David Hingtgen

Yup. Think about how it transforms to battroid. Also, the VF-11 has a high-speed mode just like the YF-19. PS---as I thought I remembered, the VFX-2 VF-22 has a scheme very similar to a certain blue-haired ace's. Can Yamato make the VFX scheme but "accidently" have a production run where the shade of blue is too light, coincidentally matching said ace's plane? :wink wink, nudge nudge: And maybe REALLY screw up one run and use red...

Holy Lonely Light, and My Friends--both of which I've listened to in my car.

Turned out really well!

While this thread is back up, I'll comment that I visited my brother a few weeks ago, and his 360 is really quiet. So I bought a new one about 3 weeks ago. Quieter than the previous one, but not nearly as quiet as my brother's. Barely livable, but we'll see how long it lasts-- Oblivion "updated" my 360 (the oblivion disc itself, the 360 has never been online) and ever since that happened, DOA 4 stutters at a certain spot in the opening. As I will soon approach the point of "can't do hassle-free return to Best Buy" I might get an extended warranty.

Basically, a goal of perfection. Sigma=statspeak for standard of deviation. 6=number of deviations. Thus 6 standard deviations off of normal (hopefully ABOVE) for quality. Thus 99.9997% of products are ok. That costs money to implement, but it's recouped by not having any returns or warranty issues or repairs or recalls, and high customer satisfaction and loyalty. (Technically it's not 6 sigma, it's really 4.5---but 6 sounds a lot better and has alliteration) Side note: I hated stats (both of them) more than any other class, ever. Of course, Yamato doesn't make enough items AFAIK to really use it. <3.4 defects per million is the goal--does Yamato come anywhere near a million valks? Lean manufacturing is a fancy way of saying "eliminate waste"---everything from material used to time. (and of course, employees) It goes deep, as literally EVERYTHING can be considered a potential for waste--from negotiating contracts to customer relationships to just how good of a warranty really needs to be provided. Heavily associated with 6 sigma because having 99.9996% perfect products greatly reduces many types of waste.

Exactly why it should have removable ones. Yamato's already done removable YF-21 gear in the FP version, but they could have been done a lot better if they had designed it like that originally. Of course, if they could get the wheels to twist 90 degrees like real ones, it'd help a lot. That's how Kawamori designs most of them (even the VF-1), that's how most modern fighters do it---that's the only way to get gear to fold into shallow wells. Just adding a simple twist-hinge can make most gear fit into a well half as deep as it'd otherwise need. (Assuming single-wheel gear--it doesn't help twin-wheel ones like most nosegear) For true "art of folding landing gear" watch an F-111 bring its gear up. I still have no idea exactly what happens. It like scissor-folds inside out. The gear is like 3 times bigger than the gear well... PS---Graham, why IS the YF-19 belly so thick? The previous one had retractable gear (though crude) and I don't recall it being nearly as bad. Especially a question as you move forward--the YF-19 nose gear retracts backwards, with the wheels at the rear of the bay---the front part of the gear well/belly bulge should only need be deep enough to accomodate the strut itself, yet it looks to be thickest under the canards. (And further looking makes me think it's not so much the thickness that looks bad, but the lack of curve---the belly should be concave, even if not overtly--but the Yamato lineart has the belly being a pretty straight line from under the cockpit to the intakes) Narrowing it just a bit directly under the canards would help a lot, I think.

Yeah, I just use the blue Clay Magic. AFAIK only "professional" clay colors mean anything---if it's off the shelf, it's whatever color that manufacturer makes, they're all fairly close at the consumer level. It's not overspray, it's a glob. A long thin glob, very much like you'd get from splattered tar, or gum. Only it's bright blue. So it's thick--probably thicker than the clearcoat itself, laying on top of the clearcoat. And almost rock hard.

