sketchley

Agreed with JsARCLIGHT. I remember watching Battle of the Planets (G-Force) and the odd episode of Astro Boy (Tetsuwan Atom), while listening to recommendations to watch Star Blazers (Space Cruiser Yamato) (it was on at a disgustingly early hour of the day, never really saw it.) All of this was pre-Robotech. Anyhow, I read somewhere, about a decade ago (!) about the 3 'firsts' in the golden age of mecha anime: 1) Realistic looking spaceships - Space Cruiser Yamato 2) Realistic 3-dimensional combat in space - Mobile Suit Gundam* 3) Realistic mass-production and realistic looking vehicle mode of transformers - Super Dimension Fortress Macross** * By this, I don't mean 3D-CG, but a move beyond 2D, naval type battles, to truly 3 dimensional battles, with opponents coming from any direction, and not everyone has the same 'up' and 'down' as you. Sadly, the naval tradition of space combat in science fiction shows still shows up far more than it should in science fiction and sci-fi productions. T.T ** Yes, Gundam started the trend towards mass-production anime mecha, but it still has the hero in a one-of-a-kind prototype (the title mecha.) Macross is mass-production all the way. From the heroes VFs, to the enemy's battlepods, to even the spaceships fielded by both sides. In fact, it's not until 1994's Macross Plus that Macross gets it's first heroes-piloting-prototypes; a decade or so after the original series was first broadcast.

*cough* J-rock *cough* SDF:M/DYRL?/Flashback 2012 are the J-pop. Macross Zero is the opera.

One thing to keep strongly in mind is that Macross is not reality. I mean it in the sense that the situation in the Macross universe, especially after SWI, and the almost complete eradication of humanity, it is fundamentally different from the world that we know. Add to it that Macross is made in Japan, by Japanese, for Japanese, and you get cultural elements that may be unique to Japan being thrown in. For starters, there's the whole age of concent/marriable age difference. Macross 7 isn't suggesting anything against the law. However, it does go semi-against the modern (Japanese) culture, which has most people getting married later in life, and having less children than in preceeding generations. In addition there are more and more people who are not getting married at all (either by choice, circumstance, or the failings of the modern culture paradigm being imported from North America - but that's another topic entirely.) The Macross universe, especially that of the late 2040s, is one where almost everybody is a decendant of a clone. Not to mention that there are probably incentives to get married and have more children sooner in life - survival of the species, et al. The other angle is that Miria was played as an overbearing mother. Her behaviour may not be an accurate barometer of the *actual* culture in Macross. In a way, her role was to help justify Mylene's actions, and to get the audience (especially the young female demographic) to relate to Mylene. The Max/Miria relationship is for us old timers who have gotten old, and grown up, and gotten married ourselves. Max essentially married the prom-queen. Look how their marriage turned out. Makes us happy, eh. That, or would they be interesting if they were always disappearing off camera to make more children? Drama, and especially conflict/arguements make for a much more interesting story than two people living happily ever after (isn't that the usual end to a love story?)

Buried in this topic somewhere either on this page or the following: http://www.macrossworld.com/mwf/index.php?...0552&st=120 You may want to read the topic up to that point. Not sure if the posts will make sense out of context.

Correction: Kissdum. One word. I do not know what the title of the HTML used in the homepage has it broken into two words. But the title logo is written as "Engage Planet Kissdum." Too late. Can't stop it. Foreign languages (basically only English for the past decade or two) not only sound cool, but ARE cool to Japanese - especially trendy Japanese. In fact, the only Japanese who don't find English cool, are the ones who attend my classes. Though, they do go and make their own butchered English words which they perceive as cool.* So... yeah, it'll be easier to understand the mindstate of Shibuya garlz and random obatallion, then why more and more English is cropping up in more and more bad, and incorrect ways. The latest that I bothered to remember is what some economist wanted to call a series of micro-bubble in the economy: froth. Is that just not right? Frothy economy. I remember it entirely because of disgust. So, lets hope that the kiss in キスダムdoesn't mean kiss (as that's the standard kana-ization of the word,) and cross our fingers that an explanation isn't forthcoming. Just bring on the transforming VF-esque jets! * It should also be noted that Japanese tend to truncate words (nothing new, happens in English all the time. television = TV, etc..) But the Japanese do it in a different way. television becomes terebi. ice cream is aisu. Kansai International airport (関西国際空港) is kankuu (関空). United Nations (国際連åˆ) is Kokuren　(国連). Maybe it's becoming clear how difficult it is to translate Macross text from Japanese, yes no? Not to mention that the producers have stressed non-standard translations and romanizations... @.@

