Most successful VF

[sketchley]

I think it's a bit of both.

No matter how many external hard points a VF has or how many internal weapons bays, FAST Packs are going to provide extended combat persistence (endurance), in terms of additional weapons and fuel, thus allowing the VF to stay in the fight longer. Simply put, a VF without FAST Packs is going to run out of weapons and fuel (in space), sooner than a VF with FAST Packs.

Graham

True. That's pretty much the only justification for craft like the VF-17, VF-19, VF-22, VF-171EX and perhaps even the VF-25 to have them.

The VF-11 is the odd one (as the VF-1 and VF-5000 definitely need the extra fuel for space use). It's been described as not needing super packs as it's capable in space (thereby in the same league as the VF-17 et al), but without them, it's internal weapons (if any) are negligible (akin to the VF-1 et al). The boggling part of it is that the engine nacelle packs are only for fuel, not additional armaments (like the VF-17 et al).

[Graham]

While the VF-11 was designed as a duel environment (space and atmosphere capable) main fighter and technically doesn't 'need' FAST Packs to fly and fight in space, it certainly like any VF will benefit greatly from having them.

As you mentioned, without FAST packs it is extremely limited in it's internal weapons carriage. And although I'm sure it must be capable of having external hard-points fitted to the wings (likely 2-3 per wing), we have not yet seen any evidence of this to date.

However, it's interesting to note that in both Plus and M7, we always see the VF-11 fight in space with FAST Packs fitted.

On the subject of the VF-11's internal leg bays, did Macross Chronicle clarify whether these were in fact canon now or not for both the VF-11B and VF-11C? IIRC,didn't Kawamori previously state his line art of the bays was only a concept drawing and the animation of them in M7 was actually an error (or something like that)?

Graham

[azrael]

While the VF-11 was designed as a duel environment (space and atmosphere capable) main fighter and technically doesn't 'need' FAST Packs to fly and fight in space, it certainly like any VF will benefit greatly from having them.

The VF-25 as well.

On the subject of the VF-11's internal leg bays, did Macross Chronicle clarify whether these were in fact canon now or not for both the VF-11B and VF-11C? IIRC,didn't Kawamori previously state his line art of the bays was only a concept drawing and the animation of them in M7 was actually an error (or something like that)?

Canon for the VF-11C. There's no mention of them in the VF-11B's pages, at all. Even the D-type doesn't mention anything about internal bays in the legs. Almost every other mention only says "VF-11" with the C-type being used as the reference pic.

[Zinjo]

I agree with Seto in that the prolific production of a fighter is a misleading way to judge its success. As the size of emigration fleets increased substantially over time as well as the number of colonized worlds.

Hence my assertion that years of active service coupled with production levels speaks to the effectiveness and / or popularity of a particular fighter. It isn't so much a pissing contest over who's favorite fighter is better, but rather which fighter was the most used and for the longest duration in universe.

The most popular real life naval fighters to date are the F-14 and F-18s, when one considers the length of their service. The last flight of an F-14 was 2006!!! A hell of a service life IMO.

Now compare that type of service life to the Macross universe and we'll get an idea of which is the most successful fighter. Hell it could very well be the VF-5000 since we see them still in service in the mid to late 2040's!

The thread is not about which is the "best" fighter, but the most successful. I interpret that as the most prolific fighter with the longest service record, used by the most worlds, fleets or units.

It may well not be possible since the Chronicle and the compendium tend to abruptly end the productions of various fighters, not considering the notion of licensed factories and upgrade regimes of various colony worlds or fleets...

Edited July 23, 2010 by Zinjo

[Graham]

Now compare that type of service life to the Macross universe and we'll get an idea of which is the most successful fighter. Hell it could very well be the VF-5000 since we see them still in service in the mid to late 2040's!

Well, we see a variant of the VF-5000 in non-UN Spacy use, in service by a law-enforcement agency on a sleepy little back-water planet.

In the big picture, that doesn't really tell us much.

Graham

[Freiflug88]

My take is that the VF-4 was built to compliment the early Megaroad fleets in humanitiy's crucial first sprints towards colonization. After barely escaped utter annihilation and venturing into an unknown frontier everyone wanted solid guardian fighters for the Megaroad fleets. With all those hardpoints and weapons that Seto mentioned IMO it was designed as a type of heavy assault fighter.

Later once the UN colonized nearby worlds and gained more experience in space their was a shift in defense mentality as well as well as fleet configurations. The perception of the big bad VF-4 and VF-14 as being necessary for fleet security gradually changes to expensive and impractical overkill for the role of mainstream fighter with-in long range fleets. While I have never seen any money amount attached to any VF its a simple fact that heavier more massive fighters like the VF-4 and the VF-14 will have to be manufactured and maintained with that much greater amounts of raw material. Sure the Zentrandi war factories gathered enough raw metal for a fleet of nearly 5 million massive ships, but the UN Spacy fleets are in a marathon race across the galaxy. They don't want to spent years mining every last asteroid field they see dry just so they can they see in space just they can build the biggest baddest fleet in the galaxy. So the progression to smaller, streamlined fighters like the VF-11,19,and 25 is just one facet of the ultra-long range immigration plan.

