David Hingtgen

Gaijin--thanks much for the info. The two highest-rated decently-priced 32's seem to be the Sharp LC-32D50U, and Samsung LN-T3253H currently. I'll check out the Panasonics, too. (I'm looking to spend up to about a grand, perferably more like 800----I plan to make use of a BestBuy 12% off coupon and get some certificates back via their reward zone program---they're really the only electronics store in the area). Those two TV's should have a price drop anyways in 6 months, plus it'll be the holiday season. And that's all assuming I have a grand to spend in 6 months! Of course, there will probably be new TV's by then. A big problem with looking/shopping for TV's at BestBuy though is incredibly inconsistent stocking of TV brands. 1 month, they'll have the whole Sharp line, and no Samsung. Next month, half Sony, half Toshiba. The next---very little name brand, all cheap stuff. There are many times when I'll go look at BB, find nothing---then head to Sears and find lots of good sets! But Sears has the exact same problem--entire brands come and go, they seem to get random shipments from random companies. PS---my bedroom TV is purely for gaming and movies. It's not even hooked up to cable. So SD picture quality is of no concern. To make a final decision on size, I think I'm just going to have to do what I did when I got the last TV---make a 1:1 cardboard mock-up and see how big it really is, sitting where I plan to put it.

Photo of the day, and good for getting a sense of scale:

The new Starscream is clearly based off of the S-37. And Kawamori likes to joke that the S-37 was based off of the YF-19.

The YF-21 has tiny little mini-heatshields that cover each "window" in the canopy individually in battroid mode. Though I seriously doubt we'll see THAT at 1/60 scale!

Reading around the AC6 forums (not going to do that again, people are already posting blatant spoilers with no warning at all--and NOBODY in the US has played it so it's a spoiler to everybody) I'm going to go try some new things soon. Also--it seems that we will be able to customize the plane's paint. Wonder if it's just an in-game editor, or can we use photoshop and make BMPs and download them to the game? Because while I have no skills for that, I can sure advise the people who can with regards to accuracy, patterns, colors, etc. Anyone here able to recolor planes? VF-101 red-tail F-14B here I come...

With the 21,000lb MOAB being not enough apparently, the B-2 is going to be getting the 30,000lb MOP bomb: http://www.gizmag.com/go/7669/ 30,000lbs. That's like dropping an F-16 on them.

The drawing of Octane clearly has him transform into an A-10 Warthog. The photo? to the right looks more like an A400M if anything, not a C-130. (but it's not an A400M) So what DOES he turn into? Thanks much for the pics.

I can tell just from the thumbnail Starscream's an S-37. ::click:: Yup. Kind of an SD S-37, but definitely inspired by the S-37. ::edit:: With an Sv-51's v.stabs.... PS--can someone give me a direct link, or just post a pic, of Classics Octane? I just can't find anything online. Same request for Sideswipe. PPS--sigh, I was hoping we'd actually get some new molds for the movie, not just repaints. I want a bigger, better Barricade, SS, and Blackout. And repainting Blackout as a Dauphin is just sad. Might as well repaint SS blue and white and say it's Air Force One. (They did use a Dauphin right? I really wasn't looking at the helis during the movie)

I guess we just have to disagree on what a transformation step "detail" is vs that step "overall". Basically, I say that where a piece starts out/what it is made from of the fighter mode is the "overall", but whether it moves above or below/rotates another piece is the 'detail'. Example: Arms. Both the YF-19 and VF-1 store the arms in the middle of the rear fuselage, between the legs, holding the gunpod. As do the VF-0 and VF-11. "Overall" the arms are the same piece/area in all those valks, and they all swing forward from a point near the head where they attach to the mid-fuselage/chest plate. Some go above the wings, some below. But that last sentence is a minor detail of the transformation that doesn't affect the fact that they all have the arms transform in the same way, starting at the same place, forming the same part of the plane. The YF-21's arms are the sides of the fuselage, and are attached to the intakes. That's a huge difference--merely going above or below the wings in the process doesn't make it like or unlike a minor valk. Just like the Sv-51's 180-degree-turning lower legs (a detail) doesn't change the fact that it still has a VF-0/1/11/19 style of overall leg transformation---the intakes are the hips, the legs are the engine nacelles, and the feet are the nozzles. But I still don't see how a YF-19's legs are any different from a VF-1 or VF-11's. From fighter mode, you pull them straight down and spread the nozzles. I still see the YF-21 as being the most unique valk, transformation-wise, by far. The sheer fact that it can fly without its limbs proves that I think. Take off a YF-19's limbs, and see what you get in fighter mode.

