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

[DarkReaper]

The guy happily jumped from a flying Macross. The guy is definitely off his rocker. He killed his boss when he realised bio-neural chips were being installed on the X-9 Ghost.

But his real goal is to give Sharon Apple sentience.

What? He killed the bearded guy because he found out the chip are installed in Sharon not the Ghost. What would a music producer have to do with Spacy's new toy.

After all he payed the guy that smuggled those chips out of the labs.

[RedWolf]

What? He killed the bearded guy because he found out the chip are installed in Sharon not the Ghost. What would a music producer have to do with Spacy's new toy.

After all he payed the guy that smuggled those chips out of the labs.

The difference between the OVA and the Movie is the scene with General Gomez. Sponsor of the Super Nova Project and the X-9 Ghost.

The guy wasn't a music industry person but the lead person of the Macross Consortium. Freelance scientists paid by the government.

What would a mere music producer know of AI and bio-neural chips?

Gomez was praising the Ghost's performance that he liked the chips installed.

This tipped him off that Marge was doing something fishy. He found out both the Ghost and Sharon have bio-neural chips. He wanted them unplugged but Marge killed him.

[DarkReaper]

General Gomez recognized Marge's rapid leap in his Sharon AI as a separate yet coincidental event to them developing the Ghost AI though.

I guess Marge was just the lead AI developer for Sharon and was frustrated about his AI not maturing further than the limits imposed by needing Myung. So through some contacts he got some leads about that new chip created for the ghost and he just bought it on the black market.

Also I reckon Marge sent a PR update to the UN Spacy with news about their final iteration of the Sharon Apple AI (UNS didn't know about Myung).

So they try to capitalize on the similarities between the Ghost and Sharon by humanizing their now AI-controlled fighter force with the help of Sharon entertaining the masses.

Trying to show that the chip designed to kill can also show a humane side. At least that's what they hoped. Instead they got a homicidal (maybe even genocidal) chip with no regards for human life.

Pure speculation of course.

Edited February 27, 2009 by DarkReaper

[miles316]

General Gomez recognized Marge's rapid leap in his Sharon AI as a separate yet coincidental event to them developing the Ghost AI though.

I guess Marge was just the lead AI developer for Sharon and was frustrated about his AI not maturing further than the limits imposed by needing Myung. So through some contacts he got some leads about that new chip created for the ghost and he just bought it on the black market.

Also I reckon Marge sent a PR update to the UN Spacy with news about their final iteration of the Sharon Apple AI (UNS didn't know about Myung).

So they try to capitalize on the similarities between the Ghost and Sharon by humanizing their now AI-controlled fighter force with the help of Sharon entertaining the masses.

Trying to show that the chip designed to kill can also show a humane side. At least that's what they hoped. Instead they got a homicidal (maybe even genocidal) chip with no regards for human life.

Pure speculation of course.

When they were on the bridge of the Macross the UN person said that they were using the same type of bio chip that Marge used in Sharon if they were not in cahoots using Sharon as a cover for developing the ghost AI. why were they talking about using illegal technology in a top secret aircraft in front of the bridge crew?

Edited March 1, 2009 by miles316

[Graham]

Why are we talking about Plus in a Frontier thread?

Graham

[Graham]

Been wondering about the reset time (if there is one), for the ICS pilot G-protection maximimm of 120 seconds at 27.5G time limit.

Let's say the pilot does fly for 120 seconds at max G, I'd really love to know how long before the pilot can utilise the ICS again?

Perhaps it's also a 120 seconds reset time or maybe longer.

Or maybe the G force is converted into energy stored in capacitors, which has to be used (for things such as pin point barrier, transformation etc.), before the ICS kicks in again?

Also, if pulling lower Gs, say 15G for example I guess the ICS may provide longer protection.

Graham

[RedWolf]

Why are we talking about Plus in a Frontier thread?

Graham

Because we don't have an all around Macross Mecha and Technology thread.

Its been that way for quite a while.

[edwin3060]

Been wondering about the reset time (if there is one), for the ICS pilot G-protection maximimm of 120 seconds at 27.5G time limit.

Let's say the pilot does fly for 120 seconds at max G, I'd really love to know how long before the pilot can utilise the ICS again?

Perhaps it's also a 120 seconds reset time or maybe longer.

Or maybe the G force is converted into energy stored in capacitors, which has to be used (for things such as pin point barrier, transformation etc.), before the ICS kicks in again?

