Valkyrie Driver

I am Currently watching Ghost in the Shell Stand Alone Complex. I have both seasons on DVD so I'm watching those again. Anime I've Seen Lately: 1. Macross Frontier 2. Macross 7 3. Full Metal Panic! 4. Full Metal Panic Fummoffu? 5. Some Episodes of Gundam 00 6. MS Gundam: The 08th MS Team / Miller's Report 7. SDF Macross (I have vol 1-4) 8. Appleseed Ex Machina 9. Appleseed (2004 movie) 10. Ruroni Kenshin ( All 100 or so Episodes, it took two weeks) 11. GitS SAC SSS 12. Ghost in the Shell (original movie) 13. GitS SAC 2nd Gig 14. Akira All of those are good, a lot of sci fi I know but hell. I don't know of many fantasy Animes so if anybody can recommend any that would be awesome. if possible provide links.

I had to say gerwalk, because it seems to be the most versatile. Even though this may sound like a cop out, all of the modes are useful. Unfortunately the gerwalk mode beats the other two modes. I mean Battroid is just cool, fighting the Zentradi on even terms, also, it reminds me of what got me into giant real robot mecha in the first place (Battletech, ahh the memories). The fighter mode is cool too, I mean, in the real world we don't have variable fighters, just the plain old fighters. Ever since I was two I wanted to fly fighters and the prestige that goes with saying your a fighter pilot is part of what makes the fighter mode so damn cool, also the flying shooting and maneuvering part is awesome too. But the gerwalk is the jack of all trades, the ultimate air support weapon, it can fly and shoot down aerial targets, mess up ground targets, not to mention fire guns and missiles in multiple firing arcs, and yes it has manipulator hands for rescuing those requisite damsels in distress (I suppose you could say it's great for picking up chicks, bad pun I'm sorry), and also picking up other things, who needs a tow truck, just call the dude with the valk...

So I think that we (and by we, I mean everyone who contributed to that discussion) have maybe figured out the control scheme for the HMI (that's Human Machine Interface, for those just joing us). This truly is a fascinating discussion, and I'll admit, the mechanincs of a Variable fighter, might even interest my father. (Ret. LtCol, USAF. fighter pilot, all that cool stuff, he used to poke fun at my fascination with giant humanoid war machines). A few things I wonder about in the service life of a VF. What happens to old VF's? I have seen mention of civilian sales (only the VF-1), Relegation to reserve unit service (Much like fighters were rotated to the air guard, up until the mid 1970's). Backwater colonial militias. But does that happen on a regular basis? I'd hate to think of Valks getting chopped up in boneyards. *shivers* That's probably to in depth, and emotionally attached but I don't care. Do old VF's become tesbeds for new technologies (ala NASA)? And honestly, ( I know this much about Macross 7) the VF-19 became a main use variable fighter. So why didn't it appear in Macross Frontier? Why an upgraded VF-17? Possible parralels to be drawn with predictions about the F22/F35? Too expensive, it's cheaper to upgrade an existing air frame? I want to know.

Perhaps Mr March is correct in saying that we're a little too hung up on the tech from today's perspective. I tend to agree. However, our circumstances and level of technology is our only real meter. And I can't seem to find out, so if anyone knows, tell me. Which was the first valk to acieve escape velocity with it's own engines? The apparent lack of independent engine control on the throttle is a source of much musing to me. In the event of a flame out or compressor stall (I dunno if that's even possible with a TN Turbine) would the flight computer compensate? Granted there is already alot of automation in a valk, but trusting a computer to keep me alive (outside the aforementioned circumstances, automated guns and anti missile systems), seems risky. I gotta know, how does a valk even stand up? It must have a gyro located somewhere, or else utilize some system to maintain the machine's balance. NOOO!! Macross was so much more fun when I didn't ask questions... J/K, LOL

I guess I am a bit hung up on that, sorry. Anyway we could argue in circles all day, but frankly I don't have that kind of time, and I wouldn't want to waste yours. I guess what I'm driving at is that it seems like poor design to me. For some reason Kawamori-Sama made it that way, and the birds still look cool. Design efficiency and superior tactics are my guiding stars. Besides, why not just have an HMD? Put your eyeball on him and shoot a missile up his arse, ala MiG29/F22/F35? That'd satisfy both of us. I get my guns facing foreward, and you get your deterrent. And nothing says get off my arse like a missile crammed up yer nose...

