Noyhauser

But the difference was the YF-21 was designed from the outset to be able to lose all its appendages and continue fighting. That was part of its unique design. If the 25 loses both legs its somewhat game over, especially in an atmosphere. However the VF-11 can lose a leg and still operate. Mylene has a turbine failure (which to me sounds like a catastrophic event) and Kinryu loses a leg when he attacks inside the Vartua battleship with the VF-11 FA

I know I'm going to get burned on this (for being off topic and off message), but I'm not the biggest fan of the Valks in Macross F thus far. A mass produced VF-17 is a great idea... but its from Macross 7. And I'm kinda ho-hum about the VF-25... it reminds me too much of the SV-51.. my least favorite design. I thought Macross + and 7 both on their own and together (given they came out concurrently) gave a better set of designs with the 11, 17, 19, 21, 22, their variants and all of the vartua mecha.

Umm the part about entrusting your lives to 7000 year old weaponry was not clear at all either.

Maybe they're invading our imagination. I vote for nuking it.

or anything else that makes Isamu, Isamu. except being a good pilot of course. I actually dig Klan Klein... though Alto and Ozma are probably my favorites.

Because it was part of the Advanced Valkyrie series before Kawamori decided to use the designs for macross. Read more about it here http://www.macrossworld.com/macross/transl...cedvalkyrie.htm Edit: errr. Well Just rereading your post I see you've made that point. Sorry for not reading more closely. I think its just an pre-production error. Whether or not its the VF-X-11 or the VF-X-10 for a series that was never produced seems a bit nitpicky... All thats important (and Canon) in the macross Universe is that it is the VF-9 I must say though I think the Cutlass is a gorgeous design. I wish someone made a model of it. Quick edit #2 It seems as if there was already a VF-X-11 made for the series too;

Rockhound, thanks for sharing this build... I can emphasize with your opening line too :-p On an unrelated note, I love the difference in size between the VF-1 and VF-0. Some might say its a retcon, but I don't think so. The VF-0 is the last jet fighter, requiring real jet engines fuel and aerodynamics. The VF-1 is the first real overtechnology fighter, with thermonuclear engines and the like. Its like the designers went and said: I think it just shows how profound the change that occurred in technological development. And for those who don't care... they also look cool too

Well we do have indications that both are the case, and they don't have to be mutually exclusive. The development of cheaper fighters for production (VF-4 vs VF-5000) is one sign of economic problems. Its quite possible as the financial position of the UEG decrease it starts increasing the taxation on colonies. That taxation for "protection" by UNSPACY, or the use of the galactic network, which might be a non opt out able. Yet some colonies might feel that the assessment is not fair, particularly if they feel they don't need the protection. That chafe might spill out to open rebellion. I'm completely extrapolating here but I don't see how this can't be realistic. In any case, Mac Plus makes clear that rebellions are occurring, first by actively showing such a rebellion in its opening scenes, and then as a reasoning behind the implementation of Operation Supernova. Its stated that the project Supernova is not intended for the conventional role of taking down large scale Zentredi fleets, but instead penetrate high value targets and kill them without using reaction weaponry which might cause a political incident. This is reemphasized in digital mission VFX2 when a terrorist group almost overthrows the United Earth Government. I think traditional threats like the Zentredi don't really scare the UEG anymore. As macross 7 seems to indicate, UN Spacy have a practiced routine against them, where they can face massive numerical inferiority and come out on top. All UN Spacy ships are equipped with reaction weaponry which seem to be far more powerful than previous generations. I think so. This would also help reinforce my point about economic stagnation. This brings me to another theory, that the NUNS see SMS and private military providers as a cheaper way to defend against major threats. Regular NUNS forces deal with the common threats to colonization missions like Zentreadi fleets, and train purely for those missions. Specialized units like SMS are brought in when special threats emerge.

I had that worry too March, but I think of a certain other Anime dynasty has done follow on series and I think Kawamori & co. have done a fairly good job. Zeta Gundam follows the 0079 Series conventions fairly closely, with a small amount of homages, but its a splendid series in its own right. I think Macross F might be following in that own way.

