Variable Fighter Master File VF-19 Excalibur

[azrael]

- the Variable Fighter Master File VF-19 Excalibur unfortunately repeats the now infamous VF-19F/S engine errors found within Macross Chronicle issues #27 and #41. We had a thread about that and I even created a dedicated page on my website to document the nature of that error. So the VF-19F does NOT have 78,500 kg of thrust, but 72,500 kg of thrust per engine.

You sure it's an error?

[sketchley]

You sure it's an error?

Seconded.

The question I have is: where did those original figures for the VF-19F and VF-19S come from?

[Vic Mancini]

You sure it's an error?

Well, errors are possible. I don't have the actual book, but from the preview scans I'm seeing the high-speed variable wing mode is definitely different from the original line art over at MMM. Something changed there. Whether it's a "error" or merely a retconned factoid, (like the size of the VF-11 was almost retconned), I guess we'll never know for sure.

[Mr March]

Is it okay if we cease doubting every piece of official trivia in the Macross Compendium prior to 2008? Because if this endlessly repeated "suggestion of doubt" is supposedly debunking the last 25 years of published Macross trivia, There Will Be Facepalms. Seriously, we all KNOW most fans source the Macross Compendium. We're also all well aware Egan Loo didn't provide a book title, page number, ISBN and favorite beer ALL in triplicate to match every translated Macross fact of the last 15 years. If someone wants to do that (if sourcing old publications would be accepted by critics and not simply dismissed out of turn anyway), then I wish the best. Otherwise, I'll assume MW still permits us to quote the definitive work of Egan Loo (with Azrael too) as a dependable source.

Besides, the Macross Chronicle CONFIRMS both original VF-19F/S thrust ratings (simply swapped) as well as 99% of all previously published Macross trivia. That means the Chronicle is SOURCING and CONFIRMING that very same original trivia regardless of which long-since-out-of-print book was used.

You sure it's an error?

Excellent question. Depends upon whether we're Tom Cruise fans and card carrying members of the Church of the Chronicle. After all, if it's in the Chronicle, it MUST be gospel, right?

Well, errors are possible. I don't have the actual book, but from the preview scans I'm seeing the high-speed variable wing mode is definitely different from the original line art over at MMM. Something changed there. Whether it's a "error" or merely a retconned factoid, (like the size of the VF-11 was almost retconned), I guess we'll never know for sure.

What is different about it?

[Vic Mancini]

What is different about it?

The wing <magically> folds straight back into the leg on it's original hinge in the line art, and it seems to unhinge and slide outward before retracting against the leg in what I've seen from the Master File.

[sketchley]

Is it okay if we cease doubting every piece of official trivia in the Macross Compendium prior to 2008?

(...)

Excellent question. Depends upon whether we're Tom Cruise fans and card carrying members of the Church of the Chronicle. After all, if it's in the Chronicle, it MUST be gospel, right?

What's with the pissy attitude? You were asked what your source was, a simple "the Macross Compendium" answer would suffice.

2nd, if you're going to diss people who accept the changes made in Macross Chronicle, than you have to be equally accepting that not everyone accepts the data in the Macross Compendium as being free from error.

3rd perhaps you'd have more doubt in your source if you have had found mistranslations and inconsistencies.

Besides, the Macross Chronicle CONFIRMS both original VF-19F/S thrust ratings (simply swapped) as well as 99% of all previously published Macross trivia. That means the Chronicle is SOURCING and CONFIRMING that very same original trivia regardless of which long-since-out-of-print book was used.

See point 3 about mistranslations. Were the two numbers accidently swapped by the translator? That's the root of my questioning.

Now, believe you me, I checked in my substantial collection of Macross and Macross related publications before asking the question. The data's not there. Which leads me to think it might have appeared in some other trade magazine (ie: Great Mechanics, Model Graphix) and not one of the "official" publications that bear the Big West stamp (ie: TiA:M7 TV Animation Materials, TiAS:M7).

