Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Seto's good at that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd just like to say how much I love the dumb nerd stuff we all regularly get into in this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Sildani said:

Seto's good at that. 

Credit where credit is due, I just have a good memory for detail... the truth is that, in Macross, the show's creators think of everything.

Really, EVERYTHING... even stuff you'd think is patently ridiculous like how overtechnology material science advancements impacted the designs of things like bolts and screws.

I've always loved seeing the attention to detail that goes into creating a truly immersive story, and I've been translating mecha anime publications for about 13 years now.  Macross does things on a completely different level from almost every other series I've looked at.  Your typical mecha title's publications will usually stop at a level of detail like "robot's gun X is Y caliber with Z-many rounds" or "it has a _________ reactor".  Macross will tell you the gun's muzzle velocity, that it's got seven types of shell and what they all are, how often the barrel assembly needs to be replaced, and how the targeting system works.  Macross won't stop at telling you what kind of reactor it is... it'll tell you how the reactor catalyzes its fusion reaction, the means by which it converts the energy into electricity, nominal and peak outputs for the generator, what fuel it uses, how much fuel the fighter carries, the fuel's mass per cubic liter, the fuel consumption rate, the difference in consumption at different altitudes, the exhaust velocity, and the manufacturer's recommended interval between engine overhauls.

Basically, most mecha shows give you Snapple Facts... Macross stops just shy of the level of detail you'd expect from a Jane's book or Haynes manual.  The only other metaseries I've seen that even comes close is Star Trek.

To date, there are only two technologies in Macross I don't have at least a moderately satisfactory explanation for.  One is Energy Conversion Armor.  The other is the Inertia Store Converter.  I've got the basics of their operation, but I haven't yet found an explanation of the underlying mechanism.  The missing pieces are whether the energy conversion armor is increasing structural rigidity in the hypercarbon composite layers or is somehow bringing down the elastic moduli in the laminate layers, and how precisely inertial forces are converted into dimensional shift energy to be stored in the ISC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That entire post was full of sexy... As an engineer as well I love that stuff.

I think he's right though, Macross gives more than Star Trek, which really only gives that much in the TNG technical manual (and spiritual successors) and is generally less... Scientific in that there is more made up words. (I say this but I still love it, and am in fact right at this moment at a Star Trek convention). 

You ever learn those missing pieces of info let me know... Cause I know what you're taking about in your guesses lol. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, aurance said:

Also - why do those ships transform?

It raises the LCF* of the class if it can transform.

 

 

 

*Look-Cool Factor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stuff that transforms is cool.

Anyway...I have a question in regards to the background info of the YF-19 Bird of Prey, Prototype #3 which was released by Yamato.  Does anyone have the translation from the back of the box of this Yamato release?  I need to know who piloted the fighter and from what base was it stationed at?  And if there's additional info, I'd like some of that as well.  :D

Thanks in advance!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Seto Kaiba said:

Really, EVERYTHING... even stuff you'd think is patently ridiculous like how overtechnology material science advancements impacted the designs of things like bolts and screws.

Hmm... Tell us more!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Master Dex said:

That entire post was full of sexy... As an engineer as well I love that stuff.

I think he's right though, Macross gives more than Star Trek, which really only gives that much in the TNG technical manual (and spiritual successors) and is generally less... Scientific in that there is more made up words. (I say this but I still love it, and am in fact right at this moment at a Star Trek convention). 

You ever learn those missing pieces of info let me know... Cause I know what you're taking about in your guesses lol. 

Star Trek lavishes most of its realism on propulsion systems, which are detailed with the kind of loving care that only a physics researcher could deliver.  Macross tends to spread the love to the other systems, but propulsion is also probably the single most detailed section.

 

 

5 hours ago, cypherzero said:

Anyway...I have a question in regards to the background info of the YF-19 Bird of Prey, Prototype #3 which was released by Yamato.  Does anyone have the translation from the back of the box of this Yamato release?  I need to know who piloted the fighter and from what base was it stationed at?  And if there's additional info, I'd like some of that as well.  :D

Thanks in advance!

I'm not aware of any existing translation of the box text for the Yamato YF-19-3, but I would be willing to take a whack at it this weekend if you can provide me with either scans of the text you want translated or some good, up-close, glare-free pictures of the text.  (Not being a collector, I don't have one myself.)

To the best of my knowledge, the Yamato YF-19-3 is rather different from Master File's YF-19-3, which was the ARIEL airframe control AI testbed built to the same spec as Isamu's YF-19-2 and piloted by Ludmila Blackwood.

