Noyhauser

There is also a difference in intent. Models are designed for display only. You're supposed to build them, put a nice finish and let them sit to look pretty. I'd argue even the Hasegawa Battroids are display pieces. They are very fragile and not designed to be moved around much. Gunplas are designed to be handled and played with. They are sturdily built, and encourage you to take them apart and play with them. Why else would you have removable armour and interchangeable weapons. This comes with the trade off minimal details and simplified construction. Thats part of my problem with the Bandai VF-25: by making a transformable model, you're immediately aiming at the type of consumer that resides in the second paragraph rather than the first.

So where did it come from? There is no precedent design linage for this vehicle: its certainly not from zentredi, meltrandi, UN Spacy, Vartua (or I guess Supervision army) linages. Instead its a non-transformable four legged beast shape, armed with missiles (not unique, but it is what the monster carries) as well as a particle cannon that looks exactly like the one carried by a Vajra. No other vehicle mounts the same weapon, or looks the same way. Thats why when I initially played it I got the WTF moment because it looked like nothing else in the macross universe up until Frontier. Everything else in the game was canon; Valkyries, destroids, Zent units, starwings, Ghosts, except this. For me the clincher is that we now know that UN Spacy had already encountered the Vajira by 2050, when the research fleet carrying Ranka and her parents were destroyed in 2048. I'm not saying the vehicle is vajra, just that it seems to be an early and poor attempt to copy the technology. With the UN official manipulating things in the background, its completely plausible that he passed information about the vajra superweapon to the Vindirance/Critical path corporation to produce a early copy. Its certainly the most plausible story.

Mike I think you underestimate the influence of VFX-2. First is what seems to be the vajira inspired craft on like the 8th ground level (when you first get the Monster.) It looks completely out of place when you first face it, but looking back now after watching Macross frontier's Vajira designs, you can't help but wonder if there is a connection. That goes for the "sound barrier" as well, which might have something to do with the jamming we see in the first episode... but thats far more tenuous a link. Finally, the whole rebellion aspect (including the use of macross 13), which might imply the creation of NUNS. That too is complete speculation, but its portrayed as a pretty serious event nonetheless.

AcroRay: I take your point, and you're right its maybe earlier in the design process than I had originally thought. I probably should have taken a closer look. My bad. Yet still I'm cynical about this release, which will only be proven or disproven when it comes out. As (likely) with you I've been building models for most of my life, maybe not professionally, but I'd like to think its one of my main hobbies. It kinda ticks me off when someone goes and says "someone who doesn't know what he's talking about." Moreover I've built quite a few Bandai kits over my time, which makes the label "hater" even more dubious. I like their kits, I collect them and build them too. I think there are two main points here. While this may be an early prototype, almost 20 years of history suggests that its difficult to make an accurate transformable model. Its always going to be a compromise between modes for shape and the ability to transform. Early photos suggest Bandai will not overcome this. Furthermore the sheer fact that Bandai chose to make a transformable model implicitly suggest they are aiming it more towards gunpla and away from traditional modeling. Thats not surprising since they are attempting to capitalize on Macross Frontier's successes, which is in a younger age group. Reading an interesting study posted on Gunota the other day on the gundam market supports this conclusion. While all this doesn't necessarily mean they will have to be bad models, but I think it makes it harder to make a good display piece, particularly in fighter mode. I've already said its likely going to have a great battroid mode, and will buy one for that reason. Still, I think its difficult to disagree with either of these two points. If I'm proven wrong I'm proven wrong; so be it. At least I'll have a set of nice models to build while I eat crow.

Acroray and LeDude We've already gone over this, some of the models presented are not rapid protoypes. As electric indigo pointed out earlier in this thread some of the models on display have clear surface engravings consistent with a product late in a development phase, and an internal skeleton. Look at the Back of Ozma's model and the leg pegs: http://ga.sbcr.jp/mreport/009935/images/11.jpg I might be wrong, but rapid prototypes don't have that. And even if it do, it still suggest that its major features are already fairly set. Sure details might be increased, panels tightened ect; but I can't see how the overall shape or issues highlighted are going to change that much. Most worrying to me is that it seems the've gone with a coloured cockpit. Look through the CA graphic's photos; http://ga.sbcr.jp/mreport/009935/