Separate post because I just love making this point, as I feel I'm vindicated so often: See the D'Stance YF-21? See how it DOESN'T have retractable gear? Just like the amazing Model Grafix converted Hasegawa YF-19? That's what happens when you accept separate gear parts. Amazing fighter modes. You sacrifice a heck of a lot for working gear, which really isn't worth it. I mean, it's not like it even retracts in the same manner as the "real" one. The Yamato YF-21 doesn't even have its gear in the right part of the plane because of concessions needed to make it with working retraction. It works for the sake of working, not because it's accurate or makes any mode look better. Having a retractable nose gear would screw up the entire front end on the D'Stance, and there's no way that amazingly superior belly would happen with retracting main gear. Maybe that's the main reason the Yamato has such open sides---"retracting gear at any cost to fighter mode". (The SHE didn't have gear mounted in its belly either, and it has better sides/shoulders than the otherwise very similar Yamato--coincidence? Separate gear looks better itself, and makes all modes look better, with fighter mode looking tons better. And if you don't like separate gear simply because it's separate and the transformation is no longer "perfect"---what do you do with FAST packs when they're not installed, or TV-style 1/48 hands? Or RMS-1 missiles when you have all the missile pods installed? No valk can accomodate EVERY piece on itself at once, some pieces just have to be kept separate. Small price to pay for such an amazingly improved fighter mode. But hey, if you think the Yamato YF-21 with its tiny ugly working gear is worth how it looks in fighter mode from the side or below, keep insisting on having not a single piece come off to transform. Not that you would have to remove any pieces to transform it even with removable gear, you only have to swap if you want the gear down. Put it on a stand and you'd never have to swap. Signed, David Hingtgen, huge proponent of removable gear in transforming valks, especially the YF-19 and -21.

VFX-2 gives us a lot of molds, but the schemes are less than great from what I've seen. Anyone got pics showing the major schemes used in VFX-2? I only really know of the sky blue VF-19A. PS to Graham: Max and Milia schemes of almost every valk have appeared all over. M3 had the most by far. Are their VF-22's considered "exclusive" to the Mac7 license? Because frankly those are the most well-known (and best-looking) VF-22's. With Gamlin's not far behind. Without them, it's almost pointless to remold the -21 to make a -22. Also---so the licenses for Macross are all or nothing? Because I know that most airlines give licenses SCHEME BY SCHEME and PLANE BY PLANE. You want to make a model of a United 747-100 in the 1974 scheme? Then you pay United for a license to make a model of a *747* in the *1974* scheme. If you want to model a 737, or the current scheme, then you have to pay a lot more to be licensed for that as well. Can't Yamato get just the "Max and Milia VF-22" license? I know some airlines grant "all inclusive" licenses, but that's usually only when granting an exclusive license to a company---and the Macross licenses are certainly not exclusive to a single company, as Bandai, Yamato, and Hasegawa all possess DYRL licenses. It's kind of pointless to only give all-inclusive licenses at high cost that only a few companies would purchase, when some companies (like Yamato) would be wiling to pay smaller amounts to get just what they wanted. And how exactly are the licenses split? DYRL and SDFM are separate I think--shouldn't M7 and its OVA etc be separate from each other? And isn't Fleet of the Strongest Woman almost non-canon and not part of M7? PPS---D'Stance YF-21 looks better than I remember. Just eliminating that huge gap in the sides in fighter mode does wonders, even if fighter mode isn't flat-sided.

My point was: whoever sculpted it obviously spent many hours toiling over drawings and photos of the real thing. It's panel-by-panel perfect over most of it. Then with the latest revision, they really botched up one particular area. WHY? Did they hire a new sculptor just for the conformal tanks? Was he told to change it to a knowingly incorrect configuration? It'd be like if just before the VF-0A comes out, Yamato decides to sculpt on an extra head laser, and then fill in the auxiliary intakes, eliminating them. Basically, the only scenario to explain it is like this: "Ok, I'm supposed to sculpt on conformal tanks to the F-15. I have tons of reference photos, so I'll do that for 80% of them, but totally ignore the photos and drawings for the front part, and do my own artistic interpretation---and while I'm working on that area I'll go over and add in another gun just because I feel like it---I'm sure that's exactly what my bosses want in going for as realistic and accurate fighter mode as possible, because that's the whole reason we're changing the mold in the first place--a more realistic fighter mode" I ask similar questions every time I see a model etc. plane become LESS accurate as the mold is revised from prototype to final production. You can't get the conformal tanks utterly perfect for 80% of their length without very closely following photgraphs from every angle (it's a complex 3D shape) and constantly comparing your work to the real thing---so why was the front part screwed up?

