Jump to content
Valkyrie Driver

Super Macross Mecha Fun Time Discussion Thread!

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Valkyrie Driver said:

Well, I guess that answers that. The VF-19F/S were 2nd production types, those would have been in federal service too right? They weren't just local variants were they?

Given that they're not specifically described as a for-export variant (like the VF-19P) or as a locally-developed monkey model derived from a formal specification, they're almost certainly official New UN Forces variants.  They're probably local spec versions of an official variant, so they might really bear a full designation along the lines of VF-19F/NM07 or something like that.

(If nothing else, Macross 30: Voices Across the Galaxy gives you a New UN Spacy Havamal Special Forces paintjob for them in New Game+.)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How big do you think the gulf is between gen 4.5 fighters and gen 5 fighters? Say a VF-19EF/A against an Sv-262?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Valkyrie Driver said:

How big do you think the gulf is between gen 4.5 fighters and gen 5 fighters? Say a VF-19EF/A against an Sv-262?

Hm... that's a complex question.

Most of the Generation 4.5 VFs in Macross were created either as stopgaps to improve performance enough to fight the Vajra (e.g. VF-171-IIIF and VF-171EX) or as test articles that were intended to evaluate technology intended for use in Generation 5 VFs.  (Thinking about this really makes me want to go back and update my old .pdf for thrust-to-weight on all VFs.)

It's kind of a skewed picture, when you look at it.  Outside of the key areas where there were enormous advances in technology, most of which became the defining traits of the 5th Generation, performance didn't actually improve all that much between the Gen 4.5 and Gen 5 designs.  I think you could make a case for saying that those key areas of advance on the Gen 5 designs enabled them to make much better use of what the Gen 4.5 and Gen 4 designs already had.  The gulf between them is pretty big, but I think it's mostly built upon the advances in those key areas and without them the Gen 5 designs wouldn't be significantly better aircraft than the Gen 4.5s.  

Looking at it in terms of flight performance, the disparity is pretty enormous thanks to the improvements in engine technology and the advancements in man/machine interface tech and the introduction of the Inertia Store Converter that rendered them usable.  Just in terms of thrust-to-weight ratio you're looking at a bare minimum 2:1 disparity if you compare the highest-end Gen 4 and Gen 4.5 VFs like the VF-19S against a typical Gen 5 VF like the VF-25A, VF-31A, or Sv-262Ba.  Against a more typical Gen 4 or Gen 4.5 VF like a Block II VF-171 Nightmare Plus or a VF-19EF Caliburn you're looking at more like anywhere from 2.7:1 to 5.3:1.  The more powerful engines also benefits the defensive capabilities, so even though armor material strength hasn't improved by leaps and bounds (barring the very limited introduction of advanced energy conversion armor) they're more durable because the existing armor material is being fed more power... like how the YF-29 achieves 4x the armor strength of a VF-25 by having twice the armor thickness and then supplying it twice the amount of power.  (The implication that, within a given armor material, strength has a linear relationship to thickness and power consumption is rather helpful in and of itself.)  The introduction of EX-Gear, ARIEL II avionics to capitalize on it, and the ISC also widen the gulf considerably by insulating the pilot from g-forces that would have been game-enders in previous-generation designs, which widens the gulf considerably.  Augmentations like the fold wave system or the Draken III's reheat system just improve those already substantial areas of existing improvement even further by supplementing generator output with fold dimensional energy conversion or simply boosting thrust by 25%+.  

Weapons, sensors, etc. don't seem to actually be all that much better than what the Gen 4 and Gen 4.5 had, barring anti-Vajra equipment like the overkill gunpods, but it's that huge flight performance improvement that really makes the Gen 5s stand head and shoulders above their predecessors because it snowballs into other areas of performance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What exactly makes VF-31 a Seigfried rather than a Kairos?

Is it the FSW wingtips or its Fold Wave System thing?