Hobbes I apreciate the welcome. And I just gotta say, Y'all are a great help. I have so much stuff rattling around up in my brain, so I misplace my info. It occurred to me that since the F-14 most mdern aricraft use a fly by wire system. In the 5th gen fighters the Su-35, F-22, F-35 and others, the thrust vectoring isn't controlled by the pilot, but by the flight computer. The computer adjusts the thrust vectoring based on the input provided by the pilot. I can't imagine it would be hugely different in a valk. Now granted we do see the foot pedals working the thrust vectoring in the anime. I have to agree with anime that having two control systems on one HMI seems wonky. I've flown before, and I'll tell you, there is a lot going on in the cockpit just trying to keep the bird in the air. Hey, do valks have afterburners? I mean I would imagine they could, though with the TN Turbines you'd already have an insane amount of thrust available to you. As for the internal weapons bays being a reality. I know they are, The last thing I want is to be dogfighting with a hung door and half spent ordinance. Besides, the only reason they began mounting internal bays is to decrease the radar cross section. If all your weapons osre inside the enemy can't bounce radar waves off your missiles. The only fighters I can think of that used internal bays for resons other than stealth are three from the USAF century series. The F-102, F-105, and F-106. They used internal bays to reduce drag, allowing them to travel at high mach. Hung doors suck. Hung ordinance sucks more. Oh yeah, the F-86D used an internal rocket launcher. Let's see how did that verse go... "Oh don't give me an 86 D, with rockets radar and av, she fast I don't care, she blows up in mid air, Oh don't give me an 86 D" My dad knew an 86D pilot who shot the nose off his ship, and landed the sucker so he could prove it. Yeah, you might be able to see my slight issues with internal weapons bays. Dunno about y'all but shooting the nose off of my bird sounds bad to me. Granted we've come a very long way, but still, shat happens.

You Focus on the guy behind you, so as someone suggested maybe the head lasers are sensor aimed and fired, (As per B-52 Tailgun, I just remembered that little system) but trying to shoot at him while he's behind you would be rather difficult. That's all I'm saying. Besides, the goal of air combat is to kill the enemy, and you will always be able to do that better if he's in front of you. The guidelines are easily available, Just look up the Dicta Boelka. You never want him behind you, ever.

I am new to the Macross toy community, I have two valks, a 1/60 Yamato VF1A Cannon Fodder, and a 1/100 Toynami Max DYRL VF1A. I want to do repaints on both of them, one of them I want to do in my dad's old MIANG 171st FIS colors, and the other in a low viz grey scheme. The problem I have is I've only ever painted models, and I don't know how to go about starting a project like this. I think that I would like to paint the 1/60 in the MIANG colors due to it being larger, and thus the markings can be more visible. Help and input opinions anything would be great, the only thing I'm afraid of with my 1/60 is well, the box said Toys R Us special edition. Is this thing valuable? Does anybody give a flying rat turd about value when they buy these toys? I bought it because it was cool, and it's Macross. Input please, I'll panhandle y'all for it if I must...