Re: wing length. There's a VERY simple solution for battroid mode to prevent them from hanging too low or hitting the ground: Angle them back another few degrees when you transform it. They're on hinges, and every pose requires a different angle. The wings aren't locked in place at some 37.45 degree angle in battroid mode (and it changes in all the lineart--they're at whatever angle looks cool, with exaggerated perspective), they're at "whatever angle they need to be at". The original Yamato YF-19 was the same--you could angle them from almost straight down to straight back, depending on how you wanted it to look and what pose it was in. The wings could have been quite a bit longer, and all you'd need to do was angle them "to the next notch back on the little circular plastic hinge piece". Which is why I always wanted finer teeth on the gear, to fine-tune what angle they were at. Half the time they were too low, but the next notch made them too high. PS---about the D'Stance YF-21. If you go WAY back and check the only archived thread about it from 2003, I have one of the first replies, and talk about they did better on the shoulders/sides of the fighter mode! I had totally forgotten I posted that. It's still way off though, and would need more work. You just have to have separate panels folding out from the belly plates--there is just NO WAY to have multiple, round, ball-joint segments of the shoulder, elbow, and arm, make a single flat rectangular shape! Stop trying to do the impossible, and just have the arms tuck further inside (with the legs) and have some panels flip up to cover up the gap. The "other" side of the belly plates aren't used anyways, they could easily accomodate a few simple folding panels, with hinges along their edges. PPS--the D'stance part of MW is still "under construction"--I only have the instructions saved. Anyone still have pics of the actual model?

I'll post the same pic I used at the 2005 boards, but the pic eugimon posted will work just as well: See the big huge crease? That's where the conformal tank and the F-15's own structure meet. The conformal tank is a quite separate part. It's as if Takara put a bunch of putty in the area and blended the two together. The conformal tanks "pinch in" at the top, and are not at all blended with the frame. From head-on, that area should have a pretty distinct kidney/bean shape due to the pinching in/taper caused by the crease. Takara actually has it bulge OUT. It's convex instead of concave. It also eliminates any hope/chance we had of the CFT's being removable, FAST pack-style. (Which I can't figure out why it wasn't done so in the first place--it's Kawamori, who loves nothing more than large removable parts on transforming jets---so why does MP-03 have them molded in place? They could EASILY have been single large pieces of plastic held in with just 2 tabs in fighter mode). Want to cover up all the robot kibble in fighter mode? Take 2 secs and put them on. Just have to take them off (another 2 secs) to transform to fighter mode. It would also eliminate all arm kibble, 2/3 of the intake kibble, and 1/2 of the hip kibble. A win-win situation for everyone, no matter what mode or sculpt you prefer. But no, they're MOLDED ON. Gah, even non-transforming plastic model kits of the F-15E don't have the conformal tanks permanently molded on. Or even diecast ones! As for the cannon vs refuelling port--IT WAS CORRECT ON THE FIRST MOLD. They changed it. Even the very first drawings had it correct, and even showed an open refuelling receptacle--I thought it might be a gimmick they were going to do. The original artist of those drawings, and the original F-15 sculpt, clearly knew what the left and right sides should look like and function. But when they added the conformal tanks, they added a non-existent gun muzzle. And there was no need to even re-sculpt it at all, the conformal tanks don't affect that area. They already have the refuelling port there (and it's still there on the current mold)--they certainly weren't trying to add it in later by adding a gun muzzle in front of it. You don't try to "save costs" by re-sculpting. It was already right, they screwed it up. Leaving it as it was would have cost no money at all, and would have been correct. Since the odds of an acceptable Thundercracker repaint are low (they can't even do SS right, what are the odds we'll get metallic sapphire blue?) I'm seriously considering buying one just to repaint, and have been planning how to carve in the groove needed to make the conformal tanks look right.

Many minutes with a claybar didn't do a thing. Tarminator almost did something. Will try the rubbing compound. I'm amazed how it stuck---isn't that sort of paint supposed to be temporary? PS--anyone tried nanowax?

I know there's a clear Thundercracker--it may have actually been those little PVC "legends of", but it looked more like the G1 mold when I saw it. Been a while, and small blurry pic (bad catalog scan I think) Black Prime---was thinking RiD, sorry if you thought I meant MP. (So many Primes, so many repaints) Anyways, the point that Takara will do "even more than everything we've seen on-screen" for repaints is still there.

