1/55 Valkyrie bill of materials

[GrampaStump]

I'm taking pictures of all the different varieties of parts I can get my hands on, making note of subtle differences in structural support on the inside, location and number of ejection pin marks, different mold marks, etc.  In addition to cataloging the parts, I think it would be nice to give them all names, so we have a common language to discuss them.  I'm trying to draw on established aircraft, military, modeling, or machining terminology, rather than inventing my own names for things.

At the moment I'm struggling to come up with a good word for the indented ring around the head cannons.  Since that is a common point of failure, and a distinctive feature, I'd like to have a name for it.  I typically refer to the cannons as "notched" when distinguishing them from Jetfire head cannons that are not notched.  But a notch brings to mind a single gouge or indent, not something that goes around the entire circumference of the cannon.  On a table leg you might call a feature like that a cove, but that doesn't seem right to me.  Groove?  I don't like it because there are other detail lines on the cannons that could also be called grooves and I don't want it to be confusing.  Ring?  If you already know what I'm talking about, it works, but it doesn't seem quite right because a ring around the cannon would be thicker than the rest of the cannon, not thinner.

Any suggestions?

[Slave IV]

Ribbed?

[pengbuzz]

Step-down?

[no3Ljm]

Barrel Notch? Barrel Cap? Barrel Plug?

 

Edited February 25, 2022 by no3Ljm

[Anasazi37]

Channel?

[sqidd]

Head laser plasma compression chamber.

[GrampaStump]

Funny how these things work.  I thought about this for weeks and couldn't come up with anything.  I'm really liking channel/channeled.  Unless there is a "real " or "correct" word that someone can present (I doubt there is - for a feature on a sci-fi weapon that isn't necessarily realistic?), I think I'll go with channel.  Although looking up synonyms for some of these suggestions I also thought of banded.  What do you think, head cannon channel?  Banded head cannons?  My wife has an amazing vocabulary but she would only make fun of me if I revealed this level of Valkyrie madness. 

I'll come back to this thread with other part name questions.  I'm going through all of them.

[no3Ljm]

3 minutes ago, GrampaStump said:

Funny how these things work.  I thought about this for weeks and couldn't come up with anything.  I'm really liking channel/channeled.  Unless there is a "real " or "correct" word that someone can present (I doubt there is - for a feature on a sci-fi weapon that isn't necessarily realistic?), I think I'll go with channel.  Although looking up synonyms for some of these suggestions I also thought of banded.  What do you think, head cannon channel?  Banded head cannons?  My wife has an amazing vocabulary but she would only make fun of me if I revealed this level of Valkyrie madness. 

I'll come back to this thread with other part name questions.  I'm going through all of them.

I was actually holding off the 'Anti-Carrier Laser Cannons' on my suggestion thinking that you probably just looking for terminology on the said 'notch'. Since you're thinking 'Head Cannon Channel' and 'Banded Head Cannons', I would like to properly add now to my suggestion the 'Laser Cannons' terminology since as per Master File book, those head lasers are officially called 'Mauler RÖV-20 Anti-Aircraft Laser Cannons'.

Laser Cannon Barrel Notch? Laser Cannon Barrel Cap? Laser Cannon Barrel Plug? 

 

[Anasazi37]

11 hours ago, GrampaStump said:

Funny how these things work.  I thought about this for weeks and couldn't come up with anything.  I'm really liking channel/channeled.  Unless there is a "real " or "correct" word that someone can present (I doubt there is - for a feature on a sci-fi weapon that isn't necessarily realistic?), I think I'll go with channel.  Although looking up synonyms for some of these suggestions I also thought of banded.  What do you think, head cannon channel?  Banded head cannons?  My wife has an amazing vocabulary but she would only make fun of me if I revealed this level of Valkyrie madness. 

I'll come back to this thread with other part name questions.  I'm going through all of them.

Added benefit of a more granular term like "channel" is that you can describe the different variations of the head laser: laser with wide channel, laser with narrow channel, etc. Term then also applies to other parts where there's a linear indentation. At some point, though, a channel probably becomes a groove when it's thin enough. So, in your original picture, the one on the left could be a "channeled" laser and the one on the right could be a "grooved" laser. We're basically talking about a creating a consistent taxonomic system.

