The 2nd Coming of the YF-19

[Vermillion21]

I'm totally psyched about this...

Ditto, mate.

[Skullsixx]

Dude...I'm there too!

[Apollo Leader]

I think Vader's, er the YF-19's hands are too small.

Seriously, this looks great! Ditto with the VF-0/Ghost combo. Hopefully the YF-21 and VF-11 get the love they both deserve!

[Graham]

Yeah, it seems strange that just about every other transforming -19 ever (even the bad ones) has had the little flaps that fold down from the outer edge of the shoulder, but the Yamatos don't.

427157[/snapback]

It will have the shoulder flaps. Maybe they are just folded up in that pic.

Graham

[recon]

Tks for the info graham, the YF-19 looks everybit as gorgeous as it could be. Pass the msg to yamato on a job well done, do hope they take note of the swing bar and tab problem in its predecessor by reinforcing it.

Btw graham, any hints of any alternate schemes for the YF-19, would be hoping along the lines of Super Nova schemes if you could so kindly suggest it to yamato.

[physioguy]

OK

I was bored, so I decided I just couldn't wait for pics of the colored YF-19 to be released, so I quickly COREL'ed the picture that David Hingtgen posted.

Here's a comparison

I'm such a geek that I had fun tainge David's old picture, and my painted one, and just flipping back and forth... and I bet some of you are geeky enough to do that too.

[Fort Max]

The VF-0 looks fantastic in those colours and with that extra gubbins attached to it.

The YF-19 is just too impressive in general.

[David Hingtgen]

800x1000 of Gerwalk goodness:

[1/1 LowViz Lurker]

making them a .jpg, would make them much quicker to load.(with little loss in quality) Phew!

I feel sorry for the dial uppers waiting for a 2.5 meg image to load.

Finally saved all the images for later viewing.

edit:

*Drool*

Can't wait to see this with markings. I had another dream that I owned one.

So do the wings droop down like the 1/72?

What are these other gimmicks graham is hiding from us?

Can someone list all the things they can think of?

Edited August 22, 2006 by 1/1 LowViz Lurker

[kensei]

Poor Roy.....

[David Hingtgen]

I'm on dialup, and I make sure every pic is as few KB as possible. (for my own sanity to upload them) What's not a JPG?

[1/1 LowViz Lurker]

Ah nevermind. Must be me. When I originally saw the image and tried to save it, it was a massive file size. It must be something I did when I "saved as" and chose bmp accidently, because it was saved as a bmp. I thought that maybe it was a bitmap originally. doh My bad. (my connection was really slow last night so I might have been trying to save the image incomplete thinking it was large image. Sometimes I also accidently double post when the connection goes slow or the images are not 100% complete yet)

Edited August 22, 2006 by 1/1 LowViz Lurker

[David Hingtgen]

If your webcache gets full from sheer number of picture files (not space limits) it'll start forcing you to save everything as a BMP.

You may have a 5-gig webcache, but they tend to get "full" long before that due to sheer number of small pic files---there's so many 1K and 2K thumbnails and buttons, that once you hit X number of *files* of the same type, it'll stop allowing any more.

[Dobber]

I feel your pain David, I'm also on dial-up.

Chris

[wwwmwww]

I can honestly confirm with whole-hearted sincerity that I have absolutely no idea whether Yamato has a D-Stance YF-21 or not.

Graham

410503[/snapback]

For a change I have something I want to say and can not. At least not yet. I really do hope to be able to share my news soon though.

Carl

421961[/snapback]

My secret is out...

http://www.macrossworld.com/mwf/index.php?showtopic=20048

Enjoy,

Carl

[1/1 LowViz Lurker]

Lucky! Post a gallery now or when it is built and stuff. Now there is something to put on the site about it.

Edited August 23, 2006 by 1/1 LowViz Lurker

[David Hingtgen]

We need lots of pics, especially the shoulder/arm transformation. That's the #1 place where it blows away all other YF-21's.

[GutsAndCasca]

The D'stance isn't made by yamato though, is it?

[David Hingtgen]

No, but it's the best YF-21 ever by a factor of ten and is what we all want Yamato to copy, as it's far better than anything else and frankly IMHO better than Yamato could do themselves. I wonder what a D'Stance YF-19 would have been like...

