Valk Designs

[d3v]

However, the VF-25 and 27 don't transform at all like the VF-19. The Nose cone, for one, is facing directly down, instead of outward. Secondly, the torso folds in the same way as the SV-51. I can give you the wings, but even then, the 27 has fixed wings, unlike the VF-19. (Only later revisions had the fixed wing. Before that, they had VGWings.) Also, the wings fold up onto the back, not the legs. Look at the attached photos.

Actually, other than the nose folding down 180' instead of forward 90' and the use of swing bars instead of the large "gullet", the VF-25 and VF-27's torsos do transform like the VF-19 with the upper torso going over the cockpit area which is now pointing upwards. The SV-51 on the other hand, while using similar swing bars, has the the main fuselage, cockpit and all, pointing down at an angle.

As for Ranka seeing the cockpit, if it's not a holographic cockpit, then maybe at that point, Grace and co. can tap into the superdimension fold plane that Ranka seems to have access to (same way the queen got through to her in episode 14, same way she got through to Sheryl in episode 25).

Edited October 13, 2008 by d3v

[Sumdumgai]

I see the VF-25/VF-27 as being an evolution of the variable fighters that have come before it. VF-25 has the classic swing wings of the VF-1 and VF-11, a combination of swing bars from the VF-11 with the YF-19's torso transformation, the SV-51's nose-cone positioning and wings being places on the back, the folding crotch piece like the YF-19 (except in this case the legs are attached to it), and the ballistic shield. The VF-27 has most of the same features as the VF-25, with a different shoulder, wing, and feet design. The wings act as if fastpacks were already integrated, but also gives it a look reminiscent of the VF-4 and VF-14.

I want to see the YF-24 and its transformations. I really liked what little we were shown.

[SchizophrenicMC]

Actually, other than the nose folding down 180' instead of forward 90' and the use of swing bars instead of the large "gullet", the VF-25 and VF-27's torsos do transform like the VF-19 with the upper torso going over the cockpit area which is now pointing upwards. The SV-51 on the other hand, while using similar swing bars, has the the main fuselage, cockpit and all, pointing down at an angle.

As for Ranka seeing the cockpit, if it's not a holographic cockpit, then maybe at that point, Grace and co. can tap into the superdimension fold plane that Ranka seems to have access to (same way the queen got through to her in episode 14, same way she got through to Sheryl in episode 25).

Never thought of that... It could be some sort of Fold Perception System...

My point is that the VF-27 and 25 transform more like the SV-51 than the VF-19, and share more similarities with the former. Besides that, it looks more like a SV-51 aesthetically, than a VF-19.

@Sumdumgai: I also liked the YF-24. There should be some more stuff about it...

Edited October 13, 2008 by SchizophrenicMC

[d3v]

I see the VF-25/VF-27 as being an evolution of the variable fighters that have come before it. VF-25 has the classic swing wings of the VF-1 and VF-11, a combination of swing bars from the VF-11 with the YF-19's torso transformation, the SV-51's nose-cone positioning and wings being places on the back, the folding crotch piece like the YF-19 (except in this case the legs are attached to it), and the ballistic shield. The VF-27 has most of the same features as the VF-25, with a different shoulder, wing, and feet design. The wings act as if fastpacks were already integrated, but also gives it a look reminiscent of the VF-4 and VF-14.

I want to see the YF-24 and its transformations. I really liked what little we were shown.

From what we've seen, it probably looks like a VF-25 but with a different back - possibly either like the V-11 MAXL and VF-0D (wings swing in, but not fully due to the seize), or like the YF-21/VF-22 (folding).

[SchizophrenicMC]

From what we've seen, it probably looks like a VF-25 but with a different back - possibly either like the V-11 MAXL and VF-0D (wings swing in, but not fully due to the seize), or like the YF-21/VF-22 (folding).

Compared to the VF-25:

Shorter nose

One-seater cockpit

Skinnier fuselage

Fixed-wing

Single-laser Head Turret

Similar engines

Same vertical stabilizers

All in all, you can tell it was the VF-25's prototype, but you can see that a lot changed. I would like to see a VF-25D, trainer, fixed-wing, or otherwise.

Does the VF-0 have the most variants? A: Cannon Fodder. D: 2-seater trainer/Radar ops. S: Commander Variant. C: Single-seater Radar ops. (Is there a B? I'm pretty sure I read about a B somewhere. Yes, I do consider the models to be canon.)