[nightmareB4macross]

What about reinforcement gap?

[Bobby]

Interesting question ... so on large caliber weapons whether it be the main gun on a tank or a triple turret on a battleship, at the base of the large barrel is often a "turret slide" or "barrel slide" that after firing, functions as recoil and is a smaller/larger diameter than the barrel itself. On VF-1's the head lasers are called RÖV-20 Anti-Aircraft Laser Cannon's so I'd suggest 'Laser Cannon Slide Channels'.

Sidenote: As I was looking through Shoji Kawamori's Designer's Notes book, in some preliminary sketches (p.76) he was doodling heads where some of them looked like single and double turret housing straight off a battleship. So perhaps the indentation on the head cannons is a vestigial design element that's obviously not needed on a laser cannon but still looks cool.

Edited March 7, 2022 by Bobby

[Slave IV]

Yeah, I’m going with “because it looks cool” as one of the most important deciding factors when it comes to anime designs.

[jenius]

Was it @glane21 that used to have a website that showed different variants of Jetfire? I think he had more than 7? 

[GrampaStump]

1 hour ago, jenius said:

Was it @glane21 that used to have a website that showed different variants of Jetfire? I think he had more than 7? 

I don't know about that, I've only been collecting and reading about them for the last 2 years or so.  But I can confirm a number of variants.

Nameplate (Left side / Right side):

-Matsushiro / Tokyo Japan

-Bandai / Tokyo Japan

-Ban Dai / Bandai 1984 Made in Japan

-Ban Dai / Bandai 1985 Made in Japan

The thing to remember is, they literally made new molds for every part.  So if you have an original Matsushiro and an original 1985, even though there are a handful of obvious external differences, even on other parts that look similar there are differences, sometimes only on the inside, but definitely noticeable if you look carefully.  If you were to actually break out a gram scale and calipers, then there would be absolutely no question that they are different, but even I haven't undertaken that task (yet).

The obvious external variations within those four groups are these:

* Some Matsushiros have head cannons with a wide channel near the base, whereas some Matsushiros and all of the others have no channel, just a vertical groove detail line instead.

*** Someone once told me they got an undated Bandai with channeled cannons.  While that is totally possible, did it actually come from the factory that way?  Doubtful, but I have no definitive evidence either way.

* And the big one, some Matsushiros have a painted on roundel on the left wing, others have a roundel sticker on the left wing, and others have a wing with no roundel.  All other versions appear to have no roundel.

*** I've seen some people claim that there is a variant with a gap in the paint for the roundel, but no roundel.  I am skeptical.  To me, this looks like a sticker that came off after it was purchased.  Any hard evidence one way or the other?  None that I am aware of.

* The backpack cover (not a great name, I know, but we'll get to that one later) has a round sticky-outy part on Matsushiro/undated, but a round pokey-inny part on 1984/1985.

* The two fins on the back flap are taller on Matsushiro/undated (and more prone to breaking off!) than they are on 1984/1985.

* The canopy can be lighter in color and have a stripe painted across it, or it can be darker

*** There are examples of lighter canopies without the stripe, but is that from the factory, or is that just the paint rubbed/cleaned off?  I am not aware of a definitive answer.

*** Did undated ever get ligher canopies?  Possibly, not sure.  Did 1984/1985?  Possibly, but doubtful in my opinion.

* Matsushiro and undated Bandai have parts that all basically share molds

* 1984 and 1985 have parts that all basically share molds - there are some exceptions though.  For example, a back flap that has a mold mark of 2 will not easily fit into a back plate with a mold mark of 1.

* It is very possible to build a Frankenstein with parts from Matsushiro/undated mixed with 1984/1985, but there will be many small mismatches, and in some places, parts just won't fit at all.

