Anybody Like The Vf-2ss Space Valkyrie 2?

[Radd]

As Phyrox said, gaudy means a tastelessly showy, overdone sort of ugly. Think ricer cars, or even some of the worse car, truck, or SUV designs to appear on the road lately (the H2 and H3 are prime examples, in my opinion).

I'd place the MII Valkyries under this category, the Sound Force mecha under this category, most Gundams, the Aquarion mecha, etcetera.

Utilitarian ugly is a "get the job done" sort of ugly. The Millenium Falcon, the Humvee and other real world military equipment, the VA-3, etcetera.

This trend's clearly visible even in Macross Plus and 7, where they move from chunky designs like the Valkyrie and Lightning III, towards the more streamlined and revolutionary looking Excalibur and Sturmvogel.

Er, I think you're confusing the Lightning III with somthing else. In fighter mode, the VF-4 Lightning III is possibly the sleekest Valkyrie ever designed.

The Valkyrie II might have been a logical progression of development from the VF-1 if Zentraedi "organic" look hadn't become the rage among Mr. Kawamori and crew. This design, along with the VF-2JA and Metal Siren, shows what "could have been" if a less "alien" look had remained the norm in the visuals for the VFs.

And yet real world aircraft remain Kawamori's top influence in Valkyrie design.

[Seto Kaiba]

Er, I think you're confusing the Lightning III with somthing else. In fighter mode, the VF-4 Lightning III is possibly the sleekest Valkyrie ever designed.

And in the other two modes it's some sick engineer's mad mistake. A battroid so utterly topheavy it'll fall over if you so much as look at it the wrong way. In a way it's probably a service to Macross that Kawamori never really focussed on the VF-4 past it's fighter mode.

Conceded, I'd overlooked the mass/inertia relation in my last post, but the lack of drag from zero gravity does apply, because stellar bodies below the approximate mass of our moon can't maintain a stable atmosphere, and when in the absence of gravity, atmosphere is a foregone conclusion.

And yes even I, a heavily biased Macross II fan, will admit that the Metal Siren is one ugly bird. Fortunately it's also a painfully effective bird, so I'm willing to overlook it's beating with the ugly stick. Like I said earlier, it was much more attractive before they added the elongated nose/right arm segment and the extra bits on the engines/legs.

EDIT: Sorry about leaving this so painfully incomplete, one of my website clients had a huge complaint about a hacker attack that required my immediate attention.

Edited March 11, 2006 by Seto Kaiba

[kensei]

No, I just think they're ugly period.  All of the valkyries in MII.  Packs or no packs.  There was no heart or soul in MII.

377707[/snapback]

Hey take that back man the Metal Siren was something here ! Even though Shoji never approved of the series its still good, I think it would have been a great addition to Macross if Shoji approved it.

Still the Metal Siren owns

378309[/snapback]

No way. It looks damn fugly, especially in battroid mode. Just look at the head. I think they modelled it off Exedol.

Edited March 11, 2006 by kensei

[Greyryder]

It's one of the greatest VFs ever, surpassed only by the original VF-1.

You wanna redesign something? Redesign those ugly hunks of scrap, from Mac+.

[SpacyAce2012]

As Phyrox said, gaudy means a tastelessly showy, overdone sort of ugly. Think ricer cars, or even some of the worse car, truck, or SUV designs to appear on the road lately (the H2 and H3 are prime examples, in my opinion).

I'd place the MII Valkyries under this category, the Sound Force mecha under this category, most Gundams, the Aquarion mecha, etcetera.

Utilitarian ugly is a "get the job done" sort of ugly. The Millenium Falcon, the Humvee and other real world military equipment, the VA-3, etcetera.

This trend's clearly visible even in Macross Plus and 7, where they move from chunky designs like the Valkyrie and Lightning III, towards the more streamlined and revolutionary looking Excalibur and Sturmvogel.

Er, I think you're confusing the Lightning III with somthing else. In fighter mode, the VF-4 Lightning III is possibly the sleekest Valkyrie ever designed.

The Valkyrie II might have been a logical progression of development from the VF-1 if Zentraedi "organic" look hadn't become the rage among Mr. Kawamori and crew. This design, along with the VF-2JA and Metal Siren, shows what "could have been" if a less "alien" look had remained the norm in the visuals for the VFs.

And yet real world aircraft remain Kawamori's top influence in Valkyrie design.

379145[/snapback]

Real world aircraft design does indeed influence Macross designs. The VF-17 and VA-3 are prime examples. But this doesn't change the fact that many later VFs have more of a bulbous, Zentraedi look to them. And this has been something of a trend in more recent installments to the Macross universe, both in games and in animation.

Of course, the Zentraedi look does make a Variable Fighter look more menacing. The VF-22 is one of the most evil looking VFs in Macross history, IMO. It is what a F/A-22 would look like if the engineers designing it had done so while on acid.

[Mr March]

Mr. March, I'd never really put it to compare the Yukikaze designs to the Macross II ones, but there is a similar school of thought there after all. Again, since it's science fiction, it doesn't really have to be practical looking, most people will be happy just that it looks great.

