Macross: Variable Fighter operations

[Letigre]

I have this question: how many times are the Sv-51 seen launching and/or stored in the sub? I've got a hunch that it's far less then the number of times they were deployed in combat.

About 23 minutes into Episode 2 you get a real good look at them stowed onboard the sub (while being serviced, no less.) There are some sort of lift equipment to the ventral side as they're stowed, but I really can't tell if it's for the plane, or for the heatshields that are lowered for launch.

But there is a considerable amount of space where they're stored..sure, it's no hangar, but if they were simply on the sub to be launched, they wouldn't need to be any open space at all..just the tubes that they're launched from.

Also, why would they be equipped with drop tanks in that episode when a whole wing of them attacked the UN fleet? If they were deployed from the sub, wouldn't they a) not need drop tanks and b) fly in low to avoid radar?

I believe the addition of drop tanks was a reaction to issues in the first skirmishes with the UN VF-0's, where they found themselves too quickly running out of fuel in the middle of a fight. Since this was (IIRC) the first combat deployment of the fighter (if not, it was certainly the first time it was fighting another variable fighter), it is within reason they did not forsee it to be as much of a problem as it became.

And I assume they were flying low on radar becausere they probably couldn't launch nearby, since UN forces were at that point expecting an attack, and presumably stepped up their CAP.

[Remko]

About 23 minutes into Episode 2 you get a real good look at them stowed onboard the sub (while being serviced, no less.) There are some sort of lift equipment to the ventral side as they're stowed, but I really can't tell if it's for the plane, or for the heatshields that are lowered for launch.

But there is a considerable amount of space where they're stored..sure, it's no hangar, but if they were simply on the sub to be launched, they wouldn't need to be any open space at all..just the tubes that they're launched from.

I've always had a problem with that... I'm a bit of a realism buff (okay, jetfighters transforming in to robots, and fighting eachother in hand to hand combat, is not exactly realistic, but you can't have it all.. ), and in a lot of shows, anime, comics or movies, submarines are protrayed totally wrong. A real sub wouldn't have any survivability with that much openspace in side.. Subs need compartments for protection, not only torpedoes, but the crushing power of the ocean. Granted, a giant aircraft carrying sub with a dozen fighters which can't be seen from the inside is not visually interesting, but I still think they could have added a bit more realism, and still have a good scene in the hangar bays. Oh well... Still, the Auerstädt is one of my favourite Macross carriers!

Anyway, back to the original topic. I have seen only one similar submarine carrier, and this one had as much elevators as it had Anti-Submarine Warfare aircraft (only 4). The aircraft would come in fast and land vertically on their individual spots. They were then lowered into their respective hangars, and after closing the hatches the sub would dive again.

[ChronoReverse]

Overtechnology takes care of that though. We have lightweight materials that can be as tough as tank armor in the first generation!

[hobbes221]

The drop tanks could have been used to allow the SV-51s to dogleg around the fleet before attacking as to hide the location of the sub. And do we know if the fuel was used up by then? As Letigre said they ran low on fuel in the first fights, so use whatever you need to get there from the drop tanks, punch them off when you get there and you have full internal fuel to do the job, much like RL ops. Most pilots feel that you can never have too much power, speed or fuel so packing a extra drop or two is all good.

on the topic of the open space inside of subs, does anyone know the size of the missile compartments for the boomers like the Ohio or Typhoon? Might be a good comparison, I know it will not be close to a sub packing 12 fighters but still its something. And IIRC in Full Metal Panic they said that the TTD-1 could not dive very far due to the design of the hull. (think I read that in the art book or something)

Edited December 10, 2008 by hobbes221

[ChronoReverse]

Hmm, the Ohio can carry 24 Tridents which are about 13 meters long and 2 meters in diameter. The calculation to get the absolute minimum volume is then elementary.

