Macross Political Climate

[azrael]

Mods, please move or remove any further off topic posts to this thread, particularly the mecha centric ones responding to LowVisLurker.

412752[/snapback]

You haven't been hear long enough to learn how to ignore Edo....I mean LowVis.

[GutsAndCasca]

Great information Mephis! Very cool.

I had no idea there was any sort of particle beam in an operational condition created by any government in the world.

Edited June 30, 2006 by GutsAndCasca

[JB0]

OK,

Those who wish to masterbate over the mecha please get your own thread!!

The rest of us are trying to discuss fictional politics in the Macross Universe, not who's gun pod is bigger than whos...

Hey now...

Mecha masturbation is what these shows are all about.

[Zinjo]

OK,

Those who wish to masterbate over the mecha please get your own thread!!

The rest of us are trying to discuss fictional politics in the Macross Universe, not who's gun pod is bigger than whos...

Hey now...

Mecha masturbation is what these shows are all about.

412830[/snapback]

I don't mind mecha masturbations, in their own threads...

[JB0]

OK,

Those who wish to masterbate over the mecha please get your own thread!!

The rest of us are trying to discuss fictional politics in the Macross Universe, not who's gun pod is bigger than whos...

Hey now...

Mecha masturbation is what these shows are all about.

412830[/snapback]

I don't mind mecha masturbations, in their own threads...

412834[/snapback]

The politics of miltary spending, then?

[KingNor]

Ok this might sound really dumb, but was Global killed at the end of SDF?

I was going to ask if you guys thought he'd be put in charge of earth after things settled down, but then i thought.. i'm not even terribly sure what happesn after the suicide attack against the SDF.

In anycase, the people of the Macross universe had to be holding him in high reguard. I know as a kid I had him up there with Optimus Prime as one of those fatherly "in charge" types.

[Lightning]

check the compendium. he lives after SDF and keeps being in charger of the UN until Bretai takes over, right?

[JB0]

Ok this might sound really dumb, but was Global killed at the end of SDF?

I was going to ask if you guys thought he'd be put in charge of earth after things settled down, but then i thought..  i'm not even terribly sure what happesn after the suicide attack against the SDF.

In anycase, the people of the Macross universe had to be holding him in high reguard.  I know as a kid I had him up there with Optimus Prime as one of those fatherly "in charge" types.

412864[/snapback]

In Robotech he dies. Kamjin's final kamikaze run destroys the SDF-1 and kills everyone aboard except Lisa.

I think this is where the confusion comes from.

In Macross he lives, as does everyone else(except Kamjin and Lap'lamiz). The Macross is heavily damaged by the kamikaze run and is later rebuilt "movie-style," with ARMDs replacing the Daedalus and Prometheus.

Edited July 1, 2006 by JB0

[Mephistopheles]

In Robotech he dies. Kamjin's final kamikaze run destroys the SDF-1 and kills everyone aboard except Lisa.

I think this is where the confusion comes from.

In Macross he lives, as does everyone else(except Kamjin and Lap'lamiz). The Macross is heavily damaged by the kamikaze run and is later rebuilt "movie-style," with ARMDs replacing the Daedalus and Prometheus.

412874[/snapback]

I thought it was odd that the bridge crew died in Robotech when you can clearly see that the bridge is completely intact after Kamjin/Kyron rammed them ... of course after finding out what Robotech really was I saw why they killed them off.

[JB0]

In Robotech he dies. Kamjin's final kamikaze run destroys the SDF-1 and kills everyone aboard except Lisa.

I think this is where the confusion comes from.

In Macross he lives, as does everyone else(except Kamjin and Lap'lamiz). The Macross is heavily damaged by the kamikaze run and is later rebuilt "movie-style," with ARMDs replacing the Daedalus and Prometheus.

412874[/snapback]

I thought it was odd that the bridge crew died in Robotech when you can clearly see that the bridge is completely intact after Kamjin/Kyron rammed them ... of course after finding out what Robotech really was I saw why they killed them off.

412882[/snapback]

I thought they avoided showing the final shot of the damaged but undestroyed Macross in Robotech for that reason. It's been ages though, and the last time I saw it was on Cartoon "Let's edit a pre-edited show because we'd like more commercials" Network.

I was more bothered by the lack of SDF-2 either way.

[Mephistopheles]

In Robotech he dies. Kamjin's final kamikaze run destroys the SDF-1 and kills everyone aboard except Lisa.

I think this is where the confusion comes from.