Stuff sticking out of the body on a Valkyrie in space really is a non-issue, since little graviational and atmospheric foibles like drag, air friction, etc. no longer apply. That's why things like the NP-BP-01 FAST packs in DYRL or the SAP packs in Macross II are actually alarmingly practical. You're adding extra maneuvering jets, extra thrusters, and a bevy of additional weapons to enhance the functionality of the craft in space, and give it a little more weaponry, since the weight of the fighter is no longer an issue either.

NO GRAVITY = NO DRAG, NO LIFT-WEIGHT RATIOS AND NO AIR FRICTION.

Effectively once you got the fighter into orbit, it's no-holds-barred on arming it. It's the age-old sci-fi argument, "Why do we make aerodynamic space ships when aerodynamics is a non-entity in space?"

379034[/snapback]

Ordinarily you'd be right Seto Kaiba because the conditions in space remove the need for certain design compromises made in earth bound craft (while at the same time creating other complex considerations). Given the technology in MOST science fiction, craft rely on such technologies that make flying bricks practical.

However, Macross is much less magical than most science fiction. The mecha of Macross are still bound by many physical laws like gravity and lift, since the Macross universe lacks miniturized, mecha-scale technologies like anti-gravity. In other words, the mecha of Macross still need to fly via aerodynamic lift within atmospheres and are still subject to g forces regardless of environment. Kawamori understands this and has designed most of the Macross fighters within some reasonable limits of believability.

IMO, the VF-2SS design fails to account for the established limitations of mecha technology in the Macross universe. Such internal inconsistancy hurts my suspension of disbelief, aside from the fact that I don't care much for the design anyway. Given a different sci-fi franchise with more complimentary technologies, the VF-2SS wouldn't bother my suspension of disbelief.

[1/1 LowViz Lurker]

Practicality or not that looks cool.

If yamato were to make a PT toy I would be pissing my pants. I honestly don't see how it is any uglier than the vf0. And I think the battroid mode looks better than the vf11 battroid mode actually.

It's not like macross makes much sense these days anyway . Flying on rocks and people creating force fields around thier body, not to mention the damaged vf0 flying off into space with magic in mac 0 for example.

As much as I am a fan of vf1 I think 2 is a good looking update. Same with the VF4.

I would like to see an OVA with these. Create a manga then base the OVA on it. If they could make a macross 7 manga based on events inside the macross 7, why not one of events post SW I?

Edited March 11, 2006 by 1/1 LowViz Lurker

[Sumdumgai]

M7 Trash takes place inside the Macross 7 and has almost nothing to do with valkyries or piloting. Macross universe sports involving futuristic inline skate hover things and a love triangle, and a girl that sings, and a girl that used to be a pilot. Oh Max is in it too.

Still don't like the MII valkyrie designs, even more so after this memory refresh.

[SpacyAce2012]

LowViz Lurker makes a valid point. Macross has lost a great deal of "realism" in recent years due to Kawamori's seemingly New Age turn in regards to the story.

If magic, monsters, and song based super-powers (Anima Spiritia) can be accepted in Macross, then minor details, such as the scientific realism and practicality of the Valkyrie II, is a minor issue and Kawamori's realism regarding VF design is largely moot.

Therfore, I disagree with Mr. March's point that Macross is less "magical" than most other science fiction genres. If anything, it has become more so than others, such as Gundam. Not that I have problem with this. In fact, I don't. But if I can accept the off the wall mysticism, then I can accept the largely "impractical" Macross II VFs.

Edited March 11, 2006 by SpacyAce2012

[Mr March]

Therfore, I disagree with Mr. March's point that Macross is less "magical" than most other science fiction genres.  If anything, it has become more so than others, such as Gundam. Not that I have problem with this. In fact, I don't. But if I can accept the off the wall mysticism, then I can accept the largely "impractical" Macross II VFs.

379299[/snapback]

Please read my criticisms carefully, especially when contrasting Mecha vs. Story. Spirita, mysticism, and any other fantastical story elements Kawamori and co. have created in Macross 7 or Macross Zero have nothing to do with the fictional rules created to govern what mecha can or cannot do in the Macross universe. None of the Macross variable fighter mecha use such fantastic story phenomena as spirita, mysticism, or anything else to power, manuver, or propel the craft AS DESIGNED. They rely on OT fusion engines with set limits and abilities. Until mystic phenomena are built into variable fighters that power their flight, enable them to counter gravity, defy g forces, ignore the need for lift, et cetera, et cetera, my original criticism stands.

[Seto Kaiba]

Real world aircraft design does indeed influence Macross designs. The VF-17 and VA-3 are prime examples. But this doesn't change the fact that many later VFs have more of a bulbous, Zentraedi look to them. And this has been something of a trend in more recent installments to the Macross universe, both in games and in animation.

Of course, the Zentraedi look does make a Variable Fighter look more menacing. The VF-22 is one of the most evil looking VFs in Macross history, IMO. It is what a F/A-22 would look like if the engineers designing it had done so while on acid.