Edited June 7, 2010 by sketchley

[Seto Kaiba]

You sure it's an error?

Seconded.

Let's see... the alleged "correction" swaps a single digit in each thrust rating, but it uses the VF-19S's atmospheric thrust rating as though that were the engine's only mode of operation, it doesn't change the weight differential, and comes with a rationalization so poor even a grade schooler's knowledge of aerodynamics is enough to tell you it doesn't hold water.

Really, it's hard to make an error MORE obvious without circling it in red ink and writing "VERY POOR. SEE ME AFTER CLASS " next to it.

Well, errors are possible. [...] Something changed there. Whether it's a "error" or merely a retconned factoid, (like the size of the VF-11 was almost retconned), I guess we'll never know for sure.

Just like the MAT book before it, the Master File is mechanical design porn. It's meant to be a lot of pretty pictures and some realistic looking diagrams for people who're into that sort of thing (in short, people like us). If they're trying to make it look somewhat realistic (and they are) then it's not going to line up with the animation perfectly due to the animation not always behaving in ways that are obvious and mechanically feasible from a real-world standpoint. I'd say more about the Master File's accuracy and reliability (or more precisely, lack thereof), but the distinction should be obvious and has been beaten to death already.

Edited June 7, 2010 by Seto Kaiba

[azrael]

Let's see... the alleged "correction" swaps a single digit in each thrust rating, but it uses the VF-19S's atmospheric thrust rating as though that were the engine's only mode of operation, it doesn't change the weight differential, and comes with a rationalization so poor even a grade schooler's knowledge of aerodynamics is enough to tell you it doesn't hold water.

Perhaps I'm not making myself clear. I'm not asking if it's rational or aerodynamically sound. I'm asking if he's sure it's an print error. I have yet to see the Chronicle issue a new sheet for it. They were quick enough catch an error in sheet numbering and re-issue the sheet.

[anime52k8]

Just like the MAT book before it, the Master File is mechanical design porn. It's meant to be a lot of pretty pictures and some realistic looking diagrams for people who're into that sort of thing (in short, people like us). If they're trying to make it look somewhat realistic (and they are) then it's not going to line up with the animation perfectly due to the animation not always behaving in ways that are obvious and mechanically feasible from a real-world standpoint. I'd say more about the Master File's accuracy and reliability (or more precisely, lack thereof), but the distinction should be obvious and has been beaten to death already.

but the the Master Files have Prettier looking illustrations, so clearly they're right and everything else is wrong.

Better pictures = Cooler book = Better book = More accurate source of information, Q.E.D.

[Graham]

I have a fairly extensive collection of Macross books and related publications, so I'll start checking through them and see if I can find the source of the original thrust figures for the VF-19F/S. I seem to recall that one source might be the instruction sheet for the Bandai 1/100 scale VF-19F/S plamodel. Another non-book source may be the box of the Bandai 1/65 scale VF-19S toy. I can't check until I get home tonight.

Graham

[Seto Kaiba]

Perhaps I'm not making myself clear. I'm not asking if it's rational or aerodynamically sound. I'm asking if he's sure it's an print error. I have yet to see the Chronicle issue a new sheet for it. They were quick enough catch an error in sheet numbering and re-issue the sheet.

Has every error or failure to properly do research been corrected in Chronicle? Hell no. Have they released new sheets to correct art mistakes or fill in data that was omitted in stats blocks before? No. There's a not-inconsiderable body of things in Chronicle that we can definitively say are errors, and we've yet to see a corrected sheet for any of them. Assuming that they meant to do it all along because they haven't made a special exception and published a corrected sheet is unwise in the extreme.

(Having an entire sheet misnumbered is a rather more severe error in the grand scheme of things, as that affects the way things are organized into the binders...)

