Aurora-7 Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 Sure, starting with Macross Frontier may not be the best way to introduce someone to the franchise, but continuing it with Robotech is way way WAY worse. spare your son from the suffering! Well, he's finished the series and he was OK with it for the most part. He's thinking of watching M7 now and I can only tell him, 'It's different. You'll see'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VFTF1 Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 writers called it Macross because they were compromising when one person wanted it to be called Macbeth I was always wanting to ask .... WHY did some body want to call it the Macbeth? Was the ship initially meant to house people lusting for power and doing terrible things to eachother towards that end, only to end up in a psychotic bloodbath?... hm...ok...maybe I answered my own question... As for the VF-0 going under water in Macross Zero and how it's possible that the jet is still able to power itself... Doesn't seem far-fetched to me. Shin says it can achieve space flight for onl X minutes - and then he basically likens underwater conditions to space flight (in both cases you need to close the vents and make the craft air tight and activate the proper pressure/oxygen systems etc). Now - since it can only maintain itself in such an environment fo X minutes (I forgot the exact time Shin gave), then clearly the power system is not "infinite" (which makes sense, since as they say in Macross Zero, the nuclear engines hadn't been installed in these yet). So they still have to refeul and stuff in a conventional manner. But it is possible that there is some super engine in there that runs on feul and charges batteries which in turn power the craft in an environment where fuel couldn't power the engine. Hybrid cars do it, so why can't a super advanced transforming fighter jet do it? Pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sketchley Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 I was always wanting to ask .... WHY did some body want to call it the Macbeth? Was the ship initially meant to house people lusting for power and doing terrible things to eachother towards that end, only to end up in a psychotic bloodbath?... hm...ok...maybe I answered my own question... I think it was the producer. And I believe the reason was nothing more than that he liked MacBeth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VFTF1 Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 Hm. Good thing they canned the idea then. SDF-1 MacBeth just doesn't sound right at all. And beyond the aforementioned royal bloodbath at the end and a very vague connection insofar as humans strive for greater power... there is little connection. Besides, the Macross itself as an inanimate object really shouldn't be named Macbeth because...well... it's not like the Macross itself is roiling from psychological problems. And also...none of the main characters are in the least Shakespearian. They're not psychopathic. Hikaru is a normal kid who doesn't like war and finds himself mixed up in one. Roy is an ace jockey pilot.. Global is a mature wise captain... I dunno...I could go on and on. I don't mean to put down Shakespeare, but Macross is way better than his plays and there's really no connection in my mind between them. Yeah, superficial stuff like death, romance and tragedy exist in both - but they way they are conveyed, not to mention the fact that Macross treats of a problem Shakespeare couldn't really fathom (science vs. nature) just...well... it would have been bad if the ship was called Macbeth. And it would have been corny too. I don't really like it when a show uses important sounding names to make up for its' lack of substance. Neon Genesis Evangelion was an exception to the rule, because even though the creators supposedly said they just used the name because it sounded important, there actually was a relevance to the name of the series in terms of how it treated the themes of God, Man and the Universe... Pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eugimon Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 I love that sci-fi truism that spaceworthy = submersible. Makes no sense and makes me cringe and giggle at the same time whenever it comes up. Futurama did it best: Fry: How many atmospheres can this ship withstand? Farnsworth: Well it's a spaceship, so I'd say anywhere between zero and one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VFTF1 Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 I love that sci-fi truism that spaceworthy = submersible. Makes no sense and makes me cringe and giggle at the same time whenever it comes up. Well, I know it's different, because the pressure under water is different from the void of outspace, and also the deeper into water you go, the more the pressure changes. I just presume the VF-0 is equiped to alter cabin pressure/environment to suit whatever you are dealing with outside. I guess you'd run into somewhat of a problem with the material that the thing would have to be built out of to sustain itself in such different environments...but... well... Don't we have anybody on the boards who actually knows something about science and can STILL give a long-shot justification for this phenomena? Pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eugimon Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 Well, I know it's different, because the pressure under water is different from the void of outspace, and also the deeper into water you go, the more the pressure changes. I just presume the VF-0 is equiped to alter cabin pressure/environment to suit whatever you are dealing with outside. I guess you'd run into somewhat of a problem with the material that the thing would have to be built out of to sustain itself in such different environments...but... well... Don't we have anybody on the boards who actually knows something about science and can STILL give a long-shot justification for this phenomena? Pete It's not just that. Exposed electronics will work fine in a vacuum, not so much under water. So lets say the cabin is pressurized and the engines are completely airtight *and* watertight (yes, airtight and watertight are different and the seals for freshwater and saltwater are different too), what about all the avionics, hatches? hydraulics, etc? It's pretty ridiculous that a plane/spaceship would also be designed as a submersible as well.. yes, even a plane/spaceship that transforms into a robot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 It's common to add names like "Koenig" (or other terms) to things to show an improved model. Since the VB-6 is a variable Monster, it's thus the "Koenig Monster", meaning "King Monster." That's all it is. It's like in World War II, the PzKpfw VI Tiger I tank was replaced by the PzKpfw VI Tiger II (nicknamed Königstiger). Incorrect. Learn German Koenig Means King or Royal. The Tiger II aka King or Royal Tiger was a whole new machine inside and out. Here is complete History and developemt from Achtung Panzer website http://www.achtungpanzer.com/panzerkampfwa...