True, most of the fighters in Macross are basically just revisions of or meldings of modern aircraft. Good examples being the VF-17, which looks virtually identical to the F-117A Nighthawk stealth fighter, the VF-22, which is almost line for line a F/A-22 Raptor, the VF-1 Valkyrie, which everyone knows is pretty much a F-14 Tomcat, and the VF-4 Lightning, which greatly resembles a miniature, streamlined XB-70 Valkyrie bomber. Still, you have to note that as time goes on, at least in the Macross Plus/7 branch, there's a marked trend towards making battroids look like Nosjadeul-Ger power armor. Look at the body structure of the VF-19 against the male power armor, looks mighty similar, no? And the VF-22 is pretty much a Queadluun Rau in disguise, both in it's fighting style and in it's looks.

We really could've done without the Zentradi-ification of the mecha, and especially not the incredably outlandish Ultraman-esque VF-19 Kai Fire Valkyrie, Mylene's VF-11, and the rest of the Sound Force technology, most of which is baldly ignorant of both style, and of little principles like acoustics. I always thought the VF-22 wasn't very menacing looking, to me it looked more like a giant cockroach, or some other large beetle.

If you're willing to suspend disbelief for the incredably impractical transformation sequence of the YF-19 prototype in which it's entire body breaks up at the hips. Or for the ridiculous gunpod deployment scheme of the VF-17 Nightmare in which is blasts outward from the hip. Or all that complete BS about the magical weaponry potential of anima spirita and music, which can be written off as pseudo-religious BS. Or giant space monsters that can control your brain and stop your spaceship dead in it's tracks with a thought, and all this other Magical stuff in Macross 7, then suspending disbelief for the Valkyries of Macross II should be small potatoes and easily within your grasp.

Heck, the only application of "spirita" that actually makes sense is from Macross II. The Marduk's emulators use music in conjunction with various other technologies to manipulate the aggressive impulses of the Zentradi they use as soldiers. That, unlike "Anima Spirita" and Sound Force's weaponry, has a solid basis in firm, unrelenting science fact. Using sounds, smells or tastes as hypnotic cues isn't a mystery, it's not magical, and it's done largely on an everyday basis by hypnotherepists for proceedures as mundane as helping people quit smoking. It could also be taken as Pavlovian conditioning, which is another well understood psychological endeavor.

Sound Force's technology is largely the product of wishful thinking on Kawamori's part, where the abysmally poor singing of a few lost causes makes aliens shrivel up and die, frees brainwashed citizens and explodes enemy sensors. It has NO BASIS WHATSOEVER in the land of science fact, putting it several standard deviations higher than my general willingness to suspend disbelief. The only thing that the power of Basara's singing, and anima spirita does is make me hit "mute" on my remote control until he's done singing. That's the power of spirita.

You want to talk spirita-related design standards, insofar as making fighters go? What about the absurdly impractical guitar, bass, or drum set controls for the sound force valkyries! Macross II's control systems aren't much different from the controls of your average F/A-22 or F-14! However, if you expect me to believe that you can fly such a bewilderingly complex machine using nothing but a bass guitar or a drum kit, you've got another thing coming. The technology in the engines is all well and good, but in the face of such a patently ludicrous control system, they might as well be running on fairy dust and floss, because until you build it and prove otherwise, you can't fly a plane with a guitar.

I hope that I have proven to you all which set of Valkyries is really the ones with which your suspension of disbelief should be suffering. If you can suspend disbelief for Mr. Nekki Basara and his amazing flying Ultraman Valkyrie controlled by a hideous guitar and his songs, then suspending disbelief for Macross II's Valkyries should pose you no difficulty whatsoever.

EDIT: Added some "oomph" to my last paragraph. The former ending lacked it somewhat.

Edited March 11, 2006 by Seto Kaiba

[the white drew carey]

379238[/snapback]

Now that I look at it, how the hell do the legs get from way out on the side of the fuselage in fighter mode to flush up against the nose in battroid mode?

Personally, I think it's a nifty redesign of Kawamori's VF-1 (no matter what anyone says, it is no way an original design). The fighter mode blows chunks because it's too wide, whereas the fighter mode with SAP system looks like something neat and powerful.

While I am not one to shy away fron fantastical designs, as I said before, I simply think the design itself doesn't fit into the Macross mythos.

Edited March 11, 2006 by the white drew carey

[Mr March]

I hope that I have proven to you all which set of Valkyries is really the ones with which your suspension of disbelief should be suffering. If you can suspend disbelief for Mr. Nekki Basara and his amazing flying Ultraman Valkyrie controlled by a hideous guitar and his songs, then suspending disbelief for Macross II's Valkyries should pose you no difficulty whatsoever.

*edited rant which blatantly misses the point*

379341[/snapback]

Since there is obviously a lack of understanding my point, I'll simplify it. Macross is a piece of fiction written and created in such a way that it demands the fictional fighters retain the ability to fly in an atmosphere using aerodynamic lift. With my admittedly amateur knowledge of aeronautics, I'm of the opinion the VF-1, VF-0, SV-51, VF-11, YF-19, and YF-21 look like they can fly via lift, with minimal suspension of disbelief...the VF-2SS does not. Since the Kawamori productions of Macross set the standard for realism vs. fiction in the franchise, I do have a big problem with the failure of the VF-2SS to uphold that standard. Hopefully this post gets through.