In response to SchizophrenicMC, I have watched macross, though, until recently haven't paid too much attention to the Valks themselves. Granted the valks are a huge part of the franchise, there is so much else that is going on, the dogfights are what really have interest for me, as well as the other combats. And true I may have said alot of subjective things, and much of it may have been slight ignorance and me talking out of my arse. My confusion about the external hardpoints come from my limited observation. I concede those points to you and was not offended. (Besides anyone who is offended by a well thought out response need their head checked anyway.) I have not seen macross 7 so I can't speak about that series, but in Macross plus and Macross Frontier, I have not seen the use of external hardpoints except on the VF171. So I apologize for an false claims I may have made. As for internal weapons bays, I am not a big fan of them, to me it seems like just one more system to malfunction. Another thing that strikes me as odd about the Macross franchise, is that in a space of 50 years, they have gone through eight main line combat craft, that I have seen or heard of (In the US military there is no such thing as a main line fighter, Each ship has a specific role, sometime its specific role is to perform multiple roles). If we use the US Navy as a guage, that may not be far fetched, the odd part to me, is the (Again to my eyes) lack of anything but multi role fighters. Again to use the USN as a guage, they have multi role fighters, and yes mission specific birds based on the same air frame (e.g. F/A-18E/F and EA-18G analagous to the VF-1 and VE-1) but also unique mission specific ships such as the S-3 Viking and E-2 Hawkeye (the only mission specific Variable Craft I've heard of was the VA3 Invader). Granted those ships are larger than fighters, but they have specific roles. The Variable fighters in Macross all seem to be Jacks of all trades. In my limited knowledge, I know this, you can't have one bird that does everything and be superb at them all. You either have one mission it excels at or no missions that it excels at. Case in point, the A-10. Sure it is a fantastic airplane, it can turn and potentially you could dogfight with it, it does great at close air support, it carries more ordinance than the old B-17, But the mission it was really intended for, was killing tanks. And it does that very very well. To me it seems that the VFs are intended for one thing, aerospace supremecy, and they get alot of chances to do it. All I guess this is saying is I wish we saw more of the other cool mecha and see how they work together. But that has nothing to do with VF design. I do like that Kawamori-sama based most of his VFs off of real world silouettes. The VF0 and VF1 are remeniscent of the F14, the VF4 was based heavily on it's nameske the P38 among others, the VF11 had alot of MiG29 and Su37 influences, the VF17 is obvious even by it's number designation, the VF19 by the Su47 Berkut, and the VF22 by the YF23. The only fighter that had any screen time that has no heavy basis on any one fighter is the VF25. But even so, the VF25 was influenced by the F14, Su37, and the Su47. The thing that ll of the ships have in common, Real and Fictional is that they are twin engine. Just once I'd like to see a single engine VF, it sounds wierd but it might be cool to see the light single engine fighter make an appearance. Oh and I don't know who said it, but the folding wings like on the SV51, VF22, and VF25, just don't stow as neatly as the sweep wings of the VF0 and VF1. THough the VF22's wings stow more neatly than the VF25 and SV51. My big issue with the SV51 is those wings, they're too straight, not enough sweep to the leading edges for a high speed fighter, IMO. Now granted I'm no engineer, but the sweep seems too shallow. The other issue I have with the wings is the hinges. Granted, that carrier based aircraft have hinged wings for storage, it is usually only the outboard two feet or so of each wing. The SV51 appears to have one hing at the wing root, and one more that is smack dab in the middle of the wing. THe hinges are the weakest link in a carrier based fighter's wing which is why they have only one per. Given the tougher materials used by VFs, this may not be an issue, but to me it seems like a liability. Though with the SV51's obvious russian design philosophy and naming scheme, it would seem tough (albeit ugly, russian planes always looked ugly to me, too industrial). Cockpit controls in the VFs (at least the controls in the VF1 from SDF Macross) seem, stange. The only controls that I have seen, that actually look like they'd work for a battroid are the controls from the Arm Slaves from Full Metal Panic!. They use a master slave system to control the whole arm and leg mechanism, by minute movement in the pilot's arms and legs. Now I don't know how much thought was put into the interface, if Kawamori-sama sat down and contemplated this for hours and days on end, but the controls look awkward for the battroid. Fighter and Gerwalk modes would function exactly like a fighter and helicopter (I would imagine that the throttle would be come the collective/throttle, the stick would become the cyclic, and the rudder pedals would act like the antitorque pedals) respectively. The battroid though is an entirely different animal. each stick (if I'm not mistaken the throttle rachets into three positions to switch modes, at least in the hotas cockpits) would control the arms, and hands while the pedals control the legs and feet. The other part of the cockpit that niggles at my mind (only occasionslly, when I'm thinking about macross) is how do you move the head? My first thought would have jumped to some form of helmet mounted display, with a projected image on the pilot's visor, with an overlaid hud. But then you'd have transparency issues, and being unable to pick out details. I know that they use video viewscreens to fight, but in all the fighters (YF19 and YF21 excluded, maybe the VF25 and some others that may come from Macross 7) the view behind them is non existant. (from the cockpit) so how does the head turn so you can use that wonderful peripheral vision to detect threats visually. (Lord knows that sensors can malf up). Oh yeah, the ballistic shields, thanks for clearing that up, I still don't like them (They just bug me, I don't know what it is about them, maybe it's the way I see them used. The pilots charge in rahter than play it cool. Ever notice that some of the protagonists in the newer shows Macross Plus and Frontier are hotheads? Them kind of pilots don't usually live very long in real world dogfights.) I'd be more apt to liking the shield on a full armor system, and speaking of which the VF11's full armor system seemed to be one of the best to me, due to its use of supplementary guns and missiles. The Head lasers still bug me to but I guess it's personal preference, I guess I just like the idea of having all of my weapons useable in a dogfight, besides the VF is the gold standard by which we compare all other VFs. Feel free to add, clarify, destroy, or applaud my opinions, feedback is much appreciated.

