David Hingtgen

If they'd used Blue ANGELs blue and ThunderBIRDS red, it'd probably look awesome. Or just use all Thunderbirds colors---it looks like the original design did more of a 90/10 Thunderbirds/Blue Angels split than a mix of each. Here we could get into a debate about "intended" vs "on-screen" or whatever colors. Since it's so clearly (both visually and name-wise) imitating the US demonstration squadrons, my opinion is that it was always intended to be the deep red and blue used by those squadrons---not the lighter colors we actually get. Kind of like I think Roy's valks should flat-out have Insignia yellow for their accents, as that is the shade of yellow the Jolly Rogers have used for some 50 years on their planes--and Yamato's is too pale. Match what the scheme itself is trying to copy, not old animation cels... Ok, here's a quick recolor I did approximating Thunderbirds red and Blue Angel blue. I think it'd be even better with Thunderbirds/Insignia blue---the very dark blue you find on an actual fabric US flag.

Do you want that to be the second post of yours I've deleted in this thread?

Actually it was more likely to be mass deletings of individual posts.

Which can be harvested as a pure form of protoculture, and then spread over the deck with a brush.

PS--the SNES proves that non-white plastics can yellow, and can yellow even worse than white.

Technically, I believe the gunpods would be "semi conformal". (Airplane nitpickyness showing up again).

I've gotta say, the robot parts really clash with the vehicle parts. Just compare Prime's hand to the body panels surrounding it. The body panels just suck IMHO.

You don't need to change the whole mold. I doubt Yamato has multiple complete sets of VF-1 molds, with only the head different. They probably have 1 mold which has 99% of the parts, and several separate head molds. They also wouldn't have multiple FAST pack sets, with and without beam cannons. The mold probably produces 2 missile and 1 beam cannon at a time, and they just don't give you the "extra" part. That's how model companies do it. There is no F-14A, F-14B mold, and F-14D mold. There's a "master" F-14 mold which has most of the parts, then smaller molds dedicated to the parts specific to each version. A VF-11D "mold" wouldn't be a new valk, they'd make whole VF-11's (original canopy and all) and just not use the parts they didn't need. And add in the "new" parts from a new little VF-11D-exclusive mold. Far cheaper to waste 3.2 cents worth of plastic, than make a whole new mold that didn't incorporate the unneeded parts. Model companies toss out half the parts on some molds--very common on ship models. And you don't even waste the parts--you just melt them back down to make more. The cost of unneeded parts is almost nil. So all those un-used VF-11C heads and noses go back into the vat of melted plastic--it's already the same stuff, same color, and pure. Kinda like making gingerbread cookies----once you've cut out all you can, you take the excess, mix it together, and roll it out and use it again. I forgot the VF-11D has a different head, and that the nozzle change on the VF-11C is enough to warrant all-new boosters. But anyways, the point is: Most variants of the VF-11 are only a gunpod and back-mounted booster change. You can do a LOT of variants (even the Elintseeker verson) without having to change the valk itself at all. (And a new head would be very easy, Yamato has quite a bit of experience in making new heads for valks). The VF-11's cockpit is the only actual change, and with the VF-11's transformation, even an all-new nose and cockpit would have no affect on any other part at all. Heck, you could stick a F-14's nose on the VF-11 and it wouldn't affect how it transforms. PS to anyone who remembers/can go look----did the "Elintseeker" VF-11's in M7 wear the standard scheme, and what color was the radar dish? Were they just the standard white, or something unique?

