Underwing Hardpoints

[Garrick]

I'm reading in several sites that some VFs other than the VF-1 (VF-11, VF-5000, VF-19) have underwing Hardpoints for missiles. Are those hardpoints canon or conjectures?

[Mr March]

None of the three valkyries you've listed have underwing hard points according to the canon write ups. The Macross Compendium does include a vague listing of "Numerous optional weapons" in the VF-11 description. It is possible, but not confirmed, that the VF-11 could be fitted with underwing missiles as part of that vague description but "numerous optional weapons" could just as easily refer to hand-held weapons or other weapons mounted on the dorsal hard points (where the FAST Packs are ordinarily mounted).

The Macross Compendium

[sketchley]

Going by (translated) canon literature, nothing other than the VF-0, VF-1, and VA-3 are directly stated as having, or not having, wing mounted ordinance.

However, the creators themselves have stated that if something isn't said, either for or against, it means that it is open to possibility.

That said, there is artwork that implies wing mounted ordinance:

TIAS: Macross Plus - the cover has only the YF-19 and YF-22, and are surrounded by a small arsenal of weapons. Most are externally carried munitions.

Some things to consider:

Since DYRL (aside from Macross Zero), VF munitions have been carried inside of something; either a FAST pack, an internal launcher, a weapons pallet (bay), or an armoured box on the wing. The armoured box on the wing (the UUM-7) has disappeared with the steady increases in the amount of missiles that can be carried internally (FAST pack, internal launcher, and/or weapons pallet.)

VFs reflect reality. Since the advent of stealth, real war planes have opted for internally carried munitions, and have done away with externally carried munitions. The same has held true with the VFs of Macross.

Therefore, IMHO, the VFs are like the *new* VF-22 Raptor, in that they *can* carry wing mounted munitions in exceptional circumstances, but generally do not, as it reduces or limits their performance (stealth, or otherwise.)

But yeah, it's your choice too, as the creators of Macross have left it open and ambiguous.

Edited March 25, 2007 by sketchley

[Zinjo]

The thing that has always made me curious is the notion of "stealth" in the post SW1 eras.

The VF-1 was built with an active stealth system despite it's fuselage configuration.

The VF-17 was specifically designed to resemble the F-117 which utilized a delta wing radar signature as well as signal absorbing composites to "fool" radar into representing it as a flock of birds, now birds don't fly in space and one would hope that the sensor equipment of a space based society (be they human, Zentreadi, SA or PC) would be more sensitive and powerful than radar!

"Lidar" for instance doesn't use radio waves at all and is more sensitive with greater range.

All the "stealth" measures visibly seen on the fighters would be effective in the 20th century, not necessarily in an OTEC powered 21st Century. The only real purpose for internally mounted ordinance is so that the fighter doesn't have to drop it's missile pylons to re-enter an atmosphere.

As for wing mounted missiles/bombs I personally believe that in an all out conflict, all the fighters are capable of carrying under wing ordinance, if the fleet commander deemes it necessary. As Sketchly has already pointed out that in a Nue sanctioned art piece of the YF-19 and YF-21 it is strongly implied that they are capable of carrying wing mounted ordinance such as the High Manueverability Missiles. If the most advanced fighters of the day are capable of such, then one could conclude that it is also possible for the VF-11 line fighter to be able to do the same.

Edited March 25, 2007 by Zinjo

[JB0]

The VF-17 was specifically designed to resemble the F-117 which utilized a delta wing radar signature as well as signal absorbing composites to "fool" radar into representing it as a flock of birds, now birds don't fly in space and one would hope that the sensor equipment of a space based society (be they human, Zentreadi, SA or PC) would be more sensitive and powerful than radar!

Flock of birds could just as easily be a busted asteroid.

Anyways, who says that radar-abosrbant material hasn't kept up with radar? That makes it a rational approach.

Best argument is either at the time of it's design, they had to apply passive stealth tech to save the power the active device would draw(if I recall, the VF-17 has a rather large assortment of energy weapons for the time it was designed), or that it's a supplement to the active stealth in an attempt to drive the ship's signature down even closer to zero.