-sd-kfz-182.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beltane70 Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 I love that sci-fi truism that spaceworthy = submersible. Makes no sense and makes me cringe and giggle at the same time whenever it comes up. The VF-1 and presumably the VF-0 are considered "all-environment" variable fighter, so I would assume that limited under water use would be within their capabilities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eugimon Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 The VF-1 and presumably the VF-0 are considered "all-environment" variable fighter, so I would assume that limited under water use would be within their capabilities. Oh I know, and the VF-1 presumably can act as a boat too. I'm just saying... it's silly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sketchley Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 Oh I know, and the VF-1 presumably can act as a boat too. I'm just saying... it's silly. One other angle to consider is the effect of the energy conversion armour. Sure, it probably shouldn't be working in battroid mode with the engines turned off or gerwalk mode (engines on or off), but there's probably a pseudo-scientific explanation that can be worked out of it that states that the energy conversion creates a watertight seal around the surface of the vehicle... it'd also explain how the Regult's can operate underwater as they also have energy conversion armour. Nevertheless, my real question with that underwater scene (Macross 0) is: where does that torpedo come from?! Macross Chronicle doesn't state (at least in an easily spotable location) that the Octos has torpedoes, and it has the lineart for the torpedo in that scene with the Austerdat (spl?) sub! Gah @.@ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mickyg Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 Thanks for the replies and the ensuing discussion - this is good stuff! However, my main concern wasn't power generation per se. I actually meant propulsion. My thought was that a turbine engine - which if I understand correctly is present in traditional or nuclear format in all Valks, I mean look at all the silly looking turbines in the yamato valks. Anyway, if it's a turbine, it's there to accelerate air to use as thrust. I may be exposing my limited knowledge of jet engines but I thought that unless you're afterburning, your primary source of thrust is super compressed air. You can't compress air if there is no intake! That was my main point. By closing off the intakes, you can't produce thrust unless you're burning something afterward. And the ocean scene doesn't have this happening. Actually, even if we discount that, you can't really produce thrust in space without a fuel source, like rocket fuel on the fast packs. So yeah, I'm still confused. And for the record, my mind can totally believe in transforming jets! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurora-7 Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 (edited) What's the deal with the backstory for Macross 11. MAHQ states it's an English speaking colony ship with the band Fire Bomber American on board with Minmae's cousin, Kyle as the manager. It appears briefly in the last episode of Macross Frontier. Edited September 5, 2009 by Aurora-7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gubaba Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 What's the deal with the backstory for Macross 11. MAHQ states it's an English speaking colony ship with the band Fire Bomber American on board with Minmae's cousin, Kyle as the manager. It appears briefly in the last episode of Macross Frontier. http://www.mahq.net/mecha/macross/macrossf/macross11.jpg Um...is that question...? (Oh, and Minmay's cousin's name is "Kaifun." ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurora-7 Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 Where's the backstory from? If it's only appearance is MF, there was no reference to it, was there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gubaba Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 Where's the backstory from? If it's only appearance is MF, there was no reference to it, was there? Ah, I see now. All the information about Kaifun comes from the album English Fire!!" by Fire Bomber American. http://macross.anime.net/wiki/English_Fire%21%21 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Dex Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 Thanks for the replies and the ensuing discussion - this is good stuff! However, my main concern wasn't power generation per se. I actually meant propulsion. My thought was that a turbine engine - which if I understand correctly is present in traditional or nuclear format in all Valks, I mean look at all the silly looking turbines in the yamato valks. Anyway, if it's a turbine, it's there to accelerate air to use as thrust. I may be exposing my limited knowledge of jet engines but I thought that unless you're afterburning, your primary source of thrust is super compressed air. You can't compress air if there is no intake! That was my main point. By closing off the intakes, you can't produce thrust unless you're burning something afterward. And the ocean scene doesn't have this happening. Actually, even if we discount that, you can't really produce thrust in space without a fuel source, like rocket fuel on the fast packs. So yeah, I'm still confused. And for the record, my mind can totally believe in transforming jets! Well in conventional jet engines, the main thrust is a mix of compressed air and jet fuel. The turbine takes in air, mixes it with fuel and then ignites the combination resulting in a powerful burning reaction that is forced out of the back of the engine by path of least resistance. Afterburners basically work by squirting extra fuel into the exiting thrust, making the reaction more powerful and producing