David Hingtgen

No Jetfires around here, but did see the new Scouts and Ravage for the first time. I very much liked Ravage in the movie (Zoid fan), but I'm kinda disappointed that the colors of the toy seem off---purple eye, black with lots of pale silver overall? Really looked very gunmetal overall to me on-screen. Plus, the tail doesn't seem removable/swappable. .

Yet another thing we need the local fan-artists to draw...

All the movie-bots would do well to emulate that design---it's more "intricate" than G1, but it's still very clear what it turns into--there's Apache parts all over it. (I saw that a few days ago, but still really like the design)

The more I see of Rottentomatoes, the more I think their measurement system is flawed. It's pass/fail in essence. A movie that ranks an "F" is rated the same as "C+" really. IIRC it's either an A/B movie, or not. If there's a lot of people straddling the C+/B- line, then the numbers get REALLY skewed---I think that's the difference between the first and second movies, Tomato-meter-wise. Same reason such a wide range of movies all have 90%+. The A+ and the B- movies all are ranked equally. People just agree "above average"---not that one movie is "good" and one is "amazing". (I use a lot of Pixar movies as my judgement---there's a good amount of variance in quality, but all are good---that shows at Rottentomatoes)

I don't recall his arms being that buff. He must have talked to Agent One recently.

Warning----something that makes the F-35 look good/cool: http://www.es.northropgrumman.com/solution...eodasvideo.html One step closer to valk cockpits.

Boeing's screwed. The 787 issue isn't minor. It was the wing starting to delaminate at some 30% below the stresses required for certification. You can't "patch" a 30% lack of structural integrity for the wing-to-fuselage connection. ::edit:: More technical explanation with pics: http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/flightbl...ng-th.html#more

Buy Ransack, even though he's not an on-screen character.

As do I.

IMHO the fight scenes were only a bit zoomed out. I could now tell what was going on 50% of the time, instead of 25% of the time. Still needs more zooming-out. Would especially have liked a bit more zooming-out on Devastator's combination scene.

Seems the 787's engine run-up and control check last week was all smoke and mirrors before the Paris Airshow--make it look like they're days away from first flight, when they know darn well that the day after the show is over they're going to announce another modification to do. They knew about this issue in May.

Overall comments: About the same as the first. A bit worse overall probably. IMHO, the bad parts weren't as bad as the first, the good parts weren't as good as the first. More homogenous. Starscream fans will be happy due to him having probably 10x more dialogue and characterization that the first. (though that wouldn't take much). IMHO, there seemed to be fewer (or at least less "dramatic") transformations--especially of those I wanted to see transform! Spoilery comments:

No problems with Grace in that regard---she's older than she looks.

Heh, was wondering who'd post that. (I didn't know if it should go here or in the airplane vs thread) PS---that's about the slowest version of the Hornet around.

It's Namco. They make tons of DLC that no one wants (AC6), and make almost no DLC for stuff people do want (SC4). I'm still waiting for more Nightmare armor parts...

If real----who'd have suspected there'd be a group of Super Flankers in the game. Bet that they're bad guys. Probably invincible too, until the plot allows you to take one down.

Interesting--VFA-131 didn't have the bird-slicers last time I checked.

I'd buy a nice, new, small *TV* version in an instant. I still like the TV version better if for no other reason than a superior transformation/cruiser mode. It actually looks like a ship. DYRL version looks like battroid laying face-down.

8800 series is too low IMHO, GTX260/4870 are a decent step up. Not worth paying for as an upgrade from an 8800, but if you're starting from scratch---worth the extra money. Can they fit in a micro-ATX, or will standard ATX be required for them? (and any possible decent future graphics upgrade)

Just from looking at it I honestly thought it had been rendered a static mockup due to the mods, but apparently it actually does run. Nigh-impossible to see the screens in the full noon sun, but the left one actually displays the roof-mounted camera's view. http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123154252

Just got back from the airshow. Saw A-10 demo from the car (took longer to get there than usual--extra crowded) Saw Harrier, talked to pilot, bought squadron patch. Climbed up Harrier to look into cockpit (first step's pretty high up). Sat in a Blackhawk. Watched Golden Knights. Watched Harrier demo. Watched Blue Angels. Lighting SUCKED this year for pics, everything's back-lit. Just a few of the decent ones, and a video. (the video looked a lot better before Photobucket did whatever it is they do--I had already converted it into FLV, but that wasn't enough for them apparently) Harrier yawing and sidling into a vertical landing:

I do like that list quite a bit overall, thanks much, just a few tweaks: 1. I'd prefer it not have an E8400, as that's what I have in mine! Purely a pointless envy thing, but the problem is E8200/8300s etc are harder to find, so that's why I was thinking E7600. Or maybe I can buy an E8600 and sell them my E8400 for their new PC. Though it is still true as it was a year ago when it cost more---the E8400 is about the best bang for the buck there is. 2. Case is bigger than preferred. Anything in the 16in by 16in range? 3. That seems a bit cheap for a 4870. I've always used nvidia cards, but I don't really have a preference (nor does who will actually be using the PC) (yes, I'm actually complaining about saving money there----graphics cards will show differences in quality easily IMHO, and shouldn't be skimped on) 4. Bit cheaper mobo? That seems fairly high-end for what's going to be put into it, and Gigabyte seems to have several other P45-based ones. 5. Powersupply is overkill IMHO, probably go with the 500w version of that one. PS----what's the most reliable, longest-lived hard drive one can get right now? That'd be the best for this PC. Assume it's going to be the PC's only drive, and it should last for many years.

Ok, got a new task----new PC for at most $1000, mainly just for surfing, but would like to play Starcraft 2 and Diablo 3 decently on a fairly small screen (probably 17in). (yeah, it's hard to build to future specs, but take a guess). If it could still run those games ok without spending a grand, do so. Doesn't need much potential for upgradability nor future-proofing----only upgrade it's likely to ever get is graphics/RAM. It will never be overclocked at all, and will use the stock CPU and graphics coolers. I'm thinking GTX 260 and an E7600 to start? No idea what mobo, though I like Gigabyte's stuff. Oh yeah--should be a fairly small PC too. No Antec Solo/Sonata cases or anything. Should be a fairly simple case---it's not going to be out on display. (honestly, finding THAT has been the hardest thing so far--if you DON'T want a half-dozen fans and glowing transparent case sides there's not much choice---simple cases tend to be giant all-steel monsters) Exact parts may very well end up being "what combos are available that week at Newegg" (want to get everything from one place---Newegg or Tigerdirect)---or just buy a complete barebones kit from Tiger.

It's suprising how "bad" scanned faces can look, and how hand-sculpted can look "more accurate".

MP SS is 1/60. I'd take a Ransack comparison pic, but my TC is in pieces. (if the humidity was ever below 90% I could actually paint it and put it back together) A quick Wiki-check and measurement gives me 1/69 for Ransack based on wingspan.