 

 

3 hours ago, aurance said:

Hmm... Tell us more!

... really?  Well, OK.

From what I've gleaned on the subject, the application of overtechnology materials and metallic composite manufacturing techniques to the design of threaded fasteners like bolts provided the same dramatic increase in material strength and wear resistance that the moving parts of giant robots benefitted from.  They also enabled them to manufacture the threading on bolts to a far higher level of precision.  That precision enabled them to use a threading design that was more along the lines of a precisely cut, slightly flattened half-hexagon profile instead of the somewhat rounded triangular profile of a normal bolt threading.  As a result, they have a near-perfect pitch diameter, pitch, and angle match between bolt and nut, or screw and hole, providing an almost impossibly snug fit since the entire thread on both sides are engaging each other, instead of leaving small gaps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Seto Kaiba said:

 

I'm not aware of any existing translation of the box text for the Yamato YF-19-3, but I would be willing to take a whack at it this weekend if you can provide me with either scans of the text you want translated or some good, up-close, glare-free pictures of the text.  (Not being a collector, I don't have one myself.)

To the best of my knowledge, the Yamato YF-19-3 is rather different from Master File's YF-19-3, which was the ARIEL airframe control AI testbed built to the same spec as Isamu's YF-19-2 and piloted by Ludmila Blackwood.

 

I don't have the box anymore, as the previous seller must have kept it near something pungent.  However, the booklet has a section in regards to the background of the YF-19 Prototype #3 and #4.  I took a photo of the section for the #3, so this should be of some use.  I'm sure this is the same text that was on the back of the box.

Okay then, thanks for taking the time to translate it, and i'm sure there are many Macross fans who will greatly appreciate your time and effort in doing this.  :D

 

IMG_20170804_124538_1.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Seto Kaiba said:

Star Trek lavishes most of its realism on propulsion systems, which are detailed with the kind of loving care that only a physics researcher could deliver.  Macross tends to spread the love to the other systems, but propulsion is also probably the single most detailed section.

 

 

I'm not aware of any existing translation of the box text for the Yamato YF-19-3, but I would be willing to take a whack at it this weekend if you can provide me with either scans of the text you want translated or some good, up-close, glare-free pictures of the text.  (Not being a collector, I don't have one myself.)

To the best of my knowledge, the Yamato YF-19-3 is rather different from Master File's YF-19-3, which was the ARIEL airframe control AI testbed built to the same spec as Isamu's YF-19-2 and piloted by Ludmila Blackwood.

 

 

... really?  Well, OK.

From what I've gleaned on the subject, the application of overtechnology materials and metallic composite manufacturing techniques to the design of threaded fasteners like bolts provided the same dramatic increase in material strength and wear resistance that the moving parts of giant robots benefitted from.  They also enabled them to manufacture the threading on bolts to a far higher level of precision.  That precision enabled them to use a threading design that was more along the lines of a precisely cut, slightly flattened half-hexagon profile instead of the somewhat rounded triangular profile of a normal bolt threading.  As a result, they have a near-perfect pitch diameter, pitch, and angle match between bolt and nut, or screw and hole, providing an almost impossibly snug fit since the entire thread on both sides are engaging each other, instead of leaving small gaps.

OK. I nutted just reading that. Which brings up the question: why do they still blow up nicely when you shot at them (anything with those perfect pitch thread counts)? Can you imagine what a Over technology Tap & Die set looks like?

 

Edited by TehPW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, cypherzero said:

I don't have the box anymore, as the previous seller must have kept it near something pungent.  However, the booklet has a section in regards to the background of the YF-19 Prototype #3 and #4.  I took a photo of the section for the #3, so this should be of some use.  I'm sure this is the same text that was on the back of the box.

Okay then, thanks for taking the time to translate it, and i'm sure there are many Macross fans who will greatly appreciate your time and effort in doing this.  :D

No problem, mate.  I appreciate the chance to work on a bizarre and obscure bit of Macross lore. :) 

Mr March and Talos will probably get a kick out of this as well.

I'll hop on this momentarily, I'm waiting for a few software updates to finish before I get cracking.  Vector GmbH doesn't seem to quite get the whole "update in place" schtick, so every time there's a new version it's a clean install.  

 

 

2 hours ago, TehPW said:

OK. I nutted just reading that. Which brings up the question: why do they still blow up nicely when you shot at them (anything with those perfect pitch thread counts)? Can you imagine what a Over technology Tap & Die set looks like?

Because, even though the material strength of those composites is around 100x what you get from straight steel, the power of weaponry in Macross is absolutely NUTS.