Edited March 11, 2006 by Mr March

[Seto Kaiba]

Since there is obviously a lack of understanding my point, I'll simplify it. Macross is a piece of fiction written and created in such a way that it demands the fictional fighters retain the ability to fly in an atmosphere using aerodynamic lift. With my admittedly amateur knowledge of aeronautics, I'm of the opinion the VF-1, VF-0, SV-51, VF-11, YF-19, and YF-21 look like they can fly via lift, with minimal suspension of disbelief...the VF-2SS does not. Since the Kawamori productions of Macross set the standard for realism vs. fiction in the franchise, I do have a big problem with the failure of the VF-2SS to uphold that standard. Hopefully this post gets through.

Believe me, the point of your post got through just fine. Of course you're missing a few key points there yourself. For starters, the Valkyrie II is a "SPACE VALKYRIE." Flying in the atmosphere is more or less moot, since the entire point of the thing is to go into space and pretty much stay there. In space, flying by lift is moot, because outside of planetary orbit, you're not worrying about gravity. Yes, it's very likely that the VF-1, VF-0, SV-51, VF-11 and YF-21 would fly, likewise the VF-2JA Icarus, and in a pinch, the VF-2SS Valkyrie II. There's enough wing surface and aerodynamic structure that given sufficient thrust, it will fly on lift. It will not be the most maneuverable plane flying on lift, but it will likely fly.

My point, which you again missed, is that your willing suspension of disbelief is horribly lopsided. You yourself stated that this is whether or not these fictional fighters look as though they could fly via lift in atmosphere, with minimal suspension of disbelief. There's enough evidence to make the conjecture that the Valkyrie II would fly relatively well on lift, if not being the most maneuverable planes out there. The control systems of the fighters are immensely relevant to the subject of whether or not a plane can fly, as a certain degree of precision is necessary to control the aircraft in atmosphere. Therefore my point about Basara's guitar-control interface remains valid.

Please do READ my posts, don't just skim them. You might learn something.

[Dante74]

Of course you're missing a few key points there yourself. For starters, the Valkyrie II is a "SPACE VALKYRIE." Flying in the atmosphere is more or less moot, since the entire point of the thing is to go into space and pretty much stay there. In space, flying by lift is moot, because outside of planetary orbit, you're not worrying about gravity.

379378[/snapback]

If the VF-2SS is a "SPACE VALKYRIE" why does it have wings in the first place? They would just be in the way when in battroid mode wouldn't they? The same goes for the air-intakes, totally useless.

Aerodynamics usually make for a sleek design which is therefore, most of the time, an esthetically pleasing form. I don't think anyone drools over the design of a sattelite.

I think the VF-2SS is a wonderfully useless design that makes no sense at all, but it still looks great.

Edited March 11, 2006 by Dante74

[Mr March]

*snip*

Please do READ my posts, don't just skim them. You might learn something.

379378[/snapback]

I have missed nothing. Your posts have continually attempted to divert discussion from my personal criticism of VF-2SS style/aerodynamics into a debate of story and subject matter (going off into topics such as guitar controls and spirita, mysticism and miscellany). The misunderstanding is failing to distinguish between the two.

If the VF-2SS is indeed a dedicated, space-only craft, the inclusion of wings and other poor aerodynamic features is either an oversight or an indication this is not a space-only fighter. In either case, the craft still fails to appeal with my personal tastes (being too busy and gaudy) and still hinders my suspension of disbelief within Macross standards (being a poor design aerodynamically). These are the subjects I'm discussing.

Lastly, the patronizing attitude isn't helping. If you want me to change my opinion of the VF-2SS, that's the wrong way to go about it.

[Seto Kaiba]

My apologies for the overbearing attitude. Guess I'm just used to the general reaction to anything Macross II from the Macross 7 fans as being "ZOMG! That show sucks cuz Kawamori sez so!" That still happens a bit here, guess I'm just conditioned to expect that sort of thing. My apologies to you all, I'll try and rein it in.

The inclusion of things like air intakes and wings and the like on a Valkyrie II make perfect sense. If you're going to be flying something that normally is designed primarily for space combat, you at least want to hedge your bets a little, since you'll doubtless be fighting near or in orbit of a planet. So having it be able to fly atmospherically, even if it's not the best performing plane in the air, is at the bare minimum, a good idea. Designed as it is, I have very little in the way of doubts as to it's ability to fly in a planet's atmosphere. If you examine closer, you'll note that in all but one circumstance in which a VF-2SS is flying in all of Macross II, the wings are folded back along the fighter's centerline (I have added a picture that illustrates this). It's a radical design, true. But so were things like the SR-71 Blackbird, the XB-70 Valkyrie, the B-2 Spirit and the F/A-22 Raptor. Sometimes dynamic breaks from the norm are the only way to evolve.

Being an engineer, generally if you're going to be criticizing one particular design, you should also be prepared to criticize and evaluate other, competing designs as well. Comparing the development of the control interfaces and body structure of the Macross Plus and 7 Valkyries to those from Macross and Macross II would seem to me at least to be a relevant consideration, as they are this particular field's alternatives.

