The 2nd Coming of the YF-19

[valk1j]

PPS--the D'stance part of MW is still "under construction"--I only have the instructions saved.  Anyone still have pics of the actual model?

422319[/snapback]

Is it this one?

[kensei]

That's it!

[1/1 LowViz Lurker]

http://park1.wakwak.com/~jasshy/yf21.html

That's what 1/72 yamato version should've looked like

So pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeease yamato: get the macross 7 license and give me the black one with head and cockpit modification that would take barely any effort. Lots of recolor in macross 7 for vf22: max+milia, and gamlin.

Just add all the details we usually get from upscaled toys.

Edited August 4, 2006 by 1/1 LowViz Lurker

[Phren]

http://park1.wakwak.com/~jasshy/yf21.html

That's what I want my 1/72 yamato version to look like

So pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeease yamato: get the macross 7 license and give me the black one with head and cockpit modification that would take barely any effort. Lots of recolor in macross 7: max+milia, and gamlin.

422326[/snapback]

Wow, not to sound like a rap song, but that thing looks awesome from the back

I really hope they make this after the 19... Love the floating knees on this one.

Though, I'd be drolling over them putting out the 19, if it wasn;t already confirmed. BTW, is the official color really beige, or kind of 'off-white'? I always thought it would look nice lightened up a bit.

Edited August 4, 2006 by Phren

[Crazy Canuck II]

Ahh Yeah....D"stancE YF-21. I never get tired of looking at that thing. I really really really hope Yamato knows this is what they're up against. Now I know the Yamato 1/60 21 (if they make it) will have to be more durable and will have to have retractable gear, so it won't be as slick, but it better be damn near close. I'm actually a little worried if Yamato does make a 1/60 21 I will be disappointed because the D"stancE has set such a high bar. Oh well, For now I'll just dream Yamato finds a way to Turn the D"stancE into a sweet ass toy.

BTW I asked Graham earlier in this thread if Yamato happened to have a D"stancE 21 kit and IIRC he said he didn't think they did, but what I really want to know is if Yamato knows of the D"stancE and have seen pics.

[1/1 LowViz Lurker]

If they click that link and bother to look at it, they will have seen what they are up against. Maybe put this in the "forward it to graham" thread..

[eugimon]

that is a sexy beast. I really hope yamato expands the 1/60 line further and adds a Yf-21/vf-22 into the mix

[1/1 LowViz Lurker]

Just looking at the lineart now:

The cockpit canopy + interior, battroid head, and the hip armor or belly plates as some call em (22 uses different weapon there and looks to be able to shoot from the hip like the yf19) ...seem to be the main differences between 22 and 21. Lot less differences between them than the variants for the 19.

Edited August 4, 2006 by 1/1 LowViz Lurker

[Graham]

Yamato is not going to get an M7 licence, as their VF-X2 licence allows them to make stuff like the VF-22, VF-17, Full Armor VF-11 etc. It's not worth the money getting the M7 licence, just to be able to do the VF-19Kai/F/S/P.

Graham

[1/1 LowViz Lurker]

Well that is a relief to me. I didn't play the game so I wasn't aware of what valks were in them. Oh well there goes the chance to see Ray's elite vf11 pink pecker squad. So loved that scheme.. (just joking! )

Edited August 4, 2006 by 1/1 LowViz Lurker

[David Hingtgen]

VFX-2 gives us a lot of molds, but the schemes are less than great from what I've seen. Anyone got pics showing the major schemes used in VFX-2? I only really know of the sky blue VF-19A.