I know this is a terrible post since there aren't any pictures of all the stuff I'm talking about; I wasn't planning to get into it yet.  But another BIG issue that comes up when trying to evaluate all this stuff is that over the course of the production of all the Jetfires, there may have been a great many rare variations, so no overall assessment based on google searching for pictures, or the 20 Jetfires I own, or the opinions/recollections of other collectors or ebay sellers, is going to give us a definitive answer to most of these kinds of questions.

For example, I found an elbow with a mold marking of 4 on it.  Did you know they went out to 4?  Did they go out to 5? 

Ok, to make this post at least somewhat marginally ok, instead of just straight up boring and bad, here are a couple Jetfire parts shots.  The aforementioned elbow with a 4 on it, and some thigh pieces that show that even when grouped by Mat/undated and 1984/1985, there can be structural differences.

But anyway, after all this, I do intend to come back here with additional requests for input on naming the various parts.  So keep an eye on this space if you like that sort of thing.

 

 

 

Edited March 1, 2022 by GrampaStump

[GrampaStump]

What should we call the three jets/thrusters/engines/turbines/intakes on the front and back of the tail section?  See the picture.  The red arrow points to the larger ones, and the yellow arrow points to the smaller ones.

In my original notes I called them "jets, large" and "jets, small."  And maybe that is fine, but I wanted to see if there was something better and/or more authentic.  The first alternative I thought of was thrusters, but I think there is a problem with that.  I don't want there to be any confusion, and I suspect when people think of thrusters, they will probably think of the giant armor / booster things that attach to the back.

Any advise on what these actually are, and what we can call them, appreciated!

 

[jenius]

I think this gets more confusing because of regional market differences. Jetfires sold in Europe may not be the same as those sold elsewhere, etc. The nature of the manufacture also means there may be fewer bright lines. Head lasers leftover from the previous run may be used until they were gone and then replaced with ones from the newest mold. So it may be that toys after date X typically have these changes... But there may be some that don't. 

I vote "backpack thrust nozzles" for that part.

I think the "4" is probably a part # to help with assembly rather than a version. Curious we don't see more #s on other parts though.

Edited March 6, 2022 by jenius

[GrampaStump]

I have not been able to pin down any regional differences, but there are definitely different revisions to the molds used to create them.  The original versions have very few manufacturers marks (like the 4), but some of them do have a number or letter to indicate left or right, most likely to help the assemblers of the toys in the factory.  But then they remade the entire mold - every single part changed, some of them non-interchangeably with the original ones.  On the new molds, just about every single part does have a mark on it, although typically they are not obvious, usually not visible without disassembly.  But this is not unique to Valkyries - if you take apart any mass produced plastic product, you are likely to find marks like this.  I took apart some headphones that weren't working, and chuckled to myself as I noted "R15" on the inside of the right ear piece, and "L27" on the left.  I assume this is because these molds eventually wear out, and for quality control, they need to know which parts were produced on which molds.  The most common mold marks by far are L1 and R1,  but there are also L2, R3, and on parts without a left or right, 1, 2, 3, and as I showed in that picture, at least one 4!  There are also A, B, C, and sometimes those have a number too.  The A, B, C letters are for parts which there are two of, but for which it doesn't matter which one goes on left or right - they are the same on both sides.

 

Here are some pictures, because as I've been told many times, people like pictures not paragraphs!

The inner shoulder pieces, the red arrow points to an "R" on an older / Matsushiro / undated Bandai type shoulder.  The yellow arrow points to an R1 on a Bandai 1984/1985 type.

The upper arm pieces, there is an A 1, A 2, and a B 1. Just ignore that 2 of them are dyed black.  It was done after market.  I did not do the dying, but I plan to use them.  I've always loved the idea of having field-repaired Valkyries with different colored parts, so I don't mind having a few alternate colored dyed parts.

Anyway, I have looked at tons of these, so to summarize again, all Bandai 1984/1985 parts have a marking of some kind, and most Matsushrio and undated Bandai that have a left and right part also have a simple L or R marking (or 0 and 1 in the case of the forearms).  And presumably as the production runs went on and they needed to make more of them, the numbers and letters incremented.  I've even seen examples where one mark appears on top of another - which is odd, considering these are injection molded.  And there appears to be a run of metal shoulder hinges where the L and R marking were misapplied and appear on both left and right side pieces.  I can believe that is a mistake at the factory, because those parts are very hard to identify as left or right, and I can easily imagine even the people modifying the mold making a mistake.  Ah! I've done it again, another paragraph.  Now for the pictures.