[anime52k8]

on the topic of the open space inside of subs, does anyone know the size of the missile compartments for the boomers like the Ohio or Typhoon? Might be a good comparison, I know it will not be close to a sub packing 12 fighters but still its something. And IIRC in Full Metal Panic they said that the TTD-1 could not dive very far due to the design of the hull. (think I read that in the art book or something)

on most SSBN type subs the missile compartments constitutes about 1/4 to 1/3 of the length of the boat (US subs carry more ICBM's, but Russian subs carry torpedoes and cruse missiles as well as ICBMs). the missile's also take up the entire height of the interior of the sub.

looking at the official drawings of the of the auerstadt, it looks like the fighter hangers take up more than half the length of the sub (quite a lot of space considering the how big the auerstadt is). however, based on how tall the sub is vertically, it looks like there may be room for compartments underneath the hanger area, (unlike a modern ballistic missile sub, which has missile tubes running all the way from top to bottom.)

[Remko]

on most SSBN type subs the missile compartments constitutes about 1/4 to 1/3 of the length of the boat (US subs carry more ICBM's, but Russian subs carry torpedoes and cruse missiles as well as ICBMs). the missile's also take up the entire height of the interior of the sub.

looking at the official drawings of the of the auerstadt, it looks like the fighter hangers take up more than half the length of the sub (quite a lot of space considering the how big the auerstadt is). however, based on how tall the sub is vertically, it looks like there may be room for compartments underneath the hanger area, (unlike a modern ballistic missile sub, which has missile tubes running all the way from top to bottom.)

Ah yes, but! As mentioned, Ballistic Missile subs (both US and Russian) carry their missiles in closed launchtubes, from within the submarine they are not accessible, let alone that they can be seen. The SV-51's on the other hand can be clearly seen in the same hangar bay/compartment. Only when they launch the protective covers slide up around them. This is understandable, because they need to be serviced, rearmed and refueled. When my SV-51 gets here (got a notice from DHL, they were at my house today), I'll see if I can think of a good layout, and post a drawing (pencil/paper) here.

[edwin3060]

looking at the official drawings of the of the auerstadt, it looks like the fighter hangers take up more than half the length of the sub (quite a lot of space considering the how big the auerstadt is). however, based on how tall the sub is vertically, it looks like there may be room for compartments underneath the hanger area, (unlike a modern ballistic missile sub, which has missile tubes running all the way from top to bottom.)

They'd probably need some space underneath the fighter bay to either a)store a system that launches the fighters using compressed gas ala the way ICBMs are launched today or b)ventilation system to handle the exhaust gases from the fighters if they launch with engines running (which may happen if the sub surfaces before launching fighters) or both, since the hangar seems to be fairly open with little machinery other than the fighters and the individual bay covers for launching.

[SchizophrenicMC]

Way I see it, the whole thing is improbable. The sub can't provide the massive amount of oxygen that several fighters would need for an engine launch, plus the entire crew. Not without resurfacing VERY often. The VF-0 is stated to be able to run for 2-3 minutes with the intakes closed. That said, the SV-51 likely has comparable performance. This tells me that it can perform an underwater engine launch. However, they'd need a lot of oxygen to start with. If they use this oxygen up and leave the sub, that oxygen can't be recycled within the boat, meaning it would have to resurface often. The Compressed Gas method requires space that they don't have.

[edwin3060]

Way I see it, the whole thing is improbable. The sub can't provide the massive amount of oxygen that several fighters would need for an engine launch, plus the entire crew. Not without resurfacing VERY often. The VF-0 is stated to be able to run for 2-3 minutes with the intakes closed. That said, the SV-51 likely has comparable performance. This tells me that it can perform an underwater engine launch. However, they'd need a lot of oxygen to start with. If they use this oxygen up and leave the sub, that oxygen can't be recycled within the boat, meaning it would have to resurface often. The Compressed Gas method requires space that they don't have.

Dude... you are talking about a show with flying robots! IMO, compressed gas is more likely, or a variant of thereof. They could store it in OTEC material tanks at insanely high pressures, or generate their own gas (maybe nitrogen?) by storing tanks of liquid nitrogen. Also, if they flood the tubes before launch, and the SV-51 is the same density as the VF-0, or less (since it is larger) it could float to the surface in a 'soft' launch, which would have the advantages of a lower launch signature, up until the point where the SV-51s engines started up anyway.