[ae_productions]

This topic keeps getting more and more interesting.

[Seto Kaiba]

Thus a VF that relies soley on internal weapons bays (and internal fuel, in space), will always have to break-off combat sooner than a VF with additional weapons and fuel mounted on external hardpoints and FAST Packs.

Granted... but it can't be denied that the use of super parts as standard hardware on variable fighters operating in space was apparently on the decline, given what we've seen of the models rolled out after the VF-11 Thunderbolt. One can only assume that the increase in airframe size in most cases included not only space for internal armaments, but increased fuel tankage. It'd certainly explain why the space-optimized VFs (VF-4, VF-14, VF-17, VF-19F/S) either don't have super parts or, in the case of the -17 and -19, why their super parts are only equipped on the rare occasion when extremely heavy combat is expected.

With the notable exceptions of the VF-11 and VF-25, it looks like the generations following the VF-1 were largely designed not to need the added fuel and firepower of super parts under normal operating conditions. There's still a niche for them, but prior to Macross Frontier (and the VF-25 in particular) it looked like they were rapidly becoming hardware intended for use in exceptional circumstances only.

[The VF-11's] been described as not needing super packs as it's capable in space (thereby in the same league as the VF-17 et al), but without them, it's internal weapons (if any) are negligible (akin to the VF-1 et al). The boggling part of it is that the engine nacelle packs are only for fuel, not additional armaments (like the VF-17 et al).

Definitely befuddling... if it doesn't need them for routine operations in space, why is it they're constantly equipped with them? All things considered, with almost all of its weapons tied up in super parts, it feels like a step backwards compared to its predecessor (VF-4A) and its successor(s) (the VF-19 and VF-171). Still, my one gripe with the whole affair is its lack of a forward-facing beam gun, forcing it to depend exclusively on its gun pod (and its rather limited ammo supply) for dogfighting, whereas many other VFs have more than one forward-facing gun system.

Still, I suppose the reduced complexity probably helped keep costs down, which along with its all-regime performance no doubt helped it win out over the heavier but better-armed VF/VA-14.

Well, we see a variant of the VF-5000 in non-UN Spacy use, in service by a law-enforcement agency on a sleepy little back-water planet.

In the big picture, that doesn't really tell us much.

Indeed... which is why I'm still wondering if there's anything to tell us if those VF-5000G and VF-5000T-G Star Mirages used by the Zola Patrol were new variants produced specifically for the Zola Patrol (or colony market) or if they're upgrades made to VF-5000Bs that were surplussed by the U.N. Spacy and sold to the Zola Patrol. If they're independently produced, that could speak to the VF-5000's low cost having made it an attractive option for colonies with tight budgets, which was a strong selling point in the VF-9's favor.

My take is that the VF-4 was built to compliment the early Megaroad fleets in humanity's crucial first sprints towards colonization. After barely escaped utter annihilation and venturing into an unknown frontier everyone wanted solid guardian fighters for the Megaroad fleets. With all those hardpoints and weapons that Seto mentioned IMO it was designed as a type of heavy assault fighter.

Or, at the very least, a space-optimized variable fighter maximizing its versatility by having the option to carry a wide array of ordinance. To me, the VF-4 certainly feels like a fighter developed to be a jack of all trades for colony operations where space is at a premium. It has everything it needs for space and atmospheric operations built right into the airframe, with a set of main engines and a set of supplementary engines for each regime and most of its weapons mounted internally or at least conformally.

Once space and resources weren't at a premium anymore, they could afford to take fighters that had optional external equipment to improve their capabilities again.

[Graham]

I've always thought that the reason beam guns were not adpoted in the Macross universe as main-armament on Variable Fighters post-VF-4 and the reason that shell firing gunpods were kept as main armament is that beam guns must be inferior in some way compared to shell firing gunpods.

Possibly, this could be insufficient (kinetic/heat) energy on target compared with shells, or possible overheating after a relatively small number of shots have been fired, or perhaps too slow a rate of fire to enage fast moving aerial targets, or perhaps insufficient capacitor technolgy resulting in a relatively small ammo capacity between recharges.

The above reasons, I think are why we only see beam guns, whether mounted on head, chest or arm, as second or third line weapons, designed for anti-missile fire, or anti-mecha fire only if the main shell firing gunpod and/or missiles have already been exhausted.

I've always considered the VF-4 something of a failed experiment. Good acceleration and thrust for getting in and out of trouble quickly, but relatively weak armament (only 2 beam guns and twelve semi-conformal missiles) and not particulaly maneuverable in an atmosphere (the phrase "turns like a dump-truck" comes to mind, at least in the various games).

