Stamen0083

I've snapped it together. My only comment is this: If you're looking for a toy in kit form, look elsewhere. Every bit on this thing screams model, and unless you can manage to glue, it won't hold together. That, I think, is how robot models should be done, with loads of details and NO color molding! Bandai, listen to this. You might learn something.

I think the VF's vectoring thrust would be enough to maneuver. To bank, point the thrust in opposite directions. As for turned stowed main geas... Almost all planes do it, since it saves space in the gear bay for the engines. If the Tomcat's gears were stowed unturned, it would poke through the wing glove, and it would just look ridiculous. The A-10 is the only one I can think of that doesn't turn the main gear, and even then, much of the wheel IS sticking out from underneath.

Hmm... Why do I get a feeling that the VF-1 has a double slotted Fowler flap system? I intend to follow the 1/48 model pretty closely, but there are intricacies I have to take into account, such as how far apart the flaps have to be placed. I never thought dropping flaps on a model would be so complicated.

Indeed. Or they can just start helping us out by giving us waterslides in the first place. Getting Peter's decals for us would be the icing on the cake.

That is a properly built and painted Gundam model. It's the same kit as the starter of this thread has. I wish people would think of Gundam kits more as actual models than as unassembled toys. Too bad Bandai isn't helping.

Some planes only drop the inner surfaces as flaps(F-22, F-18, etc...). Can that rationalization be used here? How does it work? On a bank, does the F-4 only drop the aileron on the appropriate side (bank left, drop right; bank right, drop left)?

Then you are happy with my explanation?

No, actually, it doesn't look RX-78-ish, but it did look nothing like a flyable plane. I should have mentioned that I don't have the picture and was hoping someone here who does would post it.

I assumed that I'd let history back me up. It's a fact that Gundam was the first real robot show. It's a fact that Gundam started the real robot genre. If facts aren't enough to back up what I'm saying, what would be?

EDIT: Long, lengthy flamebait post removed. Motley has put what I said into layman's terms, so everyone can understand it. In case you missed it: In other words, you don't have to like it, but you have to acknowledge its revolutionary status. PS: I don't think this is off topic. This explains why Gundam is so popular. The old timers recognized the change, they embrace it, and 25 years later, they still like it. PPS: This is Macross World. Someone surely must have seen that picture of the Valkyrie design that Kawamori first came up with?

No one said anything about scientific references. Before Gundam, robots were super robots. After Gundam, robots are real robots. Without Gundam, your Valkyries would be much more colorful, with wierd crap sticking out all over the place, and Roy, Hikaru, Max, and Millia's Valkyries would combine to form a Super Valkyrie, which then promptly shoots breast missiles at Godzilla. There's always that possibility.

No.

Street Fighter Gundam is not Gundam. Power Rangers Gundam is not Gundam. Cash Cow Gundam is not Gundam. Original and mold breaking in what respects? Breaking out of the Gundam mold? Then what? Fall into another anime mold? It's only stale and unoriginal because of these alternate universes rehashing the first Gundam story. You see the same old crap in every new show, of course the first is going to seem stale and unoriginal. There hasn't been any new things exploring the late, late UC period because no one chose to. If you think for a second that UC is dead, you're wrong. Dengeki Hobby is working on Advance of Zeta. Meanwhile, Gundam Ace is pumping out all sorts of Gundam side stories, most of which are original and entertaining. Just because the new Gundam show isn't set in the UC universe doesn't mean it's dead. That was a case of the toys promoting the show. With SEED, it's a case of the show promoting the toys.

I'm not forcing anything on you. I'm just stating the fact that Gundam started the real robot genre, and Macross rides the wave. No Gundam, Macross would be very different. My point is that even though they *seem* to only offer Gundams (you know, they do plenty of other things too, just not much Macross, and just not as high profile as Gundam), they offer different Gundams with many releases. The next company that comes along to offer another Macross product will probably give you another VF-1.

You guys... You want something to "ooh" and "aah" over. "Ooh" and "aah" over this: http://www.lovepla.co.kr/board/zboard.php?...&desc=asc&no=16

Gundam used to be revolutionary, until they started with this alternate universe bullshit. Now it's just a marketing gimmick. Gundam is popular for a reason. It used to be about the story, not the models, toys, and the shitload of merchandise that goes along with every new Gundam release. If you don't see it, then too bad, but no one is forcing you to like it. Gundam fans just want you to acknowledge that without Gundam, Macross would not be the same Macross as you know it today. Do you really want Roy to yell out "Valkyrie, transform!" every time he wants to change modes? No. toymakers don't push products that often because they have nothing new to push. Even though you groan at every new Gundam product, it's still a new product rather than the same VF-1 all the time. When was the last time you guys got a decent toy that's not a VF-1? The first Gundam has barely broken the super robot mold. There were bound to still be some residue. If you want realistic mecha, it doesn't get more realistic than Katoki designs. Check out the ZetaPlus C1. Then check out the mechanism illustration in the MG Zeta Gundam manual.

The whole point is you're shooting blind. If you can see the other guy, why would you need area saturation fire? No. Your situation is laughable. If friendly fire ALWAYS happens, then there has to be at least one dead soldier in every engagement, lethal or not. I assume nothing regarding MS hit rate. How did this come up? Even if the EM waves get through the weaker field, by the time they hit something, they would have encountered a field strong enough to disperse them, so no waves get reflected back. You can't measure something you don't have. You ever seen pictures of electric fields? I-fields are similar to that, with each ship being a charge. It completely screws up the picture. They're not shot down by ships. They're shot down by MS. The whole point of the MS is that they get up close and personal, use cameras to track targets, and shoot them down with close in weapons. You can't bombard from long range blindly. If the radar gets some sort of signal, the radar screen shows something. It does not distinguish between true or false signals. ECM's emit waves so that on the radar screen, instead of one blip, there are many blips jumping around. Now if the emitted signal from the radar is so strong that ECM's waves get taken out through low pass filtering, the actual signal remains and thus ECM is defeated. :sigh: The only way you can mess with the radar is if you mess with the only thing the radar can see, which are radio waves. See above. You have no idea what you're talking about. I should have mentioned the lattice structure thing, but I figured it was more fun to let you figure it out yourself. Now that you have found the edge of the field, you still don't know where inside the field the ship lies. It's possible for the ship to move around inside the field, you know. Why? Like I said, you don't know what you're talking about. PS: Your quoting needs work.

Holy poo is all I can say. That damn F-14's flaps are complicated! I started cutting the VF-1S wings last night, and I can identify every single part from the F-14's wings on the VF-1S. Except that the VF-1S has ailerons. I want to replicate the F-14's flaps on the VF-1S' wings. What's the consensus? Can you request the air show people to drop the flaps for you?

The tracking system in 08th MS Team's truck is acoustical rather than seismic, though I wouldn't rule out having both sensors in the spike package. They were listening to Zaku footsteps.

Is this page online yet, Graham? If not, can you help us scan and upload it? ;-) David, you're the most comprehensive source of the F-14 flaps. Have you uploaded pictures of them in the past? If not, will you upload some now? :-D

Didn't William Cheng drop the flaps on his VF-1? Does anyone have the build up threads? PS: Are the spoilers absolutely mandatory on this set?

I know you. I don't know Anubis :-P The thing with Nagano style details is that they are not functional. Instead, they are aesthetic. If I want functional details, I go with Katoki.

They needed three movies to recap the entire series. The best way to start, I think, if you don't mind the rather dated animation.

I'm not up to snuff on my Valkyrie toys, but isn't that the 1/60 Valk in the comparison shot? Unless the 1/48 VF-1 is indeed 23 cm tall.