sketchley

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.

My mistake, this is the toy section. The TV series section is not hostile. The fact that there are multiple threads active on the exact same topic, at the same time is what will lead to threads being locked. There won't be any gray VT-1 line-art. Line art is, by it's nature, lines only, with no colour or screen tone (ergo no gray.) What you want is colour art. My take it or leave it summation of the text on pg 87 of the This is Animation: Macross Plus OVA book is: VT-1 FAST Pack: SVMAT-102: From 2009.10, for three months on ARMD-4. Used the 'dayglow orange' colour scheme familiar from the movie. SVT-24: 2 units in the training wing on ARMD-2. SVT-24 also used 1 VF-1D. The body is light gray, with radome colour (dark gray) on the FAST packsm sensor head, and wing tips. Brown (same as on the dayglow orange VF-1) on the nose, and tips of the dorsal FAST packs. 00 on the front of the two FAST packs. Note: neither have a reference to their carrier on their body. There is a Super VF-1J on the same page with ARMD-03 on it's nacelle packs - so I am under the impression that the lack of carrier decal on the two VT-1 is intentional. The other impression I have is that there were (or are) not very many VT-1. With only 2 (3 if including the VF-1D) per 15 plane training wing*, and 0 per (regular) fighter wing, I am led to believe that we'd only find 2 or 3 VT-1 per ARMD (which carries upwards of 348 fighters**.) * 15 based on info found here: http://macross.anime.net//story/encycloped...pacy/index.html ** http://macross.anime.net//mecha/united_nat...armd/index.html

The 2nd image (Yamato?) looks more authenitic. I'm basing this supposition mostly on the arms - as the 1st image (Bandai?) has arms that look exactly the same as a regular VF-1; not to mention that it is in battroid mode, still with armour on - something that I have never seen in both the anime and in line-art. The way that the VT-1 transforms, it would be difficult to impossible to mount Super or Strike VF-1 FAST packs (again, as modeller, it's your call.) The VT-1 FAST packs are pretty much specific to it, and the Rabbit. It doesn't look like the leg and arm packs are limited to the VT-1. Thank you for the images of the toys (models?,) but what about line art?

I'm curious about these arm pods for the VT-1. I rechecked my Shoji Kawamori's Macross Design Works, and on pg 42 (page on the VT-1), there are NOT any arm FAST packs that are noticeable. Are there pictures of them available? The above (toy?) pictures do have arm packs, BUT they look like recoloured VF-1 Strike FAST packs. The entire section between the engine nacelles (legs) also looks different in the lineart that I have available.

No worries. Way back in the day (2001,) I made some FAST packs for the VF-4. They are based on similar looking FAST packs created for the VF-1, for either the VF-1X or VF-1X Plus upgrades. Personally, I think they are better than the VF-4 FAST packs designed for a game pre-1995. But agreed, something that revisits the reconstruction/colonization era would be nice... EDIT: the images can be viewed here: http://studiootaking.deviantart.com/art/VF...c-View-62760460 http://studiootaking.deviantart.com/art/VF...-packs-62766094

Not to mention the cost reductions due to parts commonality, and not having to retrain mechanics for work on a new machine.

Additional fuel and/or sensors in the arm units. Plus what previous posters said. Re: weapons: there's the possibility of wing mounted missiles, too.

1) Does the VF have hands? If so, then it is capable of carrying and using a gun pod in battroid and gerwalk modes. Mounting it in fighter mode is an entirely new question. Otherwise, it's good ol' hand to hand combat. The VT-1 should also be capable of mounting wing ordinance (or additional sensor pods.) 2) The VT-1 has manueverability thrusters on the tips of the wings, the VF-1D does not. The VT-1 also has a head which looks like it has more, or extended sensor capabilities. Then again, it could just be a stripped down head unit, with only the needed sensors having an advanced ability. 3) unknown. In DYRL it launched from the SDF-1 with it's attached ARMD. 5) SVT-24 (squad? unit?) has a dark & light grey, and beige scheme (seen in This is Animation: Macross Plus.) 6) No. It's a movie thing. PS Mods locked your thread. I suggest respecting their decision to lock the thread. Perhaps this forum isn't the right one, as you appear to be asking a question on a model kit. Must read: http://www.macrossworld.com/mwf/index.php?showtopic=142 (section VII, specifically.)

The film will probably be a little bit less understandable if you haven't seen the TV series yet (as it is based on, or a summary of, the events of the TV series.)