We bag on the VF-1A's coaxial laser cannon because it's the weeniest weapon it's got.  That is a FIVE. MEGAWATT. LASER.  That is legitimately five times the firepower of the laser cannon that the US Air Force developed to shoot down IBCMs from tens of kilometers away.  At a fraction of that power, lasers can set fire to steel like it's paper... and this is arguably the weakest weapon in the series.  Remember those one-and-done little space fighters the ARMD-class carriers launched in Ep1?  Those are armed with a pair of 750MW-class beam cannons and a half dozen 0.5kt thermonuclear reaction missiles.  On a per-second basis, the GU-11A 55mm 3-barrel rotary gun pod is putting 6.84x as much energy on the target as the A-10A Thunderbolt II GAU-8/A 30mm 7-barrel rotary cannon... and that's just kinetic energy BEFORE you factor in the superior armor-piercing shell materials and explosive charges.  From available numbers, a first-generation OTMat warhead filler like what was used on the AMM-1A Arrow medium-range multipurpose missile was 8.5x as energetic as modern warhead fillers used in the AIM-120D AMRAAM or AIM-7 Sparrow.  No word on detonation velocity or temperature spike on the reaction, but those are probably a good deal nastier as well.

That's the LOW end of the spectrum.  That's where we START.  It goes up from there, and IT. IS. GLORIOUS.

Variable Fighter Master File declines to cite a specific output for the RO-X2A 180mm dual-action beam cannon on the VF-1's Strike Pack, but it's described as having an output of "dozens of megawatts".  By the time we get to actual beam gunpods, we're looking at a minimum of several dozen, and potentially several hundred megawatts per shot.  The YF-27-5's beam rifle was SO high-powered the twin-engine prototype needed a separate reactor module hung on the opposite wing from the gunpod just to drive it.  A reactor that size could easily be putting out a gigawatt.  The VF-1's CTRs were a hell of a lot smaller and they were good for 650MW (1,700MW if you believe Sky Angels) apiece.

The amount of energy being casually thrown around in this metaseries is a little terrifying... these gunpods are chucking rounds downrange at speeds upwards of 2km/s.  The VF-25G's "sniper rifle" is doing it at over 7km/s.  There are reaction warheads in this setting that are rated at 10,000 megatons apiece.  THEY ARE PART OF A MULTI-WARHEAD MISSILE.  That missile has 24 warheads.  Some absolute madman at General Galaxy or Yaesu or whoever said "let's put a civilization-ending amount of thermonuclear ordinance on this missile".  Not satisfied with having built the very largest death-willy in all creation, he concluded one good turn deserves another and said "Let's put eight of those on one ship, just to see what happens".  I don't even want to think of the amount of energy that something like a Macross Cannon puts out.  Sustaining a continuous thermonuclear explosion so intense that the plasma's moving at nearly relativistic speeds for tens of seconds?  A beam with a diameter of several hundred meters?  We're into a scale of energy release where you need to have a good mnemonic device to remember the order the less-used SI prefixes go in. 

(Personally, I favor Karl Marx Gave The Proletariat Eleven Zeppelins, Yo... for Kilo, Mega, Giga, Tera, Peta, Exa, Zetta, and Yotta.  It's not offensive like the one I prefer for the names of the planets, but it's still pretty good.)

Edited by Seto Kaiba

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've heard it all before... But that's so hot.. Feel free to discuss such things anytime Seto. 

Edited by Master Dex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More... MORE!! 

Were Delta's triangle drones ever explained in detail, like endurance, pinpoint barrier resilience, offensive potential, and so on?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/4/2017 at 4:25 PM, cypherzero said:

 

IMG_20170804_124538_1.jpg

The first paragraph is super blurry, can we get a cleaner shot of that?  I'm transcribing most of it, but there are a few kanji I can't make out because of the focus.

EDIT: Swinging blindly seems to pay off... one of the unreadable pairs of kanji was in a sentence about the YF-19-1, so I started randomly looking up terms I'd associated with it and got "crashing" (墜落), which does appear to be what's written in the unreadable space :D 

Edited by Seto Kaiba

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll see what I can do about taking a clearer photo of the first paragraph.  As about the 'crashing', the previous pilot of the YF-19 had crashed it during a test flight before Isamu became the new pilot for it.  :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, cypherzero said:

I'll see what I can do about taking a clearer photo of the first paragraph.  As about the 'crashing', the previous pilot of the YF-19 had crashed it during a test flight before Isamu became the new pilot for it.  :) 

As I recall, a few had crashed, at least one fatally.  The YF-19 was a bloodthirsty little jet.