 

 

Edited March 6, 2022 by GrampaStump

[Bobby]

Hmm with naming you have to determine which mode takes precedence in helping to identify the part. If fighter mode the tail assembly that houses the horizontal/vertical stabilizers, exhaust, etc. is called the empennage ... and since these are smaller (aka vernier) they could be referred to as the 'empennage vernier thrusters.' But if battroid mode is easier for identifying parts and takes priority, then perhaps 'backpack vernier thrusters'. Also, in space vernier thrusters are used for fine tuning direction, rotation, velocity, etc. of the spacecraft and as you well know battroid mode's backpack has the vernier thrusters on both ends which lends to this function (albeit fictional).

[GrampaStump]

I agree, I think about exactly that issue of priority when naming some of these less obvious parts.  In this case, you could be reading from my own notes.  Empennage vernier thrusters were all there.  I also thought about how in space these might be called maneuvering thrusters.  Ultimately I thought in this instance simpler would be better, and I was hoping to come up with a 1 word answer.  So that leads me back to thrusters, with the bigger ones being called large and the smaller (flattish panel) being called small.

 

Another piece I'm trying to name is the housing for those jets (see the picture below) - and this one I really have no good airplane or robot-related terms for.  I have called the whole empennage area the "backpack" and the "jetpack" at different times, but I don't really like either of those.  "Back cap" was my first draft term, and then I changed it to "back shell" or just "shell" in my second/current draft, but I'm open to public input on this one.

 

[sketchley]

What about:

• backpack cover
• backpack shell

The only thing I'd be concerned with, in using the shorter 'cover' or 'shell' is that it is not immediately obvious where it goes for the common user.

[Bobby]

On 3/7/2022 at 3:38 PM, GrampaStump said:

Ultimately I thought in this instance simpler would be better, and I was hoping to come up with a 1 word answer. 

Makes perfect sense ... I see now it's more of "explain it to me like I'm a 5yr old" that way we'll know exactly what you're talking about as easy as possible and technical facets aside. I agree with Sketchley, in this instance you kinda have to use 'backpack' even if you don't prefer it because there's really no mistaking what part you're talking about ... I'd add plate (backpack cover plate) and wager a 5yr old would know exactly where to point to 😄 

With the goal of simpler=better you might not be able to reduce some naming down to less than 3 words. While 'wings' 'canopy' 'landing gear' 'nose cone' are easy/universal, it's the proprietary parts that need more contextual relationship.

Perhaps the formula could be:

1st word = general vicinity (head, leg, arm, etc.)

2nd word = part/piece (laser, thruster, hinge, etc.)

3rd word (if necessary) = modifier/detail (large, channel, plate, etc.)

For ex. head laser channel, backpack small thruster/backpack large thruster, backpack cover plate 

... you could use hyphens to get it down to 2 words:

head-laser channel, backpack small-thruster, backpack coverplate, etc.

I'm guessing lots of this is actually already in your notes!

[GrampaStump]

I'm not trying to give the BOM a 5 year old comprehension level, but I do want it to be a common language we can all communicate in clearly.  Maybe more like 18 years / no college required.  Simplicity is a factor, but not the only factor.  Sometimes a clear and simple word will be a good stand-in for a more technically accurate phrase that is uncommon and/or long.

I appreciate the input, though.  And maybe I'm wrong, but perhaps you were subtly teasing me ("...already in your notes"), in which case, bonus points!  I totally love it.  (But if you were being earnest, that is fine too!)

So back to the "shell" piece.  You're right that shell doesn't give any clue as to where it goes or what it is.  I had been using both backpack and jetpack, but the reason I want to get away from both of those terms is that they seem kind of childish.  One makes me think of a kid wearing a backpack walking to school, and the other a rocket pack that a sci-fi nerd would build in his garage to fly around and bounce off the walls with.

