Jump to content

Recommended Posts

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 VF-11 series.

Macross Chronicle and the Macross Mecha Manual say the VF-11 is 15.51 meters long with a wingspan of 11.2 meters. When I measure the artwork from the Hasegawa instruction sheet and scale it up (assuming a length of 15.51 meters), I get a wingspan of 14.37 meters. The Macross Mecha Manual line art gave me a wingspan of 13.23 meters. I have yet to measure the Yamato toy, but just eyeballing it, I can tell it has an incredibly wide wingspan.

post-7926-0-38349800-1418234694_thumb.jpg

post-7926-0-75224100-1418234713_thumb.jpg

So my questions are:

1) Is the Macross Chronicle wingspan correct, or is it a known inaccuracy?

2) If it is correct, is it with the wings fully extended?

3) Is there an accurate portrayal of 15.51 x 11.2 dimensions anywhere, either in a kit, toy, or line art?

4) Did Yamato and Hasegawa make the wings too wide, or did they shorten the body?

5) Should I just ignore the specs and go with the Yamato or Hasegawa proportions?

6) Can anyone recommend an alternate resource for VF-11 schematics?

My temptation is to go with the Yamato, since it compromises nicely for transformation, while maybe scaling down the width of the wings closer to the line art. Thoughts?

Edited by NekkiBasara
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just by eyeballing, it looks like those two drawings have slightly different angles of leading edge sweep. And since the VF-11 does have variable-geometry wings (often forgotten, as is its high-speed-mode), that could affect things. The lower drawing has the wings swept back a bit more than the upper. If they were un-swept another couple of degrees, that would increase its span.

(I assume they were trying to show both of them "fully un-swept", but look at the VF-25 for an extreme example of the "normal" forward position being more swept than the MAXIMUM FORWARD position)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just by eyeballing, it looks like those two drawings have slightly different angles of leading edge sweep. And since the VF-11 does have variable-geometry wings (often forgotten, as is its high-speed-mode), that could affect things. The lower drawing has the wings swept back a bit more than the upper. If they were un-swept another couple of degrees, that would increase its span.

(I assume they were trying to show both of them "fully un-swept", but look at the VF-25 for an extreme example of the "normal" forward position being more swept than the MAXIMUM FORWARD position)

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.

When doing 3D modeling of Macross valks I generally find Hasegawa's images to be the best. I imagine those dimensions are based on a further back swing. Start with the length, and then just go with the Hasegawa refs from there.

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 on the battroid.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah if you're going to have it transform you have your work cut out for you. Most Macross Valks use a fair amount of anime magic to transform. My suggestion then would be to block out the shapes roughly in low poly and work out the transformation first, then adjust proportions so it looks good in all modes as much as possible, then afterwords use that rough shape as a basis to go back and begin detailing and getting parts shaped exactly. The less polies you have to work with the easier it will be to adjust when working with proportions, and use the Yamato VF-11 shots as a reference as much as possible, they've done a lot of that work for you already.

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...