Asuka II Carrier Battle Group

[SchizophrenicMC]

Thank you.

Should've pointed this out earlier.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/sys...land-Image1.gif

Comm antennas.

Of course. That's a Telemetry Radar unit on top of a CIWS gun. It's good for tracking missiles and such.

I guess there are no (Port-mounted) CIWS guns on the Asuka-II. I just said I wouldn't be surprised. (And I defended my position, because you sound condescending, Saint. Saints are not condescending. I'VE GOT MY EYE ON YOU! )

[miles316]

Maybe because it's an AU as compared to reality. It's sort of like asking: shouldn't the U.N. Naval forces been using planes other than F-14's?

It is not as if SK just didn't know better, I'm sure he had reason to omit it.

The world is in the middle of a world war. Today the US navy still has a some F-14 in storage that can be used.

Fokker said that the UN was short of experienced pilots, and where did the planes those dead pilots were using go.

Edited February 27, 2009 by miles316

[SchizophrenicMC]

Their in the middle of a world war and today the navy still has a few F-14 in storage still usable.

Fokker said that the UN was short of experience pilots, and where did the planes those dead pilots were using go.

Please, use correct spelling, punctuation, and grammar.

They're in the middle of a world war. Today, the Navy has a few F-14s still usable.*

Focker said that the UN was short on experienced pilots. Where did the planes those dead pilots were using go?**

*True, but they're stationed at the Boneyard in Arizona. It would take weeks to get them servicable. They're not currently usable. In fact, they're just airframes, sitting in the 100 degree heat.

**The planes the dead pilots used? Simple. They exploded, numbnuts. "I've got a missile on my six! Performing evasive maneu-"

Welcome to Macross World, kid. Hope you enjoy your stay. Just make sure to not speak in Robotech terms. Fokker is a RT term. Focker is his name in Macross...

[hobbes221]

...where did the planes those dead pilots were using go.

I took as he meant that with all the pilots lost that means that a good deal of aircraft were lost as well and so older airframes could/might be used in their place.

and calling someone 'numbnuts' is just rude.

[sketchley]

Please, use correct spelling, punctuation, and grammar.

They're in the middle of a world war. Today, the Navy has a few F-14s still usable.*

Focker said that the UN was short on experienced pilots. Where did the planes those dead pilots were using go?**

*True, but they're stationed at the Boneyard in Arizona. It would take weeks to get them servicable. They're not currently usable. In fact, they're just airframes, sitting in the 100 degree heat.

**The planes the dead pilots used? Simple. They exploded, numbnuts. "I've got a missile on my six! Performing evasive maneu-"

Welcome to Macross World, kid. Hope you enjoy your stay. Just make sure to not speak in Robotech terms. Fokker is a RT term. Focker is his name in Macross...

Who's the one being a dick, here? Give him a break on English. Did it even enter your thick head that he (or she) may not be fluent in English? Have you ever heard of sarcasm?

FYI, Fokker is the accepted "de facto" standard romanization of フォッカー. Which is the way that his name is written.

[SchizophrenicMC]

I took as he meant that with all the pilots lost that means that a good deal of aircraft were lost as well and so older airframes could/might be used in their place.

and calling someone 'numbnuts' is just rude.

Yes, it is rude. It was to get a point across.

On the somewhat on-topic note, the older airframes, of which you speak, are probably spent at this point; destroyed or damaged beyond repair. Not to mention they're less forgiving on new pilots. (Albeit, an F-14 is NOT something you want to put a newb in.)

And, if I'm not mistaken, the plane Shin flies at the beginning is an F-14A. That's the old model.

Who's the one being a dick, here? Give him a break on English. Did it even enter your thick head that he (or she) may not be fluent in English? Have you ever heard of sarcasm?

FYI, Fokker is the accepted "de facto" standard romanization of フォッカー. Which is the way that his name is written.

I'm sorry if I'm trying to clear some confusion as far as the Anti-RT nuts go. Some people go crazy over Fokker vs Focker. I've seen it myself.

I ever say he was being a dick, or that I wasn't?

Their, There, and They're are not easily confused to people non-fluent in English? Why? Their complete differences in spelling in other languages. I've only ever seen that in English-speakers. And, even the simplest translation algorithms don't make that mistake.

No, Sketch, I've NEVER heard of sarcasm. Why don't you fill me in on what that is?