[SchizophrenicMC]

Well, can we consider "All That VF: Zero Edition" canon? If so, we know that they don't soft-launch...

[Remko]

Well, can we consider "All That VF: Zero Edition" canon? If so, we know that they don't soft-launch...

True, and that was while the sub was submerged. In Macross Zero OVA they can also been seen launching from the sub, eventhough it's hanging in the air due to the Birdhuman / protoculture. No soft launches at all, full boost. I think they are launched similar to the Trident ICBM's, compressed gass until the surfaces, or even with small boosters as the new UCAV Cormorant will use.

[edwin3060]

Well, it soft launching just a postulation for reduced signature, we cannot definitively rule it in or out.

Good point about M0 Remko! From that, and the way they launched in All that VF Zero, I guess that they are trained to do engine running launches-- I just rewatched the scene in Macross Zero and it looked like they took off with afterburners. From the All that VF-Zero video, the way they launch looks exactly the same as the Macross Zero scene. From that we can establish that the sub does carry enough oxygen stores for launching the SV-51s, regardless of whether the sub is submerged or not. This also answers the question of whether the SV-51s engine can function underwater. This does away with all the complicated gas launching mechanisms then-- the space below the launch deck could just be baffles to slow down the exhaust from the VF engines.

[anime52k8]

Way I see it, the whole thing is improbable. The sub can't provide the massive amount of oxygen that several fighters would need for an engine launch, plus the entire crew. Not without resurfacing VERY often. The VF-0 is stated to be able to run for 2-3 minutes with the intakes closed. That said, the SV-51 likely has comparable performance. This tells me that it can perform an underwater engine launch. However, they'd need a lot of oxygen to start with. If they use this oxygen up and leave the sub, that oxygen can't be recycled within the boat, meaning it would have to resurface often. The Compressed Gas method requires space that they don't have.

why do they need to surface for oxygen? and why are they using oxygen for launch anyways? they probably launch the aircraft ICBM style (i.e. shoot the plane up in a bubble of gas, then light the engines after it's clear of the surface. and the gas used to launch the valks is going to be something inert like CO2 or Nitrogen, (CO2 make sence as they could collect the CO2 filtered out by the ships scrubbers.)

if they did need to use oxygen to launch the valks they wouldn't have to surface to replenish it, sub's produce oxygen through electrolysis which is why they only need to surface to pick up food.

True, and that was while the sub was submerged. In Macross Zero OVA they can also been seen launching from the sub, eventhough it's hanging in the air due to the Birdhuman / protoculture. No soft launches at all, full boost. I think they are launched similar to the Trident ICBM's, compressed gass until the surfaces, or even with small boosters as the new UCAV Cormorant will use.

what I was saying from the start, they shoot them up with compressed gas.

[SchizophrenicMC]

While it does hold enough oxygen, it physically can't. One must take it as anime magic, I suppose...

On the same note, the space below the fighters is likely for engine maintenance. Remember pops looking at the nozzle of the 0s? The same is required inspection of the SV-51, which runs on 2 hyper-tuned combustion turbines. This points out that the engines probably require the same maintenance as the turbines on real-world fighters. I can't speak on the note of thermonuclear turbines.

[edwin3060]

why do they need to surface for oxygen? and why are they using oxygen for launch anyways? they probably launch the aircraft ICBM style (i.e. shoot the plane up in a bubble of gas, then light the engines after it's clear of the surface. and the gas used to launch the valks is going to be something inert like CO2 or Nitrogen, (CO2 make sence as they could collect the CO2 filtered out by the ships scrubbers.)

if they did need to use oxygen to launch the valks they wouldn't have to surface to replenish it, sub's produce oxygen through electrolysis which is why they only need to surface to pick up food.

what I was saying from the start, they shoot them up with compressed gas.

