sketchley

To add complexity to the エヴナ debate: be mindful that it may not be an English word, and that while ヴ may be "vu" in English, it may not represent "vu" in other languages. Random google search results for エヴナ: (more likely): エヴァン（エヴナ） in Tír na nÓg: https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/ティル・ナ・ノーグ (the land of eternal youth in Irish mythology): specifically in the section on ブランの航海 (The Voyage of Brân): "同作品では、エヴァン（エヴナ）はマナナーンの国とは別で、「女の国」である。" ⇒ In the work, Evan (Evna) is a "country of women" separate from the country of Mananaan. (less likely): Malick Evouna https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/マリク・エヴナ Interestingly, "Evna" is apparently the capital of the Land of Ev (https://oz.fandom.com/wiki/Evna) Personally I think the Irish mythological connection is a better fit than the connection to "The Wizard of Oz". But one never knows. 🤷‍♂️

To the best of my knowledge, the nozzles are exactly the same on the VE-1. Perhaps it was artistic licence on behalf of the modeller that made that specific kit? Compare to the nozzles here: http://sdfyodogawa.mywebcommunity.org/Stats/Statistics/VF-1/VE-1.php

Do you have any spudgers in your tool box? While an Exacto blade or other thin metal tool can work in a pinch, plastic spudgers are best as they're less likely to damage plastic model kit parts. Also, top tip: try to tease the parts apart a little bit at a time from each edge (front, back, left, right, etc.) That should limit any stress on the part per se, as well as ease the process of separation. While the pointy end of spudgers (or Exacto blades) are great for getting in between the parts, the more surface area you can use on the spudger, the less likely you'll damage the parts (or worse: yourself!)

My 2 cents are: the Northampton has been listed as 'about 250 m' since "This Is Animaton Series Macross 7 Animation Materials" (1995/07/20, first printing). HOWEVER, the artwork of the bridge et al are obviously penned by a different artist. Therefore, I think that Kazutaka Miyatake—the designer of the ship—decided on the size, but the writers of the Stargazer episode didn't remember (or have access to that number), and played rule of cool, and commissioned another artist to create such things as the bridge layout. I'm getting too old/not having enough time to argue, but may I suggest instead of trying to convert those that refuse to budge, just agree to respectfully disagree? I think a fair case has been made that the sizes are wrong, and plenty of evidence was provided to prove that point, and now it's best to leave it out there for others to mull over. I also really like your resizing of the Northampton. 👍 Not only does it answer (or explain away) some things, it also reframes things in a most satisfactorily way: by stimulating the imagination.

What the...? Why?!? Is there any way to fill those in?

Question about those rivets on the Zentradi ships: where are they located? I ask, because I'm wondering if they are supposed to be representative of the retractable beam turrets and missile launchers on the hulls of the Zentradi ships: http://sdfyodogawa.mywebcommunity.org/Stats/Statistics/ZentraadiShips/StandardBattleship.php#OFFENSIVE_SYSTEMS

Much improved! I've stumbled on the "less is more" the hard way as well on my Death Star II: https://www.macrossworld.com/mwf/topic/35120-whats-lying-on-your-workbench-mk-iv/page/433/#comment-1725046 I don't think I mentioned it at the time, but in addition to having to wipe off the heavy layer of pencil lead from the surface of the model, I also went over the larger blotches of red with a 2B or 4B pencil to break them into smaller swatches—to mixed results (pencil could only achieve darkish-red on those larger bright red blotches. Not a complete save, but... 🤷‍♂️) With your kit, there is another way to add detail highlights that I've heard about: edge highlighting. If memory serves: mix a lighter version of the overall colour of the part you're painting (E.g. mix in white on a 1:10 or 2:10 ratio), and dry brush a little bit of that on the upper sharp edges (E.g. top of the forearms at the elbows, top of the knee pads). If successful, it not only makes the overall shapes pop more, it also adds a dust-like effect that further contrast the 'muddy' bits below. Edit: Apparently you can do edge highlighting with watercolour pencils. This may be a good way to try it out. Worst comes to worst, you can wash it off!

I believe it is related to situation 1. Specifically, that the company that owns Robotech aggressively blocked imports of Macross goods into certain countries for several decades. It may also be due to the owners constantly trying to sell Robotech goods, and that keeps it fresh in people's minds.

The numbering in the VF series is a bit more complex than you've indicated: VF-1, VF-3000, VF-4, VF-5*, VF-5000, VF-6*, VF-7*, VF-9, and then VF-11. So, as the VF-5000 is both emulating the VF-3000's numbering and a descendant of the VF-3000, it might be better to ask why the VF-3000 was numbered the way it was. * only appear in text.

What 👀's after the 5? 😂 Posting before coffee strikes again... 🥴

😅 It's a bit more than that. In general, the font in the 4k version is more legible (compare the ツ (tsu), and the relative size of the numbers in 4+0). However, the removal of the italicized !! is odd... 🤔

I think you may be—possibly me, too. Another explanation popped into mind: Max is the commander of the Unified Forces but Miria is the mayor of the city. There's a possibility that one or the other authorized the "Dejima" attaching to City 7, but due to their ongoing marital strife, that translated into neither side (UNS or municipal staff) getting around to properly fixing the "Dejima" (a frustratingly not-uncommon situation in Japan). In this scenario, Max merely took advantage of the situation and used it as the Fire Valkyrie's base of operations.

double post

Nope, you're not crazy. It's always been named that. I don't know what prompted Seto to include the F-35 in his list, as that is basically a retcon (I'm not sure if it's even official.) At the time the VF-4 was introduced (in the real world), Kawamori-san merely extrapolated that if "X" fighter is "name" II as it is the second fighter with the same name (E.g. A-7 Corsair II), and as the VF-4 is being introduced 40 or 50 years in the future, it makes sense that the VF-4 would be the Nth iteration of a fighter baring the same name. Kawamori-san has also mentioned in an interview that he has found that people find odd numbered vehicles to be more realistic than even numbers. Thus there are more odd numbered Valkyries (Sv-51, VA-3, VF-3000, VF-5, VF-5000, VF-9, VF-11, VF-17, VF-19, etc.) than even numbered ones (VF-0, VAB-2, VF-4, VB-6, VF-14, etc.) And by that logic, the "Lightning III" is better than the "Lightning II". This is as much a testament to Kawamori san's foresight as it is to his research. The most vivid example is how strikingly similar the Su-47 Berkut (1997) looks to the VF-19 (1994)—which Kawamori-san has indicated is based on the Grumman X-29 (1984)!

I did, too. 😅 No worries. Every site/community/version of English has their own words. For example, when students do a test, is it "write a test", "sit a test", or "take a test"? All are correct, but at the same time, mean wildly different things depending on who you say it to. Nevertheless, I can appreciate how much more fun and easy "floppies" is than "mirrored manga", or the mouthful "manga printed in the Western left to right format".