Macross Frontier Mecha/Technology Thread III *Read 1st Post*

[sketchley]

Ah, but keep in mind that the VF-17 has engine nacelle weapon pallets yet we don't see them in the animation.

As I said before, I won't be surprised if later VF-25 stats mention weapon pallets. Also, you seem to have missed my point that since the VF-25's legs are larger there should be as much, if not more space in them compared to earlier VFs. Yes, it could be eaten up by additional fuel cells, as I know what the text next to the image says (translated it. Check another thread for the translation).

Thank you!

As for the the panel on the legs, we've argued over that before and come to the conclusion that - based on both the size and function (to cover the ventral fins) as well as the lack of any animated evidence to the contrary - they are, at the very least, not any form of missile bay or what have you.

[anime52k8]

Its actually two per wing.

See picture above.

no, there are three, but when the super parts are attached the inner most one is partially covered by the booster units

the hard points are the little rectangles on the underside of the wings

[Mr March]

Ah, that explains it.

[Graham]

Ah, but keep in mind that the VF-17 has engine nacelle weapon pallets yet we don't see them in the animation.

In M7 we do see reaction weapons being loaded into the the VF-17's internal weapons bays in the lower leg.

Graham

[Graham]

While the new Macross Ace Frontier PSP game should in no way be taken as accurate spec wise, it's interesting to note that the VF-25's are shown seeingly firing missiles from internal bays. No missiles are shown on the wings.

I suspect there is some limited internal missile carriage somewhere on the VF-25.

Graham

[Morpheus]

While the new Macross Ace Frontier PSP game should in no way be taken as accurate spec wise, it's interesting to note that the VF-25's are shown seeingly firing missiles from internal bays. No missiles are shown on the wings.

I suspect there is some limited internal missile carriage somewhere on the VF-25.

Graham

Well, I never played Ace Frontier, but according to my experience, game is a bad reference. Remember in VFX-2 where most of the valk can fire unlimited missiles even from valk that doesn't have internal bays.

If VF-25 does have internal missile bays, the mechanix DX book thingy should have explained it, as well as the model kit manual.

[Graham]

It seems that there is no complete specs out yet. The recent Great Mechanics DX 6 magazine while informative and a good start is far from comoplete spec wise.

Graham

[Sumdumgai]

If you watch the Triangular opening, when the VF-25F poses at the end with everyone and the Macross Quarter is in the background, you can clearly see three hardpoints on the wing.

[azrael]

Well, I never played Ace Frontier, but according to my experience, game is a bad reference. Remember in VFX-2 where most of the valk can fire unlimited missiles even from valk that doesn't have internal bays.

If VF-25 does have internal missile bays, the mechanix DX book thingy should have explained it, as well as the model kit manual.

Didn't the VF-1 and VF-11 have missile coming out from nowhere in the VF-X games? You can't really render some things (like internal pallets) in every game ya' know...

[Graham]

I mentioned the game, because MAF does have missiles rendered on the wings for the VF-1, but not for the VF-25.

Graham

[anime52k8]

Ah, but keep in mind that the VF-17 has engine nacelle weapon pallets yet we don't see them in the animation.

As I said before, I won't be surprised if later VF-25 stats mention weapon pallets. Also, you seem to have missed my point that since the VF-25's legs are larger there should be as much, if not more space in them compared to earlier VFs. Yes, it could be eaten up by additional fuel cells, as I know what the text next to the image says (translated it. Check another thread for the translation).

except the VF-25 isn't any bigger than the YF-19, but the legs are considerably skinnier. and in the official technical drawings we've seen, the engine takes almost all of the room in the lower leg (it's directly exposed when the big panel on the side of the leg opens) there is defiantly no room, and there are no pallets shown in that part of the leg if their are any missiles in the legs they're either in the back of the legs or in the little parts on the outside of the knee, and both of these places offer almost no room for missiles.

also there's a difference between not being shown in the animation and not being shown in official technical drawings. if they were to say that there are missiles in the legs, they would have to completely redesign the interior of the legs. (not that I wouldn't put it past HFH)

