David Hingtgen

I'm thinking a VF-11C would be an all new release, since the standard B and C schemes are very different. And there's no way they'd pass up the opportunity for another repaint. But it's such an obvious choice---only need a new gunpod, and new nozzles on the booster packs, to make a C from a B. And a D isn't much more work--take the C and add a new head, and new canopy/nose (which with the -11's transformation won't affect anything at all--you could put on Mylene's MAXL front end and it wouldn't affect anything). The issue is the M7 license. Graham's said for years Yamato won't get it, and that creates a problem, as all the good schemes and variants of the -11 and -22 are M7 exclusives. I think the VF-11C has only appeared in M7, with M+ and M3 having the B. I plan on replaying M3 soon to check exactly which variants/schemes appear in it. Only hope is M3--I don't know if Yamato has that license or would be willing to get it, but that would give Max and Milia schemes for almost every valk--including Milia's VF-11 that was also seen in M7. The -11 looks especially good in M&M colors. If only M3 had included the -22 instead of just the -21. (the -19 and -21 were M+ colors only, the only valks in the game not in M&M colors) For those that haven't seen it, here's Milia's VF-11 from M3. I think it was painted identically (or very close) in M7, but I don't have any screen caps of it. Either way, I think it's among he best of the Milia-painted valks. (With -17 and -4 being the worst)

Sorry Azrael, I'm reopening it. I am NOT going to let a thread like this get derailed by "certain elements", as this is exactly how I got my own 48th VF-1J Milia--asking fellow MW'ers if there's going to be a reissue, or any left not on Ebay. But to everyone else---be nice.

Just gotta make the VF-11's fins fold the other way (the way Kawamori designed, not the way the Yamato ones did) and you can have way bigger fins. Combined with folding gear to make the leg bigger inside, and you can easily fix the earlier VF-11's main flaw--the itty-bitty tailfins. That's the main reason I started talking about gear in the YF-19 thread---the original VF-11 toy's fin size was determined by two things: 1. The space the gear inside took up--since the gear well and retracted fins occupied the same area inside the leg. Remember that lowering the gear actually caused the fins to pop open. 2. The fact that Yamato had them fold the wrong way. Now, if they fold them the right way, you can double their size easily. But even twice as big isn't as big as they should be. But if you can get folding gear (doesn't need to compress at all, wouldn't help--simply need a 90 degree twist) then you can make a more shallow well, and have more room for the fin. Though I have been thinking--due to the VF-11's fins being canted out, they also retract angled in---so you may actually want like a 45-degree twist, or even no twise, to get the top of the wheel as far over to one side as possible, to allow the angled fin to fit. (Yes, I've put a lot of thought into how to fit big fins into a VF-11's legs--the most important thing is to fold them Kawamori's way---which is the way I figured out myself years ago, but then discovered recently that's how Kawamori originally drew it--Yamato was just wrong all these years) The YF-19's main gear poses no problems--the gear's small, the legs are huge. The nose-gear however---well, that's more a function of simply having the there in the first place. The only way to get a small belly is to eliminate the gear entirely, as even a small well gets in the way of the transformation due to the "spine" of battroid mode splitting. (or use the ultra-sucky "wheels on the door" that the original Yamato used)

There's a difference between "copying" and "inspiration". Taking a close look at something, then doing something similar--that's not copying. All Yamato really needs is some "inspiration" from the most ingenious parts of it. You gotta admit--there's only so many ways to make a YF-21 transform, and Yamato already has Kawamori's approval to use his design. And the best parts of the D'Stance transformation is what Kawamori already designed into it---it's just that they're the only ones who've implemented them. So it's more a matter of "seeing how to make Kawamori's design work". D'stance can't claim the YF-21's transformation----Kawamori designed it, not them. They can only claim a particular variation, 95% of which is already independently shared with every other transforming YF-21. At the moment, I mainly want pics of the shoulder, and how it goes into the wing/body. That whole area is the key to everything IMHO. Plus the fact that they have done in 3D what I still haven't been able to figure out from Kawamori's drawing of the YF-21's transformation--he draws it like D'stance did it, but I still haven't quite figured out what rotates how. PS--If I had one, I'd probably make a personal casting of the canopy, head and belly plates, so I could alter them to make a VF-22. Then paint it in Milia colors! Based on years of comments from Graham, it seems unlikely Yamato will ever acquire the M7 license, thus no Max and Milia VF-22's.