[anime52k8]

There's like 3 dubs, though, so I may have gotten my info confused...

Galaxy was on the Frontier (Get it?)of technology, but I'm pretty sure that a 20 year old (or older) military technology would be a tiny bit old-hat, dontcha think? (In 2040, the YF-21 was tested using the BDI and BCS. They both required a neural implant. This means that by 2059, the implants would be 20 years old, at the least.) I don't think most of the other fleets have banned implants, it's just Galaxy encourages them.

except that the BDI and the BCS on the 21 doesn't require a neural implant. you put the helmet on and it worked. anyone can put the helmet on and use it.

off hand I can't think of any examples of actual implants or human modification in plus, just development in terms of AI.

and I'm not saying that they are using the same spacific system on the 21, I'm saying they're using the same type of system. I'm using BDI and BCS as generic terms the same as you would us fly-by-wire or radar.

We have nothing to go by for the YF-24 except its FIGHTER-ONLY schematic. It's out, off the bat.

well based on the visible panel lines on the YF-24 it would apear to transform in overall the same way as the 25 and 27 (which would make sence since they are both based off the 24)

However, the VF-25 and 27 don't transform at all like the VF-19.

except they do

The Nose cone, for one, is facing directly down, instead of outward.

still the cockpit and forward fuselage point up and the nose pivots the same direction, it just rotates further.

Secondly, the torso folds in the same way as the SV-51. I can give you the wings, but even then, the 27 has fixed wings, unlike the VF-19. (Only later revisions had the fixed wing. Before that, they had VGWings.) Also, the wings fold up onto the back, not the legs. Look at the attached photos.

not really, the whole oriantation of the cockpit part is different. the SV-51 has the cockpit pointing down at about a 45 degree angle. with the uper torso siting above the cockpit. the 25/27 has the cockpit going strait up with the torso sitting on the nose like the 19.

as for the wings, even though the SV-51 ends up with them in the same place they don't get there the same way. on the 51 the two wings are completely separate, and connect to the mech at either shoulder mount via the wing roots. on the 25/27 the wings connect to the backpack which in tern connects to the torso.

and one thing no one ever mentions is the arms. on the 25/27 the arms fold behind the uper torso and lay side by side between the legs with the shield filling in the back of the fuselage between the legs just like on the YF-19. On the sv-51 the arms lay on either side of the mech along the engines with the tail planes sticking off the forearms sort of like on the YF-21.

here's a picture to explain what I'm trying to say.

and heres a highlighted pick to show exactly where all the parts are going.

[anime52k8]

Compared to the VF-25:

Shorter nose

One-seater cockpit

Skinnier fuselage

Fixed-wing

Single-laser Head Turret

Similar engines

Same vertical stabilizers

All in all, you can tell it was the VF-25's prototype, but you can see that a lot changed. I would like to see a VF-25D, trainer, fixed-wing, or otherwise.

Does the VF-0 have the most variants? A: Cannon Fodder. D: 2-seater trainer/Radar ops. S: Commander Variant. C: Single-seater Radar ops. (Is there a B? I'm pretty sure I read about a B somewhere. Yes, I do consider the models to be canon.)

VF-0 varients:

1. 0A - standard variant, 1 head laser, swing wings, single seat
2. 0B - test/trainer variant, 1 head laser, swing wings, two seats
3. 0C - special variant, 1 head laser, delta wings, single seat
4. D - special variant, 1 head laser, delta wings, two seats
5. S - comander variant, 2 head laser, swing wings, 1 seat

B and C are only seen as hase model kits.

VF-1 varients:

1. 1A - standard/cannon fodder varient, 1 head laser,, single seat
2. 1B - upgraded 1A, (improved avionics+ 1S head)
3. 1D - 2 head laser, two seats
4. 1J - flight lead variant, 2 head lasers, single seat
5. 1S - squadron lead, variant 4 head lasers, single seat
6. 1X - modernized VF-1 (looks like a 1A)
7. VT-1 - dedicated trainer, no head lasers, two seats
8. VE-1 - reconnaissance/AWAC variant, no head lasers, two seats
9. VEFR-1 - electronic warfare variant, no head lasers, two seats

VF-1 wins 9 to 5

[SchizophrenicMC]

VF-0 varients:

1. 0A - standard variant, 1 head laser, swing wings, single seat
2. 0B - test/trainer variant, 1 head laser, swing wings, two seats
3. 0C - special variant, 1 head laser, delta wings, single seat
4. D - special variant, 1 head laser, delta wings, two seats
5. S - comander variant, 2 head laser, swing wings, 1 seat

B and C are only seen as hase model kits.