[d3v]

except the VF-25 isn't any bigger than the YF-19, but the legs are considerably skinnier. and in the official technical drawings we've seen, the engine takes almost all of the room in the lower leg (it's directly exposed when the big panel on the side of the leg opens) there is defiantly no room, and there are no pallets shown in that part of the leg if their are any missiles in the legs they're either in the back of the legs or in the little parts on the outside of the knee, and both of these places offer almost no room for missiles.

also there's a difference between not being shown in the animation and not being shown in official technical drawings. if they were to say that there are missiles in the legs, they would have to completely redesign the interior of the legs. (not that I wouldn't put it past HFH)

Here's a thought, if it does have internal micro-missile launchers, the legs wouldn't be the best place to put them in anyway, seeing as they would be useless whenever a FAST Pack is equipped (which seems to be about 90% of the time with the VF-25).

[anime52k8]

Here's a thought, if it does have internal micro-missile launchers, the legs wouldn't be the best place to put them in anyway, seeing as they would be useless whenever a FAST Pack is equipped (which seems to be about 90% of the time with the VF-25).

I was actually thinking the same thing.

[sketchley]

except the VF-25 isn't any bigger than the YF-19, but the legs are considerably skinnier. and in the official technical drawings we've seen, the engine takes almost all of the room in the lower leg (it's directly exposed when the big panel on the side of the leg opens) there is defiantly no room, and there are no pallets shown in that part of the leg if their are any missiles in the legs they're either in the back of the legs or in the little parts on the outside of the knee, and both of these places offer almost no room for missiles.

The same arguement has been used regarding internal pallets in the VF-17 and VF-11 (VF-11 MAXL Kai). Both of those have internal pallets.

also there's a difference between not being shown in the animation and not being shown in official technical drawings. if they were to say that there are missiles in the legs, they would have to completely redesign the interior of the legs. (not that I wouldn't put it past HFH)

Ah, but we haven't been given complete (as in full-body) line-art.

[sketchley]

The YF-19, VF-11, VF-19 and VF-5000 all have internal pallets or micro-missile launchers in the engine nacelles AND FAST packs/Super parts. In Macross Plus we can see the nacelle pallet opening, and lifting the Super parts out of the way with the hatch. Same holds true for the VF-25 if there are internal leg weapons pallets.

Here's a thought, if it does have internal micro-missile launchers, the legs wouldn't be the best place to put them in anyway, seeing as they would be useless whenever a FAST Pack is equipped (which seems to be about 90% of the time with the VF-25).

[Zinjo]

The YF-19, VF-11, VF-19 and VF-5000 all have internal pallets or micro-missile launchers in the engine nacelles AND FAST packs/Super parts. In Macross Plus we can see the nacelle pallet opening, and lifting the Super parts out of the way with the hatch. Same holds true for the VF-25 if there are internal leg weapons pallets.

Yes but the lineart of the legs shows no room for internal pallets there.

[Mr March]

I suppose there could be internal launchers in the VF-25 Messiah engines/legs, but there's little room (yes, even by "Macross internal storage standards"). It has been noted some kind of "port" is seen on the engines/legs; it's found just beside the outer knee (see this rear view of the RVF-25). It could be a micro-missile launcher port or it could be a vernier thruster (or something else entirely).

It's somewhat telling that we've never seen micro-missiles coming from the VF-25 engines/legs (though admittedly, that's no guarantee that they don't exist); all we have is some off-screen missile fire in the first episode from Gilliam's Super Pack-less VF-25F. The YF-19/VF-19 Excalibur and VF-11C Thunderbolt were both animated with internal missile bays (much to Kawamori's chagrin in the case of the VF-11C, lol). The exception would be the VF-5000 internal launchers, but the Star Mirage had limited screen time AND was always shown using non-lethal shock ordnance.

Still, the VF-11B/C Thunderbolt (not the VF-11MAXL Custom) was built without internal missiles so it's not like a missile-less VF-25 Messiah would be without precedent. Considering internal missiles in the Super-less VF-25 were never seen, I think it would be disappointing to learn launchers are part of the official statistics. All the other VF-25 weapons were shown animated multiple times; even the rarely used hip and head guns were shown in action more than once. Perhaps the VF-25 internal missiles will join the ranks of the head cannon for the VF-11B/C Thunderbolt and the YF-21/VF-22 Sturmvogel II as an example of a weapon that's never been fired

Edited October 15, 2008 by Mr March

[d3v]

I suppose there could be internal launchers in the VF-25 Messiah engines/legs, but there's little room (yes, even by "Macross internal storage standards"). It has been noted some kind of "port" is seen on the engines/legs; it's found just beside the outer knee (see this rear view of the RVF-25). It could be a micro-missile launcher port or it could be a vernier thruster (or something else entirely).

A bit off discussion, but I just noticed that the wing is clipping through the long ventral boom.

[Mr March]

d3v

I guess there's still some small bit of manipulative mechanical magic, even today. Twenty five years ago, it was the infamous "shrinking wings" on the VF-1. Today, it's a few clipping errors on the 3D model of the RVF-25

[d3v]

It's just funny since if not for the clipping, that render could almost pass for a hand drawn cell... almost.

[Zinjo]

Who's to say they aren't in the fuselage itself?

[Morpheus]

Who's to say they aren't in the fuselage itself?

I'm betting the VF-25 doesn't have internal bay for missile. I took Kawamori statement as the based for my fact, he doesn't want to follow the current trend in fighter tech (which include internal missile bay) in his new valk design.

About how Gilliam manage to fire missiles when he ejected the FAST pack before entering island 1, its probably animation error, hell he could have thrown unused part of his VF-25 at the lobster.

[wolfx]

At the risk of goin abit OT, do you guys feel (being sci-fi geeks) that Macross doesn't make much effort in trying to explain its technologies in its animated media and relies on alternative media for it instead ie: the Macross Design Works books etc. As compared to say Gundam, though not exaustive they do try to make an effort to have it all on the anime. Perhaps its a tradition for Macross not to be an overemphasis on the mecha but rather the relationships and issues between its characters?

[anime52k8]

d3v

I guess there's still some small bit of manipulative mechanical magic, even today. Twenty five years ago, it was the infamous "shrinking wings" on the VF-1. Today, it's a few clipping errors on the 3D model of the RVF-25

yeah, there's actually a lot of that going on, if you watch the transformation animations closely, you'll notice that the little part on front of the chest passes through the nose cone when it goes to batroid mode. also the hip lasers and frankly most of the parts on the hips tend to move into each other or float around not fully connected to each other.

[Kurisama]

There is a damn-load of clipping going on all thru Frontier - especially with the Q-Rea's. Usually, tho - it's way too fast for the viewer to notice at all, unless ur a super-mac-freak and cg-freak, like most of us here...

[azrael]

At the risk of goin abit OT, do you guys feel (being sci-fi geeks) that Macross doesn't make much effort in trying to explain its technologies in its animated media and relies on alternative media for it instead ie: the Macross Design Works books etc. As compared to say Gundam, though not exaustive they do try to make an effort to have it all on the anime. Perhaps its a tradition for Macross not to be an overemphasis on the mecha but rather the relationships and issues between its characters?

The trend is to not over-write specifications. Otherwise, you'll write yourself into a corner down the road.

[wolfx]

The trend is to not over-write specifications. Otherwise, you'll write yourself into a corner down the road.

Its not an issue of over-writing or not. Its an issue of writing it or not at all.

Stuff like "Does the VF-25 have missiles" or "what is energy converting armour" are not explicitly shown nor explained in the anime whereas in Gundam every techno jargon throwed out is explained fairly well in the anime series. We have to rely on other media for answers to these like the compendium or some design works book.

Edited October 16, 2008 by wolfx

[d3v]

Its not an issue of over-writing or not. Its an issue of writing it or not at all.

Stuff like "Does the VF-25 have missiles" or "what is energy converting armour" are not explicitly shown nor explained in the anime whereas in Gundam every techno jargon throwed out is explained fairly well in the anime series. We have to rely on other media for answers to these like the compendium or some design works book.

Because doing it that way makes (financial) sense.