In Macross he lives, as does everyone else(except Kamjin and Lap'lamiz). The Macross is heavily damaged by the kamikaze run and is later rebuilt "movie-style," with ARMDs replacing the Daedalus and Prometheus.

412874[/snapback]

I thought it was odd that the bridge crew died in Robotech when you can clearly see that the bridge is completely intact after Kamjin/Kyron rammed them ... of course after finding out what Robotech really was I saw why they killed them off.

412882[/snapback]

I thought they avoided showing the final shot of the damaged but undestroyed Macross in Robotech for that reason. It's been ages though, and the last time I saw it was on Cartoon "Let's edit a pre-edited show because we'd like more commercials" Network.

I was more bothered by the lack of SDF-2 either way.

412883[/snapback]

They made a very clear shot. Kamjin's ship hits the right shoulder of the SDF-1 and you can still see what is left of both cannons and the bridge sitting right inbetween them. All Kamjin did was destroy the right arm and shoulder along with the outer right edge of the SDF-1's torso. I watched the sequence just a few minutes ago to be sure.

Kyron should have said "Damn it!" before he died because he failed.

[JB0]

In Robotech he dies. Kamjin's final kamikaze run destroys the SDF-1 and kills everyone aboard except Lisa.

I think this is where the confusion comes from.

In Macross he lives, as does everyone else(except Kamjin and Lap'lamiz). The Macross is heavily damaged by the kamikaze run and is later rebuilt "movie-style," with ARMDs replacing the Daedalus and Prometheus.

412874[/snapback]

I thought it was odd that the bridge crew died in Robotech when you can clearly see that the bridge is completely intact after Kamjin/Kyron rammed them ... of course after finding out what Robotech really was I saw why they killed them off.

412882[/snapback]

I thought they avoided showing the final shot of the damaged but undestroyed Macross in Robotech for that reason. It's been ages though, and the last time I saw it was on Cartoon "Let's edit a pre-edited show because we'd like more commercials" Network.

I was more bothered by the lack of SDF-2 either way.

412883[/snapback]

They made a very clear shot. Kamjin's ship hits the right shoulder of the SDF-1 and you can still see what is left of both cannons and the bridge sitting right inbetween them. All Kamjin did was destroy the right arm and shoulder along with the outer right edge of the SDF-1's torso. I watched the sequence just a few minutes ago to be sure.

Kyron should have said "Damn it!" before he died because he failed.

412887[/snapback]

M'kay, so it was a half-assed Cartoon Network edit.

That gives me a dimmer view of Rawbooteck.

[Zinjo]

check the compendium. he lives after SDF and keeps being in charger of the UN until Bretai takes over, right?

412871[/snapback]

Old Bruno lives well after the attack and manages to get elected into the new "Unity Government" at around 2016. It is at this time that Breetai is appointed Commander over the SPACY fleet, essentially taking over where Global left off.

[Mephistopheles]

check the compendium. he lives after SDF and keeps being in charger of the UN until Bretai takes over, right?

412871[/snapback]

Old Bruno lives well after the attack and manages to get elected into the new "Unity Government" at around 2016. It is at this time that Breetai is appointed Commander over the SPACY fleet, essentially taking over where Global left off.

412925[/snapback]

Yep and all this magically goes away in Robotech.

Breetai's fleet disappears.

Nobody seems to be able to recall the previous war with the Zentran.

The Zentran as a whole disappear.

The mecha seems to go backwards in terms of technology.

Of course it is all due to Robotech being three completely different shows merged together but the transistion between each third of the series is a very rough one. It'd be nice if Harmony Gold just dropped the whole Robotech thing and treat the shows as individual shows.

[IAD]

I don't usually post out here, but being an SV-51 fan (in the extreme)...

Everybody says the AUN stole the variable fighter technology from the UN... However, in Mac Zero, Nora is pretty clear on who stole what from where. (My subs have her saying "it's just the transformation system they stole from us...") Is there a Compendium entry, or something, that says otherwise?

(It seems that even if the technology was stolen by the AUN, they did a better job of using it than the UN... The VF-0 is a block, aerodynamically speaking, compared to the SV-51. )

Also, it would see that the SV was developed considerably sooner than the VF-0. Nora and Ivanov apparently had developed combat tactics which couldn't have been picked up from flying MiGs, etc..

"Schwalbe-2, formation D-Quick!"

Compare this to the VF-0, that was being combat-deployed for the first time in Mac Zero. (Note also how Nora and Ivanov speak of the UN 'newtype'... While they've been flying the SV-51s apparently for some time.)