Please, will the forum get the hell over the fact that I'm kind of an ass? I'm really a nice guy, but dicks drive the point home more clearly.

Edited February 27, 2009 by SchizophrenicMC

[Dangard Ace]

To paraphrase Red Leader: Cut the chatter or take it to PM.

[hobbes221]

The F-14s in M0 are F-14Ds on the outside, and -14As in the cockpit. And many pilots went strait into the F-14s after flight training as their first post, it's not an 'Ace Pilot' thing, you just have to know what you're doing and the Navy trains them to do just that.

Edited February 27, 2009 by hobbes221

[miles316]

I'm sorry if I'm trying to clear some confusion as far as the Anti-RT nuts go. Some people go crazy over Fokker vs Focker. I've seen it myself.

Are you implying that I am some kind of nut?

[sketchley]

Are you implying that I am some kind of nut?

Don't feed the troll.

[Mr March]

"SchizophrenicMC ate my baby!"

[The Saint]

Are you implying that I am some kind of nut?

Walk away man, he's not worth it.

[SebastianP]

(Yes, I'm a necromancer, but at least I'm not as bad as the last guy to reinvoke this thread... and, the subject is plain cool!)

First off, big thanks to Op4 for the work on the Asuka II model, it cleared up a bunch of things for me, plus it's inspiring my own efforts to model Macross ships in 3D... that bridge section looks awesome.

I just finished reading the whole thread, and there's some pretty good debate here. One of the things I'd like to comment on is the whole Macross Compendium debate - it seems to me that there's a huge split in the sources pretty generally, with written canon contradicting drawn or animated canon, sometimes from the same source (the VF-4 missiles issue for example, where SK has apparently said and written one number, but *drawn* a completely irreconcilable number...) . This thread alone contains a bunch of examples, and I'm finding more and more while crawling the web for references to my own RPG write-ups. (And sometimes the sources are so fragmentary as to be nonexistent - for example the "stealth cruiser" from Frontier which only seems to exist as a stock footage clip of it being blown up - in great detail, but with nothing to use as a reference...)

Pretty much all fandoms have similar problems due to multiple authors stirring the pot and multiple studios handling the gruntwork of animation, and I've yet to see a canon policy that appeals to everyone - some will take anything written as "word of God" and discard anything that doesn't fit even when the results become ludicrous, and some will take "it's on the screen, it's canon" to similar extremes. And neither route is any good in the long run - the first would invalidate the scene where DD blasts the turret (which doesn't exist according to the writeup); and the second opens up the infinite reloads fallacy... (face it, it's a very very rare anime where the creators actually bother to keep track of the ammo. Being out of ammo happens at the convenience of the plot... and Macross is far from immune).

Back to the topic, though.

First of all, regarding the ship numbered 71, 77 or 79 (opinions seem to vary), I'm less than convinced that this is supposed to be a DDG, as the angles are all wrong, the superstructure seems to be all one piece rather than two sections, and the deckline has a pronounced step (hurricane bow, I think it's called). An alternative explanation that's pretty close at hand is that this is either an FFG (current series ended at 61, a couple of dozen of a new class being built due to the UN wars is not unthinkable); or a CG (current series ending at 73, only half a dozen of a new class needed to catch up). As to why they don't show up in the 3D scenes, the likely answer is that no one bothered modelling them.

(Of course, this is the "SWTC"-style interpretation, i.e. any drawing of anything - regardless of quality - which disagrees with other sources, has to be a different model - which results in a two-page spread of really badly drawn star destroyers, some just blobs in the far distance, being turned into a dozen new ship classes... your mileage may vary on whether this is a good thing or not).

The above also ties in with the fact that the UN managed to put two new carrier classes, and somewhere in excess of 25 new carrier hulls of all classes, to sea in the nine years since the Macross landed. (two classes is indisputable, as both the Asuka II and Prometheus are new designs, 25 hulls is an extrapolation based on the newest US carrier at the time of the landing being the Harry S. Truman, CVN-75, and the Asuka II and Prometheus being numbered 99 and 101 respectively. Of course, they may have skipped numbers, or the number series is based on something other than the US CV series. Who knows?)

Finally, if you're still here Op4, how's your ship model coming along? I've got a bunch of (tested) methods for doing stuff like the directional deck lights (the runway lights are different colors when viewed from the fore or aft, for example), without resorting to a bunch of extra light sources, etc. I'll post them if there's interest...

Cheers!

SP