I stared at the pics and couldn't tell. And I've seen PLENTY of companies (toys/models/planes/etc) "revert" all the time. They'll introduce something, people will love it, then the next release will go back to the old way, cost more, and then they wonder why it doesn't sell as well... Progress is absolutely NOT a given with model planes and toys. (See the ways in which the FP YF-21 and FP VF-11 are inferior to the first release---did anyone like the purple YF-21 and its plain grey plastic engines?) PS---Having owned two M+ VF-11B's, I'm now ready for a VF-11C. If Yamato makes a new VF-11, they have to make a C model as well. Changes are few, and none are on the valk itself. We only need a new gunpod, new nozzles on the back-mounted booster packs, and the elimination of half the missle ports on the booster packs. It's the best of both worlds---much more than a mere repaint, but doesn't affect the actual valk's mold at all---it's all the "other" parts that need to be changed. The M7 VF-11C scheme is pretty nice, almost VF-1J Skull colors, and frankly is about the most commonly seen valk onscreen of all-time. It might even beat cannon-fodder VF-1A's. Heck, I think more VF-11C's even get blown up than VF-1A's. Also, I think a VF-11D should be possible, as it's just a cockpit change--and the VF-11's cockpit doesn't slide under anything, it just sits out in front. Should be easy to mold without affecting anything. Though most people would want the custom Jamming Birds FAST packs I think, not standard M7-era VF-11 packs.

Oooh, that'd be good too. I think it's the "extra weapons pack". It's kinda like GBP armor in that it can only be equipped in battroid mode. But only a fold booster would light up green. :;edit:: The infamous Steelfalcon.com calls it the "Heavy Weapons Module". Is that the canon term? http://www.steelfalcon.com/Macross/weapons.shtml

If it's annoying people that much that it's affecting the thread, I'll stop talking about it. (Though I get the impression more people simply don't care, than people think that I'm wrong) Anyways, I have plenty of other questions/comments, some of which Graham may be able to answer (yes, some of this should go in the "issues" threaf, but they're all YF-19-specific): 1. Fold Booster! While I was watching M+ for...other things... about the YF-19 I noticed that when Isamu jettisons it upon arrival at Earth, we get a really good look at how it attaches. And I think the current pics we have of the Yamato shows no provisions for a Fold Booster to be attached. I know I'm not the only one here who wants a light-up fold booster, but if it's not included in the first release, I doubt it'll ever happen---there's little point to include it with a VF-19A AFAIK (I only ever played the demo of VFX-2, so don't know if fold boosters were used in-game), and since it seems pretty clear from the mold that FAST packs are already planned, there's nobody who'd buy "version 2" just for a fold booster. The YF-19 has far fewer accessories than the other valks (minimal FAST pack armor, etc), and a fold booster is really what it needs to "complete" the package. If it's not included in the first release, it's unlikely they'd modify the mold later just for that lone change, especially since nobody would buy Isamu's all over again just to get a fold booster. 2. Nose sensors. (the red ones on the sides of the nosecone). They look 100x better when they're clear red, as we've all seen from the kit build-ups here. If at all possible, please convince Yamato to have them as separate clear-red parts (like they do for the landing lights on the 1/48 VF-1), and not just "red paint on the nose". 3. Spell check. ENGLISH spell check. There's several zillion errors on the Hase kit's decal sheet, and while it'd be bad enough to have the new toy's sticker sheet chock full of errors, it'd be even worse if we actually had Engrish tampo-printed on--that's harder to fix. I've seen enough "Nev Ebwars Test Flijt Center" YF-19's out there. Plus my all-time favorite: "DANGIE! AYVESTING HOOK" Gotta watch out for those ayvesting hooks.

My fave headline is still "Batboy LIVES!" Because apparently everyone thought he'd died or was seriously injured or something...

"Existing" will yellow many plastics. And "the same batch of plastic" can yellow very differently, piece to piece. Anyone who's owned an SNES knows that despite being composed of many "identical" pieces of gray plastic, some parts of it will look factory-fresh even now, and some will be so yellowed they will be the same color as oak. Even pieces on the bottom, which never ever saw light of any kind. 10 years from now, don't be surprised if a 1/48 VF-1 has the left flap, nosecone, inner part of the left leg, airbrake and starboard main gear doors turn pure yellow, with the rest of the plane being pure white. All while still being inside the box MISB, inside a MISB case, inside a locked closet underground, painted black.