PS to Graham: Max and Milia schemes of almost every valk have appeared all over. M3 had the most by far. Are their VF-22's considered "exclusive" to the Mac7 license? Because frankly those are the most well-known (and best-looking) VF-22's. With Gamlin's not far behind. Without them, it's almost pointless to remold the -21 to make a -22. Also---so the licenses for Macross are all or nothing? Because I know that most airlines give licenses SCHEME BY SCHEME and PLANE BY PLANE. You want to make a model of a United 747-100 in the 1974 scheme? Then you pay United for a license to make a model of a *747* in the *1974* scheme. If you want to model a 737, or the current scheme, then you have to pay a lot more to be licensed for that as well. Can't Yamato get just the "Max and Milia VF-22" license? I know some airlines grant "all inclusive" licenses, but that's usually only when granting an exclusive license to a company---and the Macross licenses are certainly not exclusive to a single company, as Bandai, Yamato, and Hasegawa all possess DYRL licenses. It's kind of pointless to only give all-inclusive licenses at high cost that only a few companies would purchase, when some companies (like Yamato) would be wiling to pay smaller amounts to get just what they wanted. And how exactly are the licenses split? DYRL and SDFM are separate I think--shouldn't M7 and its OVA etc be separate from each other? And isn't Fleet of the Strongest Woman almost non-canon and not part of M7?

PPS---D'Stance YF-21 looks better than I remember. Just eliminating that huge gap in the sides in fighter mode does wonders, even if fighter mode isn't flat-sided.

[1/1 LowViz Lurker]

I wonder if they could just release a non-canon scheme like they did with vf1? (credit card and stealth) Just call it stealth vf22 hehe

Maybe have a completely unique sticker sheet like LV 1, with low visible kite symbol and marking? And instead of yellow trimming, have like grey or something?

Edited August 4, 2006 by 1/1 LowViz Lurker

[David Hingtgen]

Separate post because I just love making this point, as I feel I'm vindicated so often:

See the D'Stance YF-21? See how it DOESN'T have retractable gear? Just like the amazing Model Grafix converted Hasegawa YF-19? That's what happens when you accept separate gear parts. Amazing fighter modes. You sacrifice a heck of a lot for working gear, which really isn't worth it. I mean, it's not like it even retracts in the same manner as the "real" one. The Yamato YF-21 doesn't even have its gear in the right part of the plane because of concessions needed to make it with working retraction. It works for the sake of working, not because it's accurate or makes any mode look better. Having a retractable nose gear would screw up the entire front end on the D'Stance, and there's no way that amazingly superior belly would happen with retracting main gear. Maybe that's the main reason the Yamato has such open sides---"retracting gear at any cost to fighter mode". (The SHE didn't have gear mounted in its belly either, and it has better sides/shoulders than the otherwise very similar Yamato--coincidence?

Separate gear looks better itself, and makes all modes look better, with fighter mode looking tons better. And if you don't like separate gear simply because it's separate and the transformation is no longer "perfect"---what do you do with FAST packs when they're not installed, or TV-style 1/48 hands? Or RMS-1 missiles when you have all the missile pods installed? No valk can accomodate EVERY piece on itself at once, some pieces just have to be kept separate. Small price to pay for such an amazingly improved fighter mode.

But hey, if you think the Yamato YF-21 with its tiny ugly working gear is worth how it looks in fighter mode from the side or below, keep insisting on having not a single piece come off to transform.

Not that you would have to remove any pieces to transform it even with removable gear, you only have to swap if you want the gear down. Put it on a stand and you'd never have to swap.

Signed,

David Hingtgen,

huge proponent of removable gear in transforming valks, especially the YF-19 and -21.

Edited August 4, 2006 by David Hingtgen

[1/1 LowViz Lurker]

Well, if they do the removable gear and can get it looking as good as that, then yeah I would still buy it either way.

It can't be much worse than having to put the sidecovers on the vf1 to make it look more aesthetically pleasing or swapping hands/removing intake covers. I'm going to just assume that space fighters might even be better off anyway without gears since they can land in gerwalk or can alternatively get launched off the robot arm DYRL-style..