Also, if pulling lower Gs, say 15G for example I guess the ICS may provide longer protection.

Graham

The 120 secs is the fatigue limit for the Airframe, not the ISC. From the compendium: " Maximum airframe design load: 27.5G at maximum acceleration for 120 seconds".

Don't get it confused with the second part like many other people do! Which is: "(When ISC operates, the cockpit is protected from high G.)"

We still have little idea what the limits of the ISC are--- other than a vague, it is definitely less than what the VF-27 can generate. We definitely have no idea whether the ISC is time-limited in operation.

As for the airframe, I'd assume that after that 120 secs are up, it would have to be inspected for damage/repaired/ re-qualified for the 27.5G limit before it can be certified combat-ready again.

Edited March 1, 2009 by edwin3060

[Graham]

Because we don't have an all around Macross Mecha and Technology thread.

Its been that way for quite a while.

Start one then, or better yet start a technology thread for each series.

Graham

[Graham]

The 120 secs is the fatigue limit for the Airframe, not the ISC. From the compendium: " Maximum airframe design load: 27.5G at maximum acceleration for 120 seconds".

Don't get it confused with the second part like many other people do! Which is: "(When ISC operates, the cockpit is protected from high G.)"

We still have little idea what the limits of the ISC are--- other than a vague, it is definitely less than what the VF-27 can generate. We definitely have no idea whether the ISC is time-limited in operation.

As for the airframe, I'd assume that after that 120 secs are up, it would have to be inspected for damage/repaired/ re-qualified for the 27.5G limit before it can be certified combat-ready again.

Good point. If it's not time limited, the effectiveness of the VF-25 is even better.

Also, to add Gubbaba's translation from the Macross Chronicles VF-25S page into the discussion: -

In its goal of being the most maneuverable fighter, the VF-25 receives its greatest strength from from the benefit of the ISC Unit (TO21), which reduces the effects of the fighter's ability to maintain its highest acceleration force of 27.5Gs for 120 seconds. As such, it has enough agility to rival even unmanned fighters.

Graham

[edwin3060]

Good point. If it's not time limited, the effectiveness of the VF-25 is even better.

Graham

Actually it's the other way round! If the ISC was time limited (and could recharge) and the airframe could take greater stresses, one VF could conceivably go to 27.5Gs multiple times in the same engagement as long as there was a wingman to cover for it during the downtime when the ISC recharged. However, with the airframe being limiting, the pilot would max out at 120 seconds before breaking his VF if he carried on any longer.

Edited March 1, 2009 by edwin3060

[Mr March]

The way I interpret the time limit of the airframe is either:

- An arbitrary time limit assigned by the engineers so that pilots will have a rough idea how far to push their fighters before it becomes unsafe.

- Something linked to the ECA (Energy Converting Armor), which can only sustain itself with the power available for 120 seconds.

Since the ICS "inertia buffer" pretty much eliminates the effects of g-force, the pilots no longer have an in situ sense of how much their variable fighters can take before the craft yield to stress. The 120 seconds provides a benchmark for safe operation of the VF-25.

[David Hingtgen]

I would say 120 seconds per flight, based on other "rules" for fighters.

[Killer Robot]

That's about what I figure. Before the ICS, the most important factors in what acceleration a VF could withstand were instantaneous acceleration and long-term wear, since more than 8-9 G wasn't sustainable by the pilot for more than a very brief duration. Those brief durations are still important, mind: a properly secured human can walk away unharmed from brief episodes in the 30-40G range, though in modern vehicles such accelerations are encountered only in ejections and collisions. Even more than that can be survived, though with much higher chance of injury or lasting unconsciousness.

In light of that things come together. For example, an instantaneous rating for the VF-19 in the 60G range is sensible: it's what a pilot can take for a moment or two, roughly doubled for a margin of error. If the pilot avoids the missiles but cracks a rib, or blacks out for a few moments, so long as he recovers before crashing or being shot at again it's all good. The ICS changes things, though. Before that there was no reason to make a VF that could take 25G or more for more than a few seconds, because that would kill the pilot. Or to be more specific, some might have been tough enough to due to their other design considerations. There was simply no reason to rate how much acceleration older VFs could take for two minutes. With ICS-equipped models, that statistic becomes suddenly important.