The geometry, of course, is anachronistic. The F117 was only faceted because the computers at the time couldn't do the reflections for curves. And the facets are dangerous in space, since they reflect REALLY well, and there's no really good way to ensure your enemy's radar is in a specific orientation to you.

The only real excuse there is an out-of-continuity acknowledgment that the mass market recognize facets as a sign of stealth.

All the "stealth" measures visibly seen on the fighters would be effective in the 20th century, not necessarily in an OTEC powered 21st Century. The only real purpose for internally mounted ordinance is so that the fighter doesn't have to drop it's missile pylons to re-enter an atmosphere.

It's a constant race. As detection hardware gets better, you start looking for more things to add to your countermeasures. Doesn't mean the old features weren't a good idea, just that they aren't enough by themselves anymore. Internal weapons still reduce your signature, even if they aren't enough to render you invisible anymore.

As for wing mounted missiles/bombs I personally believe that in an all out conflict, all the fighters are capable of carrying under wing ordinance, if the fleet commander deemes it necessary. As Sketchly has already pointed out that in a Nue sanctioned art piece of the YF-19 and YF-21 it is strongly implied that they are capable of carrying wing mounted ordinance such as the High Manueverability Missiles. If the most advanced fighters of the day are capable of such, then one could conclude that it is also possible for the VF-11 line fighter to be able to do the same.

Gotta have SOMEWHERE to stick those reaction missiles!

Edited March 25, 2007 by JB0

[sketchley]

Doesn't mean the old features weren't a good idea, just that they aren't enough by themselves anymore.

I am wondering if, and when we will see the return of the 1940's era visual stealth they had implemented on the bombers of the time. You know, the spotlights aimed on the front of the aircraft that matched the wavelength of the light of the sky? Worked at the time, but was rendered moot with the advent of radar.

[Mr March]

The thing that has always made me curious is the notion of "stealth" in the post SW1 eras.

I would think that features like internal armament might have something to do with stealth in the Macross universe, but with the new OverTechnologies I would think "stealth" goes far beyond mere radar absorbing. It would have to considering the detection technology of the era.

We know detection methods in Macross are far more advanced than what we have now. They use radar indeed, but VERY powerful radar and they are not limited to radar for electronic detection. In SDF Macross, capital ships are constantly detecting other vessels and energy readings over huge distances. The Macross itself detected the Zentradi approaching Earth while they were farther out than the moon and fired on them from a distance almost as far. The Zentradi were able to track the Macross from the other side of the Sol system when it folded out of Earth orbit and even from outside of the solar system when tracking the original ASS-1.

The canon literature of SDF Macross makes mention of several detection systems in addition to standard radar. There are mentions of gravity wave passive radar as well as passive and active particle systems. Naturally these systems aren't explained, but it's not necessary. It's obvious detecting gravity is something we can't do, so the name sounds sufficiently advanced for fictional literature.

In Macross Zero, the standard detection radar of OverTechnology is at last given a name called the Cyclops and it's revealed that the system is actually a cross-dimensional detection method. Likely, this was done to explain how ships can detect each other instantly over distances that would normally take several minutes for an electromagnetic wave to travel, even at the speed of light. It also explains why the radar functions under water and why the VF-0 and SV-51 can detect each other while all other radar systems are useless against their stealth abilities.

So in order to counter these methods, OverTechnology stealth must involve methods of sensor masking/distortion/absorption that goes far beyond internal weapons and hull geometry. Hell, a thermonuclear reaction engine has got to put out one hell of an energy/heat signature and is probably the thing you want to hide the most in any OverTech craft.

Edited March 25, 2007 by Mr March

[Zinjo]

Flock of birds could just as easily be a busted asteroid.

That's stretching it a bit. Busted asteroids don't normally travel in a constant delta pattern...

Anyways, who says that radar-abosrbant material hasn't kept up with radar? That makes it a rational approach.

Best argument is either at the time of it's design, they had to apply passive stealth tech to save the power the active device would draw(if I recall, the VF-17 has a rather large assortment of energy weapons for the time it was designed), or that it's a supplement to the active stealth in an attempt to drive the ship's signature down even closer to zero.