If they slap a fold wave system on a delta winged VF-31 would it still be called a Kairos?

Or if they slap FSW's on a plain standard VF-31 would you then call it a Seigfried?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, ManhattanProject972 said:

What exactly makes VF-31 a Seigfried rather than a Kairos?

Is it the FSW wingtips or its Fold Wave System thing?

If they slap a fold wave system on a delta winged VF-31 would it still be called a Kairos?

Or if they slap FSW's on a plain standard VF-31 would you then call it a Seigfried?

 

 

Partially yes, Yes, and no in that order.

To be clear, and I know Seto's keyboard will ache out a full explanation later, The Siegfried is basically an ace custom modification of the Kairos done by Xaos with improved performance (I can't recall if they actually have a different engine, they might), altered physical characteristic such as the FSW and the smaller canards that result for higher maneuverability at low speeds, and the fold wave system of course. What makes it a Siegfried is all of that and what it was designed like that to do (namely provide air combat support to the tactical sound unit Walkure). The Siegfried is not an official model and the Kairos is in fact the only version of the VF-31 that would be mass produced (which supposedly is Brisingr NUNS plan).

Share this post


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

What makes it a Siegfried is all of that and what it was designed like that to do (namely provide air combat support to the tactical sound unit Walkure). 

Also there is a Distinctly Norse theme there. Siegfried (or Sigurd in the Norse Legends) was a Norse Hero who killed the Dragon Fafnir, and then Meets Brynhildr (Brunhilda) who pledges herself to him. Brynhildr is implied to be a Walkure (Valkyrie). Also, the name Siegfried conjures up a heroic image, so that's a thing. 

So the Siegfried is an Ace Custom version of the Kairos, and you couldn't very well have the main fighter be the Kairos, which is a Greek word. Just a possible explanation of why the name change.

I'm also guessing that some differences between the Kairos and the Seigfried is armaments. Where the Seig has the drones, the kairos has missiles, and the drone charger is probably replaced by a missile pod on the Kairos.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, ManhattanProject972 said:

What exactly makes VF-31 a Seigfried rather than a Kairos?

A series of modifications made to an aftermarket VF-31A Kairos by Χάος Valkyrie Works, including, but not limited to:

  • Replacement of the stock FF-3001A Stage IIC thermonuclear reaction turbine engines with a detuned version of the YF-30's FF-3001/FC2 engines (a 14% improvement in engine output).
     
  • Modification of the the Shinsei/LAI TO21C inertia store converter to increase the unit's buffer capacity from 28.0G to 29.5G.
     
  • Switching the outer wing segment of the delta wing for a forward-swept winglet and overall strengthening of the airframe.
     
  • Exchange of the stock A-type monitor turret for a custom-built monitor turret (each Siegfried monitor turret is unique).
     
  • Upgrading the stock ARIEL II+ integrated airframe control AI of the VF-31A to a custom build optimized for close air support of Walkure.
     
  • Installation of the fold wave system and fold wave amplifiers on the dorsal surface of the VF.
     
  • Fixed weapons (e.g. the LM-27 railguns) replaced with lower-powered versions than military spec in anticipation of having to operate in close proximity to civilians.
     
  • Engine nacelle ordnance bays retrofitted into storage and charging racks for 8 MDP-001W Cygnus multidrone plates.
     
  • Fitted with a custom multipurpose container unit that includes a remote recharger for the Cygnus multidrones.

 

 

6 hours ago, ManhattanProject972 said:

If they slap a fold wave system on a delta winged VF-31 would it still be called a Kairos?

Or if they slap FSW's on a plain standard VF-31 would you then call it a Seigfried?

No and No, respectively.

 

 

5 hours ago, Master Dex said:

The Siegfried is not an official model and the Kairos is in fact the only version of the VF-31 that would be mass produced (which supposedly is Brisingr NUNS plan).