extra thrust. This is the same for passenger jets as well as fighter jets (except passenger planes don't have afterburners, lol) but the systems on fighter jets are tuned to a greater thrust capability than any passenger jet. As for the VF-0 underwater, I always assumed the engines took in extra air before the intakes closed and used that air to help create its thrust underwater. It wouldn't last long but they did say it could only stay underwater a short time. When it comes to the reaction engines of the VF-1, everything changes. There, some type of nuclear fusion (based on the fictional Macross reaction technology) occurs which heats up the air taken in by the turbines to the point where the molecules excite to a plasma state which is what is forced out the back of the engine. The VF-1 has something called overboost like afterburners but I don't know if it was ever explained anywhere how that works, perhaps the turbines spin faster to gather more air for higher thrust. What makes the VF-1 reaction engine so much better than conventional is how clean it is. The exhaust is entirely super heated air, which would cool down eventually, instead of air/jet fuel mix which is about as environmentally friendly as car exhaust (probably less friendly). To work in space, valkyries would probably carry some on board propellant like hydrogen or something to replace the lack of air they can use. This propellant is what it heated up by the fusion for thrust in space. This is mainly conjecture though, they never stated what they use for propellant in space in any series, but it would be limited, unlike in an atmosphere. Fast Packs probably carry extra propellant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VF5SS Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 Oh I know, and the VF-1 presumably can act as a boat too. The VT-1 floats pretty well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morpheus Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 The VT-1 floats pretty well. Don't forget the VA-3 which can transform into a submarine (VFX-2). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VF5SS Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 The VT-1's legs were below the water during that scene. I like to imagine it was kicking its legs to tread water while Misa and Hikaru were away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beltane70 Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 Thanks for the replies and the ensuing discussion - this is good stuff! However, my main concern wasn't power generation per se. I actually meant propulsion. My thought was that a turbine engine - which if I understand correctly is present in traditional or nuclear format in all Valks, I mean look at all the silly looking turbines in the yamato valks. Anyway, if it's a turbine, it's there to accelerate air to use as thrust. I may be exposing my limited knowledge of jet engines but I thought that unless you're afterburning, your primary source of thrust is super compressed air. You can't compress air if there is no intake! That was my main point. By closing off the intakes, you can't produce thrust unless you're burning something afterward. And the ocean scene doesn't have this happening. Actually, even if we discount that, you can't really produce thrust in space without a fuel source, like rocket fuel on the fast packs. So yeah, I'm still confused. And for the record, my mind can totally believe in transforming jets! The VF-0 was most likely using its manuevering verniers to move under water. When Shin uses battroid mode, you can clearly see him using the backpack thrusters to move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sketchley Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 What's the deal with the backstory for Macross 11. MAHQ states it's an English speaking colony ship with the band Fire Bomber American on board with Minmae's cousin, Kyle as the manager. It appears briefly in the last episode of Macross Frontier. I did a bit of research on the Super Long Range Emigration Fleets that have been shown or mentioned in the various Macross series'. Basically I was looking for where they had been or were last mentioned, and when they were mentioned. The result: http://www.macrossroleplay.org/Sketchley/L...tions.htm#slref (I will have to update the Macross 13 entry, as it appears new information has been released on it.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awareman Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 Hello, I have a simple question. Everywhere online it is mentionned that the MEGAROAD 01 has disappeared around 2016. I have just finished to watch the whole series, oav's and movies and it is nowhere mentionned ... Where do people know that, what is the source of this information? (btw, could be a good start for a new show ... they've been "folded" into the future and reappears sometime after 2060 ...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gubaba Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 Hello, I have a simple question. Everywhere online it is mentionned that the MEGAROAD 01 has disappeared around 2016. I have just finished to watch the whole series, oav's and movies and it is nowhere mentionned ... Where do people know that, what is the source of this information? (btw, could be a good start for a new show ... they've been "folded" into the future and reappears sometime after 2060 ...) It comes from outside sources (i.e. books)...most recently mentioned in Macross Chronicle http://www.macrossworld.com/mwf/index.php?...mp;#entry707983 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Dex Posted September 7, 2009 Share Posted September 7, 2009 (btw, could be a good start for a new show ... they've been "folded" into the future and reappears sometime after 2060 ...) It would... but it isn't going to happen. You read enough topics and posts on this forum, and you'll understand why eventually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MastaEgg Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 Hello, I have a simple question. Everywhere online it is mentionned that the MEGAROAD 01 has disappeared around 2016. I have just finished to watch the whole series, oav's and movies and it is nowhere mentionned ... Where do people know that, what is the source of this information? (btw, could be a good start for a new show ... they've been "folded" into the future and reappears sometime after 2060 ...) *comes out of the shadows* It's feasible, since time does slow down in fold space. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zinjo Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 *comes out of the shadows* It's feasible, since time does slow down in fold space. It's highly doubtful the Megaroad will ever reappear. Kawamori has no interest in revisiting that story in the universe. Besides, the longer it remains a mystery the greater a legend it becomes... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awareman Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 (edited) It's highly doubtful the Megaroad will ever reappear. Kawamori has no interest in revisiting that story in the universe. Besides, the longer it remains a mystery the greater a legend it becomes... It's not revisiting a story, it's a new thing. The fold system is a time and space distortion stuff, there could have been malfunction or something related to a new enemy that brought them 60 years into the future (with a 1 year fold for example), somewhere far beyond "known" universe. It's not a revisiting, it's a new step in the macross universe, as Macross 7 was to Macross, with known characters, it could be the same. New threat, new corner of the universe, they could be facing a new enemy unable to communicate with the rest of the fleet because of the huge distance ..... That's my point of view ..... maybe there could be fanfictions or books, if the guy isn't interested to make a show of it. Edited September 10, 2009 by Awareman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 It's not revisiting a story, it's a new thing. The fold system is a time and space distortion stuff, there could have been malfunction or something related to a new enemy that brought them 60 years into the future, somewhere far beyond "known" universe. It's not a revisiting, it's a new step in the macross universe, as Macross 7 was to Macross, with known characters, it could be the same. New threat, new corner of the universe, they could be facing a new enemy unable to communicate with the rest of the fleet because of the huge distance ..... That's my point of view ..... maybe there could be fanfictions or books, if the guy isn't interested to make a show of it. Fanfiction makes the baby jebus cry! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dreamweaver13 Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 It's not revisiting a story, it's a new thing. The fold system is a time and space distortion stuff, there could have been malfunction or something related to a new enemy that brought them 60 years into the future (with a 1 year fold for example), somewhere far beyond "known" universe. It's not a revisiting, it's a new step in the macross universe, as Macross 7 was to Macross, with known characters, it could be the same. New threat, new corner of the universe, they could be facing a new enemy unable to communicate with the rest of the fleet because of the huge distance ..... That's my point of view ..... maybe there could be fanfictions or books, if the guy isn't interested to make a show of it. well there is a fanfic running around that basically places them into the future from a fold malfunction. written by someone named... Mcjimmy or Mckimby or something... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Einherjar Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 well there is a fanfic running around that basically places them into the future from a fold malfunction. written by someone named... Mcjimmy or Mckimby or something... At least someone took the plunge before Kawamori could try it. We now know he avoided something that wouldn't end well the longer he talked about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
captain america Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 I have a question. I apologize in advance if it's been discussed previously; I went through roughly 10 pages of the thread and saw nothing about it. All of the "sequel" Macross series seem to be derivatives of DYRL more than the TV series; I'm basing myself off of, among other things, the fact that the Q-Rea in Flontier is much closer in design to the film Q-Rau than that of the TV series, as are the Queadluun suits in Mac 7. Further, the few flashback sequences we see in EP1 of Frontier are of the film and not the TV series. Has the TV series somehow been orphaned from the official timeline in favor of the movie, or am I missing something altogether? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLoneWolf Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 All of the "sequel" Macross series seem to be derivatives of DYRL more than the TV series; I'm basing myself off of, among other things, the fact that the Q-Rea in Flontier is much closer in design to the film Q-Rau than that of the TV series, as are the Queadluun suits in Mac 7. Further, the few flashback sequences we see in EP1 of Frontier are of the film and not the TV series. Has the TV series somehow been orphaned from the official timeline in favor of the movie, or am I missing something altogether? The link below contains Kawamori's explanation behind Macross' visual inconsistencies. Some people think it's a very creative idea, other consider it a cop-out. http://www.macrossworld.com/mwf/index.php?...st&p=760765 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kronnang Dunn Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 I have a question. I apologize in advance if it's been discussed previously; I went through roughly 10 pages of the thread and saw nothing about it. All of the "sequel" Macross series seem to be derivatives of DYRL more than the TV series; I'm basing myself off of, among other things, the fact that the Q-Rea in Flontier is much closer in design to the film Q-Rau than that of the TV series, as are the Queadluun suits in Mac 7. Further, the few flashback sequences we see in EP1 of Frontier are of the film and not the TV series. Has the TV series somehow been orphaned from the official timeline in favor of the movie, or am I missing something altogether? Episode 12 has lots of Zentradi designs from the TV series... Kawamori himself said that each Macross production is different since they are all fictional accounts of the same story... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
captain america Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 (edited) Thanks guys. So in essence, much like his line drawings, his sense of storytelling is ambiguous, inconsistent and nonsensical. Got it Edited September 10, 2009 by captain america Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts