Vifam7

This statement doesn't make sense: Long range BVR engagement? With the ASRAAM missile?

IIRC the Takatoku VF-1s were even more expensive back in the day and yet they were still made for the children demographic. Back then and even in '94/'95 all toys were for children. The concept of selling "premium collector's" toys to adults was not quite there yet. And I think this is the reason why toys were not made for direct-to-video anime (OAVs) like Macross Plus, Megazone 23, Gall Force, etc. back then. OAVs were for the older crowd and I suppose the thinking back then was - the older crowd doesn't buy "toys".

I agree with you that the fighter mode is where the 1/100 Toynami falls short. I also have issues with the tail fins looking too small and the overall proportion that looks a bit stubby. As I wrote in the other thread, the photos always make these toys look better than it is in reality. Oh, and keep an eye out on those peg holes. They seem to crack very easily. ;_; At $20 a pop, I suppose this is as good as it gets. But, after getting them and checking them out, it's hard to convince myself that these were great buys. Now if Toynami were to release a Legioss and say an Auroran in this 1/100 toy lineup to accompany the VF-1s, my opinion would change. But that'll probably never happen.

Just wondering but I would imagine that the system would have a manual backup mode, right? I mean, it'd be very bad day if suddenly the remote system or camera went belly-up, there's no manual backup mode, and there's a flight outside thirsty for fuel...

Do we have to keep bringing this up?

Let's all keep an open mind. Every model kit maker has made some beauties and some disasters. Yes, I'm sure even much revered Hasegawa has made some mistakes. In fact one could say the quality of a kit depends from kit to kit (for example Bandai's MG Gundam line is widely acclaimed but not all of them are winners). And, how good a kit may also depend on one's personal taste. A minor issue for one maybe a dealbreaker for another. In short it's really too early to judge the quality of a kit that has yet to be released!

Nevermind

Yeah, um, how popular was Macross II? And Macross 7? I didn't really see Yamato pushing lots of Mac7 toys either. If anything Bandai, Yamato, CMs, Megahouse, etc they all came to the realization that the kids of yesterday have grown up and now have money to spend.

If they make the kits anywhere like the Perfect Grade, Master Grade, or HGUC Gundam kits, it'll be AWESOME (arguably perhaps better than what Hasegawa could do).

Why did the LERX design change when the YF-17 became the F-18? Just wondering. Also isn't the Super Hornet with it's big LERX pretty much coming back to the YF-17's "Cobra" look?

Northrop also technically designed the Hornet. Strange how the YF-17 originates at Northrop, grows into the F/A-18, becomes a McD product, and it's latest form as the Super Hornet is now a Boeing product. I'm sure some of the folks at Northrop are like WTF? I wonder if Northrop still gets a share on the sales of the Super Hornet as they did with the legacy Hornets... Real shame on the Tigershark. One of my favorites. Could've been a real asset to NFWS (and perhaps not having wing cracking problems as they did with the F-16!) and to countries like Taiwan, Singapore that use/used the F-5E. Taiwan really got the shaft when Reagan vetoed the sale (and still feeling it as they continue to have problems acquiring F-16s).

Just guessing but probably - switching of parts to transform.

I'd be willing to do swaps. That would explain why it looked like something from the 80's. If I had to nitpick I'd say the nose and hands in battroid form need to be slightly redesigned. The nose a bit longer and sharper and the hands more like the squarish DYRL form than the big round TV form. Just my personal taste. I'm not a big believer in strict adherence to lineart. ; But I'm not too concerned as long as the fighter mode sculpt looks good . And looking at the pics, it looks good.

A re-issue Bandai 1/55 shouldn't cost you too much money these days. You could get one without the Super parts for less than $100. The ones that come with the Super-parts will cost a bit more.

I'm a little late to this discussion but I recently got the 3 Series 2 releases (Max, Miriya, Hikaru). I too experienced cracked/split peg inserts. The arms dropped off during my first transformation of Miriya's VF to fighter mode. And I was doing everything gently. I was like WTF!? Then I saw the cracked pegs. So it's not an isolated incident or limited to the 1st series. I think the cracks happened when I tried to connect the arms to the legs in fighter mode. This makes the fighter mode nicely rigid but (I believe) due to a inherent design flaw, the arm peg doesn't allow for a slight amount of flexing needed and thus cracks. Like 'do not disturb' wrote above, the toy doesn't fall apart BUT it does have issues. And to nitpick, the sculpt isn't that great. The forward fuselage looks too short in fighter mode (though I suppose that makes it look better in battloid mode - but I'm a fighter mode guy) and the tail fins are way too small. The photos make it look better than it does in reality. That seems to be the case with all Toynami products (IMO).

If a country were to acquire a supercarrier like the Kitty Hawk, I would assume it would be an investment for more than just prestige. I mean, the Kitty Hawk is not some dinky VTOL or helo carrier. Even a modified Gorshkov is nothing compared to what the Kitty Hawk can bring to the table. It's one heavy duty offensive weapons system. Heck, the Kitty Hawk is pretty much the centerpiece of the US Seventh Fleet. If a country wants its navy to have prestige, a light carrier would suffice. I think the Kitty Hawk would be overkill. Too bad we don't have any Essex-class carriers left to sell.

Or maybe India could ask Brazil to sell them the ex-French carrier Foch. Personally I think it'd be a good idea for India. If the US were to transfer any supercarrier to India, I wouldn't be surprised if Pakistan and/or China protests loudly. In light of our current anti-terror war, it probably isn't wise to make Pakistan angry at us.

Is it me or does anyone else think the VF-1 battloid looks like something taken from an ancient 80's mold?

It's already available for pre-order at Amazon Japan. The fine print says that the release date is June 25th. No idea if that date is reliable.

Judging by the cockpit panel and silhouette of the aircraft in the trailer, I'd say the alternate timeline would be somewhere around late 1945 or 1946-ish. The aircraft silhouette looked like that for the Kyushu J7W1 Shinden

Getting back to the Kitty Hawk to India deal, I think this news report pretty much sinks that rumor: http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews...lBrandChannel=0 I kinda felt that the deal bordered on the unrealistic.

Not sure but don't some airports almost require a pilot to pull up or bank sharply after take off because otherwise they run the risk of running into hills or buildings? Hong Kong's old airport was one of them IIRC.

I think this pic answers everyone's question: Pic came from here: http://ga.sbcr.jp/mreport/009233/14.html The back poster says: DX Chogokin Macross F series Other info I can read: 1/60 scale perfect transformation First mech: VF-25 (Alto) 2nd mech: VF-25 (Ozuma) Release date: not yet available I don't understand why some are whining about one company or another making MacF toys and presuming one will suck and other won't. Every toy company has had it's bombs and successes. Never did understand the whole company loyalty thing. I take everything case by case, toy by toy, using my own set of standards.

Since they're made of plastic, perhaps they can be "reworked". Maybe use one of the F-toys Valk for parts... But yeah, it would've been nice to have landing gears. Won't stop me from buying these though.

I thought the reconfigured Gorshkov was going to use a ski-jump (just like the Kuznetsov) instead of a catapult.