Edited June 7, 2010 by Seto Kaiba

[Graham]

There are a few issues here as I see it, that need resolving:

1) Are the Master Files books to be considered canonical or not? Initial indications would seem to suggest not, given that parts of the VF-1 book were taken from the MAT Sky Angles book, which is essentially fan-fiction. However, if Kawamori is listed as supervisor on the VF-1 and VF-19 Master Files, does that now legitimize them? When I met with Tenjin in April, together with Save & Renato, I asked Tenjin why he had not contributed any art to these books and I seem to recall he mentioned something about them not being 'official'. I should have thought to ask the question earlier that day in our visit to the Big West Office.

2) Is retconned VF-19S engine stat in Macross Chronicle a typo or not? My gut feeling is yes, it is, but rather than come clean, admit their mistake and print a corrected page, the writers, for whatever reason decided to come up with this rather nonsensical explanation to justify the revised engine ratings.

3) From which source did the compendium obtain the orginal VF-19F/S engine thrust ratings?

Graham

[Talos]

I thought I would post this up for discussion about the high-speed mode on the YF-19 versus the original Macross Plus line art. At least this one has a place for the entire wing to go.

[Graham]

Something else just popped into my mind. The FAST packs shown mounted on the VF-19A in the opening movie of the 1997 Playstation game Macross Digital Mission VF-X, where also not covered in the VF-19 Master Files Book.

Pity, I would have liked to see information on those as well. They seemed to look fairly close to VF-1 style back FAST backs, but with upper and lower thrust vectoring paddles.

For those not familiar with the movie, just look up 'Macross Digital Mission VF-X' on Youtube.

Graham

[Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0]

Something tells me Kawamori wasn't very hands on with these Master Files books; they seem more like doujin made by dedicated fans as opposed to an official book with canonical statistics. Perhaps he knew that these were being made and just looked for inaccuracies with regards to the illustrations and renders as opposed to the statistical data.

Bear in mind this in no way makes these books less awesome to me in any way, I LOVE these kinds of books, canonical or not. They are awesome. Great to read for pure enjoyment and very helpful for reference.

My opinion on the F/S engines is that the data was switched and that the S model has the higher output. I don't see a reason for the F model to have higher output.

Also, I take it from the posts today that the canards/longer wings on the VF-19A/Kai/P don't make much of a difference compared to a VF-19F/S in the atmosphere?

[David Hingtgen]

The bigger moment arm would give a long-winged -19 superior roll-rate and roll-response, period. But everything else seems pretty miniscule.

[Seto Kaiba]

1) Are the Master Files books to be considered canonical or not? Initial indications would seem to suggest not, given that parts of the VF-1 book were taken from the MAT Sky Angles book, which is essentially fan-fiction. However, if Kawamori is listed as supervisor on the VF-1 and VF-19 Master Files, does that now legitimize them?

Probably not, IMO... having Masahiro Chiba as a writer does nothing to legitimize the content in the MAT book, so I can't see why having Kawamori in a vaguely designed role like "supervisor" would be any better. We don't even know if he had any input into the creation of the book's contents, and there's certainly no proof of any kind that he intended to use the book to retcon material from unambiguously official sources like Chronicle and the various art books.

Usually, when a franchise produces something like a technical manual, it's non-canon no matter who's writing it. Star Trek is an excellent example of this, with a fair few tech manuals, all of which are non-canon, and many of which were written by major members of the production crew like art directors (Herman Zimmerman), visual effects artists (Doug Drexler), senior illustrators (Rich Sternbach), and scenic art supervisors (Mike Okuda).

2) Is retconned VF-19S engine stat in Macross Chronicle a typo or not? My gut feeling is yes, it is, but rather than come clean, admit their mistake and print a corrected page, the writers, for whatever reason decided to come up with this rather nonsensical explanation to justify the revised engine ratings.

Unless someone can find a REALLY good explanation for it, the safest assumption to make is that it's a simple typographical error that didn't get caught until they'd already finalized the graphics for that sheet. That they tried to come up with a rationalization, and that it was that weak, smacks of a hasty attempt to amend their error by explaining that the VF-19S really is supposed to have superior performance to the VF-19F without having to delay the issue (for which the article was featured).