I just clayed about 1/4 of my car to prep for my scratch removal/touch-up painting. There's no question it makes a heck of a difference. Plus it's the ONLY way to get off rail dust, which I get a ton of. (Almost every car in town has it, if you look) Don't forget to clay your wheels! Still haven't found any way to get the (I think) blue paint off my car--you know when the city sprays the water lines for construction--somehow I got a glob of it on my rear bumper (the color matches at least), and NOTHING gets it off---I've gotten a small amount off by literally scraping with my thumbnail for a while, but no solvent affects it. I may literally slice it off with a razor.

I've been looking at every (AFAIK) other transforming YF-19 out there, and they all have "correct" size wings. If there's a reason why both the original and new Yamato ones have small wings, I'd love to hear it. I think we've been complaining about small-winged Yamato YF-19's for 5 years now, and there's still no known reason why Yamato makes them that way. Frankly, I don't see how wingspan could possibly affect transformation---they just sit out there. Adding an inch won't do anything other than making fighter mode look better.

Every comment from Hasbro so far has been "even if we do bring it over, it'd be late 2007 at the earliest". There is practicaly zero chance of a US release within the next 12 months. Remember that the UK waited for what, 2 years to get Masterpiece Prime? Hasbro takes their time when they want to. Takara will probably be up to "Clear Sunstorm" by then for repaints... And from the last 2 batches of "latest pics", SS looks "F-14 green-grey" again, sigh. "Gunship grey" has NO green/blue in it. If there's the slightest hint, then it's wrong. How hard is GREY to make? Black+white=grey. Not black+white+green.

1. VF-0D. Change a few parts, get a totally different-looking valk. (And going with the big YF-19 thread, I don't think those parts affect too much--I think only the v.stab area could actually need a redesign--but I don't have much VF-0D art/transformation to go by--they transform so FAST in M0 it's hard to follow, even in freeze-frame) 2. Better QC, parts-wise. WAY too many instances of missing parts, 2 left hands, no gunpod, reversed magnets etc. When we spend triple-digits for a valk, we want all the parts, and the right ones. Also, I notice a fair amount of random gouges, bends, scrapes, scratches on the parts themselves that are frankly inexcusable--it's clearly damage inflicted AFTER being molded, either while being taken out of the mold, or while the toy is being assembled--often after it's already painted. It shouldn't be too much to ask that the toy isn't damaged while in the factory. It'd be like buying a new car with a roof dent and a big scratch on the hood. Also the molds themselves aren't that crisp or smooth. The plastic itself is often quite rough, with a fair amount of flash, especially at edges/corners (related to not being crisp). 3. Tampo print the kites on the sides of the nose, even though they go ACROSS parts that split. Takara/Hasbro have been printing large complex logos across parts that split on their Transformers for years---why can't Yamato? If Takara can print a logo across two halves of the nose of a $10 transforming jet, Yamato sure should be able to for 10x the price. 4. I want a fold booster for the YF-19. Light-up green if possible.

Seriously doubt you'd get 4-channel (rudder/elevator/aileron/throttle) on something like that. You're lucky to get 2-channel (rudder/elevator) on most cheap R/C's. It goes with 4-channel not being for beginners (nor being cheap)

You honestly have to ask if Takara will repaint that? When they re-released the G1 seekers, they made clear ghost THUNDERCRACKER in addition to "ghost" Starscream. And Sunstorm. And clear Sunstorm. And black Starscream. And TV-color Starscream. And I think clear black Starscream. When they do a half-dozen non-canon repaints of a mold, you can bet they'll do the canon ones. And c'mon---they made "unarmored Ultra Magnus" from MP-01. Not making SW and TC would be like Yamato not making Max and Milia's VF-1J's once they had done Hikaru's... Also, Takara likes making black repaints of everything. Even if they do no other repaints, they'll do a black one. And Skywarp is already SUPPOSED to be black. Even if for some unfathomable reason "the king of repaints" decided not to do Skywarp, they'd probably do "Black Starscream". Which is pretty close. And considering the pinky colors used on MP-03, it'd be REALLY close to SW lavender.