Perhaps I would have an easier time understanding your point of view if you provided a visual aide as to the type of fighter design you prefer?

[SpacyAce2012]

I hope that I have proven to you all which set of Valkyries is really the ones with which your suspension of disbelief should be suffering. If you can suspend disbelief for Mr. Nekki Basara and his amazing flying Ultraman Valkyrie controlled by a hideous guitar and his songs, then suspending disbelief for Macross II's Valkyries should pose you no difficulty whatsoever.

EDIT: Added some "oomph" to my last paragraph. The former ending lacked it somewhat.

379341[/snapback]

While I disagree with you on a few minor points (not all of Basara's songs,or the character himself, were that bad), I tend to agree with you in general on the issue of the Valkyrie II. As I have pointed out in a previous post, I'm not too crazy about the Zentraedi-style VFs either. I don't hate them outright, they're just not at the top of my list of favorite Variable Fighter designs. But I do like the YF-19 and prefer it over the "production" version seen in Macross 7. I don't see nowhere near as much Zentraedi design attributes in it as seen in the VF/VA-14, VF-22,etc. In fact, if looked at from different angles and compared to the basic VF-2SS (without the SAP), the YF-19 and Valkyrie II share some startling similarities in design (in Fighter and Gerwalk configs).

I still feel that the VF-2SS and -2JA would have been in the logical evolution of the appearance of VFs had the designs remained canon and the Zentraedi influence hadn't become so prevalent in Kawamori's later designs. And his designs would have been more aerodynamically practical when compared to the Valkyrie II. But the Valkyrie II would have no problem fitting in with this hypothetical batch of VFs if, as you pointed out, fans would excercise a bit of "suspension of disbelief". How much required will vary from veiwer to veiwer.

Therfore,my opinion still stands regarding the Valkyrie II.

Edited March 12, 2006 by SpacyAce2012

[SpacyAce2012]

Therfore, I disagree with Mr. March's point that Macross is less "magical" than most other science fiction genres.  If anything, it has become more so than others, such as Gundam. Not that I have problem with this. In fact, I don't. But if I can accept the off the wall mysticism, then I can accept the largely "impractical" Macross II VFs.

379299[/snapback]

Please read my criticisms carefully, especially when contrasting Mecha vs. Story. Spirita, mysticism, and any other fantastical story elements Kawamori and co. have created in Macross 7 or Macross Zero have nothing to do with the fictional rules created to govern what mecha can or cannot do in the Macross universe. None of the Macross variable fighter mecha use such fantastic story phenomena as spirita, mysticism, or anything else to power, manuver, or propel the craft AS DESIGNED. They rely on OT fusion engines with set limits and abilities. Until mystic phenomena are built into variable fighters that power their flight, enable them to counter gravity, defy g forces, ignore the need for lift, et cetera, et cetera, my original criticism stands.

379336[/snapback]

I fully understand your criticisms and even agree on one or two points. I fully respect your opinion on the matter.

It wasn't my intention to wander off-topic here. The point I was making was regarding the "suspension of disbelief". Macross, being hardcore science-fiction, has no true "rules" or "limits" regarding how Mecha operate regardless of the hypothetical tech or fantasy magic behind behind them. Even with the Variable Fighters, powered by plausiable power sources and operated by real-world principles, limits can be pushed,thrown out the window, or disregarded outright from the beginning by the designers or story writers. You don't need magic robots or anti-gravity to "break the rules".

So, IMO, the Valkyrie II is a perfectly plausable machine for Macross. Just as much as the VF-1 or VF-4. It's a science fiction saga,after all.

[Radd]

And in the other two modes it's some sick engineer's mad mistake. A battroid so utterly topheavy it'll fall over if you so much as look at it the wrong way. In a way it's probably a service to Macross that Kawamori never really focussed on the VF-4 past it's fighter mode.

379172[/snapback]

Top heavy? Sure. So top heavy "it'll fall over if you so much as look at it the wrong way"? Much less so than a SAP-loaded VF-2SS.

[1/1 LowViz Lurker]

Top heavy? Sure. So top heavy "it'll fall over if you so much as look at it the wrong way"? Much less so than a SAP-loaded VF-2SS.

Maybe in space it doesn't matter so much. The fast packs on the vf1 are ejected when entering an atmosphere so I imagine they might have some atmopheric version of those boosters with the cannon.

Dude I really need to dig up that picture of the big ass Cannon that the vf11 was holding in macross 7 somewhere. Let's just say it was BIG!

And about the wide look of the fighter mode, I always thought it suggested power but just in a different way, maybe that it can roll a little better in space because of it or something.

There are other things that bother me: the Qrau should be dangerous because of how big the backpack is. What if it falls back? But who cares about safety in wartime? We are talking about a a series with a ship that transforms into a giant robot at the expense of squashing people into gooey mess after all.

Edited March 12, 2006 by 1/1 LowViz Lurker

[Radd]

Seto Kaiba was critisizing the design of the VF-4. I replied. I should add, however, that I think he was severely over-exaggerating the proportions issue in defense of a wild claim.