The -19 transforms by lowering the legs, the feet are the engine nozzles, it swings the wings back, swings the arms forward from between the legs, pops its head up, and folds the mid-section of the plane forward over the nose to make the chest. It's pretty close to the VF-1 overall. The details are different, but it's similar. The VF-11 is too. Basically, the YF-21 is a fighter plane shell, over a Q-Rau hiding inside. It's a total shellformer in Transformers notation. Of all Transformers toys that are beyond the "robot under the car/plane" transformation, there's two basic types: A. Limbs/body make up the alt mode parts, just rearranged B. "Shellformer" where the robot is basically whole but encapsulated inside the alt mode. Every valk except the VF-1 is the former, while the YF-21 is the latter.

Basic screen size question: My viewing distance is 4 feet. (I've measured, it's exactly 48 inches from eyeball to screen in my normal sitting spot). Is 32in too big for a 16:9? Quality/options for TV's at 32in seem much greater than 26in. I have a 20in 4:3 now. (This is the bedroom TV, with the 360 and future PS3, not the living room TV) If needed, I could probably move the TV back 8-10 inches, maybe 12, to get a 5ft viewing distance. 30in has pretty much gone away, that was perfect. 26 seems just a LITTLE too small. But 32 is a pretty big jump, especially when it's only 4 feet (or 5) away. Note: I truly abhor the "brightness difference" visible from top to bottom of most LCD's. TV's always talk about viewing angle, but that's left/right. Most TV's now are pretty good about left/right, but can be quite poor in vertical changes, even not moving your head. If I just stand there, I can tell just from looking from the top to the middle to the bottom, that the brightness isn't even. This is really obvious at BestBuy, when they switch to a logo screen---it's all blue, with the yellow tag in the middle. And the top and bottom of the screen are always a darker blue than the middle. Is part of that because at BB you can only ever really see a 60in screen from 3 feet away, or do all LCD's have vertical brightness "consistency" issues? (And thus, I'd want as small of a screen as possible, as far away as possible, to reduce the viewing angle as much as possible) (I also see it in little 14in PC monitors, but those are cheap Dells, also fairly close to your face) Or in other words----what's the best way to reduce the "apparent change in brightness" from the top to the bottom of the screen of an LCD screen? Factored into "what size TV should I buy"? (Because an affordably-priced 26-32in adaptive-LED-backlighting TV's like I really want may be 2+ years away--I won't wait *that* long--I want an HDTV within a year, preferably within 6 months---Xmas would be nice) 6 months from now, the first adaptive LED-backlighting TV's should be in stores, and we'll see how much they are, and if anyone's going to start doing them in sub-46in sizes, etc. I'll either decide to wait if what I want is coming soon/is affordable, or go get a CCFL-lit one then.

Can the -22 remove the gunpods from the belly armor, or are they permanently integrated? I haven't seen M7 in so long I can't remember if Max ever fires in battroid mode or anything.

The -21's battroid mode rocks because it's DIFFERENT. The feet and legs aren't the engines and rear fuselage! The arms don't hold a shield in fighter mode, nor have the gunpod clamped between them! The -19's a bit different, but it's still just a VF-1 with a Z-fold chest in its basic transformation. Even the Sv-51 doesn't have the uniqueness that the -21 does. (And it's a Q-Rau, so that makes Milia's red -22 the coolest one of the entire -21/22 family)

Just buy a PS3---it upconverts all normal DVD's quite nicely, it seems.

::googles:: Dude, Sylar's going to be Spock. That's actually really good casting IMHO. Also, Nimoy's going to be Spock.

The problem is, they seem to have gone with the ski-ramp design, with the "potential" to incorporate catapults in the future built in to the design. They are planning for the future, and since the carriers will out-live the F-35, there might not BE any V/STOL planes in the future to use, and they'll have to fit catapults to have any airwing at all. It'd be a lot easier to just include catapults from the start. Or heck, just one. Use F-35's if you've got them, but keep 1 catapult around for the E-2, or Rafale, or something. Also, catapults would allow the F-35C, which is probably going to have a much easier design process than the F-35B, and will be a better plane in the end.