Yep.  When you think about it, the VF-31 Siegfrieds are essentially the same kind of custom job that Sound Force's VFs were, except they're all customized from the same base aircraft this time.

Heck, the operating profile is almost "What if the Jamming Birds stole Fire Bomber's ride?"

 

 

2 hours ago, Valkyrie Driver said:

Also there is a Distinctly Norse theme there. Siegfried (or Sigurd in the Norse Legends) was a Norse Hero who killed the Dragon Fafnir, and then Meets Brynhildr (Brunhilda) who pledges herself to him. Brynhildr is implied to be a Walkure (Valkyrie). Also, the name Siegfried conjures up a heroic image, so that's a thing. 

Not a new theme, mind... Macross 30: Voices Across the Galaxy had most of the placenames and so on for Uroboros drawn from Norse mythology.  The only references that aren't are Uroboros and the Chronos, which are both Greek, and the Percival, which is French.  Even the bad guys, Havamal, are Norse-inspired.

Fun fact... the custom build of ARIEL II that was used by the VF-25 and YF-30 is called "Brunhilde".

 

2 hours ago, Valkyrie Driver said:

So the Siegfried is an Ace Custom version of the Kairos, and you couldn't very well have the main fighter be the Kairos, which is a Greek word. Just a possible explanation of why the name change.

It wouldn't work nearly as well with the enemy fighters being Draken, which can be translated as "Dragon", though the company operating them DOES have a Greek name and logo... Χάος.

 

 

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


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

I appreciate Seto's info dumps

So do I. Such a wealth of information. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/11/2017 at 12:56 PM, Zx31 said:

I appreciate Seto's info dumps

On 10/11/2017 at 1:49 PM, Valkyrie Driver said:

So do I. Such a wealth of information. 

I just wish I had more information on the development of the VF-31 series and Sv-262.  Right now, the only sources of tech specs are the Limited Edition Blu-ray liner notes, a couple interviews about the series in Great Mechanics G, and booklets from the TOMYTEC and Bandai model kits.  It's all so basic, and gives very little insight into the mecha beyond the bare-bones facts of their major pieces of hardware... and it doesn't help that the text in those kit booklets is contradictory outside of basic tech factoids.

Variable Fighter Master File would normally be our port in this particular storm, but it's even worse... contradicting not only canon, but also previous volumes in the series.  

Personally, I really want a proper official explanation of the SV Works team that produced both the Sv-154 and Sv-262 for Windermere IV.  We know they were a pet project of one of the cofounders of General Galaxy, but exactly what they did between the team being founded in the 2010s and its change of ownership to the Epsilon Foundation subsidiary Dian Cecht is a great big blank.  They're engineers who specialized in developing VFs designed to fight other VFs, and there are a couple of General Galaxy's projects that feel like they should be one of theirs... like the VF-9 Cutlass and the VF-22 Sturmvogel II.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really want to know how the Sv series (Sv-51, Sv-154, and Sv-262) are specifically designed to kill variable fighters. Are regular VF's not designed to counter other VF's? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Valkyrie Driver said:

I really want to know how the Sv series (Sv-51, Sv-154, and Sv-262) are specifically designed to kill variable fighters. Are regular VF's not designed to counter other VF's? 

I don't think one could say that the SV-51 (capital V, unlike the other two) was designed to primarily counter Variable Fighters. It was more multi-purpose than that.

I guess an "VF Slayer" needs sufficient speed, maneuverability, weaponry, avionics and other systems to outperform enemy VFs.

Share this post


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

I really want to know how the Sv series (Sv-51, Sv-154, and Sv-262) are specifically designed to kill variable fighters. Are regular VF's not designed to counter other VF's? 

The Sv-51 isn't a SV Works program, that was something done by the Sukhoi Company jointly with Dornier Flugzeugwerke and Israel Aerospace Industries using stolen VF-0 development data before the First Space War.  The SV Works didn't exist until after General Galaxy was founded, around 10 years later.