[the white drew carey]

Top heavy? Sure. So top heavy "it'll fall over if you so much as look at it the wrong way"? Much less so than a SAP-loaded VF-2SS.

Maybe in space it doesn't matter so much. The fast packs on the vf1 are ejected when entering an atmosphere so I imagine they might have some atmopheric version of those boosters with the cannon.

Dude I really need to dig up that picture of the big ass Cannon that the vf11 was holding in macross 7 somewhere. Let's just say it was BIG!

And about the wide look of the fighter mode, I always thought it suggested power but just in a different way, maybe that it can roll a little better in space because of it or something.

There are other things that bother me: the Qrau should be dangerous because of how big the backpack is. What if it falls back? But who cares about safety in wartime? We are talking about a a series with a ship that transforms into a giant robot at the expense of squashing people into gooey mess after all.

379426[/snapback]

This may not be canon, but it may help (and plug my own artwork ):

Regardless, the top-heavy argument was simply a response to one defender of the VF-2SS stating that the VF-4 was too top-heavy, yet not realising the very design he was defending was grossly top-heavy as well.

In the end, it really does come down to personal taste. Every person, from myself to mr. march to seto to spacy to phalanx him/herself has their own criteria upon which they divine their opinions. Although I thoroughly enjoy this discussion, when people start getting bitter and petty in their responses, I do think that's the moment you should step back and think upon what you are so vehemently defending.

Let's keep it fun and happy, boys and girls.

[Seto Kaiba]

Allow me to clarify my statement regarding the VF-4 Lightning III. Personally I rather like it's design in fighter mode, and have done a few pieces of art on it myself. I just can't stand it's upper torso in battroid mode, because of the projections that come out of it's shoulders and the center of the torso, which would make it abnormally (for a Valkyrie) prone to falling either forward or backward, with that much weight displaced on the top and towards the front. True, the SAP packs would generate similar problems with the VF-2SS, but the SAP packs were never used outside of space combat in Macross II. For both in space it's a non-issue, I suppose, without gravity you really can't fall over. But at least the VF-2SS could jettison the SAP packs to level itself out if the need arose.

To me, the VF-4 is a beautiful fighter in fighter mode, but the other two modes just don't do it any justice, and Kawamori's leaving it relatively unused is more than a little unfair to what could have been a really great design. Lots of untapped potential there if he redid it's battroid mode. I'd like to see it used more, but alas, I fear such will never happen. There's some guy on here who did a really awesome CGI of the VF-4, I'll have to look some of his stuff up later.

(Also, considering things, is it just me or does the head from the Metal Siren look not too dissimilar from the head on the VF-4 sketch posted by Radd?)

Yeah, that big gun the full armor VF-11 used, the XS-06 was it? That's definately gonna be a space-only weapon, unless you get someone else to prop up the other end of the barrel. Still, it looks pretty damn powerful, and I certainly wouldn't want to be on the receiving end. Nice art by the way, I particularly like the pose.

[Mr March]

My apologies for the overbearing attitude. Guess I'm just used to the general reaction to anything Macross II from the Macross 7 fans as being "ZOMG! That show sucks cuz Kawamori sez so!" That still happens a bit here, guess I'm just conditioned to expect that sort of thing. My apologies to you all, I'll try and rein it in.

The inclusion of things like air intakes and wings and the like on a Valkyrie II make perfect sense. If you're going to be flying something that normally is designed primarily for space combat, you at least want to hedge your bets a little, since you'll doubtless be fighting near or in orbit of a planet. So having it be able to fly atmospherically, even if it's not the best performing plane in the air, is at the bare minimum, a good idea. Designed as it is, I have very little in the way of doubts as to it's ability to fly in a planet's atmosphere. If you examine closer, you'll note that in all but one circumstance in which a VF-2SS is flying in all of Macross II, the wings are folded back along the fighter's centerline (I have added a picture that illustrates this). It's a radical design, true. But so were things like the SR-71 Blackbird, the XB-70 Valkyrie, the B-2 Spirit and the F/A-22 Raptor. Sometimes dynamic breaks from the norm are the only way to evolve.

Being an engineer, generally if you're going to be criticizing one particular design, you should also be prepared to criticize and evaluate other, competing designs as well. Comparing the development of the control interfaces and body structure of the Macross Plus and 7 Valkyries to those from Macross and Macross II would seem to me at least to be a relevant consideration, as they are this particular field's alternatives.

Perhaps I would have an easier time understanding your point of view if you provided a visual aide as to the type of fighter design you prefer?

379403[/snapback]

Hahaha, well I can assure you I'm no fan of Macross 7. While I avoid the Macross 7 bashing of which some here often partake, I dislike the series and especially some of the mecha designs (Yes, even some made by Kawamori himself). However, I do think it's possible that based on Kawamori's favored design esthetics, his grievances with Macross II may have something to do with the Valkyrie designs of the show (aside from the obvious reason of his exclusion from the anime production).

I can see your point. Perhaps the VF-2SS is not supposed to be a good atmospheric valkyrie. That's certainly a reasonable interpretation and may explain why the VF-2SS appears less airworthy compared to the other Valkyries. Most of the Kawamori valkyries seem to at least adhere to a greater measure of atmosphere dependance, which may explain why the difference between esthetics is so jarring to my eye.

