air flows
just fine over the cylinder of my Magnum .91 four stroke in my Super
Skybolt. This plane looks stupid without a spinner

> -    Cause imbalance
That's why you balance the spinner just as religously as your props. You
do balance your props don't you?

> -    Add weight
very little. Of course i n a park flyer, that 1/2 ounce or less might
make a bigger difference.

> -    Add rotational mass (wears bearings during violent 3D maneouvres)
>
> On my SkyArtec Cessna 182 I use a prop saver and no UC. (bellylandings
> on grass)
> It looks ugly, but the prop lives forever and motor axis never bends.

Signature

To reply by email: vhoward1122 at gmail dot com

Blarp - 13 Jul 2009 15:28 GMT
>> -    Hamper cooling of motor
>not always. True, it blocks airflow over electric motors. But air flows
>just fine over the cylinder of my Magnum .91 four stroke in my Super
>Skybolt. This plane looks stupid without a spinner

True - "Looks" can be very important. I used to own a 60 size Hotts
that would be visually unbearable without spinner. (some may argue
that it was unbearable *with* spinner as well :-)

>> -    Cause imbalance
>That's why you balance the spinner just as religously as your props. You
>do balance your props don't you?

Spinners are some harder to balance - I had a few that would change
form while turning fast and cause imbalance whereas statically it
would be OK, or spinners that are 0.1mm out of centre alignment after
tightening the nut etc. etc.

I guess spinners are feminine: some look good, but hard to handle
right.

If in any way defendable aesthetically - I avoid spinners. (and my
planes are ugly anyway - which cause the ground to repel them)
rszanti - 13 Jul 2009 15:44 GMT
> Is a spinner really required for electric park flyers?  I keep losing
> mine.. Just wondering what will happen if I try to fly without one.

It typically won't affect anything on a small park flyer - it can be a
problem on larger planes. If the spinner is one of those rubber push-
ons from GWS, it will probably have little or no affect. Having said
that -

Airflow changes are minimal unless it's a large diameter spinner. It
can block some airflow into a cowl, reducing cooling but it can also
allow a higher airspeed because of improved aerodynamics.

It can have an affect on the CG location, I have planes that needed
the CG moved forward so I added a heavy spinner. It's out in front as
far as you can get so a small amount of weight can make a big diff in
the CG location.

Richard
Nigel Heather the-heathers.co.uk> - 13 Jul 2009 22:11 GMT
Safety.

If you are unfortunate enough to hit a child, then you will do less harm if
you have a spinner fitted rather than just a prop-nut.

Also check your insurance - you might find that you are not covered in such
an event if you don't have a spinner.

You might be okay with a domed prop nut.

Cheers,

Nigel

__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 4240 (20090713) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com
Robert Scott - 13 Jul 2009 23:25 GMT
> Safety.
>
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
>
> Nigel

+1....

I've always been told one of the most important reasons to use a spinner on
a park flyer is safety.

Good flying,
desmobob
Ray Haddad - 14 Jul 2009 01:10 GMT
>> Safety.
>>
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
>I've always been told one of the most important reasons to use a spinner on
>a park flyer is safety.

And you can sharpen them.
--
Ray
Blarp - 14 Jul 2009 09:29 GMT
>Safety.
>
>If you are unfortunate enough to hit a child, then you will do less harm if
>you have a spinner fitted rather than just a prop-nut.

Depends on the spinner - I have seen some fierce metallic pointy ones.
Rather would be hit by the nut.

>Also check your insurance - you might find that you are not covered in such
>an event if you don't have a spinner.

I am fully insured. My insurence company does not have a clue what a
spinner is, and expect I use my brain (or whatever passes for that in
my case) to avoid harm. (I am not living in the USA remember..)

>You might be okay with a domed prop nut.

Not sure what constitutes a "park flyer"; if it is a smallish foamy, a
prop saver would be way safer - as nothing pointy is actually
portruding past the propeller.

In larger models, a plastic "blunt" shaped plastic spinner with
crumple zone may add safety indeed. Though a 60 size 3 KG model with
+1HP spinning in front will never be safe to get in the head.

A 600gr foamy however..

>Cheers,
>
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>
>http://www.eset.com
Tim Wescott - 14 Jul 2009 19:20 GMT
>>Safety.
>>
[quoted text clipped - 22 lines]
>
> A 600gr foamy however..

I suspect Nigel was thinking of the GWS-style park flyer gearbox, which
has a very long 3mm shaft that extends about an inch beyond the prop.  
With sharpening this would make a nice spear point; as it is it'd hurt a
lot more than the GWS-style spinner if it hit.

More normal propeller attachment arrangements are probably no better or
worse than a spinner.

Signature

www.wescottdesign.com

Blarp - 15 Jul 2009 08:22 GMT
>I suspect Nigel was thinking of the GWS-style park flyer gearbox, which
>has a very long 3mm shaft that extends about an inch beyond the prop.  
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>More normal propeller attachment arrangements are probably no better or
>worse than a spinner.

My Artec Cessna had the same long shaft. With the same dangers /
bending risks.

So I swapped it out for a prop saver - now the axis is very short, and
any bending action is taken up by the saver rubber band.
Does not look all that well, but is bullit proof.
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2012 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.