Like the VF-0, the Sv-51 was a development and trial production platform for an anti-giant fighter.  Its design emphasized maneuverability, so it was a better anti-VF VF than the VF-0 was.

Regular VFs are meant to be all-purpose fighter aircraft, but the primary design focus behind their development was always on fighting hostile aliens (the Zentradi).  Having to fight other VFs was a corner case, a grim but unlikely possibility that had to be considered but wasn't a core area which the designers focused on... until the 4th Generation.  By the time Project Super Nova was on their plate, the New UN Government had expanded to the point that internal conflicts were occurring in their sphere of influence with monotonous regularity, so it was necessary for the new fighter to be focused on fighting other VFs and suppressing revolts at least as much as it was on fighting aliens.  General Galaxy cofounder Alexei Kurakin simply saw that one coming a long way off, and opted to establish a dedicated team to explore what he saw as the inevitability of VF on VF combat one day becoming the norm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How in the world can Valkyries fly in that zig zag pattern and throw themselves around the air like that, especially those V-9 Ghosts that Brera had with him in the last movie.

Are they producing that much thrust or are their verniers that powerful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, ManhattanProject972 said:

Are they producing that much thrust or are their verniers that powerful.

Yes (to both).

By the time the 4th Generation VF prototypes entered testing at the New Edwards Test Flight Center on Eden (see Macross Plus), thrust-to-weight ratios were already sneaking up on 10:1.  The 3rd Gen VFs were all in excess of 6.3:1 on their own, meaning that without Super Packs every one of them is able to rival or exceed the acceleration of a VF-1 Super Valkyrie going flat out.  The VF-17S was the first to actually exceed 10:1, and from that point on the only VF that wasn't operating above 10:1 is the VF-171 Nightmare Plus in its stock Block II configuration.  Most exceed 13:1. 

One of the things that made the Ghosts derived from the AIF-X-9 Ghostbird prototype so deadly was that in a period where manned fighters couldn't really exceed 10:1 without the significant risk of loss of control, it was hovering just below 20:1. (Between 19.3 and 19.52, if we're being precise, and I am).

Thanks to the introduction of Inertia Store Converter technology that could protect the cockpit of a VF from high g-forces, manned fighters were able to rival or exceed the performance of the Ghosts with Stage II thermonuclear reaction turbines that pushed thrust-to-weight ratios through the roof.  Practically every 5th Gen VF exceeds 39:1, with the current reigning champion being the YF-29 at 61.164:1.  Even with the extra weight of the Super Pack degrading its acceleration a bit, the VF-27 Super Lucifer that Brera flew in the second Frontier movie was in excess of 41:1.  

To put all this in perspective, the best performers among modern fighter jets of the current 4th and 5th Generation designs doesn't exceed 2:1, and most are just around 1.1:1 under ideal conditions.

The amount of thrust being thrown around is absolutely off-the-hook insane.

Even those humble, little, unassuming-looking rocket engines on the VF-1's backpack are putting out more thrust than an engine from a typical 4th generation jet fighter, and it has THREE of those.

 

EDIT:  That high performance is also a big part of what killed the Ghosts's role as next main fighter.  Nobody wanted a fully-autonomous fighter that exceeded the abilities of any manned craft that could decide that it wasn't interested in the orders of meatbags and go rogue.

Edited by Seto Kaiba

Share this post


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

EDIT:  That high performance is also a big part of what killed the Ghosts's role as next main fighter.  Nobody wanted a fully-autonomous fighter that exceeded the abilities of any manned craft that could decide that it wasn't interested in the orders of meatbags and go rogue.

ENTIRELY understandable after the Sharon Apple "incident".

 

Actually, it seems like Plus has had as much influence on the background setting, but very little visible influence on the foreground story. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/15/2017 at 5:08 AM, JB0 said:

ENTIRELY understandable after the Sharon Apple "incident".

