Those Glove Vanes...

[Bremspropeller]

Hi fellas,

 

I know the common wisdom about those glove vanes seems to be they were de-activated early on and generally not used a lot.

I came across this site (probably known to a few of you), which shows quite a lot of late-80s shots of VF-2 birds with the vanes out and going:

 

http://www.seaforces.org/usnair/VF/F...Squadron-2.htm

 

One example:

 

Maybe the GVs weren't de-activated all that early after all.

 

Any thoughts?

 

Cheers

[Quid]

I've posted about this several times, apart from the fact that the 1997 NATOPS still hadn't eliminated them as a system (they are nowhere to be found by 2003), photographic evidence indicates that they were deactivated across the 1990s, becoming more and more rare as the decade drew on. I don't know where or why people seem to think they were being locked shut during the early 1980s when new build F-14As were rolling off the production lines with fully functional vanes, and they were commonly rolled out for photo ops across that entire decade. Regardless, HB has stated on numerous occasions they aren't modelling them, so unless they change their tune, they won't be on either the -135 early or the -95.

[BreaKKer]

The glove vanes were welded shut very early on into the development of the F-14A, and were proceeded to be welded shut on all F-14s in the USN fleet.

[Spiceman]

We disabled the glove vanes in VF-41 in 1986, if I remember right. I remember seeing them function when I got to the squadron, but don’t remember them functioning on our 1987 deployment.

[Quid]

The glove vanes were welded shut very early on into the development of the F-14A, and were proceeded to be welded shut on all F-14s in the USN fleet.

 

What do you mean by "very early"? Just going through a cursory scan of a number of books, they were consistently rolled out between 1987 and 1989 for VF-1 and VF-2, I have shots of VF-143 with vanes out during 1988, VF-41 during ODS in 1991 and again in 1992 (so, maybe they re-unlocked them?), VF-33 in 1992, VF-84 in 1993, NAWC ca.1995. That doesn't seem very early, and while I know that they were eventually unplugged and locked shut fleet-wide, it clearly wasn't very early on if they were still functional in certain squadrons 20 years after IOC.

Edited November 20, 2020 by Quid
Added examples.

[Victory205]

We disabled the glove vanes in VF-41 in 1986, if I remember right. I remember seeing them function when I got to the squadron, but don’t remember them functioning on our 1987 deployment.

 

They functioned just fine during the 1987 Med Cruise. They functioned well into the 1990’s too. However, there is no reason to add them to the module. I’m so sick of discussing them that that’s all I’m going to say. ;)

[Eldur]

I bet the discussions will stop immediately once they'd be added as an option in the ME...

 

Probably the only thing that's being asked for more often on these forums is VR performance. Compared to getting that it would probably be piece of cake to do

 

And as far as I can remember, someone from HB, probably was Cobra, said they could actually consider modeling them at least visually. Changing the FM accordingly would probably involve more work that it's worth it, but actually I can't tell. Adding it visually only should be rather easy though. And as long as we have other airplanes from the main devs whose FMs don't care if I take the racks off or not, this probably would be good enough™. Maybe not for the high standard setting Heatblur though

[Jackjack171]

If the SME's and HB have decried that the glove vanes are useless, I think we should leave it be so that they may focus on more important things!

 

They've just delivered a major update...let's give them a break and some credit!

[Southernbear]

 

What do you mean by "very early"?

 

1980, that is when the first F-14As were going to be upgraded to 135-GE standard and the new 135s were being rolled out. It was then deemed that the Glove vane actuators should be disconnected to reduce ground crew work load or wielded shut all together.

 

 

[Spiceman]

 

They functioned just fine during the 1987 Med Cruise. They functioned well into the 1990’s too. However, there is no reason to add them to the module. I’m so sick of discussing them that that’s all I’m going to say. ;)

 

I stand corrected!

 

 

[Quid]

 

1980, that is when the first F-14As were going to be upgraded to 135-GE standard and the new 135s were being rolled out. It was then deemed that the Glove vane actuators should be disconnected to reduce ground crew work load or wielded shut all together.

 

 

That's not right. Production of Block 135 didn't start until FY1984 (October 1983-September 1984), with the first of that block delivered 17 April 1985. Updates to that standard would have started even later, and even then given the above conversation that doesn't make sense. Heck, VF-1 and -2 were flying block 135s and 140s in 1988 and 1989 when some of those photos were taken and they had functional glove vanes.

Edited November 20, 2020 by Quid
Grammar, delivery date.

[shagrat]

 

 

I bet the discussions will stop immediately once they'd be added as an option in the ME...

Very reasonable thought... ;)

 

[Swordsman422]

I like how the discussion on when the glove vanes were deactivated just blew right past the SME who stated when it happened. The -135-GR we have in hand now would have had them bolted shut at time of representation (mid 90's), so the vanes won't be missed on this model. I'm apathetic as to whether they'll appear on the earlier versions, since I won't be spending much time in the flight regimens where they'd be deployed, so my opinions on whether they should be included end there.

[Bremspropeller]

Well, if we get to have a yaw-string, there's no reson not to have the glove-vanes.

At least in the -135(Early) and the -95.

 

I get the reasoning that they weren't used much in the squadrons (and probly mostly for photo-ops as they looked cool) due to their operational benefit being outside the part of the day-to-day part of the flight-envelope, but the taxpayer paid for them and they were available through a significant time frame on at least some airframes.