Now given late 2050s advance in beam gun technology applied to the VF-27's gunpod, which allows both rapid (fully-automatic) fire at normal gunpod power levels, or the firing of a more powerful single (semi-automatic) shot, we may see a switch to pure beam armament on future VFs.

Graham

[sketchley]

I've always thought that the reason beam guns were not adpoted in the Macross universe as main-armament on Variable Fighters post-VF-4 and the reason that shell firing gunpods were kept as main armament is that beam guns must be inferior in some way compared to shell firing gunpods.

Possibly, this could be insufficient (kenetic/heat) energy on target compared with shells, or possible overheating after a relatively small number of shots have been fired, or perhaps too slow a rate of fire to enage fast moving aerial targets, or perhaps insufficienet capacitor technolgy resulting in a relatively small ammo capacity between recharges.

Good points. The VFMF: VF-19 section on the gunpod also mentions something about EMP (not sure what capacity), and cooling.

On top of that, there is versatility: it's far easier to change the bullets in a gun pod, then it is to change the beam emitters in a beam weapon. Sure, one might be able to adjust the frequency and the power output... but turn it into a tracer? HESH? HEAT? APFSDS?

[Graham]

In real world terms, I've always considered the VF-4 a bit like the F-104 or English Electric Lighting.

Good acceleration and top speed, but otherwise lacking in most other areas, especially weak in air combat maneuverability and extremely limited weapon carriage.

Graham

[sketchley]

Over the past few months I've been thinking about what role or roles the VF-4 would be applied to, and the only one that really comes up is as a (space) interceptor. What else would the long-range missiles and beam cannons that have beyond excellent performance in space but poor performance in an atmosphere be used for?

Depending the veracity of VFMF: VF-1, all of the VF-4 except for the VF-4G couldn't transform. Sure, that may be a fan error on the writers of VFMF: VF-1, but if it were true, it does ask a lot of questions about how the VF-4 could have been produced in so many numbers.

Nevertheless, TiAS:M+ Movie Edition has an image of a VF-1 being used to explore the surface of Eden. Therefore, it's fairly safe to say that the Megaroad fleets were deployed with a mix of VF-4 and VF-1 varients.

Oh, I was glancing through the VFMF:VF-1 and another nugget of information popped up: after Block　17 and the end of mass production, the VF-1 continued to be manufactured by the Factory Plants of the Emigration Fleets. Given the proliferation of appearances of the VF-1 in M7D, MDMVF-X and VF-X2, it's also fairly safe to say that an additional 1,000 to 2,000 VF-1 were made. The same could hold true of the other variable fighters, as well.

VFMF:VF-1 also indicates that these post-mass production units also continued to be improved upon. So, it's equally likely that a VF-19P with the VF-19F engines installed was made, just as would a VF-1 with engines the equivalent of the VF-19F's (of course it goes without saying that the airframe would've been strengthened to support them at full thrust, too).

[azrael]

I've always thought that the reason beam guns were not adpoted in the Macross universe as main-armament on Variable Fighters post-VF-4 and the reason that shell firing gunpods were kept as main armament is that beam guns must be inferior in some way compared to shell firing gunpods.

Possibly, this could be insufficient (kinetic/heat) energy on target compared with shells, or possible overheating after a relatively small number of shots have been fired, or perhaps too slow a rate of fire to engage fast moving aerial targets, or perhaps insufficient capacitor technology resulting in a relatively small ammo capacity between recharges.

The above reasons, I think are why we only see beam guns, whether mounted on head, chest or arm, as second or third line weapons, designed for anti-missile fire, or anti-mecha fire only if the main shell firing gunpod and/or missiles have already been exhausted.

...

Now given late 2050s advance in beam gun technology applied to the VF-27's gunpod, which allows both rapid (fully-automatic) fire at normal gunpod power levels, or the firing of a more powerful single (semi-automatic) shot, we may see a switch to pure beam armament on future VFs.

Power requirements could factored in. It's been mentioned in the Chronicle that energy converting armor is not active in fighter mode, normally. In GERWALK, it's running in a reduced output mode and finally runs at full output in Battroid. The YF-19's pin-point barrier system only works in Battroid mode due to its power requirements and only the VF-27 can use pin-point barrier and energy converting armor in fighter mode due to its engine output while the VF-25 needs the Armor packs' power capacitor to run energy converting armor in fighter mode. Which reminds me, I should read the section on beam weapons....

I've always considered the VF-4 something of a failed experiment. Good acceleration and thrust for getting in and out of trouble quickly, but relatively weak armament (only 2 beam guns and twelve semi-conformal missiles) and not particularly maneuverable in an atmosphere (the phrase "turns like a dump-truck" comes to mind, at least in the various games).

Well, if it was an experiment, it would still have the "X" in the name. I would say it's more like the product that went to market but failed to pick up steam...like Windows Vista.

[Seto Kaiba]

I've always thought that the reason beam guns were not adpoted in the Macross universe as main-armament on Variable Fighters post-VF-4 and the reason that shell firing gunpods were kept as main armament is that beam guns must be inferior in some way compared to shell firing gunpods.