Edited by JB0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah yes, you're right about that, now that I recall what Dr. Yan had mentioned to Isamu about the former YF-19 pilots.  The Yf-19 should have had a scythe painted on the top of the fighter. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, cypherzero said:

Ah yes, you're right about that, now that I recall what Dr. Yan had mentioned to Isamu about the former YF-19 pilots.  The Yf-19 should have had a scythe painted on the top of the fighter. 

Instead of Excalibur, it should've entered service with the name Reaper.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going through the Tornado Messiah kit manual, and it reminds me of a couple questions I constantly ask myself:

1) How do VFs with underslung gunpods attach said gunpods in fighter mode? Are there any demonstrations of the mechanics of it? The VF-25's gunpod especially is attached differently in every piece of merchandise I see. The DX toy use an attachment piece, as does the Bandai kit (hardly an elegant solution). The Renewal cuts out grooves in the forearms so the handle can slot in between them; the Hasegawa kit essentially does the same thing plus an extra peg towards the front of the gunpod for stability. What bothers me about those latter methods is that those grooves in the arms aren't even hinted at in the lineart/animation/etc. If there's a sliding armor panel, there certainly aren't the panel lines to go with it. (The addition of Super/Armor/Tornado parts only further complicates matters.)

The VF-1 is slightly more understandable because it actually has dedicated hard points on the arms for attachments. The gunpod handle collapses into the gunpod and reveals a plug that fits onto that hard point... I can buy that. (I suppose I could ask about the leather sling while I'm here, but...)

2) How do VFs ensure that, when going from fighter to Gerwalk/Battroid (and back again), they don't lose their gunpods (and shields, in the case of the VF-24 derivatives) in the process? This was one of the things I liked most about the VF-31 design: Nothing loses direct contact with the rest of the vehicle. The railgunpod can still be hand-carried, but doing so is rarely necessary now thanks to both the arm-mounted gunpods and the maneuverable arm upon which it rests. In those instances when it DOES need to be hand-carried, reaching for it is much less risky than, say, the VF-0/-1 having to eject its gunpod off the back of its arm and catch it mid-flight. And the shields, such as they are, are permanently attached to the forearms, a major upgrade from the fifth-gen VFs (though not nearly as elegant, IMO, as the 3-4.5-gen VFs).

Oh, and a few more having to do with the Tornado Pack armament:

tornado.thumb.png.e081a0d3fef25c6679b029b0990efa3c.png

1 - What are the things attached to the front of the engine pods? (MMM says space equipment, but I'm not sure what specifically they do. I'm guessing extra fuel tanks?)

2 - How much energy do these guns need/produce that they need so much cooling? (The fins on the back of the guns and the extendable radiator on the cooling unit.)

EDIT:

Unrelated question: Has Macross (or anything, really) ever depicted an Itano circus through the eyes of the one dodging it? Would be interesting to play Ace Combat 7 in VR and have to do exactly that.

Edited by kajnrig

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Seto Kaiba said:

The first paragraph is super blurry, can we get a cleaner shot of that?  I'm transcribing most of it, but there are a few kanji I can't make out because of the focus.

EDIT: Swinging blindly seems to pay off... one of the unreadable pairs of kanji was in a sentence about the YF-19-1, so I started randomly looking up terms I'd associated with it and got "crashing" (墜落), which does appear to be what's written in the unreadable space :D 

Here you go, a much clearer photo of the first paragraph...

Thanks again for all of your hard work!  :D

IMG_20170805_234256_1.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Delta had an overkill of having two many production units for one fighter in a single series. Any functionalities of the C, E, J, F and S units?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Sir Galahad® said:

Delta had an overkill of having two many production units for one fighter in a single series. Any functionalities of the C, E, J, F and S units?

From what I remember having asked this before too, none of the Delta Squadron units are "official" variants of the VF-31. Being customized units built and maintained specifically to supplement/augment/protect Walkure, I can't say for sure (and I don't believe the Master File does, either) what the minute differences are between the stock VF-31A and the Delta Squadron models.

Besides the obvious head and forward-swept wing differences, the stock -31A uses fold carbon instead of fold quartz in its construction (for the clear parts behind the cockpit/on top of the chest), and I believe the front canards are slightly larger on the -31A as well, though I can't say for sure.

As for between the different Delta models, the only differences seem to be head design and paint scheme (and default accessory pod, in the case of the -31C). I'm sure there are pilot-specific fine tuning tweaks as well, but otherwise they're the same. You could ostensibly turn any VF-31, even the stock -31A, into a "C variant" simply by swapping out the radome pack.