Lastly, the AUN support systems for the SV squadrons are much extensive and more tailor-made for the purpose, than the UN. I mean, custom submarines to launch from, modular boosters, etc..? It seems odd that in the time it takes the UN to the build the VF-0 and develop the VF-1, the AUN can build several squadrons of SVs, with 'accessories', and at least one submersible aircraft carrier.

Logically, it would seem to suggest the AUN actually had the technology to begin with, thus they had more time to develop workable weapon systems.

Now, of course, all my logic is to naught, if the Compendium says the AUN stole the VF technology.

~Luke

Edited July 2, 2006 by IAD

[Mephistopheles]

I don't usually post out here, but being an SV-51 fan (in the extreme)...

Everybody says the AUN stole the variable fighter technology from the UN...  However, in Mac Zero, Nora is pretty clear on who stole what from where.  (My subs have her saying "it's just the transformation system they stole from us...")  Is there a Compendium entry, or something, that says otherwise?

(It seems that even if the technology was stolen by the AUN, they did a better job of using it than the UN...  The VF-0 is a block, aerodynamically speaking, compared to the SV-51. )

Also, it would see that the SV was developed considerably sooner than the VF-0.  Nora and Ivanov apparently had developed combat tactics which couldn't have been picked up from flying MiGs, etc.. 

"Schwalbe-2, formation D-Quick!"

Compare this to the VF-0, that was being combat-deployed for the first time in Mac Zero.  (Note also how Nora and Ivanov speak of the UN 'newtype'...  While they've been flying the SV-51s apparently for some time.) 

Lastly, the AUN support systems for the SV squadrons are much extensive and more tailor-made for the purpose, than the UN.  I mean, custom submarines to launch from, modular boosters, etc..?  It seems odd that in the time it takes the UN to the build the VF-0 and develop the VF-1, the AUN can build several squadrons of SVs, with 'accessories', and at least one submersible aircraft carrier. 

Logically, it would seem to suggest the AUN actually had the technology to begin with, thus they had more time to develop workable weapon systems.

Now, of course, all my logic is to naught, if the Compendium says the AUN stole the VF technology.

~Luke

413051[/snapback]

I did see that same translated line in my Macross Zero fan-sub. I really don't think the creators thought it out when they designed the SV-51. I'm pretty sure they just went for a design that was cool and different. Additionally, some aspects of the VF-0 were more aerodynamic than the VF-1. See, you have to consider that the VF-1 was designed in the early 1980s and the SV-51 was designed sometime after 2000. They had to purposely dumb down the VF-0 however they had a bit more free reign with the SV-51. Had Macross Zero not been related to Macross, I'd bet that the VF-0 would be just as cool.

On a design note, the SV-51 would be a nightmare to maintain as it has a much more complicated transformation. It also looks like it can't take much of a physical beating.

Edited July 2, 2006 by Mephistopheles

[Tinderfitles]

Maybe its the same tree with different branches, and what i mean by that is that the theory was there but those who developed the theory might have had more of an alligence to the AUN thus devoted more time and effort while trying to throw a wrench in the UN's effort to develop the technology. Thats really the only plausible reason for such a gap between the variable fighters.

[Mephistopheles]

Maybe its the same tree with different branches, and what i mean by that is that the theory was there but those who developed the theory might have had more of an alligence to the AUN thus devoted more time and effort while trying to throw a wrench in the UN's effort to develop the technology. Thats really the only plausible reason for such a gap between the variable fighters.

413056[/snapback]

I still confident that was merely lack of planning on part of the series creators. It also has to do with 1980's designs versus 2000's designs. You have to take other things into consideration, the design was obviously modelled after a bird which fits into the other elements of Macross Zero. They needed an aircraft the presented a challenge to the VF-0 otherwise the story would have merely been Roy shooting down the AUN aircraft. In order for them to create an exciting story they had to throw some logic into the wind. Somewhat like the episode of Macross where they blow a hole in the Zentran ship to throw Breetai out but then spend their time cutting a hole through an airlock in order to escape rather than go through the hole they just made.

In Macross Zero they mention that individual countries must annouce their technological advancements to the rest of the world. Well, since it was developed by the Anti-UN they probably didn't follow those rules and had a head start on the project or perhaps they had a better strategy for development and testing of their aircraft. It could easily be explained as the AUN having a head start.