Saying again---the wingroots/intakes slope down in every drawing/shot, even Kawamori's own and the really bad ones from the anime. (Well, every shot/drawing you can tell--most notably including the TIAS drawings, which are AFAIK considered the most definitive of all Macross Plus valk drawings) If the wings angle up or are horizontal, they can't retract into a downwards-angled wingroot. The wings swing nearly 180 degrees. Basically: any time the wings are NOT drawn angled down, it's gotta be a mistake because the wings can't transform otherwise. Yamato gets away with it because they flattened out the entire upper surface of the valk, coming very close to eliminating all the slopes all over. They can only have working transforming horizontal wings by altering a large chunk of the fuselage, mainly the wingroots that the wings retract into. If the wingroots were done right, horizontal wings couldn't fit into them. It's one thing to use anime magic to change proportions---it's another to bend the wings the opposite direction to allow it to transform. It all works fine transformation-wise if the wings bend down at the same angle as the wingroots. But everything's messed up if you go with a few "different" shots from the anime that have the wings up for artistic reasons or something. It's kind of like saying VF-1's have laser cannons in the nose---yeah it was on-screen, but doesn't mean it's right. Go with "what looks right and makes sense and is most often depicted in multiple sources and just plain works better for all 3 modes" versus "but that one time it was the other way". (Yes, having the wings angled down even helps GERWALK mode---you don't have to contort the fuselage/arms so much to get up and over them)

I meant the toy. It'd be like trying to jam a CD into a car's in-dash player at an angle. You have to slide it straight in. The angle of the wing has to match the angle of the wingroots it slides into. Yamato has sloped the upper part of the wingroot ever so slightly, which won't affect the internal shape/angle of the wingroots. But if they increased the slope to match the sideview drawings, they'd have to angle the wings to match. My point was, since the wingroots are sloped in every drawing I can find, and since the wings and wingroots have to match angles quite closely to be able to transform (in an actual toy), that was IMHO pretty good evidence that the wings should angle down. All of Kawamori's designs will fly---he knows his stuff, and people (right here on MW) have built flying models of his valks. I only ever reference real aviation to try to figure out why he designs things the way he does, or figure out how "not very well documented" aspects of his designs may be shaped. If there's no drawing of an area, might as well try to guess what he may have been thinking when designing the plane (with his knowledge of real-life aviation/aerodynamics), or go with what the real plane he based that area on has. I never say "it should be like this regardless of what we see because the so-and-so in real life is like this". I say "since we have no definitive reference of this area to go by, it's probably like this because that's how similar planes are in real life or a plane like that would need, or the real thing he based it on is like this" PS---a lot of my aeronautical terms are there/used simply because frankly, most every aspect of plane design has had a term defined for it by now. "Wings angled down when viewed from head on" is "anhedral". A fairly common term, and that's what it is, so I use it. It's just a descriptive term.