From a military perspective, all of the valks are vulnerable. Simplicity is king. the more robust and simple the parts are, the better they are and the longer they will last. Now, I love the VF1 valk just because it's the original, also it's the only well known VF that doesn't have the rear facing head laser. My dad was a fighter pilot, and has taught me much, if the enemy is behind you, you shake him or you die. There is no time to line up a shot to the rear, that would require a separate display and it would split your attention, actually INCREASING your chances of dying. The VF0 is another favorite of mine, due to its similarity to real world fighters (Another reason I love the VF1). The thing is, I could see a ship like the VF0, VF1, or even the VF11 and VF22, flying today. Granted the sheer weight and bulk of the VF22 tends to put it squarely at the bottom of my list of favorite valks. The first gen VFs (VF0, VF1) being more conventional and also mounting external hardpoints, and not relying on FAST packs for hevy armaments, are just awesome. The real-ness of them is what I love. The VF19 transformation, while looking cool, was complex and it just seemed like the fighter's weak link. Another thing that endeared me to the original Macross, was the battroid combat. It was the same realism that attracted me to Gundam's 8th MS Team. The Battroids operated like huge infantrymen. THis also carried into Macross Plus, and the Mecha were well designed for the task. Unfortunately this is what leads me to the ballistic shields. If the Energy Converting Armor is as tough as or tougher than the armor of a tank, why do they need those shields? it would seem to add unnecessary bulk to the fighter, and it would be just one more thing to store. Also, what happens to the aerodynamic properties of the ship if the shield is damaged? As I said before, simplicity is king.

I am Jonesing for a macross game, the only thing that comes even remotely close is Robotech: Battlecry. Are there any Macross Games coming down the pipe, or any that might be available on previous generation systems (eg, PS2, or Gamecube). Battlecry bothers me one, because it's robotech, and two because the voice acting was typical american made poop on a stick. (American Voice Overs on anime however are the exception to the rule). Just help me out... please

I just got a TRU VF1A cannon fodder Valkyrie, and I was wondering if anybody had tips on modeling some underwing stores for it. I also was wondering if anyone had tips for modeling conformal tanks and flir pods.