In what little animated combat footage we have for the VF-4, its large-bore beam guns are quite effective and powerful. The opening cinematic for canon videogame Macross M3 depicts Max using his VF-4's beam guns to destroy a booster-equipped Glaug in a single direct hit. If I had to guess, I would be inclined to suspect that the reason beam weapons of various types lost the battroid mode main weapon position was probably that gatling guns are mechanically simpler and cheaper to produce, and possibly that their ammo is specifically designed to penetrate energy converting armor (as per something sketchley translated, if memory serves).

I've always considered the VF-4 something of a failed experiment. Good acceleration and thrust for getting in and out of trouble quickly, but relatively weak armament (only 2 beam guns and twelve semi-conformal missiles) and not particulaly maneuverable in an atmosphere (the phrase "turns like a dump-truck" comes to mind, at least in the various games).

Of course, the VF-4 as it appears in the alternate universe stories is another case altogether. True, the U.N. Spacy in that universe eventually went back to projectile weapons (railguns, to be precise) but the VF-4(-/S/SP/ST) Siren was wildly successful... and both its integrated gun systems and gunpod were beam weapons. It had the same large-bore beam cannons as the one in the main timeline, plus the -S variants had four forward-facing laser cannons on the head, and the beam rifle strongly reminiscent of the Zeta Gundam's hyper mega launcher in both appearance and firepower (said to be a particle beam cannon). They were so brutally effective that the VF-4ST was used as an assault fighter for attacking Zentradi/Meltrandi mobile fortresses.

[Graham]

Of course, the VF-4 as it appears in the alternate universe stories is another case altogether. True, the U.N. Spacy in that universe eventually went back to projectile weapons (railguns, to be precise) but the VF-4(-/S/SP/ST) Siren was wildly successful... and both its integrated gun systems and gunpod were beam weapons. It had the same large-bore beam cannons as the one in the main timeline, plus the -S variants had four forward-facing laser cannons on the head, and the beam rifle strongly reminiscent of the Zeta Gundam's hyper mega launcher in both appearance and firepower (said to be a particle beam cannon). They were so brutally effective that the VF-4ST was used as an assault fighter for attacking Zentradi/Meltrandi mobile fortresses.

I've really got no idea what this alternate universe 'Siren' you keep referring to is? Is it related to the Macross II Metal Siren?

Any links, pics?

Graham

[Freiflug88]

If I had to guess, I would be inclined to suspect that the reason beam weapons of various types lost the battroid mode main weapon position was probably that gatling guns are mechanically simpler and cheaper to produce, and possibly that their ammo is specifically designed to penetrate energy converting armor (as per something sketchley translated, if memory serves).

Nah, its just that Gatling gunpods are just so awesome they make buzzsaw sound effects... IN SPACE!

[Graham]

Well, if it was an experiment, it would still have the "X" in the name. I would say it's more like the product that went to market but failed to pick up steam...like Windows Vista.

When I said experimental, I didn't mean that the VF was still at the experimental development and rushed into service, but rather that it was something of an experiment to try a VF beam weapons substituting for the gunpod.

Hah, if you are comparing the VF-4 to Vista, then the VF-4, should be the biggest flop ever, hated by everybody.

Graham

[Talos]

I've really got no idea what this alternate universe 'Siren' you keep referring to is? Is it related to the Macross II Metal Siren?

Any links, pics?

Graham

It's the Macross II-universe version of the VF-4 Lightning III. Fighter mode's the same, but it can mount FAST packs. The battroid mode is completely different, though. Pic attached.

Well, if it was an experiment, it would still have the "X" in the name. I would say it's more like the product that went to market but failed to pick up steam...like Windows Vista.

Actually, the way he worded it: "A failed experiment" makes me think more along the lines of traditional battlecruisers and the M551 Sheridan tank. Both had full operational careers. The Sheridan operated for 30 years and had several hundred made. The battlecruisers were built in several navies and served for decades. However both of those were failed experiments when you take into the operational concept and useage. BCs were not designed to be used in the battleline against battleships, but because they have battleship-grade cannons, commanders always stuck them in. They were very, very vunerable.

As for the Sheridan, it was designed as a very light amphibious and parachute-capable tank that could shoot shells and missiles. Unfortunately there were too many compromises to do all of that and the Army has seen no reason to replace them after phasing them out.

As far as the beam guns on the VF-4, there is one extra alternate thing they would be able to do easily, just like a gatling pod. That's training. Instead of loading paintball ammo, they just dial down the power of the lasers until hits are detectable by the plane, but no damage is done.

Edited July 26, 2010 by Talos

[Mr March]

Interesting numbers. I like them.

On the subject of beam weapons....