GSI Kureosi is not a romanization of Gunze (or Gunze Sangyo). On their website it is GSI Creos. http://www.gsi.co.jp/ It does look like Gunze (Sangyo) is an affiliate or sub-company (along with Mr. Hobby, etc..) Nevertheless, I agree that the colours as per the model instructions are the same as the GSI Creos/Gunze/Gunze Sangyo colours. Good luck on the search for the lacquer chart. Now that we know where to look, it should be significantly less difficult.

Black box numbers are GSI Kureosi and Mr. Karaa (Colour). White box numbers are water Hobby Colour. I do not know if Gunze is the same or not, but the Black and White box numbers correspond to the paints by the above 3 companies/brands.

Colours (in English) can be found at the bottom left of: http://www.macrossworld.com/macross/models...tructions-2.jpg Then it's all paint-by-numbers via: http://www.macrossworld.com/macross/models...tructions-7.jpg and http://www.macrossworld.com/macross/models...tructions-8.jpg (with the occasional small detail of paint mentioned in various building steps. Cockpit interior, etc..)

Honestly... it looks like Kawamori-sama's version of Gundam. Gundam sounding name: check (キスダム= Kisudamu via Hepburn romanization. ガンダム= Gundamu.) Char Aznable lookalike villian: check Young pilots in charge of the latest robotic flying warmachines: check Anyhow, as Kawamori is credited only with mechanical design, I'm not sure what to either expect, nor make, of this project - other than we see Kawamori-sama revisiting the VF-4 arrangement. Maybe this is the answer to Egan Loo's enigmatic mentioning of Kawamori-sama's personal opinion of the VF-4?

Do you just pick and choose what to reply to, and ignore everything else that you don't like or wrecks whatever point you are attempting to make? Let me repost, but in bold terms: VF-1: (212+[# of VFs sent elsewhere])/90 days = more than 2.35 VFs per day. For comparison purposes, the F-22: 36 to 48 aircraft per year; or 0.098 to 0.132 F-22 per day.* Is that a 'limited' rate of production? And I did find an aircraft with a comparible rate of manufacture: 1 to 2 per day. The Hawker F.36/34 "Interceptor Monoplane" Hurricane.** High tech it ain't. Now, it must be stressed that we only have the number of VFs on the SDF-1, not the total number of VFs produced during that tme period. My hunch is on a much, much higher rate of production. And now that you've gone and said that you aren't bothering to check facts, I'm going to put you into the 'ignore' column of posters. One of the reasons some of us are here, is to learn more about Macross via debate. But when one side of the debate ignores facts, and relies on imaginary numbers, then it is no longer an intelligent debate and merely an exercise in correcting fallicies. * http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/f-22.htm ** http://www.k5083.mistral.co.uk/APS.HTM

Wow... too much quotage! Please check your facts first. 1) Development and mass production of VF-1A starts November and December of 2008. Total initial strength on SDF-1 Macross at space launch ceremony 2009 February 7: 212 VF-1 Valkyries. That's the amount of VFs produced within a max of three months, that are transferred to the SDF-1. Vfs were deployed elsewhere on Earth, and in orbit, as there is at least one seen parked inside of one of the two ARMD that orbit Earth. Not to mention those that would be deployed to UN facilities, such as the Grand Cannon. 2) the complement on the SDF-1 was not the full complement. The SDF-1 was slated to dock with two ARMDs in orbit, with their complement of VFs, not to mention additional fighters after the SDF-1 was completed; the Zentraedi attack got in the way . The complement of VFs may actually have been those from the Prometheus, as the opening animation of the PS1 DYRL? game hints. 3) despite combat losses, the SDF-1 still had a complement of more than 300 Super VFs when it attacked Bodolza's flagship. Assuming that they salvaged and rebuilt all VFs that were damaged until then (highly unlikely,) at least 88 new VFs were built on the SDF-1. These leads to the impression that building VFs isn't that difficult, nor expensive (in terms of both money, and manpower.) Remember, until the SDF-1 landed on Earth, it was on it's own, and recycling whatever materials it had on board, and was able to salvage from the chunk of South Ataria Island that it took with it to Pluto's orbit. At the same time they not only manufactured new units of existing Destroid models, but they designed and built an entirely new destroid! (The Phalanx.) Not to mention all the ammo, and constant repairs to the ship, mecha, and city inside the ship... If anything, SDF:M is unrealistic when it comes to what the people inside of the ship are able to do with the resources that they have. But then again, that fits with the creator's vision of a 'not serious' robot show.

