Do you prefer TV or DYRL paint scheme?

[JohnMc]

What about this guy?

vf-1s-dyrl-kakizaki-battroid.png

In all seriousness, I generally prefer the TV series aesthetically, but DYRL is definitely more realistic, both in terms of paint and mechanics(read as: hands).

Ironically enough a VF-1S in Kakizaki's DYRL Green Color scheme made an appearance in the Robotech/Voltron mini series.

[JB0]

Wait, seriously?

That's amazing!

[David Hingtgen]

I've just gotta repost this:

That looks so much better (and Milia-esque) than the "coral-red and pale grey" you usually see. Always wondered if somehow M7's VF-22's had coloring errors when being animated, and they were always intended to be "traditional" M&M blue and red, and not the "pastel" versions we got.

[Renato]

I don't know, but I always assumed it was just because it would make it easier to differentiate from the Fire valk and Emerald valks.

[JohnMc]

Wait, seriously?

That's amazing!

Yes. I was surprised to see it too. The writers threw in all sorts of cameos [like Vehicle Voltron/Dairugger XV and Gladiator Voltron/Albegas] The premise was that the crew of the SDF-1 was thrown into the future and landed on Arus while Roy, Max and Ben were left stranded on Earth and helped the Lion Voltron crew. Since was Roy was missing the Gloval had appointed a new field Commander to replace Roy so a new VF-1S was commissioned in Kakizaki's Green DYRL colors.

[Mr March]

Just to note, my coloring of the VF-22S Sturmvogel II Milia posted in this thread above may not accurately reflect the true color of the craft. Still trying to get HD screen captures of the Macross 7 series to update some of the mecha.

The Macross Chronicle does color this version much lighter than the red I currently have. Yeah, it is kinda like the pastel David doesn't like, I'm sorry to say. But even if I have to change it, I can always post this one on my site in the fan section for those that really like it. I'm cool with that.

[Kelsain]

Yeah, well, space ain't blue either. Fwiw.

[Renato]

Yeah. Space needed to be blue so that the Stealth Valks would show up against it. The in-story explanation is that they were near the galactic core. If you notice later in the show, after they fold out to various locations, it is a regular black colour. At one point it's green, even.

[Hazuki]

prefer DYRL for the more detailed, realistic overall VF-1 design, but tend to the most most of T.V. for it's Hikaru VF-1J scheme,

which, to me, is every bit as iconic and attractive as the Jolly-Rogers' based SKULL-1...

[JetJockey]

DYRL only because it made the jets look so much more realistic. I still like the TV colors though. I always ask myself do I need a Max blue valkyrie.

[Steve68]

Here is why the VF's as depicted in the TV and DYRL aren't NMF (natural metal finish).

http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?id=2283

Because modern military aircraft aren't silver under the paint. Witness the F-15 in all its naked glory! Probably 80% of the plane's surface is a color other than silver.

My 2 cents.

[spanner]

I could ramble on about the good points of both color version but in the end I have to say I love them both pretty much equally and just couldn't chose..

ok ok.. if it came to a life and death choice I think it would have to be the TV colors! Only cos that's what I was originally exposed to which started the obsession!
And not to mention there are a few more liveries to the TV series than there are in DYRL..

[grigolosi]

Guardian,

Your point about headhunting is valid. Though is far less prevalent these days. In Macross Zero, the fact that D.D. and Roy seem to go at it, is probably due to the fact that they were two members of a very select few at the time, and were seeing a lot of action against each other. On that scale it's easy to pick out individuals. However on the scale we're talking for SDFM or DYRL, it is exceedingly difficult.

Squadron Colors are painted on the CAG bird for friendly recognition. The IFF only tells you if it's friendly (More sophisticated units might give you more specifics, bit that's eyes on your screens and not outside). Nothing is faster than visual recognition, to tell you who's on your wing.

As for the natural metal finish, from a practical standpoint it wouldn't be done. As a rule we stopped doing bare metal finishes in the 50's (there are a few exceptions). The shine was a shoot me signal, It increased radar reflectivity, and was easy to spot. Also, in the late 70's and early 80's we began to see low vis grey making its way onto almost all aircraft, and by the mid 90's a good 90% of all aircraft were low vis grey (it can take a while to do, especially when an aircraft had just been freshly painted). My dates might be a bit off, but the point is, bare metal is bad juju for a military aircraft.

Driver you are correct on the paint schemes we have used in the past. One point you did miss though was the corrosion factor. Bare metal simply corrodes far quicker especially if the aircraft is based on a carrier ( the USN and USMC both require washes on their aircraft every 14 days to control corrosion regardless of where they are stationed). Also Another reason for the paint schemes was also spot on. If you were to see a modern fighter stripped of paint it would resemble and abstract painting due to the use of both composite materials and and metal (mainly aviation aluminum for the frames). On the F-16 when it is stripped completely to the surface, the stabilators and vertical are a brownish black colors due to the use of composite graphite used in making them. The rest of the frame is an aluminum color. i personally prefer the DYRL schemes myself since they tend to be more realistic in the markings for military aircraft. I like the fact that there are pictures of the Vermillion team VF-1's that show actual tail flashes and squadron designation markings on the ventral fins. This probably stems from my yrs in the USAF as a crew chief.

Here is why the VF's as depicted in the TV and DYRL aren't NMF (natural metal finish).

http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?id=2283

Because modern military aircraft aren't silver under the paint. Witness the F-15 in all its naked glory! Probably 80% of the plane's surface is a color other than silver.

My 2 cents.

That off color on the F-15 is a corrosion coating that is applied to the frame prior to applying the primer. It gives the aircraft a gold/bronze tint. When the aircraft is stripped completely the true color of the aluminum comes out.

[grigolosi]

Yeah. Space needed to be blue so that the Stealth Valks would show up against it. The in-story explanation is that they were near the galactic core. If you notice later in the show, after they fold out to various locations, it is a regular black colour. At one point it's green, even.

Actually if you want to hide an aircraft in darkness the best color to use would be the F-15 Strike Eagle gray. It is almost purple because they discovered in the late 80's earl;y 90's that dark purple/gray actually blends into darkness far better than black. Strike Eagles usually do most of their work in darkness during actual combat operations for this purpose.

[Valkyrie Driver]

Driver you are correct on the paint schemes we have used in the past. One point you did miss though was the corrosion factor. Bare metal simply corrodes far quicker especially if the aircraft is based on a carrier ( the USN and USMC both require washes on their aircraft every 14 days to control corrosion regardless of where they are stationed).

Yeah, I missed that one, but I think I made my point pretty well without it. Still though good catch. I think the Gulf coast bases require something similar. I remember seeing crews washing WC-130's at Keesler every week or so.

[grigolosi]

Driver you are right about location for the USAF when it comes to wash and anti corrosion requirements. When I was stationed at Misawa Japan from 92-98, the FW requirements were a wash every 30 days, couple that with an average of 24 aircraft per squadron and we were washing jets every day. When I was at Edwards AFB the requirement was every 120 days since we were in the high desert (I did 1 wash in the 2 yrs I was there). Eglin where I retired from it was every 30 days also due to the proximity of the Gulf.

[Valkyrie Driver]

I spent most of my time concerned with the people and making sure that they didn't get hit by lightning or that the aircraft didn't get hailed on. Which is another source of corrosion. Bam, how'd y'all like that segue? Ask most maintenance folks, the hangars are not generally where aircraft get stored, they're usually sitting out on the tarmac, so if it was bare metal, the aircraft would corrode with simple rain or even just humidity.