It definitely put the brakes on the New UN Forces' adoption of the Ghostbird as the next main fighter and spelled doom for the idea of autonomous fighters as the wave of the future.

That said, once General Galaxy removed the prototype's unstable bioneural main processor and the fully-autonomous air combat software was restricted by order of the New UN Government, they did still end up suppliers to several governments who preferred the idea of an all-Ghost air force.  Their big seller to the emigrant governments was an economized, semi-autonomous model designated as AIF-7S (or QF-4000 to the New UN Forces).  The federal New UN Forces obtained a full spec model without the unstable hardware designated AIF-9B, and Macross Galaxy produced its own version of that with enhanced (anti-Vajra) armaments officially registered as AIF-9V (locally as Ghost V-9/MG) that was illegally equipped with the fully autonomous air combat program of the prototype.

 

 

On 10/15/2017 at 5:08 AM, JB0 said:

Actually, it seems like Plus has had as much influence on the background setting, but very little visible influence on the foreground story. 

Technologically, yeah... the fallout of the events in Macross Plus was far-reaching, though only one subsequent story I'm aware of (Macross the Musiculture) directly references it.  Mostly it's all in the backstory.

Thanks to the Venus Sound Factory illegally outfitting Sharon Apple with a bioneural processor and her subsequent rampage, the New UN Government not only banned responsive virtuoids, they also legislated Sharon Apple's music off the shelves for a time.

The insane Sharon Apple's remote hijacking of the AIF-X-9 prototype during a public event the New UN Government intended to both demonstrate it at and announce its selection as next main fighter was a massive public fiasco that led to the New UN Government terminating its autonomous fighter program, the imposition of a ban on fully-autonomous fighters, Project Super Nova's reinstatement, and both prototypes being approved for production.

Of course, Isamu and Guld independently penetrating Earth's defenses in those prototypes broke it worse than the Ghost had... since the New UN Government decided it was too dangerous to export the VF-19 and VF-22 en masse, so they ended up getting shelved in favor of a less-uber fighter.

... and, to put the cherry on it, since Colonel Johnson took the blame, Isamu got punted upstairs to fill a desk job role at New Edwards to keep him out of trouble. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does the VF-19EF exceed the performance of the VF-171, or are they on par? How do we distinguish between monkey models and not? Were there Monkey Models of the first production type VF-19's or were those produced before the decision was made to restrict exports?

Also since the historical reference for Monkey Models is from the Soviet Union, would it be accurate to say that the Monkey Models were simpler to produce and operate than the fully capable standard models. Would it also be fair to say that Monkey Models might also be used by federal forces under severe wartime conditions? 

The only reason the Soviets chose to export their monkey model production was to keep the line running and recoup the costs of production. Fair to say the NUNS does it the same way?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Valkyrie Driver said:

Does the VF-19EF exceed the performance of the VF-171, or are they on par?

All told, in some respects (e.g. active stealth) they're on par but the VF-19EF Caliburn has a higher level of flight performance thanks to its more powerful engines and its less stable aerodynamics.

 

29 minutes ago, Valkyrie Driver said:

How do we distinguish between monkey models and not?

There's not a 100% unambiguous explicit flag that a given fighter is a monkey model, but usually a monkey model will either be outright identified as one in its tech writeup, or it'll be flagged as either an export variant or a locally-built derivative of an existing variant.

 

29 minutes ago, Valkyrie Driver said:

Were there Monkey Models of the first production type VF-19's or were those produced before the decision was made to restrict exports?

We don't know for certain, but based on what's said in Great Mechanics DX widespread adoption of the VF-19 fell through at the federal level very early on in their attempted transition to it... so I would assume that any VF-19s which were built locally by emigrant governments were monkey models regardless of variant.