Good point about electrolysis-- depending on the sortie rate, they probably would have to hold about 2 launches worth of oxygen at a minimum. I think from the 2 launches we have seen animated (M0 Ep5 and All tt VF Zero) they don't even do compressed gas launches-- the engines are lit once they leave the submarine, and probably even before that (since they are in a/b the moment you see them leave the submarine) which makes my underwater recovery all the more plausible.

SchizophrenicMC: Why is it physically impossible to do so? Liquid oxygen storage may solve some of the volumetric issues I guess-- more likely, the fighters themselves are able to function without external oxygen for limited periods of time just like the VF-0, given that the fighters engines are still lit when they are in the water.

[SchizophrenicMC]

Exactly. However, they're still Combustion engines. So, they need oxygen, and probably have storage tanks for O2 that go into use when the intakes are shut. No matter what, the SV-51 would need oxygen to start the engines. This is where the problem arises: A jet afterburning uses a lot of air and fuel, and a submarine doesn't have the former in it. Enough, anyway. Liquid oxygen is not combustible by a jet engine, and must be given time and room to expand into gaseous 02. While this is the basis of liquid fueled rockets, it is too slow for combat reaction in a jet. And launching is considered a combat reaction, since it must be quick. Also, it's a lot denser. Now, if I'm wrong about what I type, gimme some slack, Jack. I can barely understand what I'm talking about at this moment, as it's almost 2:00 AM. I will continue this in a more correct way tomorrow.

[edwin3060]

Exactly. However, they're still Combustion engines. So, they need oxygen, and probably have storage tanks for O2 that go into use when the intakes are shut. No matter what, the SV-51 would need oxygen to start the engines. This is where the problem arises: A jet afterburning uses a lot of air and fuel, and a submarine doesn't have the former in it. Enough, anyway. Liquid oxygen is not combustible by a jet engine, and must be given time and room to expand into gaseous 02. While this is the basis of liquid fueled rockets, it is too slow for combat reaction in a jet. And launching is considered a combat reaction, since it must be quick. Also, it's a lot denser. Now, if I'm wrong about what I type, gimme some slack, Jack. I can barely understand what I'm talking about at this moment, as it's almost 2:00 AM. I will continue this in a more correct way tomorrow.

Yea I know the issues with Liquid oxygen... maybe they use highly compressed oxygen bottles? Overtechnology could allow for pressure increases, but I'm not sure to what extent. Alternatively, they could use a different kind of oxidiser for their fuel, one that is in liquid form. I.e. the jet fuel can combust with both air or the alternative oxidiser, and the availability of oxidiser is what limits space (or underwater) operations.

P.S. This is kinda turning into the Mecha technology thread!

Edited December 13, 2008 by edwin3060

[Letigre]

Well it does all pertain to the Auerstadt , and that has probably been the largest subject of this thread.

.. which is rather funny, since the universe is largely taking place in deep space and we're having a rather lively discussion over the mechanics of a submarine -based VF carrier.

[anime52k8]

Good point about electrolysis-- depending on the sortie rate, they probably would have to hold about 2 launches worth of oxygen at a minimum. I think from the 2 launches we have seen animated (M0 Ep5 and All tt VF Zero) they don't even do compressed gas launches-- the engines are lit once they leave the submarine, and probably even before that (since they are in a/b the moment you see them leave the submarine) which makes my underwater recovery all the more plausible.