Maybe the -31S has improved weapons/engines/avionics a la the VF-1S, but... eh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/4/2017 at 9:43 PM, Sildani said:

Were Delta's triangle drones ever explained in detail, like endurance, pinpoint barrier resilience, offensive potential, and so on?

In hindsight, considering that the multidrone racks are one of the major areas where the Siegfried deviates from the base Kairos design, it's really REALLY weird that the Variable Fighter Master File: VF-31 Siegfried book flat-out ignored them.

I have a few fun theories about how they hover like that without seemingly producing any visible thrust, the main one being that since we know they're already storing enormous amounts of energy there's a high probability that they're ionocraft lifters.

 

 

11 hours ago, cypherzero said:

I'll see what I can do about taking a clearer photo of the first paragraph.  As about the 'crashing', the previous pilot of the YF-19 had crashed it during a test flight before Isamu became the new pilot for it.  :) 

10 hours ago, JB0 said:

As I recall, a few had crashed, at least one fatally.  The YF-19 was a bloodthirsty little jet.

10 hours ago, cypherzero said:

Ah yes, you're right about that, now that I recall what Dr. Yan had mentioned to Isamu about the former YF-19 pilots.  The Yf-19 should have had a scythe painted on the top of the fighter. 

Yep... that's how I figured out it was "crashed" that I couldn't read in the first picture.  It was in a section devoted to talking about the YF-19 No.1 prototype, and one of the few factoids we've been given about that prototype is that it was damaged beyond repair and its pilot died when it crashed in the middle of its second flight test.  From what Jan Neumann said, team Shinsei had had a nasty run of testing accidents that culminated in the deaths of two test pilots and hospitalized two others with serious injuries.  Various sources have given 6 names for the 7 people to pilot the YF-19 during testing.  One of the dead men is yet unnamed, the other is Juuso Grennan.  The other named test pilots are Ken Grasshunt, Ludmila Blackwood, Rick Nieven, Isamu Alva Dyson, and Amy Cunningham.  1st Lt. Grasshunt and Lt. Col. Nieven were the two who ended up hospitalized, while 1st Lt. Dyson, Ms. Blackwood, and Cpt. Cunningham all came out of it unscathed.

 

 

10 hours ago, kajnrig said:

I'm going through the Tornado Messiah kit manual, and it reminds me of a couple questions I constantly ask myself:

1) How do VFs with underslung gunpods attach said gunpods in fighter mode? Are there any demonstrations of the mechanics of it? The VF-25's gunpod especially is attached differently in every piece of merchandise I see. The DX toy use an attachment piece, as does the Bandai kit (hardly an elegant solution). The Renewal cuts out grooves in the forearms so the handle can slot in between them; the Hasegawa kit essentially does the same thing plus an extra peg towards the front of the gunpod for stability. What bothers me about those latter methods is that those grooves in the arms aren't even hinted at in the lineart/animation/etc. If there's a sliding armor panel, there certainly aren't the panel lines to go with it. (The addition of Super/Armor/Tornado parts only further complicates matters.)

The VF-1 is slightly more understandable because it actually has dedicated hard points on the arms for attachments. The gunpod handle collapses into the gunpod and reveals a plug that fits onto that hard point... I can buy that. (I suppose I could ask about the leather sling while I'm here, but...)

The gunpod mountings I've seen point to the gunpod being retained by a retractable bolt or bracket that extends between the arms in fighter mode and is counted as one of the fighter's weapons stations same as the underwing pylons.  I would assume, especially on 5th Gen VFs, that there is some electromagnetic support helping keep the gunpod aligned properly during the transformation.  The process of getting the gunpod from the arm mount to the hand seems to be either "catch it" or a handoff from one hand to the other.  (It's one of those things that either happens too fast to see or falls under the header of "anime magic".

 

 

10 hours ago, kajnrig said:

2) How do VFs ensure that, when going from fighter to Gerwalk/Battroid (and back again), they don't lose their gunpods (and shields, in the case of the VF-24 derivatives) in the process? This was one of the things I liked most about the VF-31 design: Nothing loses direct contact with the rest of the vehicle. The railgunpod can still be hand-carried, but doing so is rarely necessary now thanks to both the arm-mounted gunpods and the maneuverable arm upon which it rests. In those instances when it DOES need to be hand-carried, reaching for it is much less risky than, say, the VF-0/-1 having to eject its gunpod off the back of its arm and catch it mid-flight. And the shields, such as they are, are permanently attached to the forearms, a major upgrade from the fifth-gen VFs (though not nearly as elegant, IMO, as the 3-4.5-gen VFs).