However the SV-51 isn't fully explained so it might not have actually been a better aircraft than the VF-1. As I said in my previous post, the aircraft seemed to be much more complicated than the VF-0 and the VF-1 which means maintaining it is harder and production costs are up. The SV-51 doesn't seem like it could easily be adapted to aircraft carriers nor does it seem like it could carry a payload as heavy as the VF-0/1. It may not have faired in space as well either.

[Zinjo]

I don't usually post out here, but being an SV-51 fan (in the extreme)...

Everybody says the AUN stole the variable fighter technology from the UN...  However, in Mac Zero, Nora is pretty clear on who stole what from where.  (My subs have her saying "it's just the transformation system they stole from us...")  Is there a Compendium entry, or something, that says otherwise?

I don't recall that quote, when did she say it?

The Compendium is vague and that specific subject, it describes it as being obtained "illicitly" yet the details are not revealed. Since the UNG controlled South Ataria island the only way the AUN forces could have obtained the information is for one if it's operatives to have stolen it or for them to have gained it from defectors who stole the information themselves.

The two sides were at war, whether that war was public knowledge is another matter, since the compendium states that the events on Mayan Island were kept secret for 50 years after the fact. One could also wonder if the whole AUN / SPACY war was also kept secret?

(It seems that even if the technology was stolen by the AUN, they did a better job of using it than the UN...  The VF-0 is a block, aerodynamically speaking, compared to the SV-51. )

Also, it would seem that the SV was developed considerably sooner than the VF-0.  Nora and Ivanov apparently had developed combat tactics which couldn't have been picked up from flying MiGs, etc.. 

"Schwalbe-2, formation D-Quick!"

Not necessarily. The SV-51 may have been developed in parallel to the VF-1 project and was clearly deployed first, but that particular aircraft was not going to be much of a match for the smaller, more powerful VF-1 that was designed to be armored and trans-atmospheric.

Since the SV-51 doesn't use the Nuclear Reaction engines (which were delayed) that the VF-1 needs, naturally it would be deployed for combat operations first.

Ivanov was the flight instructor for the VF-X test team, so he and Roy knew each other. Since Ivanov would have been responsible for devising combat exercises for testing, it is only natural that he'd adopt many of those plans into his pilot training with the SV-51.

Compare this to the VF-0, that was being combat-deployed for the first time in Mac Zero.  (Note also how Nora and Ivanov speak of the UN 'newtype'...  While they've been flying the SV-51s apparently for some time.)

The VF-0 was deployed initially as a test bed for OTEC systems, it was pressed into combat when the AUN revealed the existence of the SV-51 fighter and the VF-1 was still not powered.

With the SV-51 being a completed fighter (not attempting to utilize Reaction engines like the VF-1), it is very likely to have been deployed earlier and thus it's pilots more atuned to flying it. This is the reason why there was such a lack of success the test pilots of the Skull Squadron had when engaging that variable fighter for the first time.

This doesn't imply the fighter was developed first, only that it was likely deployed for combat first. As I said, it is very likely it was developed at the same time as the VF series, since many OTEC and SPACY personnel defected over to the AUN side of the conflict. These would have taken all their experience and knowledge with them when they left.

Lastly, the AUN support systems for the SV squadrons are much extensive and more tailor-made for the purpose, than the UN.  I mean, custom submarines to launch from, modular boosters, etc..?  It seems odd that in the time it takes the UN to the build the VF-0 and develop the VF-1, the AUN can build several squadrons of SVs, with 'accessories', and at least one submersible aircraft carrier.

There is no doubt Mac Zero established the AUN as much more than some terrorist organization, but actually a fully supported and supplied army with a clear mission and objectives. It has skilled OTEC engineers that are capable of designing their own mecha.

We could equally assume the VF-0 predated the SV-51s, but they were mere test beds for new OTEC rather than combat aircraft.

We are given every indication that the VF-1 was ready to go and that airframes were only waiting for their nuclear engines to be made available to mount before they could fly. Remember the VF-0 is larger and capable of using the larger jet engines, unlike the VF-1s.

How many Valkyrie squadrons were built and waiting for their engines is not revealed in the show.

We do know that two models of Destroids were deployed and in use by UN forces vessels as opposed to the single Octo submersibles the AUN had at the time. According to the compendium all 4 destroid models (early versions) were in service by the time the AUN revealed the SV-51 and the Octo.

Logically, it would seem to suggest the AUN actually had the technology to begin with, thus they had more time to develop workable weapon systems.

If this were the case, they would have had more than just the Octo and SV-51 at their disposal, which was not the case during Mac Zero.

Now, of course, all my logic is to naught, if the Compendium says the AUN stole the VF technology.