Graham---true, but the majority of decent shots show them down. There's a few horizontal, one with slight dihedral (escape from Eden, chased by missiles) and even one with severe dihedral (the shot that's really messed up, because the YF-21 in that shot is messed as well), however: Most good shots show them down. The more detailed and carefully drawn a frame is, the more likely it is to show it. Some of the closest, "non-fleeting" shots in the entire anime of the YF-19 are of it firing guns from head-on---it is drawn carefully and very detailed in those scenes--and they showed the sloping fuselage and anhedral wings. Every side-view drawing shows the fuselage sides and wingroots sloping down (canon and non-canon). Every other kit/drawing/model has them down. The only "reference" for them being horizontal, are sporadic shots in the anime, and people who think they're horizontal because they never really looked that closely--or they look, but see that it's "close to horizontal" and thus assume it IS horizontal. Basically, if the YF-19 isn't drawn with sloped surfaces, it's because it was hastily done because it was a background shot, or the YF-19 was moving/rolling very rapidly and would only be seen at any given angle for a half-frame. Since it's hard to see from many angles, there's little point in drawing it "correctly" for the one frame in a scene when it's nearly head-on. I'll go with "the majority of depictions of it". Plus the whole fact that it looks better, and the fact that since that is how it looks most of the time, that's the mental picture most people have. Even if you don't notice it, it's been there every time you watch. Kind of like how a VF-19F/S has it's v.stabs in a different place than the YF-19. A lot of people don't notice that until you point it out to them--but it was always like that every time they saw one. Also, I'd like to point out that Kawamori's own drawings are inconsistent, even ones that are "grouped" and drawn at the same time--notably the whole "intake separate from hip" thing I mentioned a while ago. Sometimes Kawamori draws it as one piece, sometimes two. Which is the "canon" way? I vote for two pieces, as it allows both fighter mode and battroid mode to "work" better with a real-life 3D transformation. It's not always drawn that way, even by Kawamori--but it works better (part of the reason I think the animators draw it that way so often). If you make it two pieces, you get a better fighter AND battroid mode, that more closely follow the "standard" fighter and battroid mode sketches (the most canon of all). Final point: In every single drawing/sketch/diagram/animation of the YF-19 from the side I can find, the fuselage sides/wingroots are sloped. Show me a drawing of the side, I'll show you the slope. Now, if the wings aren't sloped, everything looks wrong because everything else is sloped--and the wings wouldn't fit in the wingroots anymore when they transformed. Thus, since the fuselage and wingroots are sloped, the wings have to be sloped as well or it can't transform. Now, Yamato has sloped the outer part of the wingroot slightly--not enough to affect the wing (though if you look from behind it appears to retract at an slight angle, since the wings are straight but the wingroot is partially sloped--though I'm basically interpreting single JPG pixels there, the CAD drawing I have from head on and behind is quite small). But the entire upper surface should be done to look right and to have the wing align with the wingroot when retracted for battroid mode. If they had sloped the wingroot to match the drawings, the wing wouldn't fit--since the wing has to be angled as well if the wingroot is sloped more than like the 0.3 degrees Yamato did.

It's had its airbrake replaced recently. I want to see a stripped late F-15E or F-15K do that--they've got 25% more power.

You know, I think it also shows the shoulders angled out as well--and weren't a lot of people asking for angled shoulders for battroid mode? That was like, page 2 of this thread. Angling the wings/wingroots/intakes/fuselage also angles out the shoulders (otherwise they wouldn't fit). The YF-19's upper surfaces slope, and that carries through to all modes. The original Yamato YF-19 was sloped as I recall (the chest plate sure was), they seem to have "forgotten" that.

...as if none of that has every been said/complained about for any other Yamato toy... It's part of MW culture. Toys are made, we b*tch. That's how it is. Anyways---nope, never had a single class or ground school for anything aviation related. I just read a lot. (And investigate a lot--you'd be surprised how much wrong info is in modern day text books) Basically---I like planes, and want to know how they work. Intricately. When it's a hobby, and not a job/class, you pay more attention, as you WANT to learn about it and do it on your own time/terms.

Exactly. Characterization is very important---Starscream and Thundercracker are the same toy, it's their personalities that have earned them fans--and more importantly, television ratings and toy sales. Beast Wars---the characters sold the toys. No line emphasized that more---a lot of the early toys were pretty mediocre, but you bought the toys because you liked the characters. Armada/Energon----saw lots of comments over the years contrasting it to Beast Wars---you bought the toys IN SPITE OF the characters. Characterization matters a lot--at least to anyone over 8 years old.