[grigolosi]

The lightning at Eglin is insane. we used to watch it hit the light towers on the 33rd FW side of the base during thunderstorms. People who came from bases that didn't get lightning within 5 constantly didn't quite understand how dangerous it was on a an open ramp. The hail could be very painful. I remember one day at Misawa we kept getting rained on and then suddenly while we were turnig the jets for the next go it just dumped hail on us, damn that hurt. I got stuck under the wing of my jet needless to say for about 20 mins.

[Valkyrie Driver]

I remember forecasting for Eglin, during the summer you could set your watch by the thunderstorms. Every day at around 1600L , thunderstorms. I actually miss the coast, land locked bases just kind of suck. Alas, I never made overseas, deployed or otherwise. We'll see if I still have a chance in a few years after I finish university.

[grigolosi]

when I was there as a young Airmen...many many moons ago....the afternoon summer storm usually hit between 1500-1600. We could see it coming in sheets from across the base from teh 33rd side. But back to topic......

The low vis paint used on aircraft is extremely rough and porous. The reason for this is to supposedly help with radar wave absorption but unfortunately if absorbs a lot more than that. Unless you wipe or scrub your jet every day you end up with a grungy bird. Usually oil and other greases streak heavily from panel joints, seams and screws and anything remotely close to any frequently used system exhaust port get stained badly. Considering the amount of combat and environment the VF's operate in during combat, keeping them clean like they appear on the shows would be a pain in the ass. I imagine either scheme would look like crap after a couple of months of continuous flying.

[anime52k8]

I like to believe that valks use super-futuristic Overtech paint that is incredibly scratch, chip and stain resistant.

[Sildani]

And they probably don't use oil or hydraulic fluid either.

[Valkyrie Driver]

That still leaves grunge that's in the air. If it's not stain resistant, well, even the grunge in the air will make them look like a bag of hammered crap after a while...

[grigolosi]

I imagine they have removed hydraulics as much as possible but regardless of what type of turbine you have the engine shaft will require lubricant to prevent it from seizing from overheating. So there is probably some forms of oil tank and sump system.

[JB0]

That still leaves grunge that's in the air. If it's not stain resistant, well, even the grunge in the air will make them look like a bag of hammered crap after a while...

It could be a self-cleaning surface, such as titanium dioxide(which breaks many materials down with exposure to UV light). In which case, it'd maintain that just-painted look until it gets damaged. And if it's super-durable too...

...

I think we actually have a good excuse for shiny, brightly-colored valks here.

[Valkyrie Driver]

It could be a self-cleaning surface, such as titanium dioxide(which breaks many materials down with exposure to UV light). In which case, it'd maintain that just-painted look until it gets damaged. And if it's super-durable too...

...

I think we actually have a good excuse for shiny, brightly-colored valks here.

You're right. Still though, I actually kind of like the idea of weathered valks, it makes them seem more real. Or at least like they could be real.

[JB0]

I agree with you 100%. A little wear and grime just makes them feel so much more "real".

[Valkyrie Driver]

Someday, I might get brave and do some weathering on of my toys...

[grigolosi]

Wear and tear on aircraft is a given. Most paint gets chipped and stained in areas of high maintenance. you can usually spot the most opened panels on an F-16(or any otherfighter aircraft) by the dark staining around it left by maintainers hands when opening/closing doors and panels. These Block 60 birds use a paint that bakes off especially around the engine areas and ECS exhaust. It actually bubbles and comes off in strips like leather in some cases. I can imagine with a VF and the temperatures the engines put out there would be some of the same wear going on with the paint. I know certain metals are a pain to keep painted because the paint just doesn't adhere too well to it even without enviromental factors. The XB-70 Valkyrie actually stripped paint off its verticals when 4 of the 6 J-79's were put into burner in a test flight. In the picture you could see the titanium underneath. Whatever paint they use on the VF's is some tough stuff.