Half the time they are seen landing in gerwalk mode anyway.

just be sure they pay attention to the insides too:

http://park1.wakwak.com/~jasshy/CG/21/yf21_fi045.jpg

..like they did with vf0 feet. (don't neglect the back)

Edited August 4, 2006 by 1/1 LowViz Lurker

[Nani?!]

Agreed with David 100%.

If it's possible to do the retractable landing gear EASILY then do it... but if it's the sole cause of a section that looks wrong because of it, then I say go with the swappable landing gear... What's the diff? I still consider it perfect transformation because it has pretty much nothing to do with the transformation...

[GobotFool]

Not only would swappable geat probably allow for many new transformation possibilities, it would probably look better too. Allowing for intricate detail to the gear that would not have been possible if it were fully functional.

[Graham]

Correctly proportioned rear landing in the proper location would be an absolute pig to get right in a new YF-21/VF-22 toy. The struts are very long and the wing area they fold into is very thin.

Graham

[David Hingtgen]

Exactly why it should have removable ones. Yamato's already done removable YF-21 gear in the FP version, but they could have been done a lot better if they had designed it like that originally.

Of course, if they could get the wheels to twist 90 degrees like real ones, it'd help a lot. That's how Kawamori designs most of them (even the VF-1), that's how most modern fighters do it---that's the only way to get gear to fold into shallow wells. Just adding a simple twist-hinge can make most gear fit into a well half as deep as it'd otherwise need. (Assuming single-wheel gear--it doesn't help twin-wheel ones like most nosegear)

For true "art of folding landing gear" watch an F-111 bring its gear up. I still have no idea exactly what happens. It like scissor-folds inside out. The gear is like 3 times bigger than the gear well...

PS---Graham, why IS the YF-19 belly so thick? The previous one had retractable gear (though crude) and I don't recall it being nearly as bad. Especially a question as you move forward--the YF-19 nose gear retracts backwards, with the wheels at the rear of the bay---the front part of the gear well/belly bulge should only need be deep enough to accomodate the strut itself, yet it looks to be thickest under the canards. (And further looking makes me think it's not so much the thickness that looks bad, but the lack of curve---the belly should be concave, even if not overtly--but the Yamato lineart has the belly being a pretty straight line from under the cockpit to the intakes) Narrowing it just a bit directly under the canards would help a lot, I think.

Edited August 4, 2006 by David Hingtgen

[GutsAndCasca]

http://park1.wakwak.com/~jasshy/yf21.html

That's what 1/72 yamato version should've looked like

So pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeease yamato: get the macross 7 license and give me the black one with head and cockpit modification that would take barely any effort. Lots of recolor in macross 7 for vf22: max+milia, and gamlin.

Just add all the details we usually get from upscaled toys.

422326[/snapback]

Holy crap, that thing is so cool. Oh man... if yamato makes one of these in 1/60 I'm going to be a happy happy person.

[Lonely Soldier Boy]

I couldn't build a model to save my life, but I love to collect pics of them and watch them for hours. I think the D-Stance is the most inspired valk model of all time. Come on, Yamato, you can do it. I for one, would buy every version and scheme available. In other words, I'll be your whore.

[sketchley]

VFX-2 gives us a lot of molds, but the schemes are less than great from what I've seen.  Anyone got pics showing the major schemes used in VFX-2?  I only really know of the sky blue VF-19A.

PS to Graham:  Max and Milia schemes of almost every valk have appeared all over.  M3 had the most by far.  Are their VF-22's considered "exclusive" to the Mac7 license?  Because frankly those are the most well-known (and best-looking) VF-22's.  With Gamlin's not far behind.  Without them, it's almost pointless to remold the -21 to make a -22.  Also---so the licenses for Macross are all or nothing?

422370[/snapback]

I believe it's all-or-nothing. The reason being is worth for the licensee (a bunch at a low(er) price), and less risk for the licenser (ALL the designs are purchased, giving a higher total purchase than any individual design would garner.)

