question about VF-1 tail-fin folding

[newca]

I see every VF-1 toy and most plastic models go "one on another" way(crossing type I call it)

lucky to find this pic

click here to see the picture

but hasegawa VF-1 static model series seem to split the tail wing into upper and lower halves, then they become a "x" type(see hasegawa super/strike valk parts U10 and U13)

maybe it's not a problem to you people, but do puzzled me a long time, which one is "official"?

Edited November 27, 2003 by newca

[one_klump]

The first is the correct way. According to the origional designs by Kawamori-san and both the movie 'DYRL?' and the series, the fins fold over one another. The hasagawa model just does that for ease of modeling

[newca]

thank you answering me

but the hasegawa parts don't seem to be "ease of modeling " IMHO, why doesn't hasegawa just provide 2 complete tail fins, that should be a more reasonable way I think can't understand those japanese sometime...

[Valkyrie]

Hasegawa didn't do it to make things easier. It's a clear modification of the VF-1 design. It's still not 100% clear who ordered these changes or why. But the common theory is that it's a case of Kawamori playing the old game of revisionist's history and 'improving' his old design.

The same can be said about the three doors of the rear landing gear bays. Until the Hasegawa kit, they only had two.

[newca]

you right! more toys/models I collect, much more "uncertain" I found in VF-1 design...

to "improve old design", maybe the strongest motivation of the birth of MACROSS ZERO OVA.

[Nied]

I always figured that since the Hasegawas pretty obviously model Block 5 Valyries, that the double folding fins are just another feature of late block Valks (like the new cockpits, hands , and FAST packs).

[one_klump]

Well, according to DYRL?, the fins fold over one another...

[Nied]

Well, according to DYRL?, the fins fold over one another...

They do? I didn't remember them doing that.

[Draykov]

Hasegawa didn't do it to make things easier. It's a clear modification of the VF-1 design. It's still not 100% clear who ordered these changes or why. But the common theory is that it's a case of Kawamori playing the old game of revisionist's history and 'improving' his old design.

The same can be said about the three doors of the rear landing gear bays. Until the Hasegawa kit, they only had two.

Don't the Hawegawa kits also have 6 wing hardpoints instead of 4 (3 on each wing instead of 2)?

[Cdr Fokker]

Hasegawa didn't do it to make things easier.  It's a clear modification of the VF-1 design.  It's still not 100% clear who ordered these changes or why.  But the common theory is that it's a case of Kawamori playing the old game of revisionist's history and 'improving' his old design. 

The same can be said about the three doors of the rear landing gear bays.  Until the Hasegawa kit, they only had two.

Don't the Hawegawa kits also have 6 wing hardpoints instead of 4 (3 on each wing instead of 2)?

Yes. And the Hase weapons set doesn't have any tandem racks for RMS-1s.

However, the loadouts are supposed to remain the same on the Hases (i.e., six RMS-1s, four UUM-7 pods, four triple racks of AMM-1s)