 

29 minutes ago, Valkyrie Driver said:

Also since the historical reference for Monkey Models is from the Soviet Union, would it be accurate to say that the Monkey Models were simpler to produce and operate than the fully capable standard models. Would it also be fair to say that Monkey Models might also be used by federal forces under severe wartime conditions? 

The extent to which the monkey models we've seen thus far have been simplified varies a bit, but in general they all seem to have been simplified or detuned at least slightly.  Some of the limitations in the monkey models are imposed in software rather than hardware.

Given that all but one of the monkey models we've seen thus far have been produced locally under license, I would assume that the federal New UN Forces probably wouldn't need to fall back on the export models in wartime.  They have the manufacturing power of dozens of factory satellites as a fallback plan.

 

29 minutes ago, Valkyrie Driver said:

The only reason the Soviets chose to export their monkey model production was to keep the line running and recoup the costs of production. Fair to say the NUNS does it the same way?

That may have been the case for the VF-19P, if nothing else... though the other identified monkey models have all been built locally under license by their end users (e.g. Macross Frontier, Macross Galaxy).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was looking on Macross Mecha Manual, and well...

I know it's not a Destroid or a Variable fighter, but I did just realize that Ozma's car is in fact a Lancia Delta. I mean, it was labeled that way on the site, but the everything is right, save the emblem (since it's not there). I found that pretty cool. Considering it's practically ancient...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Valkyrie Driver said:

I know it's not a Destroid or a Variable fighter, but I did just realize that Ozma's car is in fact a Lancia Delta. I mean, it was labeled that way on the site, but the everything is right, save the emblem (since it's not there). I found that pretty cool. Considering it's practically ancient...

Yeah, according to Macross Chronicle Ozma's a bit of a car nut... it shows, considering he chose to make a replica Lancia Delta HF Integrale Evoluzione 1 rally car retrofitted for Milky Road service his daily driver.  No word on what the powerplant is, but if it's anything like the other cars described in the Macross Chronicle mechanic sheets for DYRL? and Plus, it's almost certainly a hydrogen engine or a series hybrid with a hydrogen-burning generator... a subject quite near and dear to my heart, considering my vocation and employer.

It's noted in the relevant Macross Chronicle mechanic sheet that it was remodeled for space use (probably meaning Milky Road use).

Edited by Seto Kaiba

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That seems pretty constant in sci-fi anime. In the original Evangelion Misato drove a Renault Alpine modified to electric, in the manga Kaji has a Lotus 1600. In the Sky Crawlers, Kusanagi has a personal Porsche 911 from the 80’s, dunno the chassis generation. And let’s not forget Batou’s classic car collection in Ghost in the Shell.  Makes you think these guys are all motorheads deep down, or perhaps not so deep. 

Edited by Sildani

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, Batou's Lancia Stratos HF Stradale. 

Anyway, I just thought it was cool that Ozma would choose a Lancia rally car.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, now that I’ve derailed the thread, I’ll get it back on track. :)

Any word on how much the various Valkyries weigh?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Macross cars would, technically, count as mecha as they are placed in the mechanics section of artbooks and in the Macross Chronicle. :p

Share this post


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

Any word on how much the various Valkyries weigh?

Technically, no. Macross Mecha Manual does have the Empty Mass for most VF's in Macross continuity though. 

Share this post


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

That seems pretty constant in sci-fi anime. In the original Evangelion Misato drove a Renault Alpine modified to electric, in the manga Kaji has a Lotus 1600. In the Sky Crawlers, Kusanagi has a personal Porsche 911 from the 80’s, dunno the chassis generation. And let’s not forget Batou’s classic car collection in Ghost in the Shell.  Makes you think these guys are all motorheads deep down, or perhaps not so deep. 

Heh, I guess when you're in a dangerous line of work and you're drawing plenty of hazard pay on a regular basis, you can afford the finer things in life.