SchizophrenicMC: Why is it physically impossible to do so? Liquid oxygen storage may solve some of the volumetric issues I guess-- more likely, the fighters themselves are able to function without external oxygen for limited periods of time just like the VF-0, given that the fighters engines are still lit when they are in the water.

ok, I re watched episode 3, episode 5, and all that VFZero. first I'm going to say that I don't consider the launch shown in all that VF to be correct, because all they did was take the launch sequence from episode five and change the background form sky to water to save time and money. now in ep. 5, it's possible that what's shown isn't how they launch underwater either.

it's totally possible that they have different launch procedure for surface vs. sub-surface launch. for a surface launch (or a launch when you ship is being levitated by an alien device) the aircraft are clamped down, bring there engines to maximum power, then they're released and shoot strait up (sort of like how Russian aircraft carriers launch aircraft)

under water it's not so simple, there are huge problems with trying to launch a rocket under water. first you need a rocket that will run underwater (typically solid fueled rather than liquid), then you need to keep water out of everything, and finally the amount of drag water exerts on objects is 1000 times that of air, so it will take a massive amount of fuel to get you clear of the water ( hence why most missiles either are gas launched, or have an extra drop off stage just to get them clear of the water).

now I say rocket because that's probably what the engines are acting like. you'll notice that whenever the intakes are closed, the exhaust plume from the engine always looks like it's in in a/b mode. considering these are tuned and modified turbine engines, it's possible one of the modifications is that the engine can function as a liquid fueled rocket, and what we're seeing is the rocket exhaust. (if a liquid fueled rocket motor can get a trident missile airborn, it can power the SV-51 for the 5~10 seconds before it switches to conventional jet power)

also, we don't see the main engines of the VF-0 running under water during episode 3, the main engines appear to be off, and only the backpack thrusters are running. now, we don't see the intakes with enough detail to say if they opened back up or not (if they stayed closed the engines were off, if they were open, they could be using the compression section as an impeller running off internal battery).

[SchizophrenicMC]

also, we don't see the main engines of the VF-0 running under water during episode 3, the main engines appear to be off, and only the backpack thrusters are running. now, we don't see the intakes with enough detail to say if they opened back up or not (if they stayed closed the engines were off, if they were open, they could be using the compression section as an impeller running off internal battery).

But.. We do. Shin accidentally landed the plane in water, and was scared shitless. The engines were still operating, keeping them afloat, when Ed told him that the engines work with the intakes shut.

It was later, while he was grabbing that chunk of AFOS, that he was in GERWALK, and even then, using only the backpack thrusters wouldn't give enough thrust to move through water at enough velocity to catch up.

[edwin3060]

ok, I re watched episode 3, episode 5, and all that VFZero. first I'm going to say that I don't consider the launch shown in all that VF to be correct, because all they did was take the launch sequence from episode five and change the background form sky to water to save time and money. now in ep. 5, it's possible that what's shown isn't how they launch underwater either.

it's totally possible that they have different launch procedure for surface vs. sub-surface launch. for a surface launch (or a launch when you ship is being levitated by an alien device) the aircraft are clamped down, bring there engines to maximum power, then they're released and shoot strait up (sort of like how Russian aircraft carriers launch aircraft)

under water it's not so simple, there are huge problems with trying to launch a rocket under water. first you need a rocket that will run underwater (typically solid fueled rather than liquid), then you need to keep water out of everything, and finally the amount of drag water exerts on objects is 1000 times that of air, so it will take a massive amount of fuel to get you clear of the water ( hence why most missiles either are gas launched, or have an extra drop off stage just to get them clear of the water).

now I say rocket because that's probably what the engines are acting like. you'll notice that whenever the intakes are closed, the exhaust plume from the engine always looks like it's in in a/b mode. considering these are tuned and modified turbine engines, it's possible one of the modifications is that the engine can function as a liquid fueled rocket, and what we're seeing is the rocket exhaust. (if a liquid fueled rocket motor can get a trident missile airborn, it can power the SV-51 for the 5~10 seconds before it switches to conventional jet power)

also, we don't see the main engines of the VF-0 running under water during episode 3, the main engines appear to be off, and only the backpack thrusters are running. now, we don't see the intakes with enough detail to say if they opened back up or not (if they stayed closed the engines were off, if they were open, they could be using the compression section as an impeller running off internal battery).

You can't just discount animation that doesn't fit your theory-- All that VF is basically Shoji Kawamori indulging his own (and our) fighter otaku-ness. I don't see why it should count for any less than what is seen in Mac0. After all, he approved the underwater launch sequence in All that VF 0, so barring a 180 degree reversal by him, the underwater launch sequence should be taken as it is.