As for it being per flight in any case, that would make the most sense. So far as I know they're not using parts that can rest up and heal after some some hard stresses on the airframe, so it's more what's considered safe to endure before getting it on the ground for a mechanic to check it again. Especially years down the road when you have individual fighters that have a long history of combat maneuvering. Again, endurance ratings on aircraft are for the operational lifetime, not just when they're shiny and new.

[Graham]

I would say 120 seconds per flight, based on other "rules" for fighters.

I wonder if there is also an airframe time restriction for lower Gs? Or perhaps the airframe can pull say 26Gs indefinitely without overstressing.

[DarkReaper]

And if you go up to 28g your fighter instantly self-destructs... Who knows, we don't even know what the limiting factor is:

Is it the ECA or ICS running out of power (a la Star Trek SIF), so consumption is larger than energy generation and it's running on capacitors only?

Does some bolt shear off or enter it's plastic deformation range? (Then it wouldn't be time limited, either force is enough to break it or it just behaves elastically. Long-time wear from doing it too often is excluded.)

So if it's ECA or ICS then I guess it can go indefinately at up to 27g and above that endurance is limited by capacitors.

[edwin3060]

All bets are off if the time limit is due to the ECA, but, and I suspect this might be the case, if the 27.5G limit is due to fatigue limits, then the g-tolerance of the aircraft should be able to be modelled by a power-law--- off the top of my head the Larson-Miller parameter could be applied as a general simplification.

In layman's terms, that means that if it can take 27.5G for 120 secs, it will be able to take 28 Gs for less time, 29 Gs for even less time. etc. It also means that any acceleration above a critical limit will reduce that time limit of 120 secs. I.e. if the VF has already sustained 15Gs for 30 seconds, it will no longer be able to sustain 27.5 Gs for 120 seconds, but less time than that, since fatigue is culmulative.

All in all, this whole 27.5Gs for 120 seconds thing actually raises more questions than it answers, which I guess could be the intention

[Killer Robot]

All bets are off if the time limit is due to the ECA, but, and I suspect this might be the case, if the 27.5G limit is due to fatigue limits, then the g-tolerance of the aircraft should be able to be modelled by a power-law--- off the top of my head the Larson-Miller parameter could be applied as a general simplification.

In layman's terms, that means that if it can take 27.5G for 120 secs, it will be able to take 28 Gs for less time, 29 Gs for even less time. etc. It also means that any acceleration above a critical limit will reduce that time limit of 120 secs. I.e. if the VF has already sustained 15Gs for 30 seconds, it will no longer be able to sustain 27.5 Gs for 120 seconds, but less time than that, since fatigue is culmulative.

All in all, this whole 27.5Gs for 120 seconds thing actually raises more questions than it answers, which I guess could be the intention

That's about it: how long the airframe can survive a given stress will be a curve from what will break it in a few seconds, down to what it can withstand almost indefinitely. Further, every stress it takes, acceleration or damage or what have you, will push that limit down across the board. Again, since these are manufacturer ratings being described there's a level of accounting for stress over time and margin of error that we really can't estimate from the data given. I imagine in practice the VF's cockpit display would give a dynamic readout of calculated airframe stress, likely in a percentage/time left format estimated by current stresses, as opposed to just a simple "120 second countdown at speed" thing.

I think we can agree though, that the "27.5G for 120 seconds" statistic on the VF-25 represents a somewhat different property than the limits listed for past VFs.

[edwin3060]

Maybe SK was influenced by all the current world reports of fighter jets with parts that do not meet spec being grounded... the F-18A-D, F-15 A-D etc... heh.

[Mr March]

IMO, I'd be wary of jumping to conclusions from all this. I see a lot of assumptions with very little hard data or consideration for the impact of these assumptions. I also see the possibility of the VF-25 Messiah being held to a different standard than other fighters. Generally speaking, fans have a bad habit of applying the rules differently when new trivia appears that was not present before. It's also important to take into account the effects of retroactive continuity, especially if one Macross show is binding it's fiction to more/less realistic physics than another.

Is "g-limit" from the old statistics the same as "maximum airframe design load"? Do both parameters take into account the same assumptions and science? If the 27.5g limit on the VF-25 Messiah takes into account engineering practicalities such as "creep", did the older statistics do the same? If we have a time limit for the VF-25 Messiah, what then was the time limit for the older valkyries? Less? More? If there was no such time limit, wouldn't that create an obvious a continuity crisis when comparing the variable fighters? I'm sure we can understand the impact these assumptions could have upon the older valkyrie statistics. Just something to keep in mind.