Ugh, excillion, we've gone over this. Its fairly clear to the hardcore modelers here that this will not be a release that satisfies them. How can you tell? first off experience with Bandai's products + the photos in this thread = Confirmation the problems we've had with prior releases will be apparent. Serious modelers don't want transforming mecha. For me, to make it a fighter only model probably will double the time it takes to construct the model, if not more. And Its still probably going to look out of proportion, since its clear Bandai has made the battroid mode the main priority for styling. This is precisely why I (and most others) prefer hasegawa approach to modeling. They are easier to make, and look far far better on display. Also note who are the people who are most gung-ho about it: its not the seasoned modelers, with one or two exceptions. As much as JYLC's point is crassly put, I feel its the truth about this whole situation.

I really doubt it... the UNS was alive and kicking after 2040. They authorized Macross 7 to use nukes, the ceremonies to commemorate the end of space war I during macross plus, as well as fighting terrorism in 2050. Its still more likely the events during or after VFX-2 had something to do with it. edit: sorry didn't read the other posters after.

No, I'd like a "realistic display" more than anything else. The reason why there are gaps, distortions ect, is in large part due to the nature of the medium. If a valkyrie existed, you could be sure that panels would likely be flush to each other when transforming, in order to maintain aerodynamic shape. There are sure to be a number of fasteners and structures in place to ensure this occurs within tolerance. I want a model that looks like a real specimen, only a fraction of the size. Yet the modeling medium does not allow for this to occur if a transformation is involved. Plastic does not join together in the same way as lets say real panels, its an imperfect medium. There are no underlying structures to keep it together. By adding a transformation sequence, it essentially comes at the cost of realism. Those panels will never look flush, and distortions in the size are almost certain to occur in order to make the design work properly. Thats not so much aesthetics, because I'd argue that I'm just as appreciative of the mechanical aspects of the valkyrie as you are, just in a different way. In any case I see a pretty big gulf here between opinions. Besides the wait and see people; its either the classical modelers, who want a static display model that looks good, or the more gunpla oriented crowd who wants to build something and play with it a bit. I think Bandai has tried to placate both, we'll see if its a failure or a success.

... I'm sure the LDP wants the same optimism you have about their prospects. The only reason why they haven't lost the upper house is because they aren't constitutionally mandated to have an election until next year. Insiders in the LDP actually believe they will lose the next election and Fukuda is in the 20s for his popularity. I'm telling you this now, so listen. The Japanese procurement agency looks likely to buy the Eurofighter. You can disbelieve it all you want, but the people I know who watch this carefully, say that its the odds on favorite. No offense, the attitude that Japan will only buy U.S. fighters, is similar to how alot of people believed EADS could never win a major US contract. And yet here we are today.

Mac+: Episode 2 (I think) where the students at the school do the Isamu hand flying dance. And in Episode 7 Ozma directed the squadron to carry out formation "Planet Dance"

Well I doubt it would be 10X better, but Mitsubishi has started developing its own home grown 5th gen aircraft the ATD-X Shinshin. Funding for the program has been unstable, reflecting the unease the government has with developing its own homegrown fighter. However the program was only started when the F-22 was taken off the table.

First off, I can tell you that the Japanese are serious. They see the refusal of the US to provide the F-22 as a slap in the face of a loyal ally, and will dig their heels in this. Furthermore, I think you underestimate some of the shifts in Japanese international relations over the last few years. This isn't the Japan of old that is content to sit under the US military envelope and . For the last five years there has been much debate about Japan as a "Normal" power. That means greater independence and ability to carry out its foreign policy on an international stage. You've seen military deployments across the world, as well as a continual debate on if and how to rewrite the constitution to reflect these shifts. During the Koizumi and Abe terms the effects of the debate on the Japanese - US relationship weren't as apparent, as they were staunch defenders of the alliance. However that's changed significantly due to Abe's disastrous performance in office, and the Fukuda's assumption into office. He's actually been somewhat more reluctant to give unequivocal support to the United States, compared to his predecessors. Right now, the US-Japanese coalition is being pulled from two sides. The first is the Nationalists who see independence from the US as a good thing, particularly after the pointed criticism they received as a result of Abe's visits to Yasukuni. That congressional rebuke he received has accelerated the schism. In 2005 Prominent nationalist Tokyo Mayor Shintaro Ishihara has even questioned whether the US will back up Japan in the event of a major war. He's advocated greater military independence, including nuclear weapons. From this perspective, not being able to procure the F-22 is just a sign of US hesitance, which will likely force them to go to the Europeans. Second is the DPJ. You might want to read into their party platform; on foreign policy it resembles many left wing European parties. Mild anti americanism has been a staple of its policies. Ozawa has claimed that Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan isn't a UN mission, argues for closer ties with the China, and wants to adopt a more pacifist foreign policy. I really doubt he would allow the purchase of the F-22, if he even allows the program to go ahead at all.