Also, I don't see why you point out the challenges with maintaining watertightness, since the VF-0 can clearly do it, and it would be pretty silly for the SV-51, which is noted to be more combat optimised than the VF-0, and designed to launch from submarines to boot, to not be watertight. Other than that, good description of how the engine works as a liquid fueled rocket! (Which is what it would be if my theory about a onboard liquid oxidant storage is correct, the alternative being highly compressed oxygen)

For the VF-0, I would say that the main engines were probably off (or idle) up until the part where shin had grabed the birdman's head, and was heading for the surface-- at that point you can see that there are some lines drawn from the engine exhausts and the engines were probably producing thrust then-- and the engines were certainly running at the point where he breached the surface. Again, the main engines would be running off whatever oxidant the VF-0 carried for space use, since the design of impellers for underwater propulsion is vastly different from the design of a jet engine.

[anime52k8]

But.. We do. Shin accidentally landed the plane in water, and was scared shitless. The engines were still operating, keeping them afloat, when Ed told him that the engines work with the intakes shut.

It was later, while he was grabbing that chunk of AFOS, that he was in GERWALK, and even then, using only the backpack thrusters wouldn't give enough thrust to move through water at enough velocity to catch up.

Watch the scene again, when Edgar lands the VF-0 in the water he cuts the engines and the valk falls into the water. The engines weren't running, the valk was just floating. So they were off while submerged, and didn't come back on until they jumped out of the water. And when the valk goes under water the engines are off, the exhaust section is dark and there are no visible sign of the water being moved/effected at the feet. on the backpack thrusters however, the thrusters are glowing.

it's possible that the engine intakes were open, and the engines were acting as impellers running off internal batteries, but they weren't generating thrust through the burning of propellant.

[anime52k8]

You can't just discount animation that doesn't fit your theory-- All that VF is basically Shoji Kawamori indulging his own (and our) fighter otaku-ness. I don't see why it should count for any less than what is seen in Mac0. After all, he approved the underwater launch sequence in All that VF 0, so barring a 180 degree reversal by him, the underwater launch sequence should be taken as it is.

if we take the launch method as cannon, then we also have to take as cannon that the blue angles somehow got a hold of SV-51's and the auerstadt, and does demonstrations from it all the way into the 2050's.

we'd also need to accept that the VF-1 has forward firing lasers in the blisters on the nose, and has about a dozen missile hard points on the inner and outer surfaces of each vertical stabilizer, because they were shown to have them in the animation.

the all that VF animations are strictly flight of fancy animations. they're valk porn, not necessarily accurate depictions of anything.

for all we know he could have just said to throw the launch sequence in because it looked cool, and didn't require any new animation without thinking about whether or not that's actually how an underwater launch would work.

do we even know if he said, "yes this is exactly what I wan't," rather than just saying "and then we'll have the SV-51 launch underwater" and leave the animation to the animators to figure out?

Edited December 13, 2008 by anime52k8

[SchizophrenicMC]

Or maybe, 6 SV-51s were produced specially for this airshow, and the Blue Angels used a modified sub that was of the same class as the Auerstat. I mean, the VF-0s had Thermonuke Reaction turbines in All That VF 0, as is inferenced by the thrusters.

You can't compare now to the 80s. Now, animation is very precise in comparison. If something happens, chances are it's meant to. Remember SDFM episode 32? It led to the YF-1R in Robotech? That was because each frame was drawn by hand. Now, it's mostly in computers.

[anime52k8]

Or maybe, 6 SV-51s were produced specially for this airshow, and the Blue Angels used a modified sub that was of the same class as the Auerstat. I mean, the VF-0s had Thermonuke Reaction turbines in All That VF 0, as is inferenced by the thrusters.