Edited March 2, 2009 by Mr March

[ChronoReverse]

Since the ICS "inertia buffer" pretty much eliminates the effects of g-force, the pilots no longer have an in situ sense of how much their variable fighters can take before the craft yield to stress. The 120 seconds provides a benchmark for safe operation of the VF-25.

I just want to point out that you shouldn't think of that way.

It dampens the effects of g-forces. The pilot still has all the feedback he needs to tell. It's just that the upper end isn't death.

[edwin3060]

I just want to point out that you shouldn't think of that way.

It dampens the effects of g-forces. The pilot still has all the feedback he needs to tell. It's just that the upper end isn't death.

Looking at it another way, without ISC, the pilot will G-LOC before the airframe even reaches its g limits--- with ISC there is no such restriction so the pilot can conceivably fly his plane to pieces, hence the need for the 27.5G, 120 secs guideline.

Anyway, Mr March, speculation and discussion is 90% of what makes any fiction interesting-- otherwise you are just being spoon-fed your story and where's the fun in that?

[Mr March]

I just want to point out that you shouldn't think of that way.

It dampens the effects of g-forces. The pilot still has all the feedback he needs to tell. It's just that the upper end isn't death.

That's not really an answer, since we don't know whether the ISC "inertia buffer" works that way or not. Though I suppose one assumption is as good as another.

Anyway, Mr March, speculation and discussion is 90% of what makes any fiction interesting-- otherwise you are just being spoon-fed your story and where's the fun in that?

Could you do me a favor and stop insinuating that I'm stifling debate every time I "ask" fans to "consider" my "opinion"?

There's nothing wrong with asking people to take into consideration ALL the factors worth considering when trying to form some kind of unified theory. Thank you.

[ChronoReverse]

That's not really an answer, since we don't know whether the ISC "inertia buffer" works that way or not. Though I suppose one assumption is as good as another.

I wasn't answering anything. In any case, we do know that the ISC dampens g-forces because we see the existence of forces on Alto when he accelerates full throttle for an example. Furthermore, shaking still seems to exist and would provide yet another method to tell how close to the limit the VF is performing at. It doesn't make much sense to say that the ISC disconnects the pilot from feeling the craft; it's a matter of getting used to the feel.

Edited March 2, 2009 by ChronoReverse

[sketchley]

(...)

Is "g-limit" from the old statistics the same as "maximum airframe design load"? Do both parameters take into account the same assumptions and science? (...)

Which is why I've been asking, on occasion, for the original Japanese source text. Different translators do use different words, after all.

For example, is the G-limit really written only as G limit? Or is it really "maximum combat acceleration"? (Taken from Macross Chronicle M7 UNS Escort Ships).

[edwin3060]

That's not really an answer, since we don't know whether the ISC "inertia buffer" works that way or not. Though I suppose one assumption is as good as another.

Could you do me a favor and stop insinuating that I'm stifling debate every time I "ask" fans to "consider" my "opinion"?

There's nothing wrong with asking people to take into consideration ALL the factors worth considering when trying to form some kind of unified theory. Thank you.

Well, you're the one insinuating that we are jumping to conclusions when all we are doing is the MW equivalent of shooting the breeze-- Look we all know that what we are discussing is ultimately pointless due to the lack of data, but pointing that out like you do so often ends up killing the discussion and having the effect of "stifling debate" like you said.

Sketchley: Maybe Egan Loo from the Compendium could share some of his source material with you? The Compendium does seem to have little, if any, bibliography.

ChronoReverse: Would my explanation of the relative limits of the pilot and the aircraft make more sense? Previously the pilot would black out before he endangered the aircraft, but now that pilot tolerances have been massively increased due to the ISC, the pilot can fly his VF to pieces before he blacked out, and in the heat of battle he may not notice how hard he is pushing his VF, hence the need for the time limit (and probably some sort of countdown timer/warning alarm in the cockpit)

Which brings up another point-- if the VF-25S has the same g-limits as the F or G variants, what makes it special? Quicker response times from the engines? It can't just be the 2 extra head lasers, which are not commonly used anyway. For that matter, have the hip guns on the VF-25 ever been animated firing?

Edited March 3, 2009 by edwin3060

[David Hingtgen]

I would bet that all "S" valkyrie variants have the engines at max trim, while other models have the engines in a more typical trim.