About the export of the F-22/F-15 I think you're going to be wrong. Its not like the F-22/F-15E are the only fighters on the market; the Eurofighter is a very real alternative for prospective buyers. There are only three realistic buyers for the F-22; Japan, Australia and Israel. Australia has already gotten their no and they will grudgingly buy the F-35, provided there are no more delays. The largest prize was always Japan. Speaking to colleagues familiar with the situation there, the government of Japan will buy Eurofighters if they don't get F-22 and will not be satisfied with another F-15. The Government of Japan wants a true next generation air superiority fighter not more of the same. The Japanese have already communicated this threat at high levels and will not back down. If the LDP falls next election and Ozawa comes in (and stays around longer than the Hosokawa government), you can almost be assured the Eurofighter will be selected (if the fighter program isn't cancelled.) Israel was promised fighters by Clinton when he left office, yet the China export controversy probably delayed them getting them by a few years. However just a few days ago, Senate House Committee Chairman signaled his willingness to reverse his position on blocking a sale to Israel. Given the two presidential candidates position, I'd say there is a fair chance the F-22 will be sold to Israel. If thats the case then there is a much greater chance that Japan might be able to procure it as well. http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid...icle%2FShowFull I don't think it would be out of question to see F-22s in Israel's hands in the next five to seven years (a realistic timeframe for any procurement.)

Which is why I deliberately didn't point out the nose in that post. Yet I think it is clear the air intakes do not look the same, nor do the break points for battroid in fighter (which look particularly jarring if you examine them closely.)

You don't get it; It doesn't matter. This isn't even a question of technology either; almost every toy and transformable model suffers from the same problems, and bandai will never solve it; neither will Yamato, Tamiya or Hasegawa. Even from these photos its apparent that the fighter mode has suffered in realism in order to make the battroid looks good. Alot of us here are aircraft modelers and this bodes poorly for realism. Here is the best example; Compare the lineart: http://www.macrossworld.com/macross/Macross_F/MF-39.jpg to this image http://ga.sbcr.jp/mreport/009935/13.html or http://ga.sbcr.jp/mreport/009935/15.html The problem is pretty apparent; The airplane body *seems* fat, the intakes look slightly large, and the open break points for transformation really mar the design. Put together it doesn't make for a very attractive static model, unless you take hours to glue it together fill the gaps, rescribe them, and pray for the best. Even so It still wouldn't look like a great model due to the blue wash canopy and slightly off proportions. As I said, its still a great battroid, and its clear thats the main mode they are going for. Yet it comes at a heavy price for the other modes' realism. Its apparent from these photos, and I'm sure they will reflect the model we will get in our hands. Thats not to say I'm not going to buy one, two or three of them... I'm just pointing out the obvious problems with the situation.

Someone earlier talked about the economics of being macronized. As I pointed out in another thread discussing "why would people even want to colonize," its very likely that a macross colony operated based on a hybrid command/free economy, which places major restrictions on the lifestyles of colonists. While people earn money and have choices how they spend it, likely huge parts of the economy that are state controlled or regulated. For foods, clothes, basic goods, ect, prices may be fixed to a certain degree since everything comes from the limited pool of goods from the system. Really markups would be representative of labour costs, or if its considered rare. We see at the start that real meat is considered a rarity, so that certainly entailed it being more expensive. As a colonist you're assured that you will get basic goods at a reasonable price. Moreover scaling of costs could exist for Zentredi who live in macro size, yet only a few are allowed to live in such a state. It doesn't mean that they pay that much more to live in macronized form. They too are assured things at a certain price, maybe a bit more, but its not something that seems too expensive. I think you have to remember this is a closed, smaller economy, which can almost certainly be modeled through computer simulations. Everything can be planned effectively, including having a portion of the population macronized.