Don't forget the orbital shipyards, and the space colonies (potentially both at legrange point 4.) I don't know if Apollo base made any ships other than the SDF-2, but it has been stated that the orbital shipyards produced 8 ARMD, and 125 Oberth. Don't forget the countless vehicles (space fighters, drone fighters, etc.,) a handful of Prometheus & Daedulus surface going ships, and at least 5 Grand Cannons (only 1 completed) produced in the same time period. So yeah, cost wasn't exactly an issue before SWI. In fact, the only real issue would be man power, and that was only a problem immediately post SWI, until mass cloning got underway.

I remember reading a news article recently about one or two companies that are either developing, or have developed a multi-layer disc that not only has Blue-Ray, HD-DVD, but also DVD as well. They said the reason it's possible is because the laser not only reads at different depths, but the wavelength of the reading laser is different enough to allow it. It'll be interesting to see how many companies (if any!) hedge their bets and go this route, releasing all-format media.

VF-1 http://macross.anime.net//mecha/united_nat.../vf1/index.html VF-0 http://macross.anime.net//mecha/united_nat.../vf0/index.html Not including the real life 18 to 20* years that passed before the VF-0 was designed, it did not have, nor was it designed to ever have thermonuclear engines. Yes, the VF-0 can operate for extremely limited amounts of time in space. However, it was through-and-through an atmospheric fighter. Where do we see the VT-1 being used? In space. Not to mention that the statements 'secret program' and 'trial production model' are associated with the VF-0. As for the initial query - wasn't that answered (and thus solved) at the top of page 2? We're at the bottom of page 3 now, giving credence to Kensei's statement. Lastly, no one has disputed your premise. In fact, everyone has been posting statements in agreement to it. If anyone has been the proponent of an unarmed and non-combat capable VT-1, it has been you, Skull-1. IMHO, you've been arguing with yourself, at the expense of the efforts of others to save you from... yourself. *Depends on if we compare it to the VF-1, or the VT-1.

It all comes down to lighting. In your otherwise excellent picture Gammera, the shadows on the VF don't match those on the carrier (check the two white radomes on the tower.) What did you use as your model? It looks like it's CG...

Uhm, excuse me, but the VF-0 design was created after the fact. Not to mention that it was part of a top secret program that wasn't made public in the Macross universe for some 30 years after the evens of Macross Zero occured. Does the Macross universe have non-transforming fighters that can be used for training? Yes. Do non-transforming space fighters exist for training? Yes. Do humanoid robots/destroids exist for training? Yes. Are VF pilots trained in flight simulators and non-VFs before being dumped into a VF cockpit? Yes. Does a transforming VF exist for training? Beyond the VF-1D and VT-1, no.* I'm really not sure what you are arguing, Skull-1, as you're stance has become muddled with all the tangental arguements. Can you summarize your stance in a concise statement please and thank you. *Of course it could be argued that the two-seater VF-3000B, VF-5000, VF-11, and VF-17 can be used for training purposes. Which falls in line with Shoji Kawamori's philosophy for VFs in Macross - whatever countering logic may be applied. (And let's not debate this, as it's entirely tangental, and has nothing to do with this topic: the VT-102. )

Block 4, 5, 6, and 12 are directly mentioned. The vague terms of 'block # and earlier/later' machines are also used, thus implying that most, if not all, of the numbers not directly mentioned also exist.