[hobbes221]

Well from Gubaba, over in the Chronicle Translations thread we have this.

the S Type is for commanders, and it features more powerful communication systems, as well as an on-board AI equipped with battle tactic command programs for assistance.

So the -25S looks to have upgraded avionics as the main difference to me. And I'm with David Hingtgen on the engines.

Oh and I think we saw Alto use the wing root guns when he blasted his way into the ship that Luca was trapped in back in episode 7, here's the best pic I could grab.

[Killer Robot]

It's possible that the ISC totally insulates the pilot from acceleration within its limits, or that it simply lessens perceived acceleration such that, say, a VF-25 pilot pulling 27g only feels under 9g or what have you. Either way isn't deeply important: the main idea is that this suggests that in a ISC-equipped VF the pilot is no longer the weaker link. This means that during intensive maneuvers cumulative airframe stress becomes something that needs to be tracked by the fighter's systems, in much the same way that a modern fighter has to track fuel - right up to and including how the higher you throttle up the faster that gauge is going to go down. The same thing is true with the VF-27 simply using cyborg pilots.

Either way, the new generation of VFs apparently takes the effective endurance of the pilot far beyond the prior limits of g-suits and cockpit restraints, and that causes a significant change in how variable fighters need to be designed, piloted, and deployed. It's certainly the biggest single change to variable fighter tactics since the introduction of the Project Super Nova technologies with the VF-19, and possibly even since the introduction of thermonuclear engines with the VF-1.

Not, mind, that it's going to be a game changer as storytelling and presentation goes: Macross is too heavily built on the romance of the fighter pilot of the jet era for that.

And hey, I still think the S is the luxury package. Upgraded upholstery and radio, man. More seriously, I do appreciate that in Frontier the brightly colored models with special gear piloted by major characters aren't higher class hero mechs, but rather were support-focused models for the two junior pilots on the team (before Alto came in to replace Gilliam, at least.)

[REbirth]

Can the VF-27 be equipped with Super/Armor Pack to begin with?

Wow, it seems almost as fast and strong as a Super Pack VF-25 in normal mode, I wonder what a Super Pack VF-27 could do.

Edited March 3, 2009 by REbirth

[hobbes221]

Can the VF-27 be equipped with Super/Armor Pack to begin with?

Wow, it seems almost as fast and strong as a Super Pack VF-25 in normal mode, I wonder what a Super Pack VF-27 could do.

I meant that the -24 might be able to carry Packs in almost the same manner/area as the -27's wing nacelles, just going over the wing fold joint.

[DarkReaper]

No, as far as we know the VF-27 doesn't provide provisions for mounting any accessory. Maybe a FAST pack but no super pack.

[edwin3060]

If the VF-27 could carry any FAST parts, they would definitely have to be different from what the VF-25 uses. But overall the VF-27 looks to be a standalone design much like the YF-19 or -21, with missiles and beam guns and enough weapons even without the Super parts. It also has 50% greater thrust to weight ratio than the VF-25 so any Super parts would be superfluous, so to speak

Ultimately, I think the VF-27 is to the VF-25 as the VF-4 is to the VF-1--- more engines, integrated missiles, greater firepower and much higher thrust.

Edited March 3, 2009 by edwin3060

[edwin3060]

Well from Gubaba, over in the Chronicle Translations thread we have this.

So the -25S looks to have upgraded avionics as the main difference to me. And I'm with David Hingtgen on the engines.

Oh and I think we saw Alto use the wing root guns when he blasted his way into the ship that Luca was trapped in back in episode 7, here's the best pic I could grab.

Sweet screengrab, thanks! I always thought that the SV-51 using the hip guns in Battroid mode was cool.

As to the engines, it would mean that the VF-25S would need more maintenance, wouldn't it? I guess it wouldn't be much of a problem if you were the squadron commander. I'm wondering if the engines could be tuned on the fly, say when Alto went to rescue Ranka with the Armoured packs, would the engines have been re-trimmed for maximum performance?

[REbirth]

I meant that the -24 might be able to carry Packs in almost the same manner/area as the -27's wing nacelles, just going over the wing fold joint.

Eh, I was just talking about what if the VF-27 has a Super Pack (well, this is a highly probable...).

But I dunno about the YF-24, I need to see it in action for once to say something, lineart alone doesn't do it for me.