That, and for the casual viewer, alot of that detail is pointless anyway.

[Mr March]

As a tech geek, I’d naturally want more information on Macross rather than less. However, Macross has always been far more character/drama/theme-driven than it is technology-driven. It makes sense that the show wouldn't embellish the fictional technology, especially since the nature of OverTechnology as found alien technology makes it that much more fun and mysterious. The less restrictions on the description of the technology, the more one can play with it. For example, fold technology was never described beyond a few basics and it wasn't until Macross Frontier that the technology actually came to impact the plot. Were Fold technology locked into some exhaustive technical description, Macross fans would have cried bloody murder at Frontier's handling of all these new factors affecting space folds (even more than they already complain)

What does irk me about Macross literature (grrrr!) is the lack of a standard amount of technical information for each and every Valkyrie. Okay, so maybe the video game Valkyries aren't as important and leftovers from Bandai's aborted Advanced Valkyrie project don't get the royal treatment. Fair enough; I can live with that. But it's the lack of official statistics for the canon animated Valkyries that bothers me. Once they set the standard with the VF-1, they should have carried it out for at least every animated Valkyrie.

If the VF-1 was written with thrust output for the Super Part Boosters, I want thrust output for ALL Super Part Boosters from SDF Macross onward.

If the VF-1 is given a caliber for the gun pod, I want to know a caliber for EVERY gun pod until the end of time.

If most Battroids are given a height, why not ALL of them?

I'd also want "standard T-O weight" and "maximum T-O weight" for absolutely every variable fighter as well as weight for the Super and Armored variants.

I find that lack of uniformity annoying. Even Gundam has fallen short over time; Wing was the last time we could compare between the Gundams. It annoys me to no end. The reason for having fictional statistics (beyond grounding the mecha as "real robots") is so fans can compare the various Valkyries against the other. That's the fun, like crossword games and number puzzles. Short the statistics on the Valkyries and we can't compare them. Where's the fun in that?

[ChrisG]

I find that lack of uniformity annoying. Even Gundam has fallen short over time; Wing was the last time we could compare between the Gundams. It annoys me to no end. The reason for having fictional statistics (beyond grounding the mecha as "real robots") is so fans can compare the various Valkyries against the other. That's the fun, like crossword games and number puzzles. Short the statistics on the Valkyries and we can't compare them. Where's the fun in that?

With Gundam at least, a lot of those statistics are bunk and in some cases made up after the fact after the show ends. Are they really that essential to have to "compare" things?

[Mr March]

With Gundam at least, a lot of those statistics are bunk and in some cases made up after the fact after the show ends. Are they really that essential to have to "compare" things?

Not essential, just an awful lot of fun.

If one Gundam is 18 meters tall and another is 22 meters tall, it's really fun to know the difference. It's flavor fiction, adding another facet of enjoyment to an anime I like. If I know the lengths of the Macross Valkyries and the heights of the Battroids, I can create comparison pictures that I can share with the other fans.

It's all about the fun and more statistics = more fun.

Edited October 16, 2008 by Mr March

[Sulendil Ang]

With Gundam at least, a lot of those statistics are bunk and in some cases made up after the fact after the show ends. Are they really that essential to have to "compare" things?

I concur with March on this topic. I just it's just us being a tech geek.

Well I can live with any time without those statistics, I always hope there's at least some sort of explanation of a mecha's technology. And data is a very good way to get our brains working and opening a new topic to discuss them. The very example is the recent release of the VF-25's partial data. Truly shows that the next generation VF is truly a beast compared to the YF-19/YF-21 generation. And there's height and width data to see if there's even enough space for the internal missiles, and don't forget the weapons statistics, too! etc, etc, etc...

Bottom line: Statistics is, while not an essential part to enjoy the shows, a very entertaining way to enjoy the wonder behind mechas in a real robot anime.

Edited October 16, 2008 by Sulendil Ang

[d3v]

Of course every now and then the creators screw up and add some stats that seem out of place, causing the fans to start arguing over them. I remember back when I was in the Gundam Mailing List at the turn of the century when it seemed like a week wouldn't go by without some argument over the mecha stats from Stardust Memory (which seemed out of place with the progression of tech from MSG to Zeta).

