SV-51 vs VF-0

[sketchley]

Since you were talking absolutes, with no reference to timeline, I felt that small caveat was in order.

Technically speaking, the original poster also said "appeared in an anime". The MII timeline VF-4 Siren appeared in the game, Macross 2036, no?

[anime52k8]

Has anyone actually mentioned that the Sv-51 *looks* cooler? That's always worth big points, like YF-22 vs YF-23.

but the YF-23 lost. Hence my vote for the VF-0.

BTW, this is slightly off topic but, I've been been fiddling around with my Yamato SV-51 recently and I can't help but think that it would be much cooler if instead of the boosters just sitting on top of the wing, they where integrated into the wing where the joint is. I would like that.

Edited January 29, 2011 by anime52k8

[eugimon]

but the YF-23 lost. Hence my vote for the VF-0.

BTW, this is slightly off topic but, I've been been fiddling around with my Yamato SV-51 recently and I can't help but think that it would be much cooler if instead of the boosters just sitting on top of the wing, they where integrated into the wing where the joint is? I would like that.

See, that's a brilliant idea, why can't Kawamori design something so excellent?

[anime52k8]

See, that's a brilliant idea, why can't Kawamori design something so excellent?

because he's too busy sticking extra engines on the unattractive planes.

[frothymug]

kiloGRAMS, or kiloNEWTONS?

[SchizophrenicMC]

kiloGRAMS, or kiloNEWTONS?

Where did that come from, and why is it significant?

I mean, I assume you mean there's some difference between kg-f and kgm/s/s.

[frothymug]

Sketchley was listing the outputs of several different engines on the last page and he used kg as thrust measurements.

[David Hingtgen]

The problem stems from the fact that many jet engines are rated in "pounds thrust". But you can't simply divide by 2.2 and get "kilograms thrust". It's an incorrect term. But a lot of places do anyways and write it like that.

Kilograms and kilograms-force are not the same. But lbs and lbs-force are. Weird, huh?

Have fun: http://www.sengpielaudio.com/ConvForce.htm

[anime52k8]

The problem stems from the fact that many jet engines are rated in "pounds thrust". But you can't simply divide by 2.2 and get "kilograms thrust". It's an incorrect term. But a lot of places do anyways and write it like that.

Kilograms and kilograms-force are not the same. But lbs and lbs-force are. Weird, huh?

Have fun: http://www.sengpielaudio.com/ConvForce.htm

because a kilogram is a unit of mass where as pounds is a measure of weight (as in mass accelerating down at ~9.8m/s² under gravity) which is the same as force (mass accelerating at a given rate), right?

(Seriously, I'd like to know if I'm remembering this right. It's been a while since I took physics.)

[David Hingtgen]

IIRC, yes. All jet engines are assumed to be at mean sea level, at mean barometric pressure, at 1.0G when calculating thrust ratings. "Pounds" already assume 1G, kilograms do not. (and though the effect is ever so slight, being at sea level does tie in to gravity----the top of Mt Everest is like .98G or something, and a deep deep deep cave could be like 1.01)

[SchizophrenicMC]

I just assume when he posts "x kg" for a thrust rating, he refers to kgF, because all measurements are done in metric, already.

I mean, 1 kgf is 9.8N(kgM/s^2), which corresponds to standard gravity, right? And that translates to 2.2 lbf. I mean, it's just a semantic thing, I guess, writing kg instead of kgf, because it's pretty easy to assume the meaning as the metric equivalent of lbf, in that kind of situation.

[David Hingtgen]

Yes, but it's caused errors before when people improperly convert from lbs thrust to a metric equivalent. They often try to "do too much" or something. A common issue is the fact that 9.8 is close to 10, and people kind of cancel-out a decimal point or something.

[sketchley]

<sigh>

How apparent the lack of knowledge on Macross stats is.

Why kg? 'cause that's what the canon information is given in: http://macross.anime.net/wiki/VF-1#Powerplant

It's only from Macross Zero onward that stats were given in kN. If one is going to complain about how accurate or inaccurate that is, one has to go have a talk with the creator himself, Mr. Kawamori.

IIRC, yes. All jet engines are assumed to be at mean sea level, at mean barometric pressure, at 1.0G when calculating thrust ratings. "Pounds" already assume 1G, kilograms do not. (and though the effect is ever so slight, being at sea level does tie in to gravity----the top of Mt Everest is like .98G or something, and a deep deep deep cave could be like 1.01)

Don't forget that gravity is also reduced the closer one is to the equator, even at sea level, due to centripetal force and the equatorial bulge.

Then there are also gravitational anomalies, but as they're too random and the effects too varied, it's a headache to start incorporating their effects.

Edited January 30, 2011 by sketchley

[sketchley]

Sketchley was listing the outputs of several different engines on the last page and he used kg as thrust measurements.

Posting with a context is always good.

Now, back to the topic: did a bit more translating of the article last night (not posted on the net, yet), and there's at least one instance of the Sv-51 being referred to as a "masterpiece" variable fighter.

Food for thought.

[frothymug]

Notice how I didn't say anyone was wrong... I was just wondering if he intended on using kg and not kN.