Ah, ok. I see where things are stemming from. I agree that fielding one's frontline fighter as a trainer is expensive. However, please contemplate my point a little bit deeper about fielding an entirely new fighter being more expensive (or adding more expenses) than the (adapted) frontline fighter. I disagree that a purpose-built VF is cheaper than an adaptive version for the very reasons of the limited number produced and utilized by the UNS (the price per unit would be exorbitant), and that's not even mentioning the insane R&D costs involved! Also, every time an F-16 or F-22 takes to the air in non-combat situations, it is a kind of training. It has also been agreed upon that the VT-1 is capable of mounting weapons, even if it 'normally' doesn't, thus implying that it is similar to an F-22 used for both training missions, and combat missions. Therefore, I'm not sure what we are debating exactly...

Skull-1, please don't pull numbers out of nowhere. The official numbers are: Block 1 through 5 (TV series cockpit) Block 6 and above (movie series cockpit.)

Thanks. You are confirming my points. What's the difference between the VF-1 and the VT-1? Natta. Thus it's cheaper, and a better VF to train on to boot, as it's the exact same plane. If you feel inclined to disagree, then I ask: what is the difference between a VT-1 and a VF-1 stripped of all weapons, colored orange and dedicated exclusively to training?

No. The fighter comes first. Did the Wright brothers build a trainer aircraft to learn to fly the Flyer I? I disagree that a "Logan-like" VF would be cheaper. For one thing, the VF-1 took 7 years from tentative plan to operational deployment (6 years, 10 months from tentative plan to start of mass production.) The next operational VF, the VF-4, didn't see mass production start until 2012.2. Going by the DYRL? timeline, the VT-1 was deployed after the VF-1, but before the VF-4 was completed. If they attempted to design a new fighter, it would've started production around the same time as the VF-4, or after (and why waste manpower developing a dedicated trainer, when Earth's survival comes first, and a trainer jet is needed now?) In addition, there was at least two known wars occuring, not to mention the rebuilding of Earth after the end of SWI. In other words, we mustn't look at this in terms of what is available in reality, but what is available in the Macross reality. Slightly modifying a proven design is not only cheaper and faster when it comes to R&D, but it is cheaper and faster when it comes to actual production, and deployment (maintenance, etc.). I do agree that a trainer fighter can be acquired for much, much less. But a dedicated transforming VF trainer? No.

Ah. Now we get to the essence of the VF-1, and why more role specific VFs are built later in the timeline. Please reread: http://macross.anime.net//mecha/united_nat.../vf1/index.html The VF-1S is actually the most unique, and furthest removed from the other VFs in the VF/T/E-1 line. Until the X upgrade, it alone had different engines. (The VT-1C doesn't appear until Macross 7 Dynamite, and shouldn't be considered as part of this discussion, IMHO, as this discussion has been centered on the SWI era.) Therefore, IMHO, the VF-1S is as expensive, if not more expensive to maintain as the VT-1 - it's even got it's own unique FAST pack attachment, too.

I'm not following that logic. The way I see it is, aside from some lengthing in the nose, a different head (a less expensive one it should be added,) and a changed tail/rear thruster assembly/backpack, ALL of the parts are the same as the VF-1. Again, the costs involved (production, repair, retraining, replacement parts, and storage of replacement parts) is substantially reduced, simply because the two (or 4) 'different' fighters are really the same fighter, only with slightly different dohickys that give them different roles on the battlefield. I'd actually compare it to the three different models of the Joint Strike Fighter. Why did they decide to make one fighter capable of being produced in three different models? The answer to that question works for the justifications for the VF-1, VT-1, VE-1, and the short-lived VEFR-1 Funny Chinese. In addition, I don't think we can nit-pick about this too much more, as sooner or later we have to start talking about the differences between the VF-1A, VF-1D, VF-1J, and VF-1S - as they could be both described as identical, AND entirely different, and unique VFs.

Those are what I translated. Colour plates = colour images, ã­.

These ones - http://www.macrossrpg.com/docs/index.php/F...rade_FAST_Packs Note: links are only of the images; the names are arbitrary at this point. They can be found on pg. 39 of Shoji Kawamori's Macross Design Works.