Maybe back shell?  Or jet shell?

I've got the overall BOM finished now, all parts listed out, the most commonly broken components of the parts also given their own names.  I'm just working out a few details, like renaming the backpack, and figuring out if the landing latches for the front landing gear are identical to the ones on the back (I think so, but want to confirm), and a few other details like that.  Once I get it all sorted out, maybe I'll post it here for anyone who is interested to give feedback... or start using if/when they discuss parts of a 1/55 Valkyrie!

 

[sketchley]

6 hours ago, GrampaStump said:

So back to the "shell" piece.  You're right that shell doesn't give any clue as to where it goes or what it is.  I had been using both backpack and jetpack, but the reason I want to get away from both of those terms is that they seem kind of childish.  One makes me think of a kid wearing a backpack walking to school, and the other a rocket pack that a sci-fi nerd would build in his garage to fly around and bounce off the walls with.

Maybe back shell?  Or jet shell?

For me, backpack is something one wears on the back, irrespective of the age.  E.g.: Soldiers wear backpacks.  Rover scouts where backpacks when they go hiking.  And so on and so forth.

As for jetpack, what does Boba Fett have? 

Of course, rocket pack should be perfectly acceptable, as it is a literal description (according to the official setting, there are 3 liquid rocket boosters in there).

 

The alternative is you can adopt some kind of code.  E.g.:  BP-shell (= Backpack-shell), BP-nozzle plate, BP-nozzle

[GrampaStump]

Here is one I never thought about before.  What do you call the roundy thing on the back that pokes out on the original models, and in on some of the newer ones?

[GrampaStump]

Initially I wasn't going to bother giving names to these parts, because they aren't particularly prone to breaking, but then I just found one today broken off and figured what the hell, might as well have a name for it.  (The little points that stick off the back of the tail plate, circled in the picture below!)

[no3Ljm]

3 hours ago, GrampaStump said:

Initially I wasn't going to bother giving names to these parts, because they aren't particularly prone to breaking, but then I just found one today broken off and figured what the hell, might as well have a name for it.  (The little points that stick off the back of the tail plate, circled in the picture below!)

Based on the schematic, it's called 'FC'.

Hope these attached schematics can help you label the parts you needed.

[GrampaStump]

Very interesting.  Those drawings could be very useful.  In this case, I don't think I'm going to call that part "FC" because I'd rather use a word, but its a good starting place.

I looked at the schematics of an F-14 Tomcat (which I believe is the primary inspiration for the Valkyrie in fighter mode) and found something that looks very similar on the rear vertical stabilizers that are called the electronic countermeasure aerials (or ECM aerials, for short).  So think I've got my name!

 

Edited March 19, 2022 by GrampaStump

[sketchley]

8 hours ago, GrampaStump said:

Very interesting.  Those drawings could be very useful.  In this case, I don't think I'm going to call that part "FC" because I'd rather use a word, but its a good starting place.

I looked at the schematics of an F-14 Tomcat (which I believe is the primary inspiration for the Valkyrie in fighter mode) and found something that looks very similar on the rear vertical stabilizers that are called the electronic countermeasure aerials (or ECM aerials, for short).  So think I've got my name!

 

"FC"... I also don't like it, as FCS usually refers to "Fire Control System".

The image source is the Variable Fighter's Aero Report article in This is Animation: Macross Plus.  Alas, that's what it is labelled as in Japanese (with no description of what "FC" stands for).  For better or for worse, there are known typos in that article, so I suggest taking it with a grain of salt.

 

ECM antenna/aerial makes much more sense, all things considered.

[no3Ljm]

2 hours ago, sketchley said:

"FC"... I also don't like it, as FCS usually refers to "Fire Control System".

Out of curiosity. For avionics/aviation, which is more used for FCS? Flight Control System or Fire Control System?

11 hours ago, GrampaStump said:

Very interesting.  Those drawings could be very useful.  In this case, I don't think I'm going to call that part "FC" because I'd rather use a word, but its a good starting place.