~Luke

413051[/snapback]

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

You bring up good points, however the OTEC to develop the SV-51 did not originate with the AUN.

Edited July 2, 2006 by Zinjo

[Nomake Wan]

I don't recall that quote, when did she say it?

413117[/snapback]

Macross Zero, episode 2, 23:46. "Shousen... ore-tachi kara nusundaka henshin SHISUTEMU janai ka." Apologies for possible butchering of the romaji.

[sketchley]

Perhaps the transformation system was developed seperately from OTEC? OTEC simply provided the tech level to pull it off? Or the threat level that demanded/justified that both a jet and a giant infantry soldier had to be in the same vehicle.

Either way, the Anti-UN had 'perfected' the process first, and the UN took it. The points that IAD brought up support it quite a bit.

Just remember - the UN Government was embroiled in more than two wars between 1999 and 2009. The wars themselves being termed in-universe as 'the UN Wars.' That says quite a bit about their modus operandis.

Heck, for all we know, the act of stealing the transforming technology may have been what precipitated the war(s) and conflict between the UN and Anti-UN! (This is entirely speculation with no support whatsoever.)

If this were the case, they would have had more than just the Octo and SV-51 at their disposal, which was not the case during Mac Zero.

413117[/snapback]

That line makes no sense whatsoever. Sorry, but why bother investing in creating a whole arsenal of warcraft that are poorly equipped, with ill-trained pilots, and no tactics? (Sounds like the Zentraedi...) It makes more sense to invest more time and energy into perfecting the tactics and training of these elite units.

Real-world example: the "new" F-22 Raptor. That design was approved when? April 1992. It entered service in December, 2005. What were they up to during those 13 years? It certainly wasn't mass producing them. (This is a rhetorical question. Don't be tempted to reply to it.)

The very same conditions and circumstances that surround the F-22 could be applicable to the development of the SV-51 (VF-0, VF-1, Destroids, etc., etc., etc, ad naseum.)

Edited July 2, 2006 by sketchley

[IAD]

I was also thinking about the amount of time it would take to build a highly customized submarine, obviously designed specifically for the SV-51. The UN aircraft carrier that supported the VF-0 squadron looked pretty conventional, except for the destroid emplacements, which, for all we know, could have been retrofits, anyway.

I'm inclined to believe (my possibly biased opinion) that the SV-51 represented a better weapon system than the VF-0, and possibly even the VF-1, depending on how you score things. The SV is more like an F-22 (expensive, complex, and very stealty) as opposed to the VF-1 which brings to mind an F-16. (Smaller, presumably cheaper, easier to maintain, etc.)

However, in combat, I'd prefer the SV-51. The Longbow-style 'periscope' is quite a feature, and any claims that the SV transformed too slowly aren't apparent in Mac Zero. 3D thrust-vector would have given it a maneuvering edge, as would the full-flying canards, and a whole mess of flaperons. Active stealth is another nice-to-have. The integrated weapons were also more extensive on the SV... A pair of 20mm cannon make for good offensive dogfight capability. Lastly, the aerodynamics and fighter-mode capabilities make more sense than the variable geometry wings on the VF-0/1, considering the application. (I love the wings-as-airbrakes feature Nora uses against the rookies in Ep. 2...)

Interestingly, some of these same features showed up 30 years later, in the YF-21. (3D TV, active stealth, and more control surfaces than you can shake a stick at, variable-anhedral wings, etc.) Testimony to an aircraft ahead of it's time, I think.

In terms of complexity/maintenance... I think pretty much any variable fighter would be a royal pain to maintain.

Of course, being the only [known] SV pilot* in world tends to shade my views more than a little...

~Luke

*Flew a scratch-built 1/24 scale RC ducted fan job...

[sketchley]

I believe that it does say somewhere in the compendium (or another canon source) that in combat, the SV-51 is better than the VF-0.

Of course, the VF-1, with it's semi-transatmospheric nature (read: higher service ceiling) does have an advantage over the SV-51 (I'm thinking along the lines of the two jet fighters used in the Korean war - one of them could fly higher and faster, but at the same time had a lower manueverability.)

[IAD]

True. The F-86 Saberjet had higher speed and better handling, but the MiG 15 could outclimb it, and had a higher ceiling.

Then again, watching the type of fighting that variable fighters usually ended up in, (close in dogfights) and the effectiveness of BVR (beyond visual range) countermeasures, I would tend to doubt that a higher service ceiling would contribute much to combat capability. (Especially with a difference in ceiling of only 2500 m, about 1.5 miles, easy missile range.)