I don't think that Kawamori "reinventing" the Valkyrie is inherently unrealistic. I've pointed this out in here but I think he's got a more realistic idea about aircraft procurement than in most SF. Major replacement programs for aircraft seem to emerge every 10 years (from 2010 to 2040) in the Macross universe, then it seems that there isn't a major program between 2040 and 2056. That would make sense if; #1 The UNG seems to be going through some sort of economic slowdown or stagnation (which seems to be the case) #2 Project Supernova really pushed the boundaries of aerospace design, leaving no reason to build a new major superiority fighter for quite some time. Thats actually something that was true for the real aircraft manufacturing industries in the 1970s, 80s and even into the 1990s. The F-15/F-16 combo stood (and still does) sit as the main fighters for the United States, when in the thirty years previous fighters were replaced every five to 10 years.

I watched all three by D/L online torrents. Start with the Gundam movies.

Having read your post all I can suggest is watch the series from the start. Gundam wing was a steaming pile of poo, and nowhere close to being as good as the main UC stuff. Please download the three Gundam 0079 movies, 0083 Stardust memory, then the Zeta series. I think watching them will give you a new appreciation of some of the "blocky" mecha, and their follow-ons. Personally I feel some of the new Seed stuff you have there is fadish, and not as good as their predecessors. You claim the deathskythe is completely unrealistic, and yet you have the Strike Noire with its mechapistols.... I wonder how you're going to look at them in 5 years time. Down the list you have the Zeta and the Gundam MK-II; Those two are classic designs, partly because of the stories behind them. Aren't you at all curious to know the stories behind their designs and what made them classics?

I agree. If anything it is about humanity in a different age, exploring the various new avenues of consciousness available to them. In alot of ways its not that much different from Senior Spielbergo's AI.

I'm actually building a 1/144 Zeta C Plus kit right now. Actually let me rephrase that. I originally built the kit when I was 13, and I found it recently in a box. I decided to take it apart and give it some tender loving care that it obviously didn't get when I first built it. Its not a great model, its got alot of space in certain areas to allow it to transform. So I've decided to fill all the spaces in with Morimori and make it a more realistic model, without a transformation sequence. Part of me wishes that Bandai made an affordable line that was more model oriented, like some of their previous kits, in addition to the HGUC, MG and PG kits. I actually liked alot of the kits from the late 1980s and early 1990s, like the Jadg dooga and Geara Dooga. The only other option I see is to buy B-club resins, which are horribly overpriced.

I can't say much more than what others said. I collect some of the HGUC stuff because they are a good distraction from normal models... but nothing in Bandai's line up compares to stuff like Hase or Tamiya. I used to have the same opinion as the OP on the designs, until I really started watching all of the series again in my 20s (I had watched some of UC stuff in japanese as a kid.) The designs start to grow on you I think. I have a place in my heart for the 0079 stuff; the MS-09 Dom and the MS-14 Gelgoog are two of my favorite designs. After watching Zeta again, I gained a huge appreciation of the Hyaku shiki and Zeta. As for the best series, I've got two answers. The best production is 0080, but the best gundam series is Zeta followed by the original series. If you had to just watch one series, 0080 is the most accessible and profound; you don't really need to see the other series to get into it. However zeta is really the best of the genre because it encapsulates everything that Gundam is about; newtypes, massive political conspiracies, and great mecha actions. Alsozeta has the best ending of all the series, I think.

I think its a more realistic implementation of a gimmick, which is why I think gubaba's persistent comments just strike me as illogical fanboyism. There is no way one could argue that an theoretical Omni directional implementation wouldn't take alot of energy than a PPB implementation. Why would you want to expend energy to cover a whole ship when you would normally only face a threat from one facing. Its a waste of energy, which could be better used for other purposes like weapons.They already have a omnidirectional field, and yet they still use PPB 50 years later. And even if they made a better type of shield its still the same question; why would you spread its energy over a wide area rather than focus it on the axis where you face the greatest likelihood of damage? No matter how you cut it, it just makes no sense to have a omni directional barrier.

Yeah because after 50 years they can obviously develop ways to break the rules of physics.

The Episode was pretty good, but I'm slightly worried that this series may become a bit too clichéd on previous series, like how gundam has become... I hope it goes in its own directions. That said its great to have another series and I'm loving it. I also want to laugh at HG and Robotech fans too, for how badly they have been shafted.