If there is some limitation to beam weapons in the Macross universe that demands continued use of ballistics (however advanced), I never got the impression it was a want for power. At least based on the official trivia, power generation in the Macross universe appears to produce a ridiculous output per unit of weight. The VF-1 Valkyrie has 2 x thermonuclear reaction engines producing 650 Megawatts of power each, for a total output of 1,300 Megawatts or 1.3 Gigawatts. To place that power rating in some context, a Nimitz Aircraft Carrier reactor generates 104 MW, less than one-tenth the power of a single VF-1 Valkyrie. I would find it strange if power would be the limitation to beam weapons in Macross when power generation technology appears to be one of the furthest reaching performance benchmarks for the franchise.

In my own pondering about Macross beam weapons I've often thought the main limitation was their weight. The Zentradi mecha appear to embrace beam weaponry the most and each mecha weighs something in the range of 30-40 tons compared from the early era of SDF Macross all the way up to the Frontier era. By comparison, the weight range for most Valkyries is 7-14 tons. When looking at the Valkyries alone, it appears to generally follow a pattern that the more beams weapons a variable fighter has the heavier that variable fighter. Lastly, it's generally the biggest, heaviest configurations of any given Valkyrie that is equipped with the largest, most damaging beam weapons (like the Strike and various Armored Valkyrie configurations). In a military vehicle like the VF, the engineers would rely upon moderating weight to insure maximum performance for a given combat role. As such, it seems beam weapons simply weigh a great deal more that missile or ballistic weapons. Perhaps that's why even when beam guns are installed on the later VFs, they seem to be smaller bore weapons.

[sketchley]

I've really got no idea what this alternate universe 'Siren' you keep referring to is? Is it related to the Macross II Metal Siren?

Any links, pics?

Graham

The name was the non-studio nue name for the VF-4. That's about the extent of my knowledge of that version (aside from what I mentioned herein or elsewhere that it can transform and has FAST packs).

[Graham]

I think, whether it's lack of power, overheating, weight or some other issue, we are never going to know what is the issue with beam weapons, unless we are told in some officially sanctioned source.

However, I'm firmly conviced that there must be some overiding limitation with beam weapons that at least on VFs prevennts them becoming the defacto main weapon.

Graham

[sketchley]

Nah, its just that Gatling gunpods are just so awesome they make buzzsaw sound effects... IN SPACE!

I think I do remember that thing about being specifically design to defeat energy conversion armour. I believe that was in a VF-1 translation, and how the VF-1 was specifically designed to combat Zentraadi weaponry, AKA battle pods. (I distinctly remember the implication that Zentraadi craft have energy converting armour, which came as a surprise. In retrospect, it's fairly obvious (where would the technology come from, when it was introduced in the VF-0? Mankind was still learning the basics of OTM at that time.)

[sketchley]

I think, whether it's lack of power, overheating, weight or some other issue, we are never going to know what is the issue with beam weapons, unless we are told in some officially sanctioned source.

However, I'm firmly conviced that there must be some overiding limitation with beam weapons that at least on VFs prevennts them becoming the defacto main weapon.

Graham

Initially, the only reason the VF-1 had lasers in it's head turret is because of the space savings.

I'm not sure if there is a weight issue, but generally in the real world, more powerful lasers are larger.

But yeah, as was said, power supply is not an issue. Take the one-use mini-reaction-weapon powered mobile lasers that VFMF:VF-19 introduces. Uber powerful, but most sane people don't want to be next to it when it fires.

[Graham]

Interesting numbers. I like them.

On the subject of beam weapons....

If there is some limitation to beam weapons in the Macross universe that demands continued use of ballistics (however advanced), I never got the impression it was a want for power. At least based on the official trivia, power generation in the Macross universe appears to produce a ridiculous output per unit of weight. The VF-1 Valkyrie has 2 x thermonuclear reaction engines producing 650 Megawatts of power each, for a total output of 1,300 Megawatts or 1.3 Gigawatts. To place that power rating in some context, a Nimitz Aircraft Carrier reactor generates 104 MW, less than one-tenth the power of a single VF-1 Valkyrie. I would find it strange if power would be the limitation to beam weapons in Macross when power generation technology appears to be one of the furthest reaching performance benchmarks for the franchise.

In my own pondering about Macross beam weapons I've often thought the main limitation was their weight. The Zentradi mecha appear to embrace beam weaponry the most and each mecha weighs something in the range of 30-40 tons compared from the early era of SDF Macross all the way up to the Frontier era. By comparison, the weight range for most Valkyries is 7-14 tons. When looking at the Valkyries alone, it appears to generally follow a pattern that the more beams weapons a variable fighter has the heavier that variable fighter. Lastly, it's generally the biggest, heaviest configurations of any given Valkyrie that is equipped with the largest, most damaging beam weapons (like the Strike and various Armored Valkyrie configurations). In a military vehicle like the VF, the engineers would rely upon moderating weight to insure maximum performance for a given combat role. As such, it seems beam weapons simply weigh a great deal more that missile or ballistic weapons. Perhaps that's why even when beam guns are installed on the later VFs, they seem to be smaller bore weapons.