VF-1 varients:

1. 1A - standard/cannon fodder varient, 1 head laser,, single seat
2. 1B - upgraded 1A, (improved avionics+ 1S head)
3. 1D - 2 head laser, two seats
4. 1J - flight lead variant, 2 head lasers, single seat
5. 1S - squadron lead, variant 4 head lasers, single seat
6. 1X - modernized VF-1 (looks like a 1A)
7. VT-1 - dedicated trainer, no head lasers, two seats
8. VE-1 - reconnaissance/AWAC variant, no head lasers, two seats
9. VEFR-1 - electronic warfare variant, no head lasers, two seats

VF-1 wins 9 to 5

So... I'm confused. May as well get the answer here: Is DYRL? considered canon, in any way, shape, or form?

Tell me this: What are you using as your transformation reference? That'd be helpful, so as to make questions like this never exist.

The VE-1 is just a modified VT-1. The only difference is the sensors embedded in it, and the AWACSFAST Pack. (Airborn Warning And Control System Fuel And Sensors Tactical Pack) The VT-1 used the T-FAST. (I may be making up names, but they serve only to fill in the role they play. So, 8... But, that still is more than the 0...

[anime52k8]

So... I'm confused. May as well get the answer here: Is DYRL? considered canon, in any way, shape, or form?

Tell me this: What are you using as your transformation reference? That'd be helpful, so as to make questions like this never exist.

The VE-1 is just a modified VT-1. The only difference is the sensors embedded in it, and the AWACSFAST Pack. (Airborn Warning And Control System Fuel And Sensors Tactical Pack) The VT-1 used the T-FAST. (I may be making up names, but they serve only to fill in the role they play. So, 8... But, that still is more than the 0...

the VE-1 and VT-1 also have different heads, and possibly different cockpits/avionics/other internal systems that set them apart. the difference between the VT and VE are at least as great as the difference between the 1A and the 1J.

and the mecha designs in DYRL are considered cannon, but not the story. in universe DYRL is a movie produced in 2031 that depict a fictionalized account of the events of SW1. the movie used the 2012 refit version of the SDF-1 and upgraded block 6 VF-1's (the block six's have slightly different heads on the 1A's, and the cockpits have been upgraded with new ejector seats, streamlined controls, and a HUD projected on the entire canopy.

as for what I'm using as my transformation reference, I'm basing my points off what I've seen from various line arts, the toy's and models that are out, and the animations themselves. I've seen/have plenty of images to support my points, but it could take me a while to find them all.

edit: here's some images and links:

the yamato 1/60 SV-51, (the toy's transformation is essentially anime accurate. http://gamu-toys.info/goukin/yamato/sv51/sv5102.html

transformation detail on the YF-19

and the VF-25 transformation (the 27 transforms the same way more or less)

Edited October 13, 2008 by anime52k8

[SchizophrenicMC]

the VE-1 and VT-1 also have different heads, and possibly different cockpits/avionics/other internal systems that set them apart. the difference between the VT and VE are at least as great as the difference between the 1A and the 1J.

and the mecha designs in DYRL are considered cannon, but not the story. in universe DYRL is a movie produced in 2031 that depict a fictionalized account of the events of SW1. the movie used the 2012 refit version of the SDF-1 and upgraded block 6 VF-1's (the block six's have slightly different heads on the 1A's, and the cockpits have been upgraded with new ejector seats, streamlined controls, and a HUD projected on the entire canopy.

as for what I'm using as my transformation reference, I'm basing my points off what I've seen from various line arts, the toy's and models that are out, and the animations themselves. I've seen/have plenty of images to support my points, but it could take me a while to find them all.

edit: here's some images and links:

the yamato 1/60 SV-51, (the toy's transformation is essentially anime accurate. http://gamu-toys.info/goukin/yamato/sv51/sv5102.html

transformation detail on the YF-19

and the VF-25 transformation (the 27 transforms the same way more or less)

First of all, I never consider any toy (Even a Yamato) to be anime-accurate. Second.... Why spend all that money refitting the Macross? It's out of commission, anyway... That's beside the point...