Actually boeing's share price rebounded at the news 7%. People thought it would be much worse. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/1/37783c82-0639-11...00779fd2ac.html

I use these and haven't looked back since... though they are pricy. As mechtech said though, you need to be careful with them. I've never had a clog, but reduced flow sometimes occurs. http://www.shopatron.com/index/294.0.8816.9956.8787.0.0

I'm probably going to catch alot of flak for saying this, but right now I think Ghost in the Shell Stand Alone Complex is a really prophetic film, at least more forward thinking than anything we see in contemporary sci-fi. I think it provides an interesting insight into how technology might define our lives. I really enjoyed their take on information management and politics in an "open" society where internet has been a staple for peoples lives for over a generation. Very few visions have really addressed in a realistic fashion, most attempt to make extremist claims of how a society might operate and in some way lose its credibility. Look at Gattica, its this world where society has reached this polarized extreme genetic selection. Sure its a important warning, but it doesn't to me present a credible version of our future. The same goes for 1984; government control is certainly a risk, but it that ignores a huge body of individuals within many western countries who fight for civil liberties. Instead GITS SAC presents a balanced perspective of a future society extrapolating from some current trends. Sure the WWIII idea is a bit farfetched and many of the technologies (full cyborgs for example) are unlikely to happen. However beyond that, many of the same problems that afflict our society; corruption, crime, and poverty are played out in futuristic landscape. Thats why I think its such a great setting.

Forgive me for the long reply, but Procurement and Cold War history are areas I'm quite interested in. Refer to my earlier point; air interceptors were becoming outmoded by 1959 due to the realization on the part of the Western Allies that the USSR had far fewer intercontinental bombers than had been previously believed. This was evident when the Arrow's replacement, the BOMARC was withdrawn from service soon after it was introduced, and most comparable interceptor programs like the XF-12, XF-103, XF-108 and the British Operational Requirement F-155. Also I can't understate how profound the ICBM threat was to western strategic thinking. Before the launch of sputnik in 1957 Canada and the United States saw itself as being effectively invulnerable to a retaliatory counterattack by the USSR, so long as we had a significant fleet of interceptor aircraft to knock bombers out of the sky. Now after 1957, there is no defence for a Soviet ICBM strike, the only real strategy that can be adopted is Mutually Assured Destruction, and it's variation under Kennedy, "flexible response." The public and military's willingness to spend on interceptors, which would do nothing to protect North America from Bomber threats was fast approaching zero. Finally as Vietnam would soon prove, Western air forces did not require high speed bomber interceptors like the Arrow, but more nimble and utilitarian aircraft like the F-4 (which was originally designed as an interceptor) or F-8 Crusader. Gold plating was certainly a problem, partly because of the RCAF and the nature of the armed forces at the time. Actually this is part of the reason why the armed forces became Unified under Paul Hellyer several years later; environmental services frequently had too much leeway in determining projects, often causing cost overruns. However the cost overruns (both due to the RCAF’s demands and common problems) were greatly exacerbated by Avro's decision to utilize a new development system called the Cook-Craigie procedure. Under this method, development and production phases start concurrently. Preproduction models are supposed to closely resemble final models because they are produced from the same jigs. This was adopted to “lower costs” and meet an ambitious time line partly agreed to by the RCAF and the company. That might have been okay if they could ensure the Government was going to fund the project all the way from the outset, yet it was frequently teetering on the edge of being cut. The program was That should have given Avro pause for concern, but it didn't. The adoption of the Cook-Cragie method became extremely problematic in the case of the Arrow, which was based on bleeding edge technologies. Whole systems were still on the drawing board while it was in development. The famed Iroquois engine was being developed concurrently with the airframe, and underwent a series of design changes over its time. When this occurred, the Sparrow and Hughes systems fell apart, or other changes occurred, it created serious delays and cost overruns, since it required alterations to the production development already underway. Cook Craigie is the norm for most product development today except major military projects, where distinct development phases favoured, because of the unpredictability of bleeding edge technology. The current best practices is to first ensure the technology development is complete, then the airframe development, and finally the production development, to minimize risk. By opting for the Cooke Craigie system, Avro likely sealed its fate. SAAB AB provides a perfect comparison to show where Avro went wrong. SAAB has never attempted to make groundbreaking aircraft. Their designs were effective, cost efficient, and innovative at the same time. Compare the Draken to the Arrow; it wasn’t going to go Mach 2.5+, but it could carry out a number of roles, and was cheap enough to elicit interest from a number European countries. Yeah sure the Arrow could have been modified into playing a role similar to the draken, but that would have been more money, something I think the government was wary over. Also remember that after Dief, Pearson embarks on creating national healthcare, social security and welfare programs, huge capital expenditures that would have precluded any greater spending on the military. The problem here is that Avro put all of its eggs in one basket with the Arrow, a highly risky, extremely expensive aircraft that was suited for one mission only; interception. Had it (and the RCAF) been more realistic and forthright with the program, it might have survived. Its’ doubtful though whether the Avro would have survived the lean years of the 1970s. That was a period of major contraction in the aerospace industries, and defence spending in Canada under Trudeau. That's not what I’m arguing. We bought a cheaper, less effective model, to replace the Canuck. The Voodoo was not intended to be an equivalent to the Arrow, but then again that was a tacit acknowledgement that its capabilities weren’t required anymore, as I’ve pointed out above. NORAD wasn’t faced with thousands of jet driven Soviet bombers, but maybe several hundred Bear turboprops, and were unlikely to ever purchase anymore. We just didn’t need the Arrow’s capabilities, and a cheaper mix of bomarcs and Voodoos were seen as being a more appropriate choice. That's why other programs like the XF-108 and the YF-12 were cancelled. Its not that the Arrow was technically obsolete, its that it was strategically obsolete as a weapons platform. It was akin to building the Yamato Battleship in 1944; technically impressive, but also fairly useless in the Carrier age. In this case the cheaper, less effective Voodoo was a far better choice than continuing to pay for the Arrow. Well I can’t put together the figures anymore because I don’t have access to the GDP charts from the 1960s as I did before. I do realize now I made a mistake back then, I calculated the costs of continuing the Sparrow II/Astra program onwards, when in fact it was cancelled in 1958. That was one of the most serious increases from what I remembered. I could be wrong about the cost of the program, but it definitely struck me as being unbelievably expensive, for a country with limited means like Canada.

