Vic Mancini

The black/yellow logo reminds me a little bit of the Zentraedi logo. Maybe it's some kind of new human/Zent unification logo? ...Probably not. It's definitely not SWS because it would be printed upside down on the fuselage. And it's definitely not SMS because the S's would be backwards. EDIT: Actually I just realized that the logo on the fuselage and the logo on the wing aren't even the same. They're mirror images of each other. Which leads me to believe that it's not a logo at all, and simply a black and yellow symbol of caution. Probably because it's a trainer aircraft.

Looks way better with the dark spots on the legs. Nice job. Maybe make the heat shield dark too? Just a thought. I still like Dobber's scheme better, but this is VERY cool. You should be proud.

Well, actually I was the one who brought up the similarity between the Raptor and Star Mirage, and I believe I said the entire front half of the plane was reminiscent of the Raptor. I never mentioned "nosecone and canopy" only/specifically. I still maintain that if you showed a regular person on the street a photograph of the YF-22, and then showed them a photo of the F-22A, (I'm talking about the canopy/forward fuselage area/front half of the aircraft), nobody would even notice the difference unless they held the pictures side by side and studied them carefully for subtle differences. I'm actually looking at two pictures side by side as I type this, and I don't even notice a difference in the canopies at all. Both canopies look like the VF-5000, and so does the entire forward fuselage with the exception of a pointier nose on the YF-22. I must be on crazy pills, because I don't see these glaring differences you're talking about. They both look like the 5000 to me. *shrugs shoulders*

You're exaggerating. They may be "completely different" to someone extremely knowledgeable with their designs, but to a casual observer?...come on. If you showed a photograph of a YF-22 to an average person on the street who knew at least a little bit about airplanes (enough to identify popular fighter jets), they'd identify it as a F-22 Raptor immediately and they would think nothing of it being an earlier experimental version. If they looked like "entirely different planes" then it would be difficult to mistake one for the other. The F-16 and F-18 are entirely different planes....The YF-22 and F-22 are like 97% identical unless you know them like the back of your hand or you are looking at them side by side. The VF-5000 has similarities to both the F-22 and YF-22. If Kawamori wasn't inspired by the 22, and the similarities we see were purely coincidental, I'd be shocked.

Really? The entire front half of the 5000 looks like straight Raptor to me. I don't see any similarities to the Mirage 2000 besides the Mirage name.

Probably because they have bigger fish to fry for now. The 5000 isn't the most iconic or memorable design. It is cool though. Is it safe to say it was influenced by the F-22 Raptor? I see a lot of similarities.

Hear hear!

Oh, I see what you're saying. Well that's certainly an interesting way of thinking about it. (Do you suffer from OCD?...kidding.) Well I'm not nearly that picky about Valk schemes coming from the real world aircraft inspirations. That makes sense and there is certainly a logic behind your madness, I'll give you that, but as long as it's some kind of scheme that looks like practical military colours/camo then it works for me. I'd love to see the 21 in a YF-23, F-15, or any type of modern era real world scheme.

And the YF-23 scheme you posted is an artistic masterpiece? I'm not sure why low vis and camo schemes annoy you when they are right along the same lines as the black widow scheme you posted. Honestly I like boring/realistic schemes more than I like artistic masterpieces. And that includes the dull gray 23 scheme you posted. I'd rather own a valk that looks like that than one that looks like a hotrod, (Nora 51).

I bookmarked this forum thread a while back. Some cool VF-22 schemes on it. http://cs.finescale.com/forums/6/566796/ShowPost.aspx#566796

I'm pretty sure the gunpods are supposed to be stored externally.

Hmmm, I actually don't like how the turbines are visible in the intakes. Other than that it looks promising so far.

Great idea....except for the CF SV-51s not being grey in the anime.

A flashy effect for an electro magnet pulling the two pieces together, maybe? That's my guess.

Could be. But I'm looking around this thread and I seem to be the only one who actually admits a dislike for the VF-1, and I grew up on SDFM while every other kid my age was watching TF and GI Joe, so that category doesn't apply to me.

Really? I think it's very stubby, especially compared to the newer valk designs like the 19 and 51 which have long elegant fuselages that flow nicely into the sleek body of the plane. The 21/22 and 11 have some very interesting shapes/angles going on too. The VF-1's bulk in F mode is very squarish/boxy and the fuselage is rather short. I believe the wing span is about equal to, or longer, than the actual length of the F mode, which adds to it's width. And the shapeless thin rectangular wings that point straight out to the sides just turn me right off. Overall it's just not a pleasing shape to me unless it's loaded up with missles and super parts, and like I said I'm not really into that. I loved it to death when I was a kid, and I must've transformed my Jetfire 10,000 times, but I don't think the design has aged as well as most of you seem to think. That's cool though, it's all personal preference. I will say that the B mode has aged fairly well...better than F mode IMO. But I'm more of an F/G mode guy than a B mode guy. A really good looking F mode is important to me.

That's nice. If they just switched out the Kites for crosses it would be great.

Hmmm, I don't hate it. I'm still waiting for Dobber's scheme though. It's coming. I just hope that when it comes it actually looks as good as Dobber's. Don't frak up the scheme, Yamato!

That would be a pretty serious punishment actually. Thank you. There are just too many good valks that have been designed since the VF-1 that are just so much more elegant. I can barely even look at the VF-1 anymore. To me, (just my personal opinion), it's F mode is like a stubby brick with stick-wings that point straight out to the sides and it drives me crazy. I've noticed a pattern on macrossworld that a lot of VF-1 lovers are also FAST pack lovers who like to see Valks decked out to the nines with extra armor and weapons. The super/strike configuration of the VF-1 is the only thing that looks good to me anymore and since I'm not really a big FAST pack guy I'm just not into the VF-1 anymore.

VF-1, and I'm being serious. *Mancini Ducks* VF-4 somewhat. M7 Valks with the exception of the 11 and 22. Most of the Zentran mecha actually, with the exception of the Q which is kinda cool. I've always secretly wished the Zentran mecha resembled Appleseed Landmates a little bit more, especially the Guges-D which is such a bad-ass mecha. Even as a kid the Regults seemed sort of silly and unintimidating to me. It doesn't seem like something practical that a humanoid would actually design for himself. Being a Regult pilot has never looked very appealing to me. If I was a Zentraedi soldier seeing a Regult for the first time I'd be like, "I have to fly this? Can I be micronized and have a Valk instead?"

But not so rampant in the other Macross movies/series. That's the problem. Most viewers expect a certain vibe from a Macross series and Mac 7 went in a different direction that didn't sit well with a lot of Macross hardcores. I'm not saying it's good or bad, but out of all things Macross, Macross 7 is the most different.

It sounds like Yamato is finally doing the Zero justice. The 0A Shin seemed to have minimal complaints too. This is great news for someone like me who happens to like the VF-0 design a lot more than the VF-1.

Isamu is my favorite character in Macross.

^ ^ That pretty much sums it up. Sorry, Sumdumgai, I just don't believe that the director of the anime would throw in such an esoteric reference at a time like that. It would be totally misleading to 99% of it's viewing audience. It's one thing to throw in esoteric references that only aficionados are going to spot, and regular viewers are going to skim over obliviously, no worse for wear. But it's another thing entirely to throw in a reference that only aficionados are going to understand and that regular viewers are going to misinterpret for something completely inaccurate during a fairly meaningful montage.