You can't compare now to the 80s. Now, animation is very precise in comparison. If something happens, chances are it's meant to. Remember SDFM episode 32? It led to the YF-1R in Robotech? That was because each frame was drawn by hand. Now, it's mostly in computers.

it doesn't mean people don't cut corners, or throw things in for effect that isn't an accurate representation of whats going on.

look at MacF, on several occasions when alto had major section of his valk blown off they would magically be regenerated for the next shot. and the weird electrical arks that jump from the nose of the -25 to the upper torso during transformation (something that only happened some of the time). sometimes they throw things in because they're trying to save time/money, or because the decide to put looking cool over making sence or being correct.

either way my point still stands that what's animated should be taken with a grain of salt until you have other sources to back them up, since animation can have errors, anachronisms.

also, if the valks in all that VF0 have TRT's than that's even more reason to think that how they are launched in all that VF isn't an accurate depiction of how they launch in combat at the time of mac0, as they're using completely different types of engines and propellants that would allow for different launching methods.

Edited December 13, 2008 by anime52k8

[hobbes221]

Okay so I was just going over M Zero epi 3 right now and something clicked about when we were talking about the whole carrier, sub and drop tank thing. Looking at the wing stores, could the SV-51 even have launched from the sub with that much under the wings? I mean with the way that the wings fold I thought that you could only use the outer hard points not the rest. So does that mean that they would have had to come from somewhere other than the sub?

-Sorry to get off the running topic but this is buggin me and I think that you guys have covered all the bases on the launch tech that we can without more info.

You can't compare now to the 80s. Now, animation is very precise in comparison.

Sorry man but they make plenty of mistakes, we have a whole thread for bugs just for Frontier, and I quote David Hingtgen.

I freeze-framed the grappling hook being fired several times. PURE anime magic. It simply appears, full-sized and fully formed, from the side of the chest, a bit below the armpit. No hatch, it doesn't fold up to fit anywhere--it's simply missing one frame, then appears in the next.

So they do make mistakes or are we to assume that the grappling hook is designed just to appear out of nowhere? (And no, I'm not trying to be a smarta$$, I just can't take every single frame as canon when things seem to contradict each other at times)

[anime52k8]

well, in episode 5 they launch with stuff on every pilon and with the big *ss wing boosters, so apparently yes there is enough room to fit the SV-51 with it's wings folded and fully loaded.

[edwin3060]

So they do make mistakes or are we to assume that the grappling hook is designed just to appear out of nowhere? (And no, I'm not trying to be a smarta$$, I just can't take every single frame as canon when things seem to contradict each other at times)

Hobbes, Anime52k8: I understand where you are coming from-- but the case that we have with the SV-51 launching is not the same as an animation error. All we have now are two different theories of how SV-51s launch from the submarines, and we have evidence that they launch with engines running regardless of whether the sub is submerged or not. We also have no evidence for the alternate theory of compressed gas launches. Until you can come up with a valid reason why that is not possible within the limits of the anime, or until we have additional evidence from MacChronicle or otherwise, what is seen in All that VF is what is. There is no contradiction that would imply an animation error, or compel us to ignore the launch in All that VF.

About the loadouts of the SV-51-- like Anime52k8 said, clearly they can launch with a full loadout. They might not need to collapse the wings all the way for a sub launch, for example, as long as the launch ports are of sufficient diameter. I would not want to be the mechanic who loads the aircraft though-- clearly they must have some form of movable crane in order to lift and attach the weapons-- yet there doesn't seem to be sufficient space for such a crane from the top-- perhaps it comes from the bottom?

Edited December 13, 2008 by edwin3060

[ChronoReverse]

You know, it's really not that hard to just assume the SV-51 has internal storage for a small amount of oxidizer.

[SchizophrenicMC]

Maybe. maybe. If only there was a canon explanation for all of the concepts visited in the entire Macross Universe. It'd help me sleep at night. However, this crazy speculation is pretty fun.

[edwin3060]

Speculation is about half the fun of any Sci-fi series

[Remko]

Speculation is about half the fun of any Sci-fi series

Yup it is!! ^_^

While doing some reading about military aircraft and looking at various Macross designs, this just occurs to me.