Now something interesting related to what Sildani said: Lockheed wanted to eliminate hydraulics form the F-35 in its development. At Edwards we actually tested electric brakes on an F-16. The brakes were hardwired with harnesses running along the top of the tension strut instead of the pressure and return hyd line usually there. The brakes worked like a champ. They also tried a fiber optic brake but the problem they ran into was dust contamination of the connectors when the brake was removed. Eliminating the hyd system in an aircraft saves a butt load of weight between the reservoir, fluid, lines and pumps. It also eliminates one more system to break or fail.

[VF-1A Grunt]

I'm late to this discussion since I only joined recently but have thought about this topic a bit. I prefer the TV schemes in a lot of ways, but I agree that the movie schemes are more realistic from the standpoint of military uniformity. I think the TV schemes are more "classic mecha," being fully-repainted in the case of Max and Milia's aircraft, but the small patches of color on the movie Valkyries are more practical, while maintaining their squadron theme. I also agree with the earlier post about the Max and Hayao Kakizaki VF-1As' personalized paint schemes in the series being a little unrealistic, given that they were brand new pilots, but I understand the practical need to identify the characters during the battle scenes.

On a side note, I'm fascinated by all the squadron-specific paint schemes in the Master File books, having just bought my first two. I hope to recreate several of them using Hasegawa 1/72 fighters. I'm in the military in real life, so I've always liked the basic soldiers in the series, the "cannon fodder" brown VF-1As (hence my name and avatar). I plan to build several of those, but I'm curious about them in light of the squadron concepts presented in the Master Files. I guess the idea is that the VF-1As are mass-produced in the brown and white paint scheme and then repainted into specific schemes by the operational squadrons. However, the Master Files would seem to imply that there wouldn't be any brown VF-1As left on the SDF or the Prometheus (except for the squadrons that are variations on the brown scheme), which obviously isn't the case. I'm probably overthinking this...

Can anyone tell me the back story behind the Sonic Birds, anniversary, and the low visibility schemes that Hasegawa offered on their fighter model? Were those first created by Hasegawa and then included in the Master Files, or the other way around? I know the Angel Birds appeared in the TV series, but I don't recall any of the others. I would love to see decals produced for the other squadrons in the books. I know Hasegawa offered some extra decal sets, but from the photos I found online, it doesn't look like they correspond to other squadrons included in the Master Files.

[Valkyrie_001]

In my opinion, that is an evil question. Robotech or DYRL....To be honest, I do prefer DYRL for the uniformity, vibrant colours that were used during the production, and the uniforms themselves were a bit more sophisticated than the ones used on Robotech.

[grigolosi]

Too put the "R" word to rest, keep in mind that the schemes used in it were the exact same as SDFM since it was SDFM introduced to the states with a different title and spliced together with 2 other series.

I know what you are saying about the production in DYRL. It was far better than on the original Macross since it was released originally as a movie.

[Gatsu]

Absolutely TV schemes.

For many reasons: first the dyrl schemes are too dull in my opinion. I prefer a lot more the TV sdf-1 then the dyrl. Also, in my opinion, the fact that all main characters are in the skulls squadron is the consequence of a choice of the production intended to please the audience because it probably showed to prefer the vf-1s and his color schemes over the other vf-1. So this seems to me just a complaisant choice. In general i prefer a more colorful and varied mechas set.

Second i think the movie is quite bad. I think it's visually beatiful, it has beatiful drawings and i d like that the tv serie was drawn like the movie (there are some tv episodes wich are simply realised in a terrible way). It has a beatiful soundtrack. But the story is totally distorted and terribly flattened, as well as flattened are all the main characters personalities. That's why i m kind of bothered by the fact that they used the Movie as a reference for the other sequels. I remember when i saw the first time the dyrl movie in 1992 after i watched the tv serie when i was a kid and i was totally horrified from how bad from a screenplay and direction point of view it was.

[Skullsixx]

DYRL schemes all the way! It's hard for me to look back on any of the original Macross TV stuff after seeing DYRL.

[arbit]

TV for colors

DYRL for amazing mecha design.

DYRL for special valks.

Toss up for SDF-1.