"hip Guns" On The Sv-51 & Yf-19

[Kurisama]

Hello one and all. We've seen that in M.Zero, when Ivanov decides to break into the Asuka, he squishes all the little maintenance dudes running about - he also unleashes a short burst of machine gun fire from the 'hips' of the SV-51, yeah? And in fighter mode, the SV-51 has the guns facing forward.

Now the YF-19 has 2 machine guns on either side of the intakes in fighter, and in battroid these forward facing guns appear as the hip-mounted wings we all know and love, so my question is -

Can the YF-19 use these hip mounted machine guns in battroid? My guess, yes.

Maybe for close combat fighting with other mecha? Crowd dispersal? Or no use in battroid? Hold on a moment... are they even guns?

[JB0]

The YF-19 can. But they're lasers on the 19, not machine guns.

[Kurisama]

"Lasers" *In Dr.Evil voice* - right lasers, god bless 'em. But the SV-51 has machine guns tho, right?

[Sumdumgai]

Could you imagine the YF-19 tracking a descending target with the hip lasers in battroid mode, only to have the wings clip the arms off by accident? Since I haven't watched through a lot of M7, do any of the 19s fire the lasers from the hip?

[azrael]

"Lasers" *In Dr.Evil voice* - right lasers, god bless 'em. But the SV-51 has machine guns tho, right?

Thou shall consult thy holy book:

http://macross.anime.net/mecha/anti_un/var...sv51/index.html

http://macross.anime.net/mecha/united_nati...vf19/index.html

Yes, the lasers are available in all modes. Whether or not they are used, is up to the VF-19's pilot.

Since I haven't watched through a lot of M7, do any of the 19s fire the lasers from the hip?

Nope.

[Briareos9]

Wait... using machine guns for crowd dispersal? Getting totalitarian squash the plebian vibes, are we?

Well if they're not actually used in actual combat out of fighter mode, then whether they can is more of a simple intellectual exercise. As in, it's in the sales brochure, with all the other claims generated by the hard work of the marketing division to try to make their product look good. It's usually best not to take the effective marketing brochure too seriously with RL hardware, and the same would appear to apply here.

[JB0]

Wait... using machine guns for crowd dispersal?  Getting totalitarian squash the plebian vibes, are we?

I've heard that battroid feet make an excellent replacement for tank treads, too.

Well if they're not actually used in actual combat out of fighter mode, then whether they can is more of a simple intellectual exercise.  As in, it's in the sales brochure, with all the other claims generated by the hard work of the marketing division to try to make their product look good.  It's usually best not to take the effective marketing brochure too seriously with RL hardware, and the same would appear to apply here.

397042[/snapback]

Well, there's actually valid uses here. If you run out of gunpod ammo, you aren't restricted to the (presumably low-power) head laser.

The wing lasers are larger and have more room for heat dispersion mechanisms, which generally means more power is possible.

The YF-21 and VF-17 forearm cannons are probably more useful, though. The greater range of motion should make it much easier to blast something in GERWALK or battroid.

They're among the few VFs I think could be effective combat machines sans gunpod.

Edited May 5, 2006 by JB0

[Briareos9]

You're quoting me, but you're talking along a very different vector and in so doing basically conducting a strawman.

[JB0]

You're quoting me, but you're talking along a very different vector and in so doing basically conducting a strawman.

397104[/snapback]

That is incorrect.

"Well, there's actually valid uses here. If you run out of gunpod ammo, you aren't restricted to the (presumably low-power) head laser. The wing lasers are larger and have more room for heat dispersion mechanisms, which generally means more power is possible" is DIRECTLY relevant to the quoted text.

The tangental comment about the YF-21 and VF-17 is merely an observation about a weakness of the YF-19 design relative to other VFs. To conduct a strawman attack, I would have to actually present your argument as "The YF-19's lasers are better than the YF-21's and VF-17's lasers." I believe any rational person will find that I did no such thing.

I could pick random fallacy names to throw back at you.

Or I could just continue on with business as usual and not look for a way to take offense.

I think I'll do the latter. Particularly as I'm not actually attempting to engage in a debate here, merely pointing out a practical use for large lasers in battroid mode.

Throwing fancy words out doesn't make you look smart, especially when you misuse them.

O NOES AD HOMINEM!111

[1/1 LowViz Lurker]

I do think the hip lasers are kinda funny.. YF21's arm laser is what makes zentradi mecha in robot mode have more attitude. Most of the time the pilot probably even forgets they are even there.

hiplaser conjure up image of gundam mecha which have weapons on all sorts of awkward postion on the body which imo looks cheesy. (ie swords on the feet, guns in the mouth of the face, chest cannons with no space to store the ammo etc)

What they should have done is made it so that the hip lasers can detach like bits or drones in space. Ah that would be fun.

Edited May 6, 2006 by 1/1 LowViz Lurker

[JB0]

What they should have done is made it so that the hip lasers can detach like bits or drones in space. Ah that would be fun.

397186[/snapback]

But not very realistic. You have to have an engine, a power source, and reaction mass for them. And there's just not space to stick all that in the wing segments.

[1/1 LowViz Lurker]

Maybe in the future they could have some form of advanced wireless energy transfer or maybe they could have some futuristic batteries and these recharge when connected to the bot?

Only supernatual creatures like basara, mao and sara, and gubaba would be able to use this i suppose.

[Sumdumgai]

Or they could detach the hip wings and form a ppb along the edge and use them as swords. Okay the lameness burns my brain.

[Briareos9]

There are two reason to quote JB0. Either you're wanting to comment on something someone said, that would otherwise be unclear. That doesn't apply here as your post is literally right after mine. The second is to respond to some particular thing the person said.

You responded to a comment about marketing claims verse actual use by the military in combat in relation to use of the lasers out of fighter mode, with commentary about gunpods and the ability of the secondary armament to compensate. The fact you didn't recant that, clearly means such was your intention.

Strawman fallacy:

The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position.

Not to mention basically blowing up because someone dared to question you even in a neutral tone devoid of meaningful accusation, is not professional. Or to use your phrasing it's "looking for a way to take offense." *sigh*

Edited May 6, 2006 by Briareos9

[JB0]

You responded to a comment about marketing claims verse actual use by the military in combat in relation to use of the lasers out of fighter mode, with commentary about gunpods and the ability of the secondary armament to compensate.  The fact you didn't recant that, clearly means such was your intention.

Strawman fallacy:

The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position.

Your position, as I read it, was "the battroid lasers are marketing flash with no actual utility." My response was DIRECTLY relevant according to that reading, as they ARE actually useful in combat. Gunpods run out of ammo. They run out fas. And when they do, it's nice to have something else to use.

In other words, I said they had actual utility.

Not to mention basically blowing up because someone dared to question you even in a neutral tone devoid of meaningful accusation, is not professional.  Or to use your phrasing it's "looking for a way to take offense."  *sigh*

Blow up? When? You may be confusing my naturally abrasive personality with genuine annoyance. Believe me, if I blow up, you'll know it.

And I'm sorry, but we're on a message board dedicated to a cartoon about transforming jetplanes and 30-foot aliens, discussing the relative merits of a specific model of cartoon transforming jetplane. Where exactly does professional behavior become relevant in this equation?

I had no intention of entering into a discussion on the level where words like "fallacy" were useful. If I did, I'd be participating in a formal debate. But I'm not, am I?

I reiterate my belief that you're throwing fancy words around to make yourself look smart.

You COULD have just said "that's got nothing to do with what I said." It gets the message across a LOT clearer than "You're quoting me, but you're talking along a very different vector and in so doing basically conducting a strawman." And yet, it means the same thing.