Hasegawa honestly seems to make most of their money from repacking old kits with new decals, then doubling the price. That won't work as well for battroids, as most "special schemes" are intended for (and only look attractive in) fighter mode. Look at the VF-1: Any tailfin markings are invisible in battroid mode. Nowadays, Hasegawa has many kits that aren't consistently available, even if they had been for years on end---said kit will only be released once or twice a year, in limited quantities, as a limited edition kit with special decals. And it'll cost 2 or 3 times what the "basic" version of the kit did. But if you really need a few more F-18 kits for the raw plastic only, that's the only way to get them. It's how they've been for military planes for years now, and they probably want to do the same with Macross.

The old Yamato 1/72 could do high-speed mode, and had movable thrust vector paddles--I'd expect the new and improved one to as well.

1 new theme, and 1 new set of gamer pics are up today. (#4 for each) Can't really tell what's in the new theme. New gamer pics are A-10 and Rafale. It's pretty clear they're releasing gamer pics in pairs of random planes. I'll eventually purchase whatever gamer pic sets have the F-14B/D, and YF-23.

With the latest backwards compatability update, the 360 can now play every Xbox game I want it to, so I have utterly no use for my Xbox now. I'm thinking--there's often system trade-in specials, especially when new ones come out, or any other time system sales will go up. (I got double normal value for my old PS2 when the PStwo came out--cost me only 50 bucks to "upgrade") Anyone know/think there'll be an XBox trade-in bonus when Halo 3 comes out, since they'll be expecting a lot of new 360 owners just for that? But if it's only if the trade-in is to be applied to a new 360, that's pointless for me.

Any truth to the rumors of Blu-Ray already winning the format war? The $179 HD drive deal is tempting, but kind of a waste if in 18 months Blu-Ray is way ahead of HD-DVD and support falls away. It's more expensive, but I'd probably rather buy a PS3. (I'll probably end up with a PS3 before an HD TV, as the HD TV I want still doesn't exist--it will, just probably not in the next 9 months) 26-32in with adaptive LED backlighting. That's what I want. (Should we also expand the thread to include HD TV's?)

Seacons as a TF club exclusive? Might be cheaper to go buy a C9 G1 set. (Better colors, too--and now that there's FINALLY reproduction stickers available, it's pretty easy to have a very nice-looking G1 Piranacon---note the lack of the H)

When I first heard about this, my first thought was "I bet it's something REALLY common, that only an utter moron would fail to recognize"--and I was right. Latest version of the story: ""Gameboy Sparks Main Terminal Evacuation, Long Beach CA Airport The main terminal at the Long Beach, CA Airport has been evacuated and at least 100 people were forced to wait outside until officials determined if the threat was legitimate. All outbound flights have been put on hold due to the threat, which was a suspicious package, revealed to be a gameboy. Apparently someone with a suitcase was going through security at 9:30 AM when officials realized there was something of concern inside the suitcase, but have now discovered it was only a video game. Agency spokeswoman Jennifer Peppin said: "It certainly was nothing but it certainly looked like something. It had all the wires and components that you would see in an explosive device." Sure am glad the TSA is looking out for us, if they can't tell a Gameboy from a bomb. I sure hope no one sends a PSP through, they'd really freak out over some that high-tech and "unusual"--since apparently even a GB isn't common enough to be identified by your average security guard.

Oooh, Wing Zero? I'll download the demo just for that. But I doubt I'll buy the game--I've tried several Dynasty etc demos, never really got into it. I like hack and slash, but the Dynasty series is such PURE hack and slash I get bored and my fingers hurt.

The entire underside and sides of the fuselage are gone. The "shutters" are not part of the limbless mode nor intended to smooth out the area---they are the vanes for deflecting the engine thrust in GERWALK mode and are always present. They are merely exposed by the loss of the belly. The YF-21 has an intake/nacelle configuration very similar to the YF-23, with the intake trunking angling upwards as you go in, thus the loss of the belly doesn't interrupt airflow to the engines, as the intake trunking stays near the top of the fuselage. (With the shutters forming the underside of the intake trunking---more properly I think they'd be called louvers, but they act as vanes/deflectors)