Anyhow, colour schemes from VF-X2 (from the poster that comes with the game):

VF-1A: Tawnie

VF-1S Super Pack: Fokker's colours

VF-11: white, with yellow trim

VF-17: standard, and an all-red model

VF-19: sky blue

VF-22: dark blue (note: it is VF-22, and not YF-21.)

VA-3M: pink/light purple (mauve?)

VB-6: light brown, grey and red trim

There's also (and I'm not sure if they're included in the license): all are standard colours

Light Missile Regult

Graug/gluag

Tomahawk Destroid

Defender Destroid

Spartan Destroid

Zentraedi Fighter Pod/Gnerl

SB-10/10 Starwing

Target Drone

Feious Valkyrie

Ghost AIF-9B

Gjagravan-Va

There's a gold mine of designs there. And us model builders don't exactly have to settle for the 'recommended' paint-schemes when we have model paints...

[Sumdumgai]

Man, I hope that the VF-4 falls under the VFX license and that it's not JUST VFX2. The VF-4 needs some love, even if the first VFX was butt (and I own it anyway! ).

Man I can't wait to see a plastic prototype of the 19!

[Limbo]

VA-3M? That's that hibrid that can go on water right?

The overall design was pretty cool... Is there a variable toy or model of this thing out there?

[chowyunskinny]

...

[1/1 LowViz Lurker]

The koenig monster looks so mean in videogame form.

So graham, if they did the vf22, would they be able to make non-canon variants like they did for vf1 ie low visibility, camo (LVII), stealth, credit card valks?

Given how limited the vf22 is in the macross universe (according to the compendium) I think all kinds of paint schemes like stealth scheme would look good for a vf22.

Edited August 5, 2006 by 1/1 LowViz Lurker

[Phren]

man that 17D looks sick.. I'm thrilled about the 19 and all, but I think I'd be beside myself if that got announced

[Vermillion21]

chowyunskinny - Thanks for the poster pic - very cool!

[Dante74]

On that poster, the VF-11 looks weird to me. Can a VF-11 sweep it's wings back?

[David Hingtgen]

Yup. Think about how it transforms to battroid. Also, the VF-11 has a high-speed mode just like the YF-19.

PS---as I thought I remembered, the VFX-2 VF-22 has a scheme very similar to a certain blue-haired ace's. Can Yamato make the VFX scheme but "accidently" have a production run where the shade of blue is too light, coincidentally matching said ace's plane? :wink wink, nudge nudge: And maybe REALLY screw up one run and use red...

Edited August 5, 2006 by David Hingtgen

[kensei]

I really hope that Yamato adds the FAST Packs, which are essentially bits of armour.

Also I do think that GERWALK mode will be exactly like Graham has described it, exquisite, if they incorporate the legs that they designed on the 1/60 VF-0. I just discovered it today and it was awesome. really improves the GERWALK mode. I'm hopin to one dy mod my 1/48s too, so they can also have good GERWALK modes.

Then again, even without it, Toynami's MPCs can't hold a candle to the 1/48 in anything.

[Dante74]

I never really liked the 19 in gerwalk. The empty space between the wings just looks... off. I guess I only need to get 2 then, one for fighter mode on a display stand and one for battroid mode.

And one for fighter mode with the wheels out and the canopy open...

and one for fighter mode with FAST packs...

and one in a different color scheme.

damn...

[kensei]

Can't wait for a VF-19A....*sigh* that would be gorgeous.

We'll have a red translucent visor too! Red!

[wwwmwww]

VA-3M? That's that hibrid that can go on water right?

The overall design was pretty cool... Is there a variable toy or model of this thing out there?

422667[/snapback]

There is this Studio Half-Eye model...

Carl

[kensei]

That is one of the ugliest planes in the game, but I'm willing to buy it just to be a completist. Luckily there is not much variation.

[sketchley]

Didn't someone do a VF-4 as well (from VF-X)? There's a few pictures available here in Macross World in the model section.