 

Some more pictures of other squadrons' jets with their vanes out from that same parent-website:

 

VF-1

http://www.seaforces.org/usnair/VF/F...n/image052.jpg (~1988 )

http://www.seaforces.org/usnair/VF/F...n/image075.jpg (~82)

 

VF-14

http://www.seaforces.org/usnair/VF/F...n/image060.jpg (~1990)

 

VF-32

http://www.seaforces.org/usnair/VF/F...n/image139.jpg (~1990)

 

VF-33

http://www.seaforces.org/usnair/VF/F...n/image023.jpg (~1991)

 

VF-41

http://www.seaforces.org/usnair/VF/F...n/image041.jpg (~1991)

 

VF-84

http://www.seaforces.org/usnair/VF/F...n/image021.jpg (~1993)

 

VF-154

http://www.seaforces.org/usnair/VF/V...nights-012.jpg (~1988 )

 

 

[BreaKKer]

Well, if we get to have a yaw-string, there's no reson not to have the glove-vanes.

At least in the -135(Early) and the -95.

 

That's not how that works... lol

[Jackjack171]

Wow! This discussion says a lot about the folks that ignore an SME. I'm not so sure what all the hype about glove vanes is, especially if the SME says that they are pointless. It's funny what people fight for!

[Wizard_03]

I just think they look cool, that's why I want them lol

[Victory205]

Every time you bring up glove vanes, a puppy dies...

 

They aren’t “useless”, they just enhance turn rate in a flight regime that is rare. They do look cool, but not at the expense of cute, little puppies.

 

You got the glove vanes to extend by sweeping the wings aft using the throttle switch, then going to bomb mode.

 

[fat creason]

Wow! This discussion says a lot about the folks that ignore an SME. I'm not so sure what all the hype about glove vanes is, especially if the SME says that they are pointless. It's funny what people fight for!

 

You must be new here :)

[Uxi]

I just think they look cool, that's why I want them lol

 

Maybe a cosmetic addition (or mod) where they don't actually do anything to the flight model would be the via media for the early models.

 

I am intrigued by anecdotes that some pilots were manually deploying them for subsonic maneuvers and damaging them.

[Bremspropeller]

Wow! This discussion says a lot about the folks that ignore an SME. I'm not so sure what all the hype about glove vanes is, especially if the SME says that they are pointless. It's funny what people fight for!

 

It's just another airplane-system - "pointless" or not. It's intended mode of use wasn't necessary, since you don't often go zipping around supersonic, trying to get that extra g in day-to-day operations. It just wasn't used very often and finally it was decided to de-activate the system to reduce maintenance hours and spares-complexity. It's nothing out of the ordinary, really. The Krüger-flaps on all Tornados were de-activated for much similar reasons (the ADV didn't even have them - just like the F-14D didn't have the GVs at all).

 

 

Modelling the canopy is just as "pointless", since you can't climb down the ladder and walk around. Or modelling the ejection-seat, since you can't actually die.

 

On a more serious note: I wonder whether the GVs were beneficial when cruising faster than normal (for whatever reason), relieving some trim-drag.

 

[Sideburns]

If the choice was between finishing all other features on the F14 to a high standard, jester and phoenix issues resolved, TARPS pod, Forrestal released, AI A6 and possibly even a surprise with a North Sea GIUK gap map.... or the glove vanes in next six months. I suspect a few people here would still want the glove vanes. I don't make this comparison lightly as adding a proper FM for the glove vanes is probably not an inconsiderable effort to make and test!

 

As much as I love the F14 and realism the glove vane feature seems a really weird thing to get hung up on given operationally they were abandoned.

[IronMike]

100% there will be no glove vane related changes in the FM.

 

Maybe we will add them as eye candy only. But please understand: we don't need convincing why they look cool, or what version had them, and whatnot. We'll make up our minds considering a plethora of factors that need to be weighed when developing software. Even only visually they are not a small task. They cost manhours of work. Manhours that might be needed elsewhere. Or manhours that might not be available. Or manhours that just might. And that would still be only 1 factor.

 

Sometimes you need to trust a bit that we know what we are doing, too. And that we have to manage and balance more than just community wishes, although we always try to put these on top, if only possible. And yes, sometimes the outcome will not be to your liking. We're willing to try most of what makes you happy. In return we need your support most, when we sometimes have to make decisions that do not make you as happy as others. There will always be trade offs, that's just how reality is. Hence, let us wait and see. As you know us, you know that we will definitely always give it our best.

[Bremspropeller]

100% there will be no glove vane related changes in the FM.

 

Maybe we will add them as eye candy only. But please understand: we don't need convincing why they look cool, or what version had them, and whatnot. We'll make up our minds considering a plethora of factors that need to be weighed when developing software. Even only visually they are not a small task. They cost manhours of work. Manhours that might be needed elsewhere. Or manhours that might not be available. Or manhours that just might. And that would still be only 1 factor.

 

Sometimes you need to trust a bit that we know what we are doing, too. And that we have to manage and balance more than just community wishes, although we always try to put these on top, if only possible. And yes, sometimes the outcome will not be to your liking. We're willing to try most of what makes you happy. In return we need your support most, when we sometimes have to make decisions that do not make you as happy as others. There will always be trade offs, that's just how reality is. Hence, let us wait and see. As you know us, you know that we will definitely always give it our best.

 

I would be totally fine with that. It's a rational decision to priorize other, more pressing stuff over a system that was almost never used.

I mainly wanted to point of that the common narrative that the vanes were de-activated "early" and that they weren't really a thing anyway isn't backed by factual evidence.

[Uxi]

On a more serious note: I wonder whether the GVs were beneficial when cruising faster than normal (for whatever reason), relieving some trim-drag.

 

The shape definitely seems useful in certain conditions enough that ST-21 was using it built into the frame and adding more fuel.