Mind you, both the Ghost in the Shell manga and Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex anime imply that Batou didn't exactly pay for his fancy cars.1

Ozma must be getting paid pretty well, to afford a custom car modeled on the Lancia Delta HF Integrale Evoluzione and a house in one of the fleet's most upscale neighborhoods.  (The main residential areas are actually the subterranean urban district seen in the movies, living topside is said to be the most exclusive and expensive place to live.)

 

11 hours ago, Valkyrie Driver said:

Yeah, Batou's Lancia Stratos HF Stradale. 

Anyway, I just thought it was cool that Ozma would choose a Lancia rally car.

6 hours ago, ManhattanProject972 said:

And Lockon's Lancia 037 in Gundam 00.

The anime industry seems to have a lot of love for Lancia and other FCA brands... when he's not stealing cars to be inconspicuous or driving that ancient and frequently-destroyed Mercedes-Benz SSK2, Lupin III's usually seen driving a yellow Fiat 500 or an off-white Abarth 595.3

 

1 hour ago, azrael said:

Macross cars would, technically, count as mecha as they are placed in the mechanics section of artbooks and in the Macross Chronicle. :p

 

 

4 hours ago, Sildani said:

Ok, now that I’ve derailed the thread, I’ll get it back on track. :)

Any word on how much the various Valkyries weigh?

Well, we've got empty masses for all but a few... or did you mean with a combat load?

Fuel mass is an amusingly negligible concern on Valkyries, considering that the fuel of choice for the thermonuclear reaction turbine engines is hydrogen slush... which is just shy of 1/10th the mass per unit of fluid volume.  The VF-1 Valkyrie's full fuel load (without drop tanks or conformal tanks) has a mass of just under 120kg (264lb).

 

1. It's implied, with varying degrees of strength, that Batou may have "liberated" some of his cars from asset forfeitures of wealthy criminals and the like.  Section 9 apparently does this a lot, so much so that in Stand Alone Complex they get flak for it from a couple sources including in court and from the JMSDF's Umibozu special forces team.

2. Mercedes-Benz made less than 40 SSKs in the entire production run, and at most 5 survived to the modern day.  Lupin III's as hard on cars as James Bond, and his poor SSK gets destroyed several times a season.  The only explanation I can think of is that Mercedes-Benz made a lot more than 40, and Lupin I or Lupin II made off with most of them.

3. ... and before you say "that's not Macross", Lupin III and his Fiat 500 show up in episode 24 of Super Dimension Fortress Macross, as part of a video game in the arcade where Max first meets Milia.

Edited by Seto Kaiba

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What exactly does a Valkyrie's Air Flow Control do and is it something a RL modern or near future plane can accomplish without the use of overtechnology?

 

I recall scenes like Guld vs Ghost in which they fire off their nose verniers for hypersonic maneuvering and I remember a diagram from the masterfile which depicts altered airflow around the VF caused by the useage of the nose verniers.

Is that a Valk's AFC?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, ManhattanProject972 said:

What exactly does a Valkyrie's Air Flow Control do and is it something a RL modern or near future plane can accomplish without the use of overtechnology?

 

I recall scenes like Guld vs Ghost in which they fire off their nose verniers for hypersonic maneuvering and I remember a diagram from the masterfile which depicts altered airflow around the VF caused by the useage of the nose verniers.

Is that a Valk's AFC?

 

I suspect this is more Otech than not, but it is certainly something that could be useful in reality, and is theoretically possible. It's an engineering problem more than a scientific one I suspect.

Inb4 Seto's super explanation, based on my own engineering knowledge the AFC probably manipulates boundary layer forces of the air that flows across the airframe and wings to provide an increase in lift forces and decrease in drag forces to enable even more efficient flight, which could allow even faster movement in atmosphere. Even with positive lift being generated every square inch of an airframe is subject to small forces due to the friction of air. In modern aerodynamics models aircraft designs are meticulously optimized at this left to try and decrease the effect of drag as much as possible within design and cost constraints but in reality there is only so much that can be done with the design of the structure. The AFC in VFs probably manipulates the air flowing around the plane itself through a variety of means such as the verniers you mentioned.

I doubt this is something in use by anything modern as it would be technically difficult and expensive even if we could manage it with modern tech. I do think it could be done eventually though, and wouldn't be surprised if it was an area of research already. After all, stuff like this is probably what super secret aircraft research groups do (like Area 51 maybe) but it would be classified if so since it could potentially create a massive tactical advantage in our air fleet over other countries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, some experimental aircraft have done it IRL using large airpumps and an array of tiny ports on the wing. It turns out that dirt in the air is a not-insignificant issue, and plugged nozzles are a serious impediment to deployment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, JB0 said:

Actually, some experimental aircraft have done it IRL using large airpumps and an array of tiny ports on the wing. It turns out that dirt in the air is a not-insignificant issue, and plugged nozzles are a serious impediment to deployment.

That's not surprising to hear. Like said, it's mainly an engineering issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, ManhattanProject972 said:

What exactly does a Valkyrie's Air Flow Control do and is it something a RL modern or near future plane can accomplish without the use of overtechnology?

It's pretty much entirely real-world technology... though some of it is mostly restricted to X-planes and other prototype aircraft.

Almost every Valkyrie uses boundary layer control to manipulate laminar airflow over the airframe to manipulate aerodynamic drag on the airframe.  The real-world application most commonly uses suction via a sub-intake to reduce drag, decreasing the minimum takeoff distance, improving fuel efficiency, and increasing the available angles of attack during maneuvering.  Macross goes a good deal farther, using BLC suction to gain all those benefits at a greater level and also even acheive some limited attitude control purely by asymmetric laminar airflow manipulation.  (This is what those little intakes separate from the main intake are for.)

Later VFs, like the VF-19, added vortex flow control to that.  That approach involves injecting small amounts of gas into the airflow over the aircraft skin, shifting the postions of the vortices and reducing drag on one side of the aircraft, causing it to pull towards the side with greater drag.  (Much like the above, but MUCH more effective and versatile, to the extent that it can potentially be a substitute for an aircraft's tail.)  This was toyed with on the Grumman X-29, which the YF-19 is based on.

 

 

17 hours ago, ManhattanProject972 said:

I recall scenes like Guld vs Ghost in which they fire off their nose verniers for hypersonic maneuvering and I remember a diagram from the masterfile which depicts altered airflow around the VF caused by the useage of the nose verniers.

Is that a Valk's AFC?

What you saw in Macross Plus was a bit more mundane... the YF-21 and AIF-X-9 were both indulging in more brute-force methods to super-high agility, burning their high thrust verniers heavily to achieve that maneuverability.  Airflow control methods like BLC or VFC are better suited to lower speeds.

 

 

Share this post


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

That's not surprising to hear. Like said, it's mainly an engineering issue.

I just thought I'd put it out there because it is the sort of crazy engineering that makes life better for the knowing of.

According to Wikipedia, the ultimate arbiters of truth(if not actually fact), it was last messed with in the 90s by NASA, who retrofit it to the F16XL prototypes.

 

Which brings us kicking and screaming back to the ACTUUAL topic, since I believe the  F-16XL was an inspiration for the VF-11MAXL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, JB0 said:

I just thought I'd put it out there because it is the sort of crazy engineering that makes life better for the knowing of.

According to Wikipedia, the ultimate arbiters of truth(if not actually fact), it was last messed with in the 90s by NASA, who retrofit it to the F16XL prototypes.

It's actually used relatively often, the F-16XL just did it a bit differently with a collection of tiny ports on the leading edge of the wingtip instead of a larger sub-intake and/or a splitter plate.

 

36 minutes ago, JB0 said:

Which brings us kicking and screaming back to the ACTUUAL topic, since I believe the  F-16XL was an inspiration for the VF-11MAXL.

Yep.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×