That is a possibility, however my point is that would radar actually still be used? As I stated that Lidar could be the standard detection system of the day as well as the OTEC based sensor equipment. Granted the producers went with what was known at the time and Lidar was not a well known or fully developed system in the 90's.

The geometry, of course, is anachronistic. The F117 was only faceted because the computers at the time couldn't do the reflections for curves. And the facets are dangerous in space, since they reflect REALLY well, and there's no really good way to ensure your enemy's radar is in a specific orientation to you.

The only real excuse there is an out-of-continuity acknowledgment that the mass market recognize facets as a sign of stealth.

I share that opinion as well. The GW1 F117 inspired a lot of "stealth" aircraft designs in the media, the VF-17 was no exception.

[Retracting Head Ter Ter]

I am wondering if, and when we will see the return of the 1940's era visual stealth they had implemented on the bombers of the time. You know, the spotlights aimed on the front of the aircraft that matched the wavelength of the light of the sky? Worked at the time, but was rendered moot with the advent of radar.

Was there such a thing? Never heard of it even though I am a WW2 aviation buff.

[sketchley]

Remember reading about it about a decade ago in Popular Mechanics. A search on the web didn't result in anything of concequence other than blurry eyes.

[David Hingtgen]

I've heard of something like that, but not that it was implemented. And it was more along the lines of lights mounted everywhere on the underside facing the ground---since a plane is almost always spotted as a "dark spot against the bright sky"---if you could make it as bright as the sky when viewed from below, it'd be invisible.

[JB0]

I am wondering if, and when we will see the return of the 1940's era visual stealth they had implemented on the bombers of the time. You know, the spotlights aimed on the front of the aircraft that matched the wavelength of the light of the sky? Worked at the time, but was rendered moot with the advent of radar.

We do, in a way. Paint colors for planes that are actually on-duty are chosen to match the sky.

Sure it's a lot lower-tech, but it's pretty effective.

The canon literature of SDF Macross makes mention of several detection systems in addition to standard radar. There are mentions of gravity wave passive radar as well as passive and active particle systems. Naturally these systems aren't explained, but it's not necessary. It's obvious detecting gravity is something we can't do, so the name sounds sufficiently advanced for fictional literature.

Actually, we have some gravity wave detectors in operation right now.

Admittedly they're VERY large detectors(several kilometers long), and we're using them to try and prove gravity waves EXIST, but...

That's stretching it a bit. Busted asteroids don't normally travel in a constant delta pattern...

Y're no fun.

That is a possibility, however my point is that would radar actually still be used? As I stated that Lidar could be the standard detection system of the day as well as the OTEC based sensor equipment. Granted the producers went with what was known at the time and Lidar was not a well known or fully developed system in the 90's.

Radar is called out by name in multiple shows.

Admittedly it's possible the term has been genericized and refers to ANY radiation-based detection mechanism.

But I can't really see a good reason that reflections will behave differently for different wavelengths(aside from resolution issues). Obviously radar-absorbant materials won't do squat for light, but if it bounces off at the wrong angle to be seen, it shouldn't matter what wavelength it is. It may not be as pronounced an effect, but every little bit helps, especially at the ultra-long ranges seen in space.

[Mr March]

Actually, we have some gravity wave detectors in operation right now.

Admittedly they're VERY large detectors(several kilometers long), and we're using them to try and prove gravity waves EXIST, but...

We're also trying to prove tachyons exist, but we're a long way from superluminal particle application

[Briareos9]

VFs reflect reality. Since the advent of stealth, real war planes have opted for internally carried munitions, and have done away with externally carried munitions. The same has held true with the VFs of Macross.

Does anyone other then the US have an operational, deployed (not tech demons and most certainly not sketches) fighter with internal carriage? Does it help with stealth, yes but that's not even half the story. All underwing stores add drag and mess with the handling of the aircraft, which is part of why those big war loads are never actually used. A clean bird has a big advantage over one that isn't in handling characteristics.