I always got the impresion that at least for the beam cannons mounted on the Strike Valk, VF-11 Full Armor and VF-25 Armoured Pack, the beam guns were powered from capacitors, rather than drawing power directly from the VF's engines. Of course whether those capacitors could be recharged 'on the go', from the VF's power plants is another question entierly.

For the smaller beam guns mounted on the VFs head, chest, arms & wingroots (depending on which VF), I would imagine that these do draw power directly from the engines (although I could well be wrong). Possibly size is the limiting factor to power output on target, as well (as previously mentioned), cycle times, cool down times or other limitations.

Graham

Actually, the way he worded it: "A failed experiment" makes me think more along the lines of traditional battlecruisers and the M551 Sheridan tank. Both had full operational careers. The Sheridan operated for 30 years and had several hundred made. The battlecruisers were built in several navies and served for decades. However both of those were failed experiments when you take into the operational concept and useage. BCs were not designed to be used in the battleline against battleships, but because they have battleship-grade cannons, commanders always stuck them in. They were very, very vunerable.

That's exactly what I was implying.

Something that was very much a product of the current thinking of the time, but which later showed itself in actual use to be somewhat lacking. Another example that springs to mind would be the initial decision not to have an internal gun on the F-4 Phantom.

Graham

[Seto Kaiba]

I've really got no idea what this alternate universe 'Siren' you keep referring to is? Is it related to the Macross II Metal Siren?

Yes and no... the 'Siren' was the first name given to the VF-4 and its first set of battroid and GERWALK modes, prior to Kawamori's return to the franchise and subsequent completion of the VF-4 design as the Lightning III you're familiar with. Its first appearance was in the PC Engine game Macross: Eternal Love Song, one of two games created as canon prequels to the Macross II: Lovers Again OVA. It was erroneously listed as VF-X-4 Siren in the game manual (an goof that was subsequently duplicated in the Macross Compendium), though was referred to as the VF-4 Siren in-game, with the base variant being the VF-4S, and the two types of super parts adding a letter to make the VF-4SP and VF-4ST.

The original variant of the VF-4 Siren (implied to be VF-4A) entered service in 2014 as the fighter complement of the Megaroad-01 (not a typo, LONG STORY). By 2037, the variant in service was the VF-4S, which sported the slight modification in the form of a S-style head turret similar to the one on the VF-1SR Attack Valkyrie, adding four forward-facing AA laser guns to its preexisting armament of 2 beam guns and ~12 conformal missiles. The VF-4SP Siren had super packs that boosted its missile capacity (as one might expect) and the VF-4ST Siren had super packs that provided it with extra missiles, a set of funnels (yes, like in Gundam) and a heavy beam rifle almost as long as the plane itself.

Its most notable combat action was spearheading the final offensive on the Zentradi Army Burado main fleet's mobile fortress and the attack on its commander at the conclusion of the 2037 Zentradi invasion. See the attached images for some art of the VF-4S's battroid mode and forward view of its fighter mode (sans super parts). The ship in the background is the Prometheus, a Daedalus II-class ARMD/ramship.

EDIT: As far as being related to the VA-1SS Metal Siren, which I forgot to cover, the VF-4S Siren isn't a direct relative of it. It is, however, a design ancestor of the VF-2SS Valkyrie II.

Nah, its just that Gatling gunpods are just so awesome they make buzzsaw sound effects... IN SPACE!

Don't you know... noises like that are louder in space because there's no air to get in the way!

Edited July 26, 2010 by Seto Kaiba

[sketchley]

Something that was very much a product of the current thinking of the time, but which later showed itself in actual use to be somewhat lacking. Another example that springs to mind would be the initial decision not to have an internal gun on the F-4 Phantom.

Hmmm... no internal gun on the F-4. No gun pod on the VF-4. Hmmm... deep thoughts.

Could it be that the VF-4 was great at long-range interception, but piss-poor at dogfights?

[Mr March]

I always got the impresion that at least for the beam cannons mounted on the Strike Valk, VF-11 Full Armor and VF-25 Armoured Pack, the beam guns were powered from capacitors, rather than drawing power directly from the VF's engines. Of course whether those capacitors could be recharged 'on the go', from the VF's power plants is another question entierly.

For the smaller beam guns mounted on the VFs head, chest, arms & wingroots (depending on which VF), I would imagine that these do draw power directly from the engines (although I could well be wrong). Possibly size is the limiting factor to power output on target, as well (as previously mentioned), cycle times, cool down times or other limitations.