The Macross saga uses the American style nomenclature for aircraft denomination. For example, the Cat's Eye has the type number ES-11D. Meaning Electronic (warfare) Space / number 11 / block D. The VF-1A Valkyrie has the denomination Variable Fighter / number 1 / Block A (D/S/J etc). This means the VF-1 is the only variable fighter to be called Valkyrie. All others are Variable Fighters, but don't carry the name "Valkyrie", just as there's only one Tomcat. In this style, SV-51 most likely means Submarine (launched) Variable (fighter) / type 51 / Alpha or Gamma. The prefix Sukhoi Variable is also possible, but unlikely.

The only exception in this, is the VF-171 from Macross Frontier.

Just thought I'd brought this up.

BTW, now that I have my SV-51, I've begin designing the launch tube for use on a Naval vessel. So far I have a tube design ready for a surface vessel, a near 700 meter long ultra heavy guided missile battlecruiser CBGN "IAS Jormungand"). This will carry twenty SV-51's in vertical launch bays. Landing will be done on the rear flightdeck, capable of handling two SV-51 landing at the same time. I still have to finish the design, but it will be based on the current (late coldwar actually) Sovjet Kirov class cruiser. Meaning it's exceptionally equipped with numerous weapons, from small Anti Submarine rockets, to medium anti-aircraft missiles, long range cruise missiles and even full blown ballistic missiles launched from similar containers as the Tomahawk launchers. But I'm wandering of...

Edited December 22, 2008 by Remko

[anime52k8]

Yup it is!! ^_^

While doing some reading about military aircraft and looking at various Macross designs, this just occurs to me.

The Macross saga uses the American style nomenclature for aircraft denomination. For example, the Cat's Eye has the type number ES-11D. Meaning Electronic (warfare) Space / number 11 / block D. The VF-1A Valkyrie has the denomination Variable Fighter / number 1 / Block A (D/S/J etc). This means the VF-1 is the only variable fighter to be called Valkyrie. All others are Variable Fighters, but don't carry the name "Valkyrie", just as there's only one Tomcat. In this style, SV-51 most likely means Submarine (launched) Variable (fighter) / type 51 / Alpha or Gamma. The prefix Sukhoi Variable is also possible, but unlikely.

The only exception in this, is the VF-171 from Macross Frontier.

more like they used something that SOUNDS like american tri-service system. if they used real nominclature, they all should have been FV's with the FV standing for Fighter VTOL. (since from right to left it goes basic mission (F), then vehicle type (V))

SV-51 would mean anti-submarine warfare VTOL

also the YF-19/YF-21 should have been the YFV-19 and YFV-21.

and technically, since all valks are space capable the could technically be considered space planes, and therefore should either be FS-1 (for fighter spaceplane) or FVS-1 (for fighter VTOL spaceplane)

which means the YF-19 is really the YFVS-19

ok, I think I like SK's system better.

[SchizophrenicMC]

more like they used something that SOUNDS like american tri-service system. if they used real nominclature, they all should have been FV's with the FV standing for Fighter VTOL. (since from right to left it goes basic mission (F), then vehicle type (V))

SV-51 would mean anti-submarine warfare VTOL

also the YF-19/YF-21 should have been the YFV-19 and YFV-21.

and technically, since all valks are space capable the could technically be considered space planes, and therefore should either be FS-1 (for fighter spaceplane) or FVS-1 (for fighter VTOL spaceplane)

which means the YF-19 is really the YFVS-19

ok, I think I like SK's system better.

Actually, using the American classification system, VF would be used. An entire series of planes gets its own class.

Therefore, Variable Fighter-1.

SV could go either way, classification or Ruskie...

YF is universal for experimental fighters. So, even with the US MAC system, YF-19/21 would be so.

Bit of trivia, Boeing aircraft are classed B-(Plane number). For example, B-737. Boeing produced all but 2 of the USAF's bombers. Bombers are calssed B-(Plane number). B-52, for example.