[Chindenathus]

Does anyone other then the US have an operational, deployed (not tech demons and most certainly not sketches) fighter with internal carriage? Does it help with stealth, yes but that's not even half the story. All underwing stores add drag and mess with the handling of the aircraft, which is part of why those big war loads are never actually used. A clean bird has a big advantage over one that isn't in handling characteristics.

The Raptor and the JSF have internal ordinance bays and yes they help with stealth characteristics.

[eugimon]

The Raptor and the JSF have internal ordinance bays and yes they help with stealth characteristics.

thanks for re-iterating what Bri said...

[Garrick]

Whoa, so much info! This shows me how much of a rookie I am. Anyway, basically, it's sort of a limbo. Good. I'm making a mod with Macross stuff in it and i was gonna include the VF11 and the VF-19 and i was wondering how many weapons i could actually fit on them.

In this case, even a VF-5000 can somehow carry underwing missiles... (At least some of the preproduction sketches has it with some underwing stuff).

Expect some screenshots soon.

Also, by the way, is it possible to find TIAS Macross Plus somwhere or it is long out of print and the ones that have it are jealousy guarding their copies?

[sketchley]

It's as easy as heading to a Mandarake in Japan. The last I checked, both the Umeda, and Nanba stores had copies. To be honest, the rare books are the Gold Book, and the Macross 7 Animation Materials book (snapped that up the one time I saw it. Haven't seen the gold one.)

The prices are moderate - as in most are between 100 and 150% of cover price.

[David Hingtgen]

Internal missile bays are not new at all----using them because of stealth, is new. And bombers have had internal bays since the beginning. Makes me wonder--what was the first bomber with EXTERNAL bombs?

See the F-102 for a much older example of an internal missile bay.

http://members.aol.com/cba1974/myhomepage/...walkaround.html

[sketchley]

I think a more relevant question would have been: how many countries are deploying, or are developing 5th generation jet fighters?

As for the 6th generation... I fear it'll be pilotless...

[David Hingtgen]

Well, since Russia seems to think just adding enough canards and vectoring to 20-year-old designs is enough to qualify as a new generation...

[T.V.]

Well, since Russia seems to think just adding enough canards and vectoring to 20-year-old designs is enough to qualify as a new generation...

Then the Indo-Russian fighter of the future surely must be a 6th generation aircraft!

Nice info all around guys.

Btw, The F-86D from the '50s was the first fighter to have an internal missle bay IIRC.

[IAD]

...It also explains why the radar functions under water and why the VF-0 and SV-51 can detect each other while all other radar systems are useless against their stealth abilities...

But is there a single example where the SVs/VFs actually FOUND each other via radar, OT or otherwise?

I mean, most of the time, they were just doing visual acquisition... You know, your wingman's ship blows up, and... Whaddya know, you've got enemy fighters in the area.

Or else they were detected because of external factors... Non-stealthy refueling aircraft, Protoculture-signature-emitting mecha parts, etc.

And, is the active stealth all that good to begin with? I mean, Shin locks Nora up with an F-14, for goodness sake. (Unless he had slaved the gun reticule to an passive IR system, or something. But that means the IR sig. isn't suppressed, which makes it unstealthy again. )

~Luke

[kalvasflam]

Internal missile bays are not new at all----using them because of stealth, is new. And bombers have had internal bays since the beginning. Makes me wonder--what was the first bomber with EXTERNAL bombs?

See the F-102 for a much older example of an internal missile bay.

http://members.aol.com/cba1974/myhomepage/...walkaround.html

Better than that, the F102 also had some built in rockets on that panel. It was quite neat the first time I saw it at WPAFB. I assume that's where you got the pictures.

[David Hingtgen]

The F-8A through F-8C have rockets built into their speedbrake panel---not sure they could use both at the same time, it's double-hinged and almost zig-zags when both are open on the ground.

[JB0]

And, is the active stealth all that good to begin with? I mean, Shin locks Nora up with an F-14, for goodness sake. (Unless he had slaved the gun reticule to an passive IR system, or something. But that means the IR sig. isn't suppressed, which makes it unstealthy again. )

~Luke

Aren't the F-14s in Zero supposed to be upgraded with overtech hardware?

