Jump to content

Super Macross Mecha Fun Time Discussion Thread!


Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, twich said:

With the previous mention of the FF-1999 that was in the ghost unmanned fighter AND the VF-0 NF, what kind of thrust does the engine produce? Knowing the meager thrust that the conventional jet engine of the VF-0, anything has to be an improvement.

We do not know.  We have very few actual specs for that initial-type thermonuclear reaction turbine engine... most of which pertain to its propellant efficiency in space.  The available data very loosely suggests the FF-1999 had about 90% the performance of the FF-2001.

 

5 minutes ago, twich said:

PS- IN the variable Fighter master file for the VF-0, does it mention what engine the revival version Of the VF-0 did they use? Does it make mention of it? Thanks!

The VF-0 "The Nostalgia" restoration that was done for the First Space War armistice 25th Anniversary was using reproduction EGF-127 turbofan jet engines.  Six engines were made as part of the restoration process.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, well....I was thinking that they did a new production run of them for S&G’s and threw some thermonuclear reaction engines in there....as I recall, isn’t it being flown in formation with VF-11’s?  With as big as the VF-0 is, it could probably fit some rather powerful engines in there to make it more in line with modern(for the time) valkyries.

Twich

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, twich said:

Ok, well....I was thinking that they did a new production run of them for S&G’s and threw some thermonuclear reaction engines in there....as I recall, isn’t it being flown in formation with VF-11’s?  

Yup.  There are several pictures in the book that show it flying alongside what appears to be a VF-11B.

 

8 minutes ago, twich said:

With as big as the VF-0 is, it could probably fit some rather powerful engines in there to make it more in line with modern(for the time) valkyries.

Oh, absolutely... though the replica VF-0's on Uroboros mainly used parts from the VF-1C and VF-5000.  Macross the Ride featured a totally rebuilt VF-0 that was remodeled to use tech from the YF-25, including its FF-3001A engines.  That was Hakuna Aoba's VF-0改 "Zeke".

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

A VF-0 with YF-25 engines... that can't be good for the airframe, or anything attached to or contained within it.

Well, it started life as a VF-0... what it was rebuilt into really belongs more in the same category as the SV-52 орел.  

"A customized Valkyrie of unknown origin produced to imitate the VF-0".  

Well, except that we know exactly what its origins are... the above remark is, save for the "VF-0" part, how the SV-52 орел is described since it's indicated to have a lot of VF-17 hardware under the hood despite allegedly starting its life as a SV-51.  Katori Brown-Robins did some interesting things to that VF-0 airframe.  The end result was more "a YF-25 thinly disguised as a VF-0" than anything.

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

Well, it started life as a VF-0... what it was rebuilt into really belongs more in the same category as the SV-52 орел.  

"A customized Valkyrie of unknown origin produced to imitate the VF-0".  

Well, except that we know exactly what its origins are... the above remark is, save for the "VF-0" part, how the SV-52 орел is described since it's indicated to have a lot of VF-17 hardware under the hood despite allegedly starting its life as a SV-51.  Katori Brown-Robins did some interesting things to that VF-0 airframe.  The end result was more "a YF-25 thinly disguised as a VF-0" than anything.

Huh...should name it the "VF-42 Mishmash"  (due to variety of parts)

Edited by pengbuzz
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Seto Kaiba said:

Well, it started life as a VF-0... what it was rebuilt into really belongs more in the same category as the SV-52 орел.  

"A customized Valkyrie of unknown origin produced to imitate the VF-0".  

Well, except that we know exactly what its origins are... the above remark is, save for the "VF-0" part, how the SV-52 орел is described since it's indicated to have a lot of VF-17 hardware under the hood despite allegedly starting its life as a SV-51.  Katori Brown-Robins did some interesting things to that VF-0 airframe.  The end result was more "a YF-25 thinly disguised as a VF-0" than anything.

Huh. If they could do that I wonder why the SMS crew didn't mock up a VF-0 for the Movie during Frontier?

Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, deathzealot said:

Huh. If they could do that I wonder why the SMS crew didn't mock up a VF-0 for the Movie during Frontier?

Budget and time? CG is cheaper probably.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, pengbuzz said:

Huh...should name it the "VF-42 Mