Jump to content

NekkiBasara

Members
  • Content Count

    3
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About NekkiBasara

  • Rank
    Cannon Fodder
  • Birthday 04/04/1978

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  1. I think you may be right. The only way for the VF-11 to fit those specifications is to have the wings swept. I can see how it would make sense to measure the width of a plane at its smallest for carrier storage, but I could also see an argument for measuring a plane at its widest for maximum clearance while in flight. Thanks, Brand-X. That's the approach I am going to take. The Hasegawa VF-11 looks great; my only concern is that it doesn't transform, so the parts are proportioned for fighter mode only. I'll model it in fighter mode first, and then make adjustments where needed when I work o
  2. Hello everybody, This is my first thread, but I have a question that I feel only my fellow Macross fans could help to answer. I am an amateur 3D artist and as a hobby, I enjoy modeling Valkyries. I just started a new model of a VF-11 Thunderbolt. I want to make it as close to the line art as possible while still being able to transform it from fighter to battroid. For reference, I have Yamato's VF-11B and Hasegawa's injection kits. They look good and will work great, but I noticed when I started measuring them that the proportions don't match the specs given in all the documentation of the V
  3. VF-171 !!! There's never been a decent toy done for the VF-17. i have the Bandai toy and it's pitiful. I think part of the reason is a scaling issue. In the series, the parts don't remain a consistent size when it changes modes. When Macross F came out, The VF-17 was reshaped into the VF-171 to actually transform realistically now that the valkyries are being done via CGI.
×
×
  • Create New...