Funny story: all of the advanced transformation systems of the UN were based off of AUN designs. (Don't tell me the VF-1 was more advanced than the SV-51.) What you're saying validates my comment, at least in part. The VF-19 transforms like the SV-51. (At least, more like it than the VF-1 or 11.) The VF-25 transforms like a VF-19. Therefore, a VF-25 transforms like a SV-51.

Let's get off of that, and back onto the topic's main idea: VF-25 design purpose. The VF-25 can safely out-perform the YF-21 and YF-19. The latter 2 had a barrier where any higher performance would kill the pilot. The VF-25 exceeds this limit. How? My theory is that anti-gravity generators, as the technology became smaller, were installed within the airframe, and were used to lessen g-loads on the plane and its pilot, while retaining maneuverability.

[badboy00z]

Funny story: all of the advanced transformation systems of the UN were based off of AUN designs. (Don't tell me the VF-1 was more advanced than the SV-51.) What you're saying validates my comment, at least in part. The VF-19 transforms like the SV-51. (At least, more like it than the VF-1 or 11.) The VF-25 transforms like a VF-19. Therefore, a VF-25 transforms like a SV-51.

No offensive but are you blind? Have you seen the diagram of the 19. 51 and 25 that Anime52k8 posted? The nose cone on the 19 becomes the chest whereas on the 51 the nose cone becomes the crotch. Not to mention the cockpit orientation is totally different. The arms on the 51 is on the outer side of the engines whereas the arms on the 19 is on the inside. The only similarity is that the forward fuselage goes over the cockpit to form the chest.

[Morpheus]

Let's get off of that, and back onto the topic's main idea: VF-25 design purpose. The VF-25 can safely out-perform the YF-21 and YF-19. The latter 2 had a barrier where any higher performance would kill the pilot. The VF-25 exceeds this limit. How? My theory is that anti-gravity generators, as the technology became smaller, were installed within the airframe, and were used to lessen g-loads on the plane and its pilot, while retaining maneuverability.

The Ex-Gear system on VF-25 greatly improve the pilots ability to resist high-G condition. When VF-171 is upgraded into VF-171EX, the Ex-Gear system is also introduced which mean VF-171EX has higher performance.

Anti-Gravity does not nullified high-G stress on pilot, IMO only inertial nullifier/damper could lessen the G impact on pilot.

Now the question is, why Ranka is not killed when Brera is using the VF-27 to evade the Vajra, I bet he's using it at max performance.

Imagine this: Brera pull high-G manuever when he evades the Vajra, he look back and saw Ranka has been Gulded

[d3v]

The Ex-Gear system on VF-25 greatly improve the pilots ability to resist high-G condition. When VF-171 is upgraded into VF-171EX, the Ex-Gear system is also introduced which mean VF-171EX has higher performance.

Anti-Gravity does not nullified high-G stress on pilot, IMO only inertial nullifier/damper could lessen the G impact on pilot.

Now the question is, why Ranka is not killed when Brera is using the VF-27 to evade the Vajra, I bet he's using it at max performance.

Imagine this: Brera pull high-G manuever when he evades the Vajra, he look back and saw Ranka has been Gulded

It's possible that suit that she's wearing is some form of G-suit (since it's similar to the suit worn by VF-25 pilots). Also, the major issue with high G maneuvering would be G-LOC and not "Gulding" as you so succinctly put it.

[ChronoReverse]

Anti-Gravity does not nullified high-G stress on pilot, IMO only inertial nullifier/damper could lessen the G impact on pilot.

However, anti-gravity is a potential basis for an inertial dampening system since it can apply a constant force on the entire body (not just the surface) at once.

[anime52k8]

Why spend all that money refitting the Macross? It's out of commission,

the SDF-1 is Spacy central command. it was before it was damaged and continued to be afterwords (and besides, the SDF-1 is a landmark, it be like not fixing the statue of liberty if one of the arms fell off)

[Macross007]

The Ex-Gear system on VF-25 greatly improve the pilots ability to resist high-G condition. When VF-171 is upgraded into VF-171EX, the Ex-Gear system is also introduced which mean VF-171EX has higher performance.

Anti-Gravity does not nullified high-G stress on pilot, IMO only inertial nullifier/damper could lessen the G impact on pilot.