If they do a YF-21 like that, and make a revised VF-11 with tailfins that actually *fold the right way*, we'd have *good* versions of all M+ valks finally.

*the reason the Yamato VF-11's tailfins are so small are because Yamato got the folding backwards and at the wrong place---Kawamori drew them going the other way and pivoting at the other end---you can get WAY bigger fins to fit in the legs if you actually do it how he designed it. The fins are actually shaped to fit inside the leg quite nicely---if you fold them the right way. As Yamato did it, they had to make them like 1/3 as big as they shold be, as they effectively ended up "upside down" inside the leg compared to Kawamori's design, so they didn't fit at all without being severely shrunken.

[kensei]

The only thing I don't like about it is the fact that the back part of the head is overly tilted up in Battroid mode. Otherwise it looks sweet.

[David Hingtgen]

I never figured out why the head is "double layered/folded"--no others do it, it's totally contradictory to the lineart, and it doesn't seem to improve anything. My only guess is "artistic style to alter the length of the forward fuselage". The most obvious clue its there in fighter mode is the extreme distance between the canopy and the large yellow blade antenna.

Edited August 23, 2006 by David Hingtgen

[aaajin]

1 question. Dont you have to REMOVE the legs to transform it into that sleek fighter mode? I kinda remembered seeing it once....a long time ago...

[Scream Man]

The 21 toy was a BIT CH to get back into fighter mode in 1/72. if and when they DO make a 1/60, i just hope its easier to transform.

But lets face it, Yamato has come a long way since then, so its safe to assume we'll be fine

[1/1 LowViz Lurker]

What I want is for the legs to be detachable even IF it is PT. Because in the show guld ejects them to take out the ghost. Because it is allowed to be able to do it. I think it would be a neat gimmick.

Edited August 23, 2006 by 1/1 LowViz Lurker

[David Hingtgen]

The Dstance does all of that. Arms and legs can be removed for "Guld's final 30 secs", but they do not need to be for transformation.

The only thing that needs to be swapped is the gear, if you want the gear down in fighter mode. Showing yet again, just how good a valk you can make if you sacrifice working retractable gear.

[Sumdumgai]

Heheh, spring powered ejecting legs and arms, awesome.

Although having the ability to swap arms for having a better battroid look or a better fighter look could be a cool alternative to sacrifices made for all three modes... It would be like giving the 1/48 VF-1s an optional lengthened nosecone to optimise the look of fighter mode, and a shorter nosecone to make battroid mode look better.

[Gatillero PR]

Hey David, for the YF-21 rear landing gear what about having a mechanism similar to the vf-1/vf-0 gunpod extension? In figther mode the rear landing gear wold be almost half long. When the gear is open, you can extend and lock the gear for landing. I'll try to make an example with my no good paint skills.

[Gatillero PR]

Sorry for my lack of skill

Or maybe twist and lock? I did something similar for the front landing gear of my 1/72 yf 19 a long time ago. I'll try to get some pictures and post them tomorrow.

Edited August 23, 2006 by Gatillero PR

[David Hingtgen]

It's not so much length as depth. We need rotating gear more than extending/compressing gear. That'd cut the depth required for wheel wells in half. But it's equally easy to implement---it's how most real fighters do it, and how Kawamori designs every valk (excluding the VF-17) to do.

What you drew would certainly help most nosegears though, and would also allow another issue I have with recent valks--GIGANTIC catapult launch bars on the nose. Real planes kneel down so the launch bar can reach----the launch bar isn't big enough to reach down to the catapult in normal conditions. Yamato toys can't kneel, so the launch bar is like 3x as big as it should be, to reach the ground.

Yamato frankly has greatly advanced most parts of the valks, yet still has the landing gear of a 1955 tin toy! If they would spend 1/10 the money on the gear that they do on working airbrakes etc, they could have much better gear that'd fit in much much smaller wells, allowing better fighter and battroid modes.

A lot of it comes down to "we have to make this area bigger to accomodate the gigantic wheel bay inside". Or "the wheel bay takes up so much room inside the leg/nose, this part has to be way smaller to get out of the way".

If they had rotating gear (simple and easy to do) they could make the wells half as deep. And if they had compressing gear (like Gatillero drew) they could also be half as long. I bet a wheel bay for the nose gear only 1/4 as big could have helped the YF-19's belly a lot. The alternative is removable gear. Either way, it leads to much smaller gear bays. You either have to have rotating wheels/compressing struts, or removable gear. Yamato's "simple working gear" leads to gigantic wheel bays that interfere with everything around them.