The toys are kind of lousy about it, since there are a number of design concessions to making the toy more durable (or transformation easier on the purchaser).

The arm-mounted anti-projectile shields are on a kind of sliding mount.  You can see this most clearly in the VF-11 and YF-19 transformation line art.  When the arms are stowed back in fighter mode, the shield slides on that mounting so that, while still physically bolted to the left arm, it's aligned with the centerline of the airframe.  During transformation, once the arms separate the shield slides so that it's centered on the forearm and then locks itself in place again.

 

 

 

10 hours ago, kajnrig said:

Oh, and a few more having to do with the Tornado Pack armament:

tornado.thumb.png.e081a0d3fef25c6679b029b0990efa3c.png

1 - What are the things attached to the front of the engine pods? (MMM says space equipment, but I'm not sure what specifically they do. I'm guessing extra fuel tanks?)

2 - How much energy do these guns need/produce that they need so much cooling? (The fins on the back of the guns and the extendable radiator on the cooling unit.)

EDIT:

1. "Auxiliary propellant tank and atmospheric reentry fairing" is the description I have.  Basically, it's a fuel tank with an aerodynamic shape.

2. The heavy quantum beam cannon assembly has a dedicated thermonuclear reactor powering it, the extendable cooling unit is noted to be mostly for space use to increase the radiating surface.  It's noted that its coolant loop services both the reactor and the beam generator itself, but I would assume a key reason they need such a large surface is because the reactor is not expelling its reaction plasma the way the ones in the VF's engines are.

 

 

10 hours ago, kajnrig said:

Unrelated question: Has Macross (or anything, really) ever depicted an Itano circus through the eyes of the one dodging it? Would be interesting to play Ace Combat 7 in VR and have to do exactly that.

Macross Plus did that, didn't it?  Guld demonstrates the agility of the BDI-driven YF-21 No.2 by evading, rather than intercepting or outrunning, an Itano Circus of HMM-111CS missiles launched by target drones by diving straight through the barrage so quickly that the proximity fuses didn't have a chance to go off.

 

 

6 hours ago, Sir Galahad® said:

Delta had an overkill of having two many production units for one fighter in a single series. Any functionalities of the C, E, J, F and S units?

Well, I have some news on that score that may improve your outlook on it.  

Y'see... there is only one production VF-31 unit in the Macross Delta series.  The VF-31C, VF-31E, VF-31F, VF-31J, and VF-31S are not production variants of the VF-31, they're officially all one-of-a-kind aftermarket conversions of the VF-31A Kairos with informal designations.  The actual difference between them is mostly cosmetic, because Delta Flight is every bit as much a performance unit as Walkure is.  There's a dozen or so kilograms of mass one way or the other, and the number of ROV-127 beam machineguns, but that's about it.  Master File goes and doubles down on it, as its version is that they aren't even converted from production-intent VFs... they're converted from early prototype VF-31s.  (Which oddly contradicts the series, as it shows Arad operating a production-intent VF-31A in support of Walkure in flashbacks.)

The only things I've seen that suggest there is any kind of difference at all between the various custom VF-31s apart from monitor turret differences is in Macross Delta Scramble, which asserts that the VF-31C and VF-31S are equipped with the same kind of command and control software as the VF-25S, that Messer's VF-31F has its control software optimized for use in atmospheric combat, and Arad's has all the limiters turned off.

The VF-31A Kairos is the only production variant to appear in Macross Delta, though there is mention of a VF-31B which is in Sir Not-Appearing-In-This-Film territory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe the Master File also explains that the head variations on the Delta 31s are prototypes from different manufacturers that they are field testing for possible production on the official 31 variants.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Zx31 said:

I believe the Master File also explains that the head variations on the Delta 31s are prototypes from different manufacturers that they are field testing for possible production on the official 31 variants.

Not just the variant monitor turrets, it treats the Xaos Custom Siegfried configuration as an alternate production version of the VF-31 Kairos also destined for NUNS service.

The bits that aren't simply copied from the VF-25 Master File put a lot more emphasis on the Siegfried than the Kairos, and make the Siegfried out to be a lot more than the aftermarket custom job it actually was in the official setting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Seto Kaiba said:

The toys are kind of lousy about it, since there are a number of design concessions to making the toy more durable (or transformation easier on the purchaser).

The arm-mounted anti-projectile shields are on a kind of sliding mount.  You can see this most clearly in the VF-11 and YF-19 transformation line art.  When the arms are stowed back in fighter mode, the shield slides on that mounting so that, while still physically bolted to the left arm, it's aligned with the centerline of the airframe.  During transformation, once the arms separate the shield slides so that it's centered on the forearm and then locks itself in place again.

 

 

Macross Plus did that, didn't it?  Guld demonstrates the agility of the BDI-driven YF-21 No.2 by evading, rather than intercepting or outrunning, an Itano Circus of HMM-111CS missiles launched by target drones by diving straight through the barrage so quickly that the proximity fuses didn't have a chance to go off.

Oh, okay. So the 5th-gen VFs do have sliding rails like the older-gens, just extended quite a ways. Given how far the shield has to travel (and the many twists and turns it must make along the way), I just assumed that there couldn't have been any rails involved, electromagnetic or not, and that the kits/toys were accurate in that regard.

I meant like an in-cockpit view, literally from the pilot's eyes, with missile warnings circling all around the HUD while smoke trails crisscross everywhere. One extended shot. The YF-21 scene shifts between multiple perspectives, from Guld's "eyes" to directly outside the VF to a wide shot, etc.

Edited by kajnrig

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Seto Kaiba said:

Not just the variant monitor turrets, it treats the Xaos Custom Siegfried configuration as an alternate production version of the VF-31 Kairos also destined for NUNS service.

The bits that aren't simply copied from the VF-25 Master File put a lot more emphasis on the Siegfried than the Kairos, and make the Siegfried out to be a lot more than the aftermarket custom job it actually was in the official setting.

I find both explanations lame to the point that it makes me kind of sad. I'm just going to pretend something better is going on for the sake of being able to enjoy the toys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, kajnrig said:

I meant like an in-cockpit view, literally from the pilot's eyes, with missile warnings circling all around the HUD while smoke trails crisscross everywhere. One extended shot. The YF-21 scene shifts between multiple perspectives, from Guld's "eyes" to directly outside the VF to a wide shot, etc.

Ah, I don't recall anything where it's like that the entire time.  Usually for drama's sake they cut back and forth between the cockpit and external view.

 

 

44 minutes ago, anime52k8 said:

I find both explanations lame to the point that it makes me kind of sad. I'm just going to pretend something better is going on for the sake of being able to enjoy the toys.

Can't say I've ever found the official explanations of what the mecha were for any impediment to enjoying them as display pieces.  I didn't especially like Macross Delta, and I still have a DX VF-31J on my desk at work alongside my VF-2SS, VF-4G, VF-171, and VF-25F.

Still, I can completely understand the disappointment with the explanation.  The first set of specs we got made the VF-31 look like a huge step forward for 5th Generation VFs instead of no improvement at all, and having five different ace customs in the same series kind of dilutes the special-ness of the ace custom idea... even if Macross doesn't usually do ace custom fighters.  It really was a bad idea to have five ace customs dramatically different from the actual production model.  (Especially when the actual production model is better looking than all five.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeez. Sounds like one buys the Master File for the VF-31 just for the pretty pictures. Okay. What's the armament of the 31 then? I don't think it's been explicitly laid out about gun pod power, number of internal missiles, and so on. Also, what do the Super parts bring to the party?

And thanks so much! I feel like this thread needs to be archived and curated...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Sildani said:

Jeez. Sounds like one buys the Master File for the VF-31 just for the pretty pictures.

They used to be much better, but GA Graphic seems to have totally phoned the last couple books in... the VF-22 book was kind of lazily done but still workable, the VF-4 book was an utter mess that ignored most of the official info outright, and the VF-31 book is basically only good for the pictures.  The VF-31 book may have suffered from the relatively anemic writeup on the VF-31 in official sources.

 

 

26 minutes ago, Sildani said:

Okay. What's the armament of the 31 then? I don't think it's been explicitly laid out about gun pod power, number of internal missiles, and so on. Also, what do the Super parts bring to the party?

And thanks so much! I feel like this thread needs to be archived and curated...

All we're really told about the Howard LU-18A beam gunpod is that it's a high-powered (heavy quantum) beam gun that can be deployed as a turret or handheld.  Then again, we haven't been given explicit outputs for the other heavy quantum beam gunpods so this is only frustrating instead of surprising.  For the weapon that's used the most in the series, the railguns are actually the least detailed.  Master File outright skips them in the armaments section, and the official specs only mention caliber, model number, and manufacturer.  The production model uses a LM-27s 27mm railgun while the Siegfried custom uses a LM-25s 25mm railgun.  Given the presence of a conspicuous ejector port on the gun itself in the art and CG models, I have little recourse but to assume it's the same kind of "railgun" that the SSL-9B Dragunov is... namely, a chemical propellant machinegun with a railgun "assist" to further accelerate the round while it travels down the barrel.  Half or more of the forearm seems to be a box magazine feeding the gun.  The ROV-127E beam machinegun on the monitor turret hasn't changed much from the ROV-127C the VF-25 uses, so I'd assume it's still ~10MW-class.  The six Bifors CIMM-3B missile launchers (3 per nacelle) have a total missile capacity of 36 micro-missiles (so 6 missiles per launcher).  The nacelle bays are given over to a pair of multidrone racks, each leg bay's rack holds 8 MDP-001W Cygnus multidrones able to maneuver at up to 200kph while onboard power lasts.  