The wings still retract and fit when angled down because the wingroots are angled too, at the same angle. Fuselage is also angled (on the upper surfaces). Basically you can start on either side of the center fuselage "tube" and go down along a straight line (but at an angle) from the fuselage to the wingroots to the wingtips, all along the upper surface. This is a very simple schematic I made up. Note the green line. It is not only the wings, but also the upper surface of the wing roots, and the upper surface of the intakes. It's ALL sloped. Now, it's exaggerated a bit to show what I'm talking about. Also, the slope should become more shallow as you move in towards the fuselage tube. The wings are the most angled, then the wingroots are shallower, then the intake/fuselage are is the shallowest--almost horizontal, but not quite. But that's hard to show without a detailed drawing of the wingroots and intakes. As for the legs---I was hoping for some variation on the SHE in that area. As I said--they've had literally years to figure out a more durable/practical version of that for a mass-production toy. The SHE would have left a huge gap if it didn't have the extra folding panels that unfolded to cover up the hole left for the shoulders when it went into battroid. The SHE's leg transformation is probably 3x as complicated as the Yamato's, just so it can move the legs closer to the shoulders, yet not have a gap in battroid mode--it basically folds up the calf, and stuffs it down inside the ankle, thus making room for the shoulder by the knee.

Whatever the Army picks to replace the Chinook would be a good choice, since they basically want a modern version of the C-123. Or just new-build C-27's. They lost an entire category of air transport when they got rid of the C-27, and have realized that mistake many times. They have no "smaller turboprop" so they have to use Chinooks and Humvees. And they've used up like 10 years of Chinook airframe hours in like 2 years now, they're flying them so much, doing jobs they really shouldn't be doing. And Humvees are much more vulnerable and carry far less of course. C-295 is a good option. Basically anything that looks like a smaller, 2-engine C-130.

Watched M+ again (well, all the YF-19 scenes). The wings have anhedral in nearly every shot that it's drawn well. (not a rapidly-rolling little speck in the background). It's most obvious in the scenes where they show the guns firing from head-on----this happens early in the YF-19's testing (fires both gunpod and wingroot-mounted guns) and very soon after the "screen full of ISAMU" sequence starts. Also, just before the first "gun-range" head-on firing sequence, we get our first actual look at the YF-19--it rises up out of the ground as Isamu watches---also a good shot of it. Any quick/easy/freeware screencap programs out there? I could then just pop the DVD's in and show where I mean. Also, they angle more than I showed. Finally, the "sloping" upper surface is always present, period. Even if the wings don't appear to angle in some drawings, the upper fuselage/intakes do in every drawing. And yes, there are a few scenes where it seems to have no angle, or even DIhedral---but those scenes are few, and half the time involve the YF-21 which also has no anhedral in those scenes--but the YF-21 has EXTREME anhedral across both body and wings, and so those scenes are just drawn wrong or something--I suspect they're actually drawn upside down----the details on the planes are the upper surface, but the overall shape seems to imply the lower surface. Or along those lines. Most of the time, the YF-19 is shown as having anhedral. Is there any official head-on drawing from Kawamori of the YF-19? I can't find one---the YF-21 has several. For comparison, the VF-9 has a nice head-on drawing (Kawamori's other FSW valk), definitely has flat wings, but has an extreme amount of washout--which is strange, as forward-swept wings basically negate the phenomenon which washout counteracts. (In otherwords, it's really pointless, but clearly there) YF-19 appears to have a small amount of washout (going by what I think is a canon side-view, from my M7 TIAS book) but it could also be incidence.

747's are quite agile for their size, and have an incredibly low stall speed for their size----triple-slotted fowler flaps, plus variable camber flaps, plus kruger flaps. Yes it needs the flaps out to fire-fight, but it's not "5kts from stalling". 747's can than their own weight in fuel (actually, slightly more). When a 747 is empty, its thrust:weight ratio is doubled (again, actually slightly more). Being full of water is nowhere near its max weight. Most people only see 747's lumbering along at 99% MTOW for trans-pacific flights. But when empty--very impressive. Sheer quantity---drop as much as 10 other planes. Can be refilled fairly quickly AFAIK. Better to drop 10x as much, rush back to base at 500mph, refill, then do it again, than wait for a bunch of other planes to lumber back home slowly, get refilled, slowly make their way there, and drop a few gallons. It's been so impressive to most places they're looking at converting some DC-10's as well.

Don't know, wasn't me (claims mod-innocence)