scand--they were just unfolding, going half-way to GERWALK mode. The old one could that if you wanted--you just had to mostly transform it to fighter, then transform it back without folding the wings. Nani--want me to rename this to the "Future 1/60 valk speculation" thread or something? I think it's a good idea, as opposed to a bunch of dedicated threads for each valk. (I want a VF-14 now, having just looked at it again)

Should be blue, don't know if it's the scan or the photo or the model itself. It's a VF-19S from Macross 7, in Emerald Force colors (the counterpart to Gamlin's Diamond Force). Here's the boxart, looks much better there: http://www.macrossworld.com/macross/models.../she_vf19sb.jpg Anyways, I was thinking earlier we should split off the YF-21/VF-11 discussion into a new thread, and Nani started one today, so all non-YF-19 comments should go there starting now. (Any "new M+ valk" thread inevitably turns into "all of them" as they are so linked--we KNOW a new -21 has to be coming because of the new -19)

Ok, now it's time to close the thread. PS--I go to TBDX too. As I'm sure quite a lot of MW'ers do. Thread is closed (instead of deleted) to preserve it for posterity's sake---other mods are welcome to review it.

You just double-posted. Was that intentional, or did you mean to do something else?

I would however like a response to my last question--and I shall ask (and post here) no more. Were you at all serious about the whole "any pic with a no photos sign must have been taken by some low-class law-breaker" comment? (And FYI, none of the pics were mine or any other Mod's, so don't worry about insulting me or anything)

Fellow MW'ers----Why do you think I haven't closed the thread already? I'm sure it won't last another 6 hours, but I'm keeping it open for a while for a reason. If it really gets out of hand it'll be stopped, but for the moment, I'd like to watch this discussion play out.

Since the YF-19 and VF-0's at both WF and Chara Hobby had the no photos sign, does that mean every pic we have was taken by some "low-class law-breaker?"

Well, be sure to go to every single site that has a photo of the new 1/60 YF-19 or low-vis VF-0 and tell them they broke the law. I could provide a list to get you started--including some of the ones I got the pics from, which obviously couldn't be from ToyBoxDX members which you claim most Japan show photos are from, as they wouldn't have taken illegal photos.

So you mock the photos your friends take?

Well, if you feel the need to comment on MW member's photography skills totally unrelated to the thread's topic, there's plenty of pictures here taken by our own members. Even some in the site's own toy reviews. Try this one by "Mr. Parkes" http://www.macrossworld.com/macross/toys/_...yamato_yf19.htm Why don't you give us your opinion on his photography skills? And also let us know how his toy reviewing style compares to yours.

FYI, I deleted your "welcome" thread. Why? 1. It was the most self-praising, arrogant, pompous thing I've read here in months. It reminded me immediately of AGENTONE. (That last sentence is for MW members for comparison) 2. What the heck was up with the post you made in the VF-0A thread? You come here and mock my photography skills first thing? The lighting and how the toy's colors appear? A. I think most people think the latest full-screen pics of the VF-0A and Ghost are quite good, clear shots of them. B. IT'S NOT MY PIC! I just posted it. Kinda like how most every "Japanese toy" forum on the planet is currently doing--people scour the web for pics, and post them/link when they find them so we can all see them. I'm going to assume you knew it wasn't my pic and were just joshing the photographer or something, because if you didn't I don't even know what to say, but even if you did, you made an *incredibly* stupid post. 3. Combined with what EXO had already closed of yours based on other member's requests, I found it easier to just delete that thread---EXO had already dealt with some of your stuff, but you made one of the dumbest, most pointless posts I've seen on here in years. Directed towards me. So I upgraded it from "closed" to "deleted". In the future I'll probably keep posts like that closed but viewable so everyone can see what/why I did what I did. Most people here know that "personal attacks on another MW member" will result in immediate warnings/moderation from me---and personal attacks on me--well, you figure it out. PS---99.9% of mod actions go unexplained. I'm one of the few here that will respond to a "why'd this happen" request. I'm answering this mainly because you're blaming EXO for something he didn't do.

Maybe it's your sig?

I was thinking that too, I just wasn't going to say it. The greatest gift is sharing...

I always thought they were blasted off the same way the YF-19 and -21 lose their FAST packs earlier when they fight each other (they each lose a major piece at the same time)---and I'd have to frame-by-frame, but I thought one arm was gone already at the start of the scene, then the Ghost blasts off the other three limbs, then Guld transforms and rams it with what's left of the YF-21. Regardless of how it happens, the point is that the YF-21 can still transform into fighter mode and fight having lost most of its battroid mode (including the entire belly-plate assembly)---which is pretty cool. If any other valk loses its arms and legs--there's not much left.

FYI, I know a guy who does steerable/rotating metal landing gear at 1/400 scale for airliners. Like, .1mm tubes and such... Builds the axles from scratch from needles I think. For solid metal diecast planes. And I think he's done a few 1/200. The 1/200 airliners weigh far more than any Yamato ever would. Actually, a 1/400 747 weighs more than a Yamato 1/48 I think. Haven't seen one collapse yet. The parts are nearly microscopic, but diecast is frankly very weak---actual aluminum or steel tubing is far stronger. (Diecast is mostly zinc with a dash of magnesium, aluminum and copper---little better than pot metal) Also, just follow real planes--you don't arbitrarily slice the strut in half and try to make two tubes of similar diameter slide into each other---the lower, smaller oleo strut goes into the thicker main strut. There's supposed to be an obvious size difference, so that the main strut (tubular) can have much thicker side walls---otherwise real planes would be collapsing their thin-wall tubular gear struts all the time. Ok, here's an F-14's nosegear kneeling sequence. See how the thinner oleo (lower, shiny silver right above the tires) strut fits into the much thicker main (white, lots of tubing and framing etc) strut? This also shows how the catapult launch bar works--it's far too short to reach the ground when the gear is extended (even if the bar was rotated down)--it can only reach the ground when the strut is fully compressed---Yamato makes the bars far too large, so that they can reach the ground it's not compressed--which is wrong--it shouldn't be able to, and Kawamori doesn't draw it that way--he copies the F-14/18 etc exactly, in that the gear must compress down for the bar to reach the ground. Also, here's an F-14 main gear retracted, with the wheels rotated. The wheels simply twist 90 degrees. It's exactly as if the main gear had steering like the nosegear does----and they turned perfectly to the side, then the gear came up. Tthe wheels lay flat in the bay, and the bay can be much more shallow. Otherwise it'd have to be tall enough to accomodate the round shape of the whole tire and wheel, rather than simply be tall enough to accomodate the tire's tread-width. (The F-14's not the best example, as it has "fat" tires---most planes have a more obvious difference---I'll try to find an F-16 nosegear, that one's really obvious how much space it saves) Kawamori has all his valks save the VF-17 do this. Also, the strut's hinge point must be deeper in the well if you *don't* do this, or you have to have the strut retract up beyond the horizontal, maybe 10 degrees above horizontal, to make room for the lower part of the non-turned wheel--which again makes the wheel bay taller to accomodate the slightly more vertical strut. (The 1/60 has more of a "stuts retract futher than horizontal" solution, while the 1/48 does more of the "strut hinge is deep inside the well, making the stut deeper in the well").

Box photos are almost always hand-painted prototypes, rather than the real thing. It allows them to get the packaging ready earlier, and makes the product look better---as a hand-painted one usually has more details etc. than a mass-produced one.

It's not so much length as depth. We need rotating gear more than extending/compressing gear. That'd cut the depth required for wheel wells in half. But it's equally easy to implement---it's how most real fighters do it, and how Kawamori designs every valk (excluding the VF-17) to do. What you drew would certainly help most nosegears though, and would also allow another issue I have with recent valks--GIGANTIC catapult launch bars on the nose. Real planes kneel down so the launch bar can reach----the launch bar isn't big enough to reach down to the catapult in normal conditions. Yamato toys can't kneel, so the launch bar is like 3x as big as it should be, to reach the ground. Yamato frankly has greatly advanced most parts of the valks, yet still has the landing gear of a 1955 tin toy! If they would spend 1/10 the money on the gear that they do on working airbrakes etc, they could have much better gear that'd fit in much much smaller wells, allowing better fighter and battroid modes. A lot of it comes down to "we have to make this area bigger to accomodate the gigantic wheel bay inside". Or "the wheel bay takes up so much room inside the leg/nose, this part has to be way smaller to get out of the way". If they had rotating gear (simple and easy to do) they could make the wells half as deep. And if they had compressing gear (like Gatillero drew) they could also be half as long. I bet a wheel bay for the nose gear only 1/4 as big could have helped the YF-19's belly a lot. The alternative is removable gear. Either way, it leads to much smaller gear bays. You either have to have rotating wheels/compressing struts, or removable gear. Yamato's "simple working gear" leads to gigantic wheel bays that interfere with everything around them. Real plane manufacturers have spent decades coming up with ways to make landing gear fit into as small a space as possible--and most of them are very simple to implement, and have even been found in small diecast model jets, etc. PS--you did a twist-and-lock? Incorporating a 90-degree turn of the wheels? That's exactly what nearly every valk could use for the main gear. PPS--I am so going to scan my WAPJ F-14 schematic showing the gear rotation. Only drawing I've ever found that actually shows it--despite it occuring on so many planes. Such a simple concept, but hard to explain (since wheels and tires rotate anyways, it's hard to explain how they rotate the OTHER way)

The Dstance does all of that. Arms and legs can be removed for "Guld's final 30 secs", but they do not need to be for transformation. The only thing that needs to be swapped is the gear, if you want the gear down in fighter mode. Showing yet again, just how good a valk you can make if you sacrifice working retractable gear.

I never figured out why the head is "double layered/folded"--no others do it, it's totally contradictory to the lineart, and it doesn't seem to improve anything. My only guess is "artistic style to alter the length of the forward fuselage". The most obvious clue its there in fighter mode is the extreme distance between the canopy and the large yellow blade antenna.

No, but it's the best YF-21 ever by a factor of ten and is what we all want Yamato to copy, as it's far better than anything else and frankly IMHO better than Yamato could do themselves. I wonder what a D'Stance YF-19 would have been like... If they do a YF-21 like that, and make a revised VF-11 with tailfins that actually *fold the right way*, we'd have *good* versions of all M+ valks finally. *the reason the Yamato VF-11's tailfins are so small are because Yamato got the folding backwards and at the wrong place---Kawamori drew them going the other way and pivoting at the other end---you can get WAY bigger fins to fit in the legs if you actually do it how he designed it. The fins are actually shaped to fit inside the leg quite nicely---if you fold them the right way. As Yamato did it, they had to make them like 1/3 as big as they shold be, as they effectively ended up "upside down" inside the leg compared to Kawamori's design, so they didn't fit at all without being severely shrunken.

We need lots of pics, especially the shoulder/arm transformation. That's the #1 place where it blows away all other YF-21's.