Range is a more significant disadvantage, compared to the VF-0, though the SV was eventually to be replaced with a nuclear-turbine-powered design. Assuming the nuclear version would have retained the distinguishing features of the SV-51, it would have been a very impressive aircraft, I would imagine.

This is now rather far removed from the original political dicussion, though... Sorry guys, I shan't do it again!

~Luke

[Mephistopheles]

True.  The F-86 Saberjet had higher speed and better handling, but the MiG 15 could outclimb it, and had a higher ceiling. 

Then again, watching the type of fighting that variable fighters usually ended up in, (close in dogfights) and the effectiveness of BVR (beyond visual range) countermeasures, I would tend to doubt that a higher service ceiling would contribute much to combat capability.  (Especially with a difference in ceiling of only 2500 m, about 1.5 miles, easy missile range.)

Range is a more significant disadvantage, compared to the VF-0, though the SV was eventually to be replaced with a nuclear-turbine-powered design.  Assuming the nuclear version would have retained the distinguishing features of the SV-51, it would have been a very impressive aircraft, I would imagine. 

This is now rather far removed from the original political dicussion, though...  Sorry guys, I shan't do it again!

~Luke

413315[/snapback]

Not entirely, if the roles were reversed and the VF was on the attack they could fly at altitudes where the SV-51 would be unable to intercept.

[Zinjo]

Perhaps the transformation system was developed seperately from OTEC?  OTEC simply provided the tech level to pull it off?  Or the threat level that demanded/justified that both a jet and a giant infantry soldier had to be in the same vehicle.

Either way, the Anti-UN had 'perfected' the process first, and the UN took it.  The points that IAD brought up support it quite a bit.

That is a real possibility, however for that to take place, the UNG would have to know about the SV-51 prior to it's revelation, which isn't mentioned. Is it possible that the theory or engineering existed, but the AUN engineers were able to implement it first? Since the SV-51 was designed and produced as an atmospheric fighter from the beginning, unlike the VF series.

Just remember - the UN Government was embroiled in more than two wars between 1999 and 2009.  The wars themselves being termed in-universe as 'the UN Wars.'  That says quite a bit about their modus operandis.

Not sure how this statement fits with the rest of them.

Heck, for all we know, the act of stealing the transforming technology may have been what precipitated the war(s) and conflict between the UN and Anti-UN!  (This is entirely speculation with no support whatsoever.)

Maybe, but I am leaning toward the idea that the AUN and SPACY war was not publically known, similar to the events on Mayan Island. That the facts were "sealed" for 50 years along with the Mayan Island incident. It would fit the description of the UN Wars being mostly territorial disputes and the fact that the AUN forces are not mentioned in the chronology until 2 years into the conflicts. If the "control" of the technology was the basis for the war between the two sides, it would support the need to keep things quiet.

If this were the case, they would have had more than just the Octo and SV-51 at their disposal, which was not the case during Mac Zero.

413117[/snapback]

That line makes no sense whatsoever. Sorry, but why bother investing in creating a whole arsenal of warcraft that are poorly equipped, with ill-trained pilots, and no tactics? (Sounds like the Zentraedi...) It makes more sense to invest more time and energy into perfecting the tactics and training of these elite units.

It makes perfect sense. If one side has the ability to build bleeding edge weaponry, why stop at a variable fighter and submersible mecha? I'm not necessarily suggesting they build up the same number of mecha as SPACY, but one would reasonably expect them to come up with more than just two types?! They are a well funded and supported military force, and they choose to stop developing advanced vehicles at two in order to "train"? Doesn't sound like a brilliant strategy to topple the UNG to me.

The very same conditions and circumstances that surround the F-22 could be applicable to the development of the SV-51 (VF-0, VF-1, Destroids, etc., etc., etc, ad naseum.)

413196[/snapback]

I beg to differ. We are looking at a 8 year span for destroids and 6 years to this point for variable fighters. I'm sure it didn't take 5-6 years to develop, build and test the F-22 did it? In the timeline we are talking about massive leaps in knowledge and engineering in mere months and even years.

In 6 years, after the decision to build one, OTEC has a nearly complete nuclear powered variable jet aircraft and fully functional turbine powered jets. We know that a year later the VF-1 has been mass produced.

So if the AUN are as capable as the UNG in developing mecha (as we know they are) then why limit themselves to such few types? That is the question I posed and still find a bit mysterious if one is to subscribe to the notion that the AUN had the technology first that they'd limit themselves in such a way.