I looked at the schematics of an F-14 Tomcat (which I believe is the primary inspiration for the Valkyrie in fighter mode) and found something that looks very similar on the rear vertical stabilizers that are called the electronic countermeasure aerials (or ECM aerials, for short).  So think I've got my name!

Also, I tried searching on what the FC stands for in-relation to airplane/avionics/aviation and it gave me Flight Cycle and Fighter Control. Not sure what's the best meaning for it and this is just basing it on the cutaway diagram and which I think that makes more sense on what FC stands for.

And I think ECM also makes more sense. Anyways, just name it what you think that fits.

 

Edited March 20, 2022 by no3Ljm

[sketchley]

3 hours ago, no3Ljm said:

Out of curiosity. For avionics/aviation, which is more used for FCS? Flight Control System or Fire Control System?

I can't say authoritatively, but context plays a strong role.

For example: "the Boeing747 FCS" probably means Flight Control, but "the F-18 FCS" is unclear.

3 hours ago, no3Ljm said:

And I think ECM also makes more sense. Anyways, just name it what you think that fits.

There's no other antenna on that part, is there?*  If not, referring to them as "antenna" should be fine.  E.g.: backpack cover antenna (L).

 

* like the long-thin one coming out of the top in this hand-drawn image:

https://macross.fandom.com/wiki/VF-1D_Valkyrie?file=VF-1D+GERWALK.gif

Edited March 20, 2022 by sketchley

[slide]

On 3/20/2022 at 2:06 AM, no3Ljm said:

Out of curiosity. For avionics/aviation, which is more used for FCS? Flight Control System or Fire Control System?

If you meant "Fire Control" as in fighting a fire: onboard fire-fighting systems are generally referred to as "Fire Extinguishers" or "Fire Suppression Systems"

In the F-14 they are certainly referred to as "extinguishers"

Note the "FIRE EXT SW" [Fire Extinguisher Switch] marking on the Fuel cut-off handles [top left/top right of the instrument panel, in yellow and black stripes]

 

If you meant "Fire Control" as in Launching a Missile, they tend to stay away from that wording to deconflict the acronyms. [**non-english-speaking nations mileage may vary]

Pilots would never say "Firing" when employing a weapons system [like Tom Cruise did in Top Gun] because the word "Fire" is reserved for emergencies/flame-related moments.

#8 is the "big red button" in the RIO seat that sends an AIM-54 Phoenix at some poor sucker. Note the label:

#13 is the "select the next poor sucker from the TWS priority list" switch.

 

 

On 3/20/2022 at 6:05 AM, sketchley said:

I can't say authoritatively, but context plays a strong role.

For example: "the Boeing747 FCS" probably means Flight Control, but "the F-18 FCS" is unclear.

FCS in the F/A-18 would refer only to the Flight Control Systems. 

Here is the "FCS Page" on one of the hornet's DDIs

 

 

 

 

I think calling the "FC" parts in question ECM blisters/antennae makes the most sense.

[pengbuzz]

8 hours ago, slide said:

If you meant "Fire Control" as in fighting a fire: onboard fire-fighting systems are generally referred to as "Fire Extinguishers" or "Fire Suppression Systems"

In the F-14 they are certainly referred to as "extinguishers"

Note the "FIRE EXT SW" [Fire Extinguisher Switch] marking on the Fuel cut-off handles [top left/top right of the instrument panel, in yellow and black stripes]

 

If you meant "Fire Control" as in Launching a Missile, they tend to stay away from that wording to deconflict the acronyms. [**non-english-speaking nations mileage may vary]

Pilots would never say "Firing" when employing a weapons system [like Tom Cruise did in Top Gun] because the word "Fire" is reserved for emergencies/flame-related moments.

#8 is the "big red button" in the RIO seat that sends an AIM-54 Phoenix at some poor sucker. Note the label:

#13 is the "select the next poor sucker from the TWS priority list" switch.

 

 

FCS in the F/A-18 would refer only to the Flight Control Systems. 

Here is the "FCS Page" on one of the hornet's DDIs

 

 

 

 

I think calling the "FC" parts in question ECM blisters/antennae makes the most sense.

*drools*