Real plane manufacturers have spent decades coming up with ways to make landing gear fit into as small a space as possible--and most of them are very simple to implement, and have even been found in small diecast model jets, etc.

PS--you did a twist-and-lock? Incorporating a 90-degree turn of the wheels? That's exactly what nearly every valk could use for the main gear.

PPS--I am so going to scan my WAPJ F-14 schematic showing the gear rotation. Only drawing I've ever found that actually shows it--despite it occuring on so many planes. Such a simple concept, but hard to explain (since wheels and tires rotate anyways, it's hard to explain how they rotate the OTHER way)

Edited August 23, 2006 by David Hingtgen

[kensei]

Ugh. I would hate that. Doesn't always work.

[1/1 LowViz Lurker]

If the removable one looks better and more detailed, then I'd go for that.

[Sumdumgai]

Well twisting landing gear for storage in the landing gear compartment would make taking them out easier on my fingernails. More space to grab onto for me.

[Gatillero PR]

Ifets, etc.

PS--you did a twist-and-lock?  Incorporating a 90-degree turn of the wheels?  That's exactly what nearly every valk could use for the main gear.

427451[/snapback]

Exactly, I'll get the pics tomorrow, it's crude, I used a Bandai 1/100 VF-19 Kai front gear to do it.

[Graham]

I'd have concerns whether a rotating, collapsable landing gear strut would be durable enough. The top part of the strut that the lower part collapses into would have awfully thin walls on a 1/60 scale toy.

Graham

[David Hingtgen]

FYI, I know a guy who does steerable/rotating metal landing gear at 1/400 scale for airliners. Like, .1mm tubes and such... Builds the axles from scratch from needles I think. For solid metal diecast planes. And I think he's done a few 1/200. The 1/200 airliners weigh far more than any Yamato ever would. Actually, a 1/400 747 weighs more than a Yamato 1/48 I think. Haven't seen one collapse yet. The parts are nearly microscopic, but diecast is frankly very weak---actual aluminum or steel tubing is far stronger. (Diecast is mostly zinc with a dash of magnesium, aluminum and copper---little better than pot metal)

Also, just follow real planes--you don't arbitrarily slice the strut in half and try to make two tubes of similar diameter slide into each other---the lower, smaller oleo strut goes into the thicker main strut. There's supposed to be an obvious size difference, so that the main strut (tubular) can have much thicker side walls---otherwise real planes would be collapsing their thin-wall tubular gear struts all the time.

Ok, here's an F-14's nosegear kneeling sequence. See how the thinner oleo (lower, shiny silver right above the tires) strut fits into the much thicker main (white, lots of tubing and framing etc) strut? This also shows how the catapult launch bar works--it's far too short to reach the ground when the gear is extended (even if the bar was rotated down)--it can only reach the ground when the strut is fully compressed---Yamato makes the bars far too large, so that they can reach the ground it's not compressed--which is wrong--it shouldn't be able to, and Kawamori doesn't draw it that way--he copies the F-14/18 etc exactly, in that the gear must compress down for the bar to reach the ground.

Also, here's an F-14 main gear retracted, with the wheels rotated. The wheels simply twist 90 degrees. It's exactly as if the main gear had steering like the nosegear does----and they turned perfectly to the side, then the gear came up. Tthe wheels lay flat in the bay, and the bay can be much more shallow. Otherwise it'd have to be tall enough to accomodate the round shape of the whole tire and wheel, rather than simply be tall enough to accomodate the tire's tread-width. (The F-14's not the best example, as it has "fat" tires---most planes have a more obvious difference---I'll try to find an F-16 nosegear, that one's really obvious how much space it saves) Kawamori has all his valks save the VF-17 do this. Also, the strut's hinge point must be deeper in the well if you *don't* do this, or you have to have the strut retract up beyond the horizontal, maybe 10 degrees above horizontal, to make room for the lower part of the non-turned wheel--which again makes the wheel bay taller to accomodate the slightly more vertical strut. (The 1/60 has more of a "stuts retract futher than horizontal" solution, while the 1/48 does more of the "strut hinge is deep inside the well, making the stut deeper in the well").

Edited August 23, 2006 by David Hingtgen