I've always seen/heard numbers well above the tens of thousands for most toys/models. But I certainly don't know, so won't argue. Also would like to point out that Yamato has always had piss-poor mold alignment issues, with flash and mis-aligned parts since the beginning. I am not at all impressed by the 1/48's actual molding--not crisp, not even, not symmetrical, with poor fit. They also pay NO attention to the back/underside of parts it seems--if it's hidden in the final product it's left as rough as possible, and that sometimes interferes with fit. It's a lot better than their earlier stuff, but still not up to snuff, especially considering the price. Maybe Yamato flat-out uses cheap molds... Maybe it's that molds to my standard cost 100K...

Yet the half of Xenogears that was released is still my fave game... (Also, unlike say KOTOR2, they actually finished it up quite well, rather than flat out STOPPING the game and leaving loose ends all over the place when they ran out of time/money) And I'll second Valkyrie Profile for beating most anything. It certainly wins for "best reason to play through twice". Nothing else comes close---it's like the entire second half of the game plays out differently when you go for the alternate ending. It's not the last 5 mins that's different, it's the last 15 hours. Interestingly, my fave 2 games ever also have the best 2 soundtracks ever. Xenogears and Valkyrie Profile. Though I think I may have to give the music edge to VP. (Legend of Mana rounds out the top 3 soundtracks ever, but certainly not game) As for Zelda: Ocarina of Time had the most complex/involved dungeons. Certainly the most brain-wracking water puzzle---iron boots on, iron boots off---and you'd spend 20 mins working your way back up just to see what that OTHER switch did, to get ready to get the other ones set up. Zelda 4 is still the best IMHO--yes, "Link's Awakening" on the Gameboy. Black and white. I loved the dungeons and gadgets. Final Fantasy---4,6,7,9,10. Others are forgettable, plotwise IMHO. I think 9 is very underappreciated. It's like a modern 4, and was exactly what I wanted. Just always wish the 4 temples of the fiends were actually DONE---they did a Xenogears there---just TOLD you about what happened, you didn't actually explore them. That could have been 4 very good, important dungeons to go through.

I just find the "Isamu" scheme to be awesome, and pretty much couldn't be improved upon, so I'm happy with just that. Though as I said before--Max and Millia colors. PS--just so people know, I like the VF-19S a lot, and would buy one in Emerald Force (Mac7) colors in a second. I just don't think it'd happen, due to how much remolding some key parts involves. PPS--the YF-19 looks really good in the standard F-18 low-vis scheme, IMHO. Since the VF-1 first low-vis was F-15 style, the YF-19 could be F-18 style--which are the same colors, but a different pattern.

Remember, KC-135's were built to stick their boom into a USAF receptacle, not have a probe stuck into a basket. They have to put a basket onto the boom to refuel any non-USAF plane, and it IS that close on the F-14---the basket practically eats the probe, and it is very stiff/strong compared to most baskets---thus parts tend to break off if there's any contact or bending. F-14 pilot's nickname for the KC-135 is the "Iron Maiden"---unforgiving. Macross73--you mean Air Tran? Also, the main difference between the 777 wing and 767 wing is that the 777 wing has a much higher aspect ratio, and also has greater sweep for higher speed. 777 airfoil is generally similar to the 767. (Most of a 777 is like a 767) The 777 finally reversed a trend of ever-slower airliners. If you chart jet airliner speeds, it's gone downhill ever since the first ones, excluding a brief spike for the early widebodies. The 777's the fastest airliner in 20 years. 747 still beats them all of course (and it SHOULD be even faster, if the other airlines had gone along with Pan Am) Overall I find 777's incredibly boring and non-distinct to fly on. (Ironically I really like 767's, which are probably the most indistinct airliner of all---but I think it's just that it's so well balanced and designed the whole effect just really looks right) United is one of the few to keep the 2-5-2 777 seating, as they used that on their DC-10's (most airlines had their DC-10's like that). Most airlines have gone to 2-4-3 for 777's AFAIK. (or rarely 3-3-3 I think)

Refueling probe door is removed whenever they expect to deal with KC-135's. KC-135's have a nasty habit of breaking the refueling probe doors off of F-14's, in such a way that it's thrown right down the F-14's intake. I presume KC-10's aren't much better. (Basically anything originally designed for USAF planes). Want to see how to model paint touchups? http://s96920072.onlinehome.us/tnt1/101-20..._Gok/tnt119.htm