I'd agree that sometimes unorthodox designs do produce airworthy results. But using the real world aircraft you noted as examples, it's good to keep in mind what those designs have in common. While the XB-70, the B-2, and the SR-71 certainly look unusual for aircraft, they are in essence flying wings at a fundamental design perspective. Those three craft are also 2-3 times larger than most valkyries and none of those real world aircraft are designed for combat or manuverability (bomber, reconnaissance, stealth/nuclear bomber respectively), unlike a dedicated fighter craft like the VF-2SS would need to be. The F-22 Raptor is very much a traditional fighter jet, with stealth and modern advancements but looking very much like lineage of the F-15.

I prefer the designs of the VF-1, VF-0, SV-51, VF-11, YF-19, and YF-21 most out of all the valkyries. My favoured real world fighter aircraft designs are Northrop/McDonnell-Douglas YF-23 Black Widow, Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor, McDonnell Douglas F-15 Eagle, Mikoyan MiG-29, Sukhoi Su-30, Sukhoi Su-47, F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (possibly my favorite), and naturally the A.V.Roe CF-105 Arrow (gotta represent!). The other non-fighter aircraft I love are the ockheed SR-71 and the B-2 Spirit.

[Mr March]

*snip*

I fully understand your criticisms and even agree on one or two points. I fully respect your opinion on the matter.

It wasn't my intention to wander off-topic here. The point I was making was regarding the "suspension of disbelief". Macross, being hardcore science-fiction, has no true "rules" or "limits" regarding how Mecha operate regardless of the hypothetical tech or fantasy magic behind behind them. Even with the Variable Fighters, powered by plausiable power sources and operated by real-world principles, limits can be pushed,thrown out the window, or disregarded outright from the beginning by the designers or story writers. You don't need magic robots or anti-gravity to "break the rules".

So, IMO, the Valkyrie II is a perfectly plausable machine for Macross. Just as much as the VF-1 or VF-4. It's a science fiction saga,after all.

379413[/snapback]

I would tend to agree. By and large, one has to often look at science fiction with an accepting eye in order to be absorbed by the story in all its incredulity. Much of the science in science fiction is simply created to suit, with famously silly technologies almost made up on the fly to allow plausible possiblities in the story.

Where I'd disagree is the mechanics of Macross mecha. Accepting the silliness of variable mecha, alien fusion engine technology, energy converting armor, and other assorted nonsense is simply part of enjoying Macross and suspending ones disbelief for sake of the story. However, it's clear an effort is made by Kawamori and co. to keep all the other elements of the Valkyries under some degree of control. For example, the weight of Valkyries is comparable to a modern warplane, the VF-1 weighing in at some 13 tons IIRC. Most valkyries also feature believable air speeds, thrust performance, payloads, structural g limits, T-O mass, et cetera. Design wise, most of the Valkyries appear to have sufficient wing surface and aerodynamic construction to fly properly (albiet each with some inherent problems).

For me, the design of the VF-2SS is bothersome, but like you say, it's not so bad as to call the thing a brick and let in ruin any enjoyment of Macross II. Personally, I dislike Macross II as a story anyway, so my distaste for the VF-2SS is just another small contributing factor. In something like SDF Macross or Macross Plus, I probably wouldn't have even cared all that much

[Mr March]

*snip*

In the end, it really does come down to personal taste. Every person, from myself to mr. march to seto to spacy to phalanx him/herself has their own criteria upon which they divine their opinions. Although I thoroughly enjoy this discussion, when people start getting bitter and petty in their responses, I do think that's the moment you should step back and think upon what you are so vehemently defending.

Let's keep it fun and happy, boys and girls.

379481[/snapback]

Hear, hear!

[1/1 LowViz Lurker]

Sh!t that looks pretty cool. You should do a Macross Doujin.

because of the projections that come out of it's shoulders and the center of the torso, which would make it abnormally (for a Valkyrie) prone to falling either forward or backward, with that much weight displaced on the top and towards the front.

that's one of the reason why I kind don't like the yf19 massive boob in battroid mode. In anime it looks good, but if you think about it, is it really practical to have it jutting out like that? The yf21 at least looks like it would hold together in a battroid brawl. Very compact and things are hidden into its body rather than having stuff stick out like that.

[Sumdumgai]

that's one of the reason why I kind don't like the yf19 massive boob in battroid mode. In anime it looks good, but if you think about it, is it really practical to have it jutting out like that? The yf21 at least looks like it would hold together in a battroid brawl. Very compact and things are hidden into its body rather than having stuff stick out like that.

If the nose section of the YF-19 is really strong, it could hug a zentraedi or another mecha to death with it's booby of death. lol I do like the YF-19 by the way, but even stuff I like is fair game for jokes.

[Radd]

Heh. Here's where we see an example of an extreme divergence of opinion. I personally think the VF-4 battroid is one of the best battroid designs to come out of Macross. I love the contrast between the super-sleek and graceful looking fighter mode, and the very stout and menacing battroid. I realize I'm in the minority here, a lot of people on the forum have voiced dislike of the design, still I see it as an improvement on the ideas behind the popular YF-19 design.