Graham

It's rather hard to say one way or the other. I've not read much about capacitors in Macross until publication of the Chronicle, which indicates a much wider role for capacitors than previously revealed, from M0 all the way to Frontier. I'm also not sure if there is any indication one way or the other whether capacitors are high-energy storage or low-energy storage (relatively speaking). But I would say a good indication of where the limits for Macross beam weapons don't lie is to consider the conventional comparison: in our current "real world" technology, power sources are by far the most significant limitation we suffer; in Macross it appears that power generation is the technology of least concern. Factors such as thrust, weight, fuel, cost and such always seem to be highlighted while in contrast power generation seems so plentiful it has lead to such indulgences as fighter-scale pin point barriers. Granted this all just impression, but honestly beam weapons being limited by power generation would be my last guess. I agree that beam weapons limited by heat, cycling and other factors are good considerations, but I might argue the factor of weight does appear to enjoy at least circumstantial trivia to support it, however lacking for correlation that may be. I suppose I just like weight is a "best fit" guess.

[Uxi]

Based on Anime, it would clearly be the VF-11. VF-4 only made one Hikaru toy, and Flashback 2012. Don't recall ever seeing it on screen since. It looks cool, but the impression is that it's basically a VF-1 with the FP integrated in, and we can all clearly agree it's a limited platform compared to VF-11/17/19/21/25

[Seto Kaiba]

Hmmm... no internal gun on the F-4. No gun pod on the VF-4. Hmmm... deep thoughts.

Eh... you'd think if there had been a major change in tactical doctrine like the US's odd insistence that "we don't dogfight anymore", it would've been mentioned at some point. It seems a trifle odd that, if the VF-4 was as unsatisfactory as is being implied, that they would take the pains necessary to keep it in service into and beyond 2047. I'd guess that the VF-4 was the right fighter at the right time... a space-optimized VF that had all the capabilities of a VF-1 Super Valkyrie in a single compact package, for colony ships where space and resources were at a premium.

As I see it, the VF-4 is ideally suited to something like a Megaroad colony mission. In an operational environment where space is at a premium, having components that would've otherwise been built into super packs built into the airframe instead and a set of main guns that don't require the production and storage of physical ammunition would both be significant virtues. Note that the VF-11 was conveniently introduced at the roughly the same time that a new model of colony ship with significantly greater space, much looser resource restrictions, and greater manufacturing capacity was pressed into service. The established colonies and majority of the local fleets wouldn't suffer from the resource and space limitations that would make the VF-4 advantageous, so they could afford to go back to using simpler (and presumably less maintenance-intensive) gatling cannons and separate super pack systems when they picked up the VF-11. IMO, it's probably more to do with appropriateness for their operating environment than than any issue of the VF-4 not being up to snuff.

Could it be that the VF-4 was great at long-range interception, but piss-poor at dogfights?

Doubtful, given what little visual evidence we've seen...

Based on Anime, it would clearly be the VF-11. VF-4 only made one Hikaru toy, and Flashback 2012. Don't recall ever seeing it on screen since.

It figured reasonably prominently in Macross M3 and Macross 7 Trash in the main timeline, and Macross: Eternal Love Song in the parallel world continuity. A reasonably prominent and important fighter in the latter case, and still in service about twenty years after being replaced by the VF-11 in the former case.

It looks cool, but the impression is that it's basically a VF-1 with the FP integrated in, and we can all clearly agree it's a limited platform compared to VF-11/17/19/21/25

On the first note, we agree... on the second, not so much... one could assert that the VF-4's six hardpoints and conformal munitions give it greater flexibility than the VF-11 with its apparent lack of hardpoints and need to be permanently wedded to a set of super parts to have weapons in space.

[Uxi]

On the first note, we agree... on the second, not so much... one could assert that the VF-4's six hardpoints and conformal munitions give it greater flexibility than the VF-11 with its apparent lack of hardpoints and need to be permanently wedded to a set of super parts to have weapons in space.

"we dont need no stinkin' hardpoints."

[Seto Kaiba]

"we dont need no stinkin' hardpoints."

Let's examine this closely... the VF-4 has a potentially unlimited number of combinations of ordinance it can take using its six wing/body hardpoints, whereas the VF-11 can take a set of protect armor loaded with short-range ordinance and trade its transformation and a good deal of maneuverability for armament, or it can take the standard set of super parts and carry a single long-range reaction missile in each leg bay. Of course, if we were to take the external modules out of the equation altogether since the VF-4 doesn't NEED them, we're left with an even more significant disparity in the VF-4's favor.

NB: Some of the art (dated 1987) shows the VF-4 with a maximum of eight hardpoints, two inboard and two outboard of each engine nacelle. Just looking at it, that's an arbitrary maximum of four times the VF-11's anti-ship reaction ordinance, or a mixture of other missile types that may meet or exceed the capabilities of the VF-11's standard armament.

I think this rather supports my hypothesis that the VF-4 wasn't a bad fighter, but rather a fighter designed to fill a need that ceased to exist with the introduction of larger colony ships.

EDIT: At the prompting of Talos, it's also relevant to note that the VF-4 can trade its beam guns in for a set of 30mm gatling guns similar to those used by the VF-11, as per a Great Mechanics DX (I think) article that was translated by sketchley a while back. I believe that same article also said it could take a gunpod if need be.