Edited October 16, 2008 by d3v

[anime52k8]

Its not an issue of over-writing or not. Its an issue of writing it or not at all.

Stuff like "Does the VF-25 have missiles" or "what is energy converting armour" are not explicitly shown nor explained in the anime whereas in Gundam every techno jargon throwed out is explained fairly well in the anime series. We have to rely on other media for answers to these like the compendium or some design works book.

I don't really see the why it has to be explained IN THE ANIME, its rather superfluous to add all that info in to the show and it can start detracting from the story telling aspect of things.

now I do agree with Mr. March on the point that they should give equally detailed statistics for all the valks.

[wolfx]

As a tech geek, I’d naturally want more information on Macross rather than less. However, Macross has always been far more character/drama/theme-driven than it is technology-driven. It makes sense that the show wouldn't embellish the fictional technology, especially since the nature of OverTechnology as found alien technology makes it that much more fun and mysterious. The less restrictions on the description of the technology, the more one can play with it. For example, fold technology was never described beyond a few basics and it wasn't until Macross Frontier that the technology actually came to impact the plot. Were Fold technology locked into some exhaustive technical description, Macross fans would have cried bloody murder at Frontier's handling of all these new factors affecting space folds (even more than they already complain)

What does irk me about Macross literature (grrrr!) is the lack of a standard amount of technical information for each and every Valkyrie. Okay, so maybe the video game Valkyries aren't as important and leftovers from Bandai's aborted Advanced Valkyrie project don't get the royal treatment. Fair enough; I can live with that. But it's the lack of official statistics for the canon animated Valkyries that bothers me. Once they set the standard with the VF-1, they should have carried it out for at least every animated Valkyrie.

If the VF-1 was written with thrust output for the Super Part Boosters, I want thrust output for ALL Super Part Boosters from SDF Macross onward.

If the VF-1 is given a caliber for the gun pod, I want to know a caliber for EVERY gun pod until the end of time.

If most Battroids are given a height, why not ALL of them?

I'd also want "standard T-O weight" and "maximum T-O weight" for absolutely every variable fighter as well as weight for the Super and Armored variants.

I find that lack of uniformity annoying. Even Gundam has fallen short over time; Wing was the last time we could compare between the Gundams. It annoys me to no end. The reason for having fictional statistics (beyond grounding the mecha as "real robots") is so fans can compare the various Valkyries against the other. That's the fun, like crossword games and number puzzles. Short the statistics on the Valkyries and we can't compare them. Where's the fun in that?

Numbers were one thing, but explaining technowizardry in the world of macross is another. At least Mac7 gave Basara's ability a name and explained technically by Dr. Chiba. I think there will be more whining if that aspect of Basara was never revealed IE: why he sings and monsters run away. In contrast, Sara's ability for levitating rocks wasn't explained and there WAS lotsa whinging about "LOLMAGICROCKS".

I don't really mind stats or no stats at the moment ....but topics like "do they have missiles?", " Is that a PPB knife?" interest me. Nowhere in the anime was it stated it was a PPB knife for example when they could've just shown a computer console saying it was a PPB knife or something. That's another example.

I have been a macross fan for some time and I have conceded to the fact that Macross does not emphasize on its technology simply because it is NOT a mecha show. It never was, it might be in the future (who knows?), but it still isn't. Valks are just the props in the show. I was just wondering what everyone else feels about this.

I don't really see the why it has to be explained IN THE ANIME, its rather superfluous to add all that info in to the show and it can start detracting from the story telling aspect of things.

now I do agree with Mr. March on the point that they should give equally detailed statistics for all the valks.

Cuz you wanna know why the VF-27 can do stuff the VF-25 can't. Cuz you wanna know why there are fold faults in the galaxy and why fold travels is hampered by them. Cuz you wanna know why Alto doesn't use his PPB on his poor abused VF-25F (or is it even there?). Not ENTIRELY necessary but it gives the universe more depth, IMHO. But meh, this is Macross and I have accepted it long ago.