Edited June 7, 2010 by Seto Kaiba

[Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0]

The bigger moment arm would give a long-winged -19 superior roll-rate and roll-response, period. But everything else seems pretty miniscule.

This is going to sound very noobish of me, but what is a moment arm?

[Knight26]

I remember a long time ago we figured out that the yf-19 wing does some origami to get into the high speed config, with the leading and trailing edges either folding flat, 180 degrees, against the rest of the wing, or retracting into the high camber portion before swinging back. I always agreed with the second method as it makes more sense in Aero-D, but both are horrid for structures. Of course it could be some advanced aerolastic wing as well.

[sketchley]

(...) the writers, for whatever reason decided to come up with this rather nonsensical explanation to justify the revised engine ratings.

Where has the translation to this been posted?

EDIT: I was PMed the line of text, in Japanese. Nevertheless, the question still stands: has a translation of that article been posted online?

Edited June 7, 2010 by sketchley

[sketchley]

I have a fairly extensive collection of Macross books and related publications, so I'll start checking through them and see if I can find the source of the original thrust figures for the VF-19F/S. I seem to recall that one source might be the instruction sheet for the Bandai 1/100 scale VF-19F/S plamodel. Another non-book source may be the box of the Bandai 1/65 scale VF-19S toy. I can't check until I get home tonight.

Graham

The Bandai 1/100 VF-19 "Blazer Valkryie" seems like the most likely source. Anyhow, I'll tell you where the data is not (so it'll help the search):

TiA: M7 TV Animation Materials

TiAS: M7

Roman Album: Fire Bomber Formal Programme in Macross 7

Shouji Kawamori Macross Design Works

Shouji Kawamori Design Works

Figure Ou No. 77 "Macross Chronicle"

Macross Digital Mission VF-X Guide

Great Mechanics.DX 4~12

Great Mechanics 76, 88, 93, 95, 105

Edited June 7, 2010 by sketchley

[David Hingtgen]

"Moment arm" isn't a noobish term at all. For planes, it's part of "moment" which is basically a "measurement of effectiveness" a control surface has over a plane's movement. Example:

All planes balance about their center of gravity. All forces acting upon a plane are considered to be some distance and direction from this point. All forces (including lift) will effectively treat the center of gravity as the pivot point that the plane will move about. Think of a teeter-totter. Pushing at the ends, is much more effective than pushing near the middle. Even if it's the same amount of force, the further away from the pivot point that a force is applied, the more effect you'll get.

Moment is very similar to torque (if not identical). It's force multiplied by distance. 5ft and 200lbs is the same as 200ft and 5lbs, they're both 1000ft-lbs. A plane's ailerons roll the plane about its center of gravity---the further out they are, the more effect they have. This is why ailerons are near a wing's tips in the first place.

The distance, is the "arm" of the moment. (the preceding sentence applies for all physics, not just planes)

If the ailerons can exert, say, 1000lbs of force, and they are 20ft from the center of gravity, then the moment arm is 20ft, and the moment is 20,000lb-ft. This is the reason that if a plane is shortened (as opposed to stretched) it will often need a BIGGER tail, as the moment arm (distance from the center of gravity) of the tail surfaces has been reduced---so the raw amount of force needs to be increased to make up for it, to have as much moment/effectiveness as the original version.

A plane with a wider wingspan, assuming the ailerons are at the tips, will always have a larger moment arm, and thus moment, vs a plane with shorter wings. (unless the shorter plane's ailerons are increased in size to compensate--which doesn't appear to be the case in the VF-19F/S)

Also, as I'm sure the YF-19's canards can apply at least a bit of roll, their loss would exacerbate (though only slightly) the F/S's decrease in roll.

Of course---if the F/S's ankle verniers are notably superior to the original version, and work well in the atmosphere, they may be enough to compensate for the loss of aileron effectiveness.

[Graham]

Where has the translation to this been posted?

This is not a translation. It is the theory that was postulated here on MW.