Now the question is, why Ranka is not killed when Brera is using the VF-27 to evade the Vajra, I bet he's using it at max performance.

Imagine this: Brera pull high-G manuever when he evades the Vajra, he look back and saw Ranka has been Gulded

''Gulded''. A new word in the Macross universe.

[azrael]

The Ex-Gear system on VF-25 greatly improve the pilots ability to resist high-G condition.

I keep seeing this but I have yet to see any text mention this.

[Mr March]

Yeah, kinda wondering about that one myself. No doubt the whole EX-Gear acts as an advanced g-suit, but aside from perhaps helping protect the pilot from an additional g or two over most flight suits, I hope there is some other reason why the VF-25 Messiah can protect it's pilot from high-g maneuvers.

[Shaka_Z]

I keep seeing this but I have yet to see any text mention this.

it's a reference to when Leon is looking at some of michel and alto's cam footage, and his analyst/aide mentions that even with the Ex-Gear no human pilot could achieve that level of maneuverability.

[anime52k8]

Yeah, kinda wondering about that one myself. No doubt the whole EX-Gear acts as an advanced g-suit, but aside from perhaps helping protect the pilot from an additional g or two over most flight suits, I hope there is some other reason why the VF-25 Messiah can protect it's pilot from high-g maneuvers.

well, it's in the compendium it's stated that starting with the VF-15 (not animated) onward, something called the"biological anti-G boost system is in use on valks. in the compendium its described "This system stimulates the human body with laser, electromagnetic pulse, infrared, and other means to momentarily activate metabolic functions against stress. "

this is just speculation, but it's possible that the VF-25 uses a newer version of the same system but it's integrated into the EX-Gear.

[Vic Mancini]

The whole leg mechanism of the VF-1 relies on perfect timing. If it's not timed within milliseconds of the exact optimum, it could end in the loss of: A leg, an engine, the landing gear on that side, the entire plane.

I think you could say the same thing about the entire transformation process of every Valk. They all undergo full transformations in split seconds. One arm moving out of place before a chest plate detaches, or a leg moving into position before a wing root unhinges, and the Valk snaps into pieces against it self. I think the micro-second timing of all the transformations leave next to zero margin for error, detaching VF-1 style legs or not.

Edited October 14, 2008 by Vic Mancini

[SchizophrenicMC]

Yeah, but the loss of an arm doesn't (Generally) destroy its flight capabilities. (Though, for balance, you may have to eject the other arm...)

Yeah, IsamuAvvie laughs at "Gulded."

Anyway, an anti-gravity generator would (As it seems do do on the Macross*) create a bubble of gravity. (Or lack thereof.) This bubble would retain the gravity within it, and could be adjusted by the flight computer. The plane detects higher G-load, it increases the AG power. As for the scientist with Leon, I think he's just misinformed as to the VF-25's capabilities. G-LOC isn't the issue, because it's recoverable to an extent. G-LOC doesn't kill you, you not waking up before SMACK! does. The G-load on the YF-21 was so great, Guld got... Gulded. This is way beyond G-LOC.

*It's a scientific explanation for why Valks had to be catapulted and they all went down after leaving the Prometheus's deck, though they were in space. It creates a bubble of gravity, with the force collectively moving towards the bottom of the craft. It also explains everything falling while it transforms.

[Mr March]

well, it's in the compendium it's stated that starting with the VF-15 (not animated) onward, something called the"biological anti-G boost system is in use on valks. in the compendium its described "This system stimulates the human body with laser, electromagnetic pulse, infrared, and other means to momentarily activate metabolic functions against stress. "

this is just speculation, but it's possible that the VF-25 uses a newer version of the same system but it's integrated into the EX-Gear.

I'd be cautious. I'm not sure if Kawamori and Co. have officially adopted that element into the post-VF-15 Valkyries. This tech lacks any kind of mention beyond the entry on the compendium and for all we know it could be another dead-tech, like BDI/BDS.

Personally, I think micro-gravity control would be the next step in g-force counter technologies. Macross already uses gravity control on ships, so if it's miniaturized like fold engines, it seems a fairly likely candidate.

[SchizophrenicMC]

I'd be cautious. I'm not sure if Kawamori and Co. have officially adopted that element into the post-VF-15 Valkyries. This tech lacks any kind of mention beyond the entry on the compendium and for all we know it could be another dead-tech, like BDI/BDS.

