David Hingtgen

I would assume "rotate 180 degress to fit in the torso area".

Just a quick comment on seeing it last night: The 777 was done exceptionally well, far better than any airliner in a movie I've seen in a long time---amazingly, it's even better than the real actual 747 used in "Air Force One" in a few ways. Little things like spoiler deployment, etc. Very nicely done, rather than "lets just have all the flaps moving in ways they can't". Also--the breakup sequence was exactly what'd happen, as a 767 once went into a flat spin, and broke up that way---I wonder if they used that as a reference, as it's one of the few known airliner flat-spin breakups, as well as being a similar aircraft.

Watch for scenes showing the back of the battroid--then it's more obvious that they separated the upper part of the intake from the "hips". Actually, I think the "red part" moves back (towards the engines) rather than the legs/hips moving.

I need to go watch M+ again and get the exact time/frames that show the 'extra' piece in the YF-19's intake transformation sequence. It's not in Kawamori's drawings, but the animators figured out how to reconcile the different shapes. I mentioned it to Graham, but haven't gotten back to him on where it's shown. I'll try to do it tonight. Basically, the upper and lower halves of the intake split--the lower section forms the "hip" while the upper section becomes the "rear skirt armor". Have the red part separate from the blue part:

However, the Hasegawa version just plain looks friggin' awesome, as well as having detailed perfect 3 view schematics, so people "accept" that as the definitive version nowadays, for how fighter mode should look at least. Hasegawa knows planes, and they made it as "real jet-esque" as they could, and so their version of fighter mode looks the most real/acceptable to most people--regardless of conformity to Kawamori's sketches.

I have read that the CG in the Dirge of Cerberus game beats AC's.

Or, again, make it removable and solve the problem entirely... Of course, Yamato is fond of making, huge, carrier-style dual-wheeled extra-beefy nosegears, even in planes which are clearly shown to have thin, single-wheeled nosegears. See their YF-21. I think someone at Yamato just has a dual-wheel beefy-gear fetish or something, and incorporates it into all the designs. Yamato's trademark seems to be big nosegears, regardless of accuracy, and always to compromise fighter mode.

Real pics are always cooler than anything anyone can photoshop: There's another one on the other side of the carrier, they straddled it. Twice.

And proud of it!

Port side in the cargo door facing outwards--AC-130 style.

If you had the v.stabs on a sliding hinge and able to be rotated, you could make them bigger and still fit totally behind the legs. Look at the blue VF-19A pic. Imagine the fins could slide up along their hinges on the legs a bit, then rotate downwards to be behind the legs. As for stuff hanging off: c'mon, it's the YF-19. It has GIGANTIC wings hanging off the hips. Having a bit larger canard or ventral fin or v.stab hanging off won't make the slightest difference in battroid mode compared to what the wings do---but could help a lot in fighter mode.

Designed as a counterpart to Hercules gunships, this is certainly the smallest plane to ever be armed with four AIM-7's and a M197 gatling (the Cobra's gun), the AU-24 Stallion: 17 built, all went to Cambodia. Nobody believes the Sparrows went with them nor could actually be launched (kind of hard without a radar), but some joke they could be a form of improvised JATO...

How much of Computron do you have? It's usually easier/cheaper to buy a whole one than search for parts. You'll end up paying 10 bucks for one little gun...

What it actually is, is a tab from the inner liner of my car's glovebox. It seems to have no purpose other than to snap when you take the the part the glovebox attaches to off, when you replace the air conditioner's fan. (Annoyingly I found you can EASILY bend it out of the way to remove it without snapping, but you can only see that it's possible if you're upside down laying on your back on the passenger seat's floor, looking up from below the dash)

MEK will melt MOST plastics, as it's a ingredient in many model cements/glues. Many people use raw MEK for gluing models together, few things are better (nor brain-cell-killing).

Generally, yes. (go for acrylic)

Most every plane from the F-15 on has the computer automatically move the rudder(s) to counteract the yaw induced by firing the gun. If there were a problem with the system, I'd think it'd be easy to correct. Anyways---most people are thinking the ADT-X is a twin-engine plane.

What type of plastic snaps along an incredibly clean line? It's like glass-smooth on both sides. No tears/jags/peeling/bending.

If you're really concerned about the match, test a sample and let it dry. Colors can change a lot when they dry. (though this affects pale grey/white less than most)

Nope, not acetyl/Delrin, I'd recognize that in a second. (I dabble in HO scale)

99% of these turn out to be something else, but this is popping up a lot of places (as in good places, not BeyondTopSecret): Said to be the RCS model of Japan's ADT-X fighter, with a model to be flown later this year. It's the low-fat version of the F-35.

Nied--don't you mean F-16 h.stabs, not v.stabs? And I don't think it was a problem so much as an improvement. Ironically it seems easier to fix aerodynamic problems than mechanical/electical problems, historically. It's not the planes, its their systems... Anyways--ironically, the F-16 has actually had one of its ram-air avionics cooling scoop deleted recently----unnecessary.

I do believe it's thermoset---Plastruct can at least have SOME effect on most anything, but not this--it was like using water. The wire might work, but actually I found out tonight that the loss of the tab is inconsequential---it doesn't do anything other than break as far as I can tell...

Recent Lego ships that could float had a single-piece hull, as well as a special "ballast" brick or two installed low in the hull. However, early ones did have multi-piece hulls, but I don't know if they could inherently float---they had attachement points for individual motors and floatation devices below etc, it may be that the hull flooded but the add-on parts kept it from sinking. Very similar to many toy/model ships you see today, that have removable motors for display.

Not a model, but I have a plastic tab that snapped off something and it is absolutely impervious to everything I have---standard styrene cement, Plastruct's solvent, superglue. Will epoxy hold at all? Does JB Weld work in situations like that?