So blowing 3% on our GDP for an obsolete fighter was a good move? There are so many other worthwhile things the government could have spent its money on, not just the arrow. Even the great CD Howe, the person who initiated the project saw it as a disaster. The Pearson and his liberals were going to campaign against it the next election. Avro was going to get axed no matter what. I know you're kidding, but I'm far from a diefenpologist. I don't think he's even on the same scale to Mike, who I consider the greatest Canadian Prime Minister. And I'm all for protecting canadian industries, but I can't ignore when it was done at a disasterous cost to the public interest. I don't lay all the blame on Diefenbaker for the failure, though DND didn't help matters. However much of it does rest with Avro, who initiated an incredibly ambitious project and made some fairly questionable decisions in the design process that led to massive cost overruns. The case is actually taught in public administration courses of how not to run a procurement project. A failure as epic as the Arrow was going to have recriminations no matter what. What happened with Avro was unfortunate, but it was largely the company's own doing. Now could Dief do something to soften the blow? Maybe, but there was no way for the government to save 14,000 jobs. A lightweight fighter project or something else might have been sustained. But then again should it have been Avro with its obvious failings in management? I'm personally skeptical. Canada was too small a market to sustain a major defence aircraft manufactor on the scale of Avro. Even in the U.S. major contractors were starting to fold in too. Its an unfortunate point in our history for sure, but I'm not going to gloss it over with a nationalist paint and romantic visions of our history.

Meh. Thanks for saving us from the greatest military procurement disaster of all time. I once did a rough calculation and if the cost overruns ran their course, the project was set to eat up over three percent of Canada's entire GDP in the years following 1960. We don't spend even three percent today on the entire defence budget. We weren't just responsible for the Fighter; we actually took over the Sparrow II program, and a radar program. The Americans had a better fighter on the boards at the time, the XF-108, which would have been far cheaper to procure. And its also important to take a good look at the changing situation. All major high speed interceptor projects were dead by 1960, there was just no need for them anymore, because of the aggressive reconnaissance operations put forward by Eisenhower (RB-47 raids, U-2 flights and finally Corona) discovered the USSR had very few manned bombers able to reach North America. Sputnik, and the first Soviet ICBMs became the greater threat. Spending hundreds of millions on a handful of Interceptors for an almost non-existent threat was indefensible. I think Deif and George Pearkes would have faced even greater controversy if he had not cancelled the programme at the time that they did.

Hey guys, I've listened to a couple of your other podcasts, and I thought this one was pretty on the mark. "Its all about rocking women into space orgasms"... brilliant. I actually expected something like what the resident bashers here believed to be the "only legitimate opinion" on macross 7, but I was pleasantly surprised by your take on it and had a great laugh in the process. I thought it was waaaaay better than if you had simply bashed it or lavished praise on it, as some might have done. Actually, because of this episode, I've decided to subscribe to your podcast full time. Keep it up.