The SPS-31A Super Pack has some reasonably good data, but only for its flight performance.  It's got a mass of about 12,600kg on its own and when fully fueled and armed and docked with a VF-31 that's likewise fully fueled and armed the craft weighs ~38,000kg.  The main booster packs each contain 2 Bharat SLE-6B booster rockets for forward thrust, 1 Bharat SLE-3B rocket for braking, and 6 Bharat SLE-1F rockets for maneuvering.  Each booster is armed with five Bifors CIMM-5A micro-missile launchers.  The leg packs each have 3 Bharat SLE-1F rockets for maneuvering and two Bifors CIMM-5A micro-missile launchers.  The shoulder pack array has a pair of Bifors HMM-7C CIWS missile launchers each holding 15 micro-missiles.  The last two packs on the dorsal body are standalone SLE-3B booster rockets.  The combined output of the four Bharat SLE-6B boosters is 2,194kN (or 548.5kN/ea), providing 15.75G of acceleration at full combat loading approaching 30G on propellant and armament exhaustion.  It can sustain that maximum thrust for 125 seconds before fuel depletion.  (These are all throttleable hybrid or liquid rocket motors, so they can dial the output power up or down to conserve fuel.)  I'd assume anywhere up to 6 missiles per CIMM-5A, so that's potentially 102 micro-missiles.  Not as much as Master File alleged were in the incredibly capacious VF-25 launchers, but hey... these packs are also a lot smaller.

Master File provides art but not specs for alternative Modular Multipurpose Pack configurations including an extended range pack with extra fuel for the SLE-6B's, and two different Double Strike variations.  It feels like they have the labels backwards on those last two, since the one that is very clearly a converging beam cannon or heavy quantum beam cannon is marked up as a laser and the one that looks like a laser cannon is marked up just as a beam cannon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On August 6, 2017 at 2:33 AM, kajnrig said:

 

EDIT:

Unrelated question: Has Macross (or anything, really) ever depicted an Itano circus through the eyes of the one dodging it? Would be interesting to play Ace Combat 7 in VR and have to do exactly that.

 

In addition to the M:+ scene mentioned, you have a very short example in the M3 opening sequence (search Y/T for Macross M3 Remastered Opening) and you get a couple seconds of Max's HUD with a swarm of Zent missiles inbound. The thing to note is Max and Mirya pulled off the same trick as Guld, while flying belly to belly in a VF-4 and a VF-5000.

 

 

Edited by Andras

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Andras said:

 

In addition to the M:+ scene mentioned, you have a very short example in the M3 opening sequence (search Y/T for Macross M3 Remastered Opening) and you get a couple seconds of Max's HUD with a swarm of Zent missiles inbound. The thing to note is Max and Mirya pulled off the same trick as Guld, while flying belly to belly in a VF-4 and a VF-5000.

 

 

A stunt which for Guld using special hardware was considered impressive and indicative of the technology of a much more advanced fighter. For Max and Milia, that's just Tuesday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Master Dex said:

A stunt which for Guld using special hardware was considered impressive and indicative of the technology of a much more advanced fighter. For Max and Milia, that's just Tuesday.

To be entirely fair, Max and Milia were dodging bog-standard Zentradi Army ordnance designed to engage relatively slow-moving targets.  Guld might've done it in a newer fighter, but what was being fired at him was the UN Spacy's state-of-the-art air-to-air high-maneuverability missile intended to bring down high-performance VFs.

Guld's qualifications weren't anything to sneeze at either.  He had a Special A qualification from the UN Forces as a civilian operator.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This makes me think: What is the strength of micromissiles through the Macross ages? Are they designed such that a single one has the strength to take out a same-era or perhaps slightly older VF, or are they designed ONLY to work as part of a barrage? I'd imagine the former is the case (and the miniaturization just allows for mass firing without regard to ammo conservation), but it would be interesting if the latter were the case, and why and how they would develop their tech around that strategy...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...