edwin3060

Where's Klan dialogue?

Except that Mach 5 is the cruise speed of the VFs. And your rate of turn in degrees is related to....? Thats right, your turn radius! I know that. I've already stated that many many times over. But in the absence of any other data, the g-limits are clearly meant to illustrate the maneuverability of the vfs. Else we wouldn't have a standard of measurement at all.

Depends on what your definition of Max speed is-- for the F-22 I suspect max speed is more materials limited than drag limited, but I digress.

Not at all-- these data are provided from a more or less objective point of view so there's no reason to suspect inflation or deflation? It's not like we are reading sales brochures after all, all these data are equivalent to the technical manuals for the aircraft (less detailed, to be sure).

Ahh that clears it up then.

Yep veffidas explained my point more clearly-- also, once someone downloads off rapidshare, how likely is that person to seed the file? I'm not even sure how you're supposed to seed the file once you put it together-- do you have to create a new torrent, or something? I just woke up and I see that the Availability of the file is only 0.213 now-- up from around 0.11 last night-- that means over the past 8 hrs Gubaba only managed to upload another 10% of the file. I think we really do need a distro network like veffidas says.

Sweet thanks.

Well, regardless, I have to say, if Bandai is going to make every single one of the VFs pictured on that page, I will buy at least 1 of each of them. Just to be a completist

Yea well, I'm out. Wayyy too big, even if it only costs about 2-3 1/60s or 5-6 1/60 VF-1s Really, if you think about it that way, the only issue is the size.

That just makes me want to get my YF-19 out to check it. Unfortunately its in storage for now. hmmm. Doesn't seem to be that widespread a problem compared to some other Yamato issues though.

Alright we'll still have half a liver to cover the rest of the costs then...

Roger.

This is a definite buy for me. Heres the cdjapan link as well (that someone else posted previously) http://www.cdjapan.co.jp/detailview.html?K...340&ref=myp It says that the release date is the 20th of March.

Heh, 1 seed 400+ leechers. Looks like your torrent is pretty popular, Gubaba! Congratulations, its great work!

Thanks for all the GREAT WORK! Esp to Gubaba! However,1 seed, 400+ leechers. Seriously, I think rapidshare may be a better distribution mechanism than torrents if Gubaba has a slow connection and can't leave his com on all the time.

Gubaba's translation of the VF-25S page in Mac Chronicles covered this. Basically the EX-Gear detects some electric field (which could either be due to muscle movement, or more likely nerve impulses) for precise control during operation of the EX-Gear, and also during operation of VFs, which has the benefit of allowing transformation of a single part without affecting other parts of the VF.

That's just arguing semantics None of which has anything to do with the g-limits of the VF. Besides, SK has already said that the VF-25 is a VF-1 that transforms like a YF-19. If that isn't using elements from previous designs, I don't know what is. That's not what you are arguing at all. And that exposes your misunderstanding of what the g-limits of an aircraft mean. Short answer: When velocity is the same, the Gs you can pull are an objective measure of maneuverability. David made a false analogy which I pointed out if you had taken the time to read my rebuttal. Long answer: I'm sure David understands this very well, it may just have slipped his mind-- basic physics, a=v^2 /r . That is to say, a car can make tighter turns (lower radius r) because its velocity is much lower than an aircrafts for a given acceleration (g). That's how an aircraft travelling at Mach 1 pulling 9Gs can out turn a missile travelling at Mach 4 pulling 40 Gs--- because to match the same turn radius as the aircraft the missile has to actually pull 144Gs. But, like I pointed out already, the VF-25 and VF-19 have the same cruising speed in the atmosphere of Mach 5-- at the same velocity, your acceleration directly determines your turn radius and hence your maneuverability. Ultimately given what hard data we have on both aircraft, we can only ever make the inference that the VF-19 can outperform the VF-25 in atmosphere. Anything else is just useless conjecture and wishful thinking. I'm quite certain of my knowledge of physics, are you? Yea so? If you recall, the original point that was brought up was that, given ISC, could the VF-19 outperform the VF-25 in terms of maneuverability? We have quickly rejected that hypothesis in space, where the insane thrust of the VF-25 would give it the benefit (and the VF-19 couldn't even strain it's g limits), but, with the speed limitations in the atmosphere, and the additional factor of control surfaces, the VF-19's ability to pull higher Gs could give it the advantage. None of which is relevant to the discussion-- you sought to prove that the F-35 was superior in every way to current generation fighters, and I've proved that it's not. It has a higher probability of winning not because it has higher thrust, or can pull greater gs. It wins because of its better radar and stealth. Similarly, the VF-25 doesn't need to be superior in every way to the VF-19/22 in order to be a 'successor', even by your terms. It may win because it carries more missiles, for example. If you can't understand this simple point then there's no point in continuing this discussion. On a separate note, SK said that the VF-25 is the first fighter to be able to transform with FAST pack attached, but in MacPlus the YF-19 and YF-21 are clearly able to do so as well. What gives?

How good is Basquash anyway?

Alright then thanks. I've just given Overdrive quite abit of cash for the DX Super packs and one of those SDF1 shirts and its time to give my wallet a break!

Hopefully the finished product looks more like that then... you're right, it does look good

Sweet.. what is that totally pink VF-25 in the lower right corner? Some kind of Trans-am valk?

Hmm thats weird... ahh well i guess YMMV. I have to say, the modelling wash worked perfectly for me and didn't require the tedious panel lining that using a marker entailed. It is true that some areas may not panel line perfectly with the first brush, but all I have to do is dab abit of the wash onto the model and let capillary action do the rest. Edit: Did you use the wash after you assembled the kit? the oils from your fingers may have reduced the adhesion as the wash is water based-- I just used the panel lining wash when the parts are on the sprues so no handling oils at all. That could account for the difference in results.

Uh.. that full armour picture was for the VF100s line? Is it coming out for DX as well? i hope its not an exclusive. badboy00z: I think the 'new' DX was just the MacQuarter (that sounds so much like a MacDonald's Quarter Pounder!) anime52k8: the front mounted clips may be awkward, but they are still better than back mounted clips since they could (conceivably) be aerodynamic fairings (not anime accurate of course, but this is the DX we are talking about!) The front wing clips for the missiles and all in the RVF-25 exclusive look very awkward though Vostok 7 : Yea, but sucks that it can't be mounted with the landing gear down in fighter mode--- I guess that spells doom for the VF-27 as well then---while the beam grenade launcher may well split down the middle, the landing gear may not be long enough. rikiryou: OMG O_O that really sucks. are you able to get a replacement toy? Seems to be an isolated case so far though. I hope the full armour comes with 4 reaction missiles.

Ahh well, false rumours then. It wouldn't be smart of Yamato to compete directly against Bandai i guess. About the VF-19F: Maybe Bandai just hates Macross 7? They haven't made any good products for it that I can think of I just hope the fighter mode looks good.

So many valks, so little money. What are the chances that this will still be available say... 3 months from now?