Graham

[Graham]

"Moment arm" isn't a noobish term at all. For planes, it's part of "moment" which is basically a "measurement of effectiveness" a control surface has over a plane's movement. Example:

All planes balance about their center of gravity. All forces acting upon a plane are considered to be some distance and direction from this point. All forces (including lift) will effectively treat the center of gravity as the pivot point that the plane will move about. Think of a teeter-totter. Pushing at the ends, is much more effective than pushing near the middle. Even if it's the same amount of force, the further away from the pivot point that a force is applied, the more effect you'll get.

Moment is very similar to torque (if not identical). It's force multiplied by distance. 5ft and 200lbs is the same as 200ft and 5lbs, they're both 1000ft-lbs. A plane's ailerons roll the plane about its center of gravity---the further out they are, the more effect they have. This is why ailerons are near a wing's tips in the first place.

The distance, is the "arm" of the moment. (the preceding sentence applies for all physics, not just planes)

If the ailerons can exert, say, 1000lbs of force, and they are 20ft from the center of gravity, then the moment arm is 20ft, and the moment is 20,000lb-ft. This is the reason that if a plane is shortened (as opposed to stretched) it will often need a BIGGER tail, as the moment arm (distance from the center of gravity) of the tail surfaces has been reduced---so the raw amount of force needs to be increased to make up for it, to have as much moment/effectiveness as the original version.

A plane with a wider wingspan, assuming the ailerons are at the tips, will always have a larger moment arm, and thus moment, vs a plane with shorter wings. (unless the shorter plane's ailerons are increased in size to compensate--which doesn't appear to be the case in the VF-19F/S)

Also, as I'm sure the YF-19's canards can apply at least a bit of roll, their loss would exacerbate (though only slightly) the F/S's decrease in roll.

Of course---if the F/S's ankle verniers are notably superior to the original version, and work well in the atmosphere, they may be enough to compensate for the loss of aileron effectiveness.

Thanks David. Very clear explanation.

Graham

[Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0]

Thanks for the explanation David, that elaborated a lot and cleared up a lot of stuff for me.

I just got my copy today, it is an EXCELLENT book. Love the line art and details. Funny thing is, most of the VF-19F line art features the longer wings. Aren't the shorter wings shown in the anime more? Also the 1/100 model and upcoming VF HI METAL Blazer Valkyries use the shorter wings IIRC. The Skull 1 VF-19A was cool to see too. Seems to me that the authors LOVE the VF-19F because it's seen more than the S and other models. The VF-11 with FSW wings was cool to see too.

I'd like to see the VFA-19A Assault Excalibur in battroid mode. Also, correct me if I'm wrong but is the following info correct?:

• VF-19A has faster roll rate than the VF-19F/S models unless the latter have more vernier thrusters in specific locations
  
• VF-199F/S however, have the highest thrust output and thrust to weight ratios
  
• Verniers aft of canopy on VF-19F/S can help not only in space but the atmosphere
  

Edited June 7, 2010 by Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0

[Vic Mancini]

I thought I would post this up for discussion about the high-speed mode on the YF-19 versus the original Macross Plus line art. At least this one has a place for the entire wing to go.

Nice, thanks for posting that.

Looks like the mechanics that pivot the wing around are not only inside the wing root, but inside the wing itself.

It also looks like the wing may be able to slide around in that root/glove more than I thought. In the bottom-left diagram it shows the wing fully retracted in a different way than the full retraction in the coloured/storage mode illustration. Probably because the bottom-left (high speed mode) retraction would scrape the pavement if the wings were also angled 90 degrees down for storage mode. ....If any of that makes sense.

Either way, the high speed mode in the master file is different than the anime and line art. The master file way would involve de-hinging the wing root mid-air for a brief moment to get into high speed mode, also. And I'm pretty sure that didn't happen in the anime. But whatever. The Master File makes more sense mechanically, so it's probably retconned by the big guy himself.

[David Hingtgen]

Anyone have any translations from that page? The "shaded in very light grey" panels near the wing root still aren't explained---are they hinged? Retractable? That's the area that's always "sliced through the leg" when swinging back.

[Chronocidal]

My guess would be those function just like the leading edge of the X-02's wing in Ace Combat 4, split into upper and lower halves that part to allow the hinge to pass through, but close up to form a sealed edge once the hinge support is past.

Still doesn't explain how the wing then slides into the position shown in the colored picture though.

I'll have to grab a copy of this, these images look like they would be incredibly fun to build a flight sim model out of. I think the mid-sized wing version of the VF-19F might be my new favorite version of this plane.

What I do find annoying/funny though.. no matter how many times I see any variation of YF-19/VF-19 lineart.. I have yet to see any drawings that include even remotely reasonable divisions in the belly plates to allow for the transformation to work at all. At least this newest version seems to include panels along the fuselage that resemble the cut in the Yamato 1/60 and Bandai Hi-Metal used to shorten the forward fuselage.

[Vic Mancini]

Still doesn't explain how the wing then slides into the position shown in the colored picture though.

I was working on a theory in photoshop to see how the wing could configure into the hangar/storage mode (that's what I'm calling it) shown in the coloured picture. My theory involved the two mechanical arms, one telescopic, the other static, sliding backward into the wing root on an unseen track...(see yellow arrow). But then I ran into a whole new problem. I can't for the life of me figure out how the wing transforms into battroid mode.

If you line up the leading edge of the wing with the corner of the wing root like how it's supposed to be in the line art for battroid, the trailing corner of the wing sticks out of the wing root.

Does anyone have good scans of the master file battroid mode and how the wing is configured in relation to the wing root? Did they retcon the wing transformation to resemble the "hangar/storage" mode of the coloured picture? Cuz I'm at a loss.

EDIT/ADD:

Nevermind...I found a scan online. Looks like they did indeed retcon the way the wing transforms for Battroid. The leading edge of the wing no longer lines up with the corner of the root.

Edited June 8, 2010 by Vic Mancini

[Graham]

Looks like the VF-19F with the longer wings has about the same wingspan as a VF-19A, so roll rate should be about the same as a VF-19A, right?

Am I the only one that thinks the Assault-Calibur is a bit hokey. The only difference is those two little retractable beam guns under the nose, correct?

Forgot to dig out the VF-19S/F plamodel instructions last night to check if they have the engine thrust figures, as I didn't get home until late. Will do so tonight.

Also, want to compare the wingspan of my Bandai 1/250 scale VF-19 toys, as I seem to recall the VF-19F/S wingspan is not much different from the YF-19/VF-19Kai/P. Although I may be remembering wrongly.

Graham

[sketchley]

2) Is retconned VF-19S engine stat in Macross Chronicle a typo or not?

3) From which source did the compendium obtain the orginal VF-19F/S engine thrust ratings?

An update on this: in a recent PM conversation with someone who will remain annonymous (otherwise I feel they'd have posted the information themselves), the original Macross Compendium has had the information all along (original thrust ratings highlighted)

http://macross.anime.net/mecha/united_nations/variable/vf19/index.html

POWER PLANT: Two 56500 kg [x g] class Shinsei Industry/P&W/Roice FF-2200 thermonuclear turbine engines in VF-19A. Two 72500 kg [x g] class (maximum output in outer space) Shinnakasu Industry/P&W/Roice FF-2500F thermonuclear turbine engines in VF-19F. Two 78950 [68500] kg [x g] class (maximum output in outer space) Shinsei Industry/P&W/Roice FF-2550J in VF-19S. (...)

Macross Chronicle gives the VF-19S 68,950 kg x2, and the VF-19F 78,500 kg.