I'm guessing its these? http://www.macrossworld.com/macross/models...ii_mikimoto.htm I don't know what it may fetch, maybe someone who regularly peruses yahoo japan can maybe tell you.

I didn't say that about the legs, if your read what I said before. A frame seems to be a good way to do the legs because they need to show internal detail according to the lineart, and they must also allow the wings to fold in. However given the nature of the body it seems impossible to have any sort of frame there.

I got it too... :-(

If we're lucky, they didn't. Adding an internal frame will just make the transformation that much more awkward than it already is. In fighter mode the model already looks fat; the air intakes are oversized and the aircraft looks abnormally fat compared to the line art. There really isn't much room or point to include one.

I think the leg might use some sort of frame design, but beyond that I don't think so. The legs kinda would need to do that because of the armour and wings. I don't know if that will be the same for the body, and doubtful for the arms.

Nicely done... is this a 34-85?

No I think he means it will have a more traditional model set up, not a Gundam design philosophy. As I've mentioned before, the gundam HG/MG/PG have a very different design philosophy than normal models, mostly due to their intended market. They are supposed to fit into a area between real models and the HCM or Fix Figuration line, which means you can pose and play with them to a limited extent. For most of my models I don't see a need for an internal frame; I'm never going to touch it or open it up because that will put fingerprints on a finish I probably worked several days to make. And that goes for most traditional modelers, not gunpla enthusiasts. Even though the VF-25 might be able to transform, it looks to me that its more along the lines of a traditional model, and not intended for much durability or playability. Thus its unlikely you'd ever see the internal frame, except to add detail.

Anyway, back to the task at hand. While The space fleets might seem like utopia, its most likely that there must be major limitations on individual freedoms and aspirations both socially and economically. First population control must be key element to any long range colonization mission. Its impossible to think that the small closed society could handle a larger population, given their limited systems. You may well see a one or two child policy at work to prevent overpopulation of a colony. Once landing on a planet, any such limitations are likely to disappear. Moreover while the economy might run normally on a capitalist model, there must be certain limits to what you can buy, and even how much you profit. Everything operates in a closed system. Though you might be able to gain more materials through asteroid mining, you can't grow more crops, catch more fish, or raise more hippocows. Technically the economy continues as a small closed system. Such limitations only disappear once a colonyship lands. The establishment of a colony is likely to stimulate a huge boom in an economy as people start having more children, limitations are withdrawn on businesses operations, and new cities are built. There would just be more opportunities once on the ground than in space, something colonists were likely to look forward to.

Not to diverge into this to deeply, but you've confused your terms here, partly because you're using a wikipedia definition. Manifest destiny was linked directly to the concept of a contiguous territory the United States and later its assured ability to control it. While a mission civilisatrice was a part of many supporters views, that was one of many perspectives people had on the concept of Manifest Destiny. You could very well be a conservative who supported Manifest Destiny, but did not support a colonizing mission in itself. Instead they would argue this land was god's gift for the United States, and have purely expansionist motives. This is why large segments of the Indian Population were essentially rounded up and put into camps or killed;they were only seen as a threat to the american settlers living on their land. Isolationism as a whole was a key component of U.S. policy at the time. Conservatives mostly believed that the land was for the United States, and the country should remain out of dangerous European intrigues, and Europeans should remain out of the United States. Actually your use of the concept "shining beacon on the hill" is misconstrued. Winthorp's speech does not call for the settlers to colonize others with their values, rather it is a call for them to act as piously, to serve as an example to others, not as a call to impress those values upon others. Even more pertinent is Washington's Farewell address: Europe has a set of primary interests which to us have none; or a very remote relation. Hence she must be engaged in frequent controversies, the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence, therefore, it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves by artificial ties in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics, or the ordinary combinations and collisions of her friendships or enmities. Instead according to Washington, America should focus inwards on itself, and to many later individuals, that meant the taming of the west. As another poster pointed out, what you're talking about is pax americana, or idealist notions of american hegemony. Thats for a whole different other post.