Edited July 27, 2010 by Seto Kaiba

[Graham]

Eh... you'd think if there had been a major change in tactical doctrine like the US's odd insistence that "we don't dogfight anymore", it would've been mentioned at some point. It seems a trifle odd that, if the VF-4 was as unsatisfactory as is being implied, that they would take the pains necessary to keep it in service into and beyond 2047. I'd guess that the VF-4 was the right fighter at the right time... a space-optimized VF that had all the capabilities of a VF-1 Super Valkyrie in a single compact package, for colony ships where space and resources were at a premium.

As I see it, the VF-4 is ideally suited to something like a Megaroad colony mission. In an operational environment where space is at a premium, having components that would've otherwise been built into super packs built into the airframe instead and a set of main guns that don't require the production and storage of physical ammunition would both be significant virtues. Note that the VF-11 was conveniently introduced at the roughly the same time that a new model of colony ship with significantly greater space, much looser resource restrictions, and greater manufacturing capacity was pressed into service. The established colonies and majority of the local fleets wouldn't suffer from the resource and space limitations that would make the VF-4 advantageous, so they could afford to go back to using simpler (and presumably less maintenance-intensive) gatling cannons and separate super pack systems when they picked up the VF-11. IMO, it's probably more to do with appropriateness for their operating environment than than any issue of the VF-4 not being up to snuff.

I would consider a VF-4 comparable or better than a VF-1 Super or Strike in terms of speed and acceleration, maybe range as well, if we knew the fuel figure, but certainly not in terms of weapons, at least unless extra ordnance is carried. 12 medium range semi-conformal missiles is certainly a fairly limited loadout, compared to a fully loaded Strike or Super VF-1 with full external loadout.

But I agree, that the VF-4 was likely well suited to the Megaroad colony missions, which would be spending long times in space and likely lacked the manufacturing facilities and space that the later New Macross class fleets had.

I imagine the bulk of the 8000+ VF-4 produced went to the Megaroad colony missions and were likely in service for so long as the Megaroad colony fleets probably lacked the factory facilities to construct large quantities of newer more advanced VFs. So basically it was a case of the Megaroad ships being stuck with the VF-4.

If 8,245 VF-4 were produced and there were 30 Megaroad colony ships, that gives us a figure of 274 VF-4 per ship. Not many really.

Did Chronicle ever give a figure for the number of VFs per Megaroad?

Graham

[sketchley]

I would consider a VF-4 comparable or better than a VF-1 Super or Strike in terms of speed and acceleration, maybe range as well, if we knew the fuel figure, but certainly not in terms of weapons, at least unless extra ordnance is carried. 12 medium range semi-conformal missiles is certainly a fairly limited loadout, compared to a fully loaded Strike or Super VF-1 with full external loadout.

But I agree, that the VF-4 was likely well suited to the Megaroad colony missions, which would be spending long times in space and likely lacked the manufacturing facilities and space that the later New Macross class fleets had.

I imagine the bulk of the 8000+ VF-4 produced went to the Megaroad colony missions and were likely in service for so long as the Megaroad colony fleets probably lacked the factory facilities to construct large quantities of newer more advanced VFs. So basically it was a case of the Megaroad ships being stuck with the VF-4.

If 8,245 VF-4 were produced and there were 30 Megaroad colony ships, that gives us a figure of 274 VF-4 per ship. Not many really.

Did Chronicle ever give a figure for the number of VFs per Megaroad?

Graham

No, no mention in MC. All we can infer is to double the total number of craft on an ARMD - as the Megaroad class appears to have a pair of them.

As for the VF-4 being not up to snuff - one must keep in mind the background that it was made in. It started development before SWI, and was rushed to completion immediately after SWI. It doesn't truly take into consideration all of the lesson's learned during SWI.

The VF-5000, on the other hand, does take into consideration the lesson's of SWI, as well as incorporates Zentraadi technology.

So, in short, if the VF-1 is ver 1.0, the VF-4 would be ver 1.1. The VF-5000/9/3000 etc would be ver 1.5, and the VF-11/14 ver 2.0.

[Graham]

As for the VF-4 being not up to snuff - one must keep in mind the background that it was made in. It started development before SWI, and was rushed to completion immediately after SWI. It doesn't truly take into consideration all of the lesson's learned during SWI.

The VF-5000, on the other hand, does take into consideration the lesson's of SWI, as well as incorporates Zentraadi technology.

So, in short, if the VF-1 is ver 1.0, the VF-4 would be ver 1.1. The VF-5000/9/3000 etc would be ver 1.5, and the VF-11/14 ver 2.0.

Agree with all the above.

So what's the figure for an ARMD?

Graham

[sketchley]

Agree with all the above.

So what's the figure for an ARMD?

Graham

http://macross.anime.net/wiki/ARMD#Armament

I figure it's a safe bet that only 1/2 to 2/3 are actually the VF-4, the remainder being VF-1.

In addition, I figure that later Megaroad launches would have less VF-4, possibly no VF-1, too. The balance being made up by VF-5000, VA-3 and so on.