The VF-19 Master file gives the following thrust information,

YF-19: 64,700 kg x2 (space), 56,500 kg x2 (atmosphere)

VF-19A: 66,200 kg x2 (space), 57,200 kg x2 (atmosphere)

VF-19B: 66,200 kg x2 (space), 57,200 kg x2 (atmosphere)

VF-19C: 66,200 kg x2 (space), 57,200 kg x2 (atmosphere)

VF-19D: 66,200 kg x2 (space), 57,200 kg x2 (atmosphere)

VF-19E: 78,500 kg x2 (space)

VF-19F 78,500 kg x2 (space)

VF-19S 68,950 kg x2 (space)

VF-19P: 62,950 kg x2 (space)

VFA-19A, VEF-19D, VEF-19E, VC-19V, VRF-19D: thrust not listed

Thoughts and observations:

- the max thrust for the VF-19S has gone full circle back to approximately where they started.

- is it possible that the manufacturer of the product that gave the VF-19S a greater thrust made a typo and accidently reversed the VF-19F and S thrust stats?

- The max thrust of the VF-19F/S are NOT given for in an atmosphere. Does the S have higher max thrust than the F in an atmosphere? Text in Macross Chronicle indicates it is so.

- There is a noticeable drop in thrust after the VF-19F. Why is that? We know only one thing: the VF-19S and VF-19P have more functions (additional head lasers, speakers) than the VF-19F. Could the drop in max thrust in space be due to the requirement that power be used elsewhere? Could it be that despite any (relatively small) increases in thrust with the "more advanced" engines in the VF-19S and VF-19P, the increased power demands of the additional equipment effectively reduced the max thrust in space? Heck, as the VF-19P uses the exact same engines as the VF-19F (albiet a revision or two greater), isn't it interesting that they have significantly reduced max thrust in space? Hmmm

Anyhow, I'm still interested in knowing where the numbers come from. Though, given the information that's been on the Macross Compendium all along, I think there's a less pressing demand to know where the numbers came from.

Edited June 8, 2010 by sketchley

[sketchley]

Am I the only one that thinks the Assault-Calibur is a bit hokey. The only difference is those two little retractable beam guns under the nose, correct?

Text mentions that it's for attacks against terrorists and aliens. In addition to the dual laser turret (REB-33D), the wing-glove lasers have greater output (REB-35), and it has the FF-2550J/rev.2 engines (same as the VF-19E/F/P). And because of those engines, it has a lot more power (electricity), thus it can use the PPB in fighter mode, and can use it on the wings and nose, and something about hyper concrete shelters (ram attacks? Slices with the wings? Don't have the time to do a proper translation).

But I agree, it's hokey.

[sketchley]

Anyone have any translations from that page? The "shaded in very light grey" panels near the wing root still aren't explained---are they hinged? Retractable? That's the area that's always "sliced through the leg" when swinging back.

The very light gray shaded area is "moveable/mobile panel"

medium gray is: "mounting plate"

dark gray is: "main wing part/side actuator mount"

The wing-glove upper and lower bulges are also described as "moveable/mobile panels".

So... it looks like both the wing AND the wing glove deform in order for the wing to swivel. Neat.

Edited June 8, 2010 by sketchley

[sketchley]

Which, in itself, is not new to Macross nor the VFs in Macross. The revision to the VF-1's transformation well over a decade ago is the best example of that.

what got changed?

Hmmm... no one else answered this.

Well, for the original, see:

Macross Perfect Memory pg 158, 159

revised transformation, see:

Shoji Kawamori Macross Design Works pg 036

Macross Chronicle Mechanic SDFM UN 02D, E VF-1J

He removed the anime magic by using the actuators that move the air intakes/upper legs out of the way to allow the arms to fold out from jet to GERWALK, to move the legs down to the nose cone. What was the anime magic? The legs detached completely from the airframe and floated down to join the hips.

Fun with pictures: notice the different art style in this picture (drawn during the SDFM era) vs. this image (I presume it was drawn post M7 Dynamite, as it doesn't match the VF art style of that period nor is it printed in Macross books from the M7 era, like TiAS:M+)

Edited June 8, 2010 by sketchley

[VF5SS]

That's not a retcon. It's always been like that.

This image has existed in the Macross Hobby Handbook and as part of the data card for the HCM VF-1 since 1983.