I also still say to call it so top-heavy that it would be prone to falling over is an exaggeration, and that the very picture I provided is enough argument for that.

As for the head being similar to that of the Metal Siren, I don't see it other than it's head-shaped, both have little detail on the lower "face" area, and both are somewhat elongated.

[Seto Kaiba]

Thought of another good example that is slightly closer to what I mean, the lifting-body design employed on the American Space Shuttle, in which the wings don't actually do the bulk of the lifting when the shuttle is coasting down. Really an ingenious idea, but it doesn't exactly lend itself to being really maneuverable, so the applications are limited, but it's definately the same sort of revolutionary design leap.

I can definately see why you have a beef with the VF-2SS's design, now that I've got a feel for the aircraft you prefer. Mine are the VF-2SS Valkyrie II, the YF-19, the VF-2JA Icarus, the Variable Glaug, the VF-1SR, and the VF-1S Valkyrie. For real planes, I'm more of a fan of the XB-70 (even if it is ugly), the F/A-22, the F-14, the F-17, the B-17 Flying Fortress and B-52 Stratofortress, especially the pre-revision model with the tandem cockpit. I still get the urge to stomp on the VF-22, as it reminds me too much of a gigantic roach.

The one constantly returning design that continues to bug me about the Valkyries of the Macross 7 timeline is what a friend of mine dubbed "The Twinkie Suit" (Don't ask, loooooooooooooooooooong story involving too much tequila and many a night spent playing VF-X, VF-X2 and the not-too-bad actually Battlecry). The GBP type armor that shows up on the VF-0, VF-1, and VF-11, which to me just seems TOO DAMN BIG to make much sense. Sure, lots of missiles is nice, but not being able to go anywhere quickly can get a little risky.

Well, the VF-4's lower torso looks good and all, it's just it's pre-YF-19 superboob and the two huge chunks on the shoulders that get to me, and give it the impression of being topheavy.

Ah well, March, there's not much we can do for you not enjoying the story, but at least we can have a spot of fun debating the finer points of the mecha.

[SpacyAce2012]

I want to offer my apologies to all if I came across sounding like a snob. It wasn't my intention to do so, nor was I taking anything personal.

I enjoy all installments to the Macross saga. Even Macross II and Macross 7. And I do like the MII mecha designs, particularly the VF-2SS, VF-2JA, and the updated Destroids (yeah!). So, I do tend to be a little zealous in defending them in debates.

Once again, my apologies if I came across as an ass.

And Mr. March, I agree that the CF-105 was one spectacular and beautiful bird. It's a crying shame that it never entered service.

[valkyrie312]

Many of us love the MII mecha - too bad the Kawamori didn't like it, so we may never see any real merchandise. I think it would be well-received should Yamato decide to make some VF-2SS and VF-2JA toys. (Hint, hint!)

[Mr March]

*snip*

The one constantly returning design that continues to bug me about the Valkyries of the Macross 7 timeline is what a friend of mine dubbed "The Twinkie Suit" (Don't ask, loooooooooooooooooooong story involving too much tequila and many a night spent playing VF-X, VF-X2 and the not-too-bad actually Battlecry). The GBP type armor that shows up on the VF-0, VF-1, and VF-11, which to me just seems TOO DAMN BIG to make much sense. Sure, lots of missiles is nice, but not being able to go anywhere quickly can get a little risky.

Well, the VF-4's lower torso looks good and all, it's just it's pre-YF-19 superboob and the two huge chunks on the shoulders that get to me, and give it the impression of being topheavy.

Ah well, March, there's not much we can do for you not enjoying the story, but at least we can have a spot of fun debating the finer points of the mecha.

379632[/snapback]

The GBP armor options were made basically to give the Valkyrie the option of heavy firepower similar to the Destroids in a ground combat role. It turns the Valkyrie into a walking tank of sorts, much like some of the Gundams or Battletech mecha. Although I agree it takes away much of the manuverability of the otherwise nimble Valkyries, the GBP for the VF-1, VF-0, and VF-11 does enhance the versatility of the UN Spacy's standard mecha and enables the Valkyrie to maintain a very important role in the combined arms of the UN forces.

I've never really liked the VF-4 all that much. The fighter mode looks good, but the battroid mode is awkward in my eyes. I agree tt does appear very top heavy, unlike most of the Valkyries.

You bring up another point that I really liked about the Macross Valkyries as mecha. Most of the designs transform in such a way that the engines are in the lower legs. Likely the engines would be the heaviest part of the fighter, which would give most of the Valkyries a low center of gravity in battroid configuration. This is certainly an advantage for a tall standing vehicle and a nice ancillary design benefit which makes the Valkyries a smart design.

[Mr March]

And Mr. March, I agree that the CF-105 was one spectacular and beautiful bird. It's a crying shame that it never entered service.

379642[/snapback]

It's such a simple design, yet so damn efficient. It was indeed a tragedy that my nation's fighter aircraft industry was decimated over the Avro debacle. The loss was quite a blow, not least of which was my generation growing up without realized dreams of Canadian built fighter craft. Probably why I was attracted to Macross at such an early age