[Zinjo]

I believe that it does say somewhere in the compendium (or another canon source) that in combat, the SV-51 is better than the VF-0.

The compendium does state: "since it was planned from the beginning for actual combat, its practicality and stability in combat situations is higher than the VF-0's." It has a shorter cruising range than the VF-0, but is far more maneuverable and it's transformation sequence takes longer.

Of course, the VF-1, with it's semi-transatmospheric nature (read: higher service ceiling) does have an advantage over the SV-51 (I'm thinking along the lines of the two jet fighters used in the Korean war - one of them could fly higher and faster, but at the same time had a lower manueverability.)

413311[/snapback]

The VF-1 also has a smaller sillouette, is armored and has no range limitations.

It is clear that the design characteristics of the SV-51 are ahead of it's time, hence being used 30 years later in a VF design.

The fact that both the SV series and the VF series came out at the same time leads me to believe they were developed at parallel times by different groups with the same information.

Range is a more significant disadvantage, compared to the VF-0, though the SV was eventually to be replaced with a nuclear-turbine-powered design.  Assuming the nuclear version would have retained the distinguishing features of the SV-51, it would have been a very impressive aircraft, I would imagine.

I have no doubt a nuclear SV series fighter was in development or like the VF-1's simply waiting for a nuclear engine to power it. It's the next logical step in the evolution of both series of fighters.

This is now rather far removed from the original political dicussion, though...  Sorry guys, I shan't do it again!

~Luke

413315[/snapback]

I don't know, Sketchley and I seem to be bouncing back and forth on that topic...

Edited July 3, 2006 by Zinjo

[IAD]

Oh, OK.

In regards a limited fleet of variable aircraft...

Assuming there's no anime magic involved in the development time of variable fighters, these things are going to take a LONG time to develop, probably close to all of the 5-6 years they had to work with...

I don't think they 'stopped to start training' so much as they only were capable of putting two variable craft (with full support) into production, presumably with developmental work going on for a nuclear SV.

Aside from the fact that the SV and Octos (both being variable vehicles) likely took years to develop, fielding the AUN mobile units to support the weapon platform(s) they had committed to would take considerable development time and production resources. In all probability, it's not that they willingly stopped devising new weapons, but instead they were intent on fully supporting the weapons they were fielding, and it was taxing their capabilities.

Regarding ceiling advantages:

"...if the roles were reversed and the VF was on the attack they could fly at altitudes where the SV-51 would be unable to intercept..."

Timing the burn-times on the micromissiles launched against Shin's F-14 (30 seconds) and assuming the 14 was outrunning the missiles at about 2500km/h, the range of the missiles is ~20km... The ceiling difference is only 2.5km. In short, the SV might not be able to get in ultra-close, and head-kick the VF-0 into submission, but still could make itself a pain in the neck. Higher ceiling was better in the days of gunfighters, but introduce the missile, and things change...

~Luke

[GutsAndCasca]

Okay here's an off-topic question. If you take into consideration that all VFs have miniature nuclear reactors powering them... wouldn't they cause a huge mushroom cloud explosion when they get hit instead of the little 1 second orange bubble-pops?

[JB0]

Okay here's an off-topic question. If you take into consideration that all VFs have miniature nuclear reactors powering them... wouldn't they cause a huge mushroom cloud explosion when they get hit instead of the little 1 second orange bubble-pops?

413414[/snapback]

Because a breached reactor actually isn't anything like a bomb.

Beyond that...

In space scenes, spherical explosions are correct for ANY detonation other than a shaped charge. Any deviation from spherical is a result of an uneven explosion or atmospheric interference.

Of course, nukes are still really hot, and should probably be white instead of orange, even without an atmosphere to incandesce.

In an atmosphere, the famous mushroom cloud is an artifact of the size of the explosion, not an inherent property of a nuclear detonation.

The detonation superheats a very large quantity of air, which rises rapidly, then spreads out as it cools down.

Even if they DID explode like a bomb, the VF and Destroid generators just aren't big enough to cause a mushroom cloud.

[KingNor]

most likely a destroyed nuclear reactor would either shut down or melt down, i don't think it would nesesarily explode, and certainly woudln't explode like a nuclear bomb!

[Mephistopheles]

Oh, OK. 

In regards a limited fleet of variable aircraft...

Assuming there's no anime magic involved in the development time of variable fighters, these things are going to take a LONG time to develop, probably close to all of the 5-6 years they had to work with...

I don't think they 'stopped to start training' so much as they only were capable of putting two variable craft (with full support) into production, presumably with developmental work going on for a nuclear SV.