So locking on to her with an F-14 doesn't really prove much, since it's not using the real-world hardware.

[T.V.]

Aren't the F-14s in Zero supposed to be upgraded with overtech hardware?

So locking on to her with an F-14 doesn't really prove much, since it's not using the real-world hardware.

Even if radar and IR signatures are supressed with active stealth methods, such as venting plasma into the airstream at the nose, the variable craft is still very much visible.

So, using the EO sensor to acquire the target in the visual light wavelength spectrum wouldn't be problematic.

While Shin's aircraft is called an F-14D Kai, I doubt it's a radically upgraded version.

Just some small enhancements here and there.

Even the cockpits are the same as the standard F-14.

Edit:

Though it should've had some major structural enhancements considering the manoeuvres he pulls in it.. aside from anime magic that is.

Edited April 18, 2007 by T.V.

[David Hingtgen]

F-14A+ Kai. Not F-14D Kai. Having the original cockpit is the main thing that makes it an A+ instead of a D.

[T.V.]

The F-8A through F-8C have rockets built into their speedbrake panel---not sure they could use both at the same time, it's double-hinged and almost zig-zags when both are open on the ground.

Never knew that.

Any pics?

I can't imagine it being very practical, considering the structural stresses, unwanted motions, having to deploy airbrakes to fire a rocket, etc.

[T.V.]

F-14A+ Kai. Not F-14D Kai. Having the original cockpit is the main thing that makes it an A+ instead of a D.

D'OH![/Homer]

Anyway, I figured they used the A+ version instead of the D as a homage to Top Gun.

Edited April 18, 2007 by T.V.

[Mr March]

But is there a single example where the SVs/VFs actually FOUND each other via radar, OT or otherwise?

I would think any blip showing up on the tracking instruments would count. At any rate, the YF-19 and YF-21 stealth systems were overcome by OT detection systems so it's obvious that even more advanced stealth systems can be detected with Cyclops radar. Most likely, though electronic warfare in the Macross universe is now operating on a whole other level, the race between detection and stealth still follows similar patterns as our modern conventional technologies today.

[David Hingtgen]

D'OH![/Homer]

Anyway, I figured they used the A+ version instead of the D as a homage to Top Gun.

How so? Top Gun had A's, not A+'s.

Anyways---pics of F-8 rocket launchers are rare, you pretty much need a lot of F-8 books to have a few pics. Basically there's a large panel on the belly just in front of the gear, hinged at the rear. The front end lowers, and you get a rocket launcher revealed. The speed brake is a smaller part of that panel, hinged at the front. It was taken out for the D to make room for a larger fuel tank. It was also fairly worthless to start with, as pylon-mounted rockets were bigger and better, and there was a big risk if any rockets didn't launch right--since the rocket launcher is RIGHT below the main fuel tank, and the rocket exhaust is angled into the fuel tank area when the launcher's deployed...

Checking around, it seems the speed brake auto-deployed partially for trim purposes, when the rocket pack was lowered. So you do get a "zig-zag" of panels.

[T.V.]

How so? Top Gun had A's, not A+'s.

The cockpit scenes, especially switching to guns, looking like a straight copy.

The D features a new control column while the A+ still has the same as the A model.

Thanks for the info about the F-8.

Edited April 20, 2007 by T.V.

[David Hingtgen]

We had a discussion here a while ago, and we believe Shin's F-14 (the CG model at least) is based off of Fujimi's F-14D kit, which is not quite really anything. It's closest to a B, but of course has a D's chinpod. In other words:

Shin's has an A cockpit, because the F-14D kit it was based off of is so inaccurate.

[sidearmsalpha]

Sorry to get off topic, but on the subject of hardpoints and missiles regarding the Super VF-1, how are the two RMS missiles that are mounted together supposed to be aligned according to the TV series (I don't remember right now if they used RMS missiles in DYRL)? Are they supposed to be staggered or even (as they are on the 1/60 and 1/48 Yamato Super/Strike VF-1's)? I like them staggered personally, which is only possible with the super armor parts for the Toynami VF-1's since they are mounted on a piece that can be swiveled about the hardpoint on the wing.