Personally, I think micro-gravity control would be the next step in g-force counter technologies. Macross already uses gravity control on ships, so if it's miniaturized like fold engines, it seems a fairly likely candidate.

My sentiments, exactly. So, Mr March, you get all of your VF stats from the M3?

[Morpheus]

My sentiments, exactly. So, Mr March, you get all of your VF stats from the M3?

Mr.March IS M3

[taksraven]

''Gulded''. A new word in the Macross universe.

I think we need a Macross dictionary of some sort. A place where we can put serious stuff like a description of the Protoculture that is less than several thousand words.

Taksraven

[Mr March]

My sentiments, exactly. So, Mr March, you get all of your VF stats from the M3?

Yes, the M3 is my website. Much of the material is referenced from Egan Loo's excellent Macross Compendium, with extra translations from helpful fans.

[daflip702]

So what's the difference between this thread and the technology thread? Suprised a mod hasn't locked it up....

[RedWolf]

So what's the difference between this thread and the technology thread? Suprised a mod hasn't locked it up....

The stickied thread says Macross Frontier Mecha and Technology.

Very specific don't you think?

[daflip702]

The stickied thread says Macross Frontier Mecha and Technology.

Very specific don't you think?

My answer is no...There are alot of things dicussed on that thread that dosen't pertain to Frontier.....why change it? You Think?

Edited October 15, 2008 by daflip702

[RedWolf]

Is there anything in the rules that general Macross tech discussion is prohibited to that thread?

Besides this thread and other threads addresses specific topics.

The discussion in the Macross Frontier Mecha/Technology is comparison and contrast between the new , which is Macross Frontier, and the old , the other series of the Macross franchise.

Heck if tech discussion is only limited in that thread Azrael would have closed the Macross Chronicle thread or March's Macross Mecha Manual thread.

Edited October 15, 2008 by RedWolf

[Morpheus]

Well, this thread is about valk design, so let the discussion continue

Most VF can be disabled by taking out its arm and legs (the reaction engines are in the leg) except VF-27 which also have another pair of engines on the wings. This show that YF-21/VF-22 is the most robust of all, since the lost of a limb does not reduce the valk performance (in fighter mode).

I'm wondered about the VA-3 invader design, since I think the cockpit is literally located at the head in batroid mode and the engines located in the chest/shoulder area.

[anime52k8]

My answer is no...There are alot of things dicussed on that thread that dosen't pertain to Frontier.....why change it? You Think?

it's elliptical discussion. It starts on topic and quickly starts drifting off, but it always comes back to topic eventually.

I'm wondered about the VA-3 invader design, since I think the cockpit is literally located at the head in batroid mode and the engines located in the chest/shoulder area.

in that case one trying to take out an arm/leg to block transformation would be secondary to getting a head shot/kill on the pilot.

[Mr March]

As long as there is intelligent discourse happening in the same relevant topic (Valkyrie design), what should it matter?

Ultimately this is a discussion board and discussion is taking place; all the tangents seem relevant to me. I think we need to all agree (members and staff alike) that as long as the dicussions work, they can continue. When a topic requires moderation, we'll all know it

Moral of the story: let's participate or leave well enough alone.

Morpheus

Actually, the YF-21 had it's legs and arms blasted off, yet kept going. The YF-21/VF-22 Sturmvogel II does have a rather unique design among the Valkyries where the engines are mounted on the rear torso of the Battroid, so removing all it's limbs would not stop it, nor would it remove all it's weapons (remember the head gun). So even an armless/legless YF-21/VF-22 could still fly and fight. Impressive when you think about it

Also, keep in mind that all the Valkyries have vernier thrusters and more importantly "auxillary thruster pods" (AKA, "backpack thrusters"). Even if both legs on a Valkyrie were destroyed, it's likely capacitors would keep the variable craft powered for at least a short period of time and the auxillary thruster pods could keep the mecha flying (at the very least, in the vacuum environment of space). The arms are probably the most disposable parts of most variable fighters (like the arms of Hikaru's VF-1S Valkyrie in episode 27 of SDF Macross), but it may be possible to operate a Valkyire to some degree even with both engines/legs removed. Operation could be possible, but definitely wouldn't last long after losing the engines.

[d3v]

So then if you think about it, Brera was pretty much saved by his valk in episode 9. If he were in any other valk (than a VF-27), Alto taking his leg off would have been a bigger problem for him.