Aside from the fact that the SV and Octos (both being variable vehicles) likely took years to develop, fielding the AUN mobile units to support the weapon platform(s) they had committed to would take considerable development time and production resources.  In all probability, it's not that they willingly stopped devising new weapons, but instead they were intent on fully supporting the weapons they were fielding, and it was taxing their capabilities. 

Regarding ceiling advantages:

"...if the roles were reversed and the VF was on the attack they could fly at altitudes where the SV-51 would be unable to intercept..."

Timing the burn-times on the micromissiles launched against Shin's F-14 (30 seconds) and assuming the 14 was outrunning the missiles at about 2500km/h, the range of the missiles is ~20km...  The ceiling difference is only 2.5km.  In short, the SV might not be able to get in ultra-close, and head-kick the VF-0 into submission, but still could make itself a pain in the neck.  Higher ceiling was better in the days of gunfighters, but introduce the missile, and things change...

~Luke

413387[/snapback]

True, they could launch missiles at them however if the VFs flew by near top speed and given that the SV and VF require the nose to be pointed at their target, they wouldn't get that many opportunities.

About the explosions. Any explosion in the atmosphere that is big enough will have a muschroom cloud provided that it was a surface detonation. When a 105mm rocket hit the ammo dump in Ballad the first explosion had a mushroom cloud.

Nuclear reactors don't explode just because they were damaged. The reactors are also no where near the scale of a power plant. If a valkyrie was destroyed it would be fairly easy to decontaiminate the area later.

[JB0]

most likely a destroyed nuclear reactor would either shut down or melt down, i don't think it would nesesarily explode, and certainly woudln't explode like a nuclear bomb!

413457[/snapback]

Indeed.

Melt down is a fission-exclusive effect.

You'd get a nice fireball out of a fusion reactor, but nothing really explosive since there's not enough fuel in the reactor for a weapons-grade reaction or enough pressure to sustain fusion once it ruptures.

About the explosions. Any explosion in the atmosphere that is big enough will have a muschroom cloud provided that it was a surface detonation. When a 105mm rocket hit the ammo dump in Ballad the first explosion had a mushroom cloud.

Yup.

Nuclear reactors don't explode just because they were damaged. The reactors are also no where near the scale of a power plant. If a valkyrie was destroyed it would be fairly easy to decontaiminate the area later.

A. Valks use fusion. A clean fusion reaction, no less. There's nothing to decontaminate.

B. A damaged fusion reactor likely WILL explode, just not in the sort of detonation that even a small nuclear bomb provides.

Expect something more akin to a damaged blowtorch.

C. The VF-1's reactor generates 650 megawatts plus engine thrust per engine, and it has 2(the compendium entry implies each engine has it's own reactor). That's 1300 megawatts per VF, which is comparable to modern real-world nuclear power plants.

Fission and fusion are fundamentally diffrent technologies to start with, though.

Most notably, fusion doesn't require a large mass of highly radioactive substances and many fusion reactions don't leave signifigant radioactive substances behind(but even the dirtiest fusion reactions are far cleaner than fission reactions).

There's a disturbingly prominent confusion surrounding fission and fusion as well as weapons and generators that rears it's head every time this subject comes up.

In short:

Fission is dirty. Fusion isn't.

Generators don't blow up like bombs because they're built to create a sustained and controlled reaction instead of a single violent uncontrolled burst of supreme power.

[GutsAndCasca]

Hm. If the technology is relatively safe then, I mean, without all the worry of decontamination and such in the event of a "problem", I'm surprised that tons of modes of transportation don't use fusion reactors. At least for military use. Maybe this will be prevalent in the near future? I wouldn't mind riding around on a small nuclear reactor if it meant I didn't have to pay these exhorbitant gas prices.

[JB0]

Hm. If the technology is relatively safe then, I mean, without all the worry of decontamination and such in the event of a "problem", I'm surprised that tons of modes of transportation don't use fusion reactors. At least for military use. Maybe this will be prevalent in the near future? I wouldn't mind riding around on a small nuclear reactor if it meant I didn't have to pay these exhorbitant gas prices.

413559[/snapback]

The problem is making a fusion reactor WORK.

Fission is easy, but fusion is a lot more difficult.

To date, there are no successful fusion power plants, though they have a few that hypothetically would have surpassed break-even if they'd actually been equipped to generate electricity(break-even is the point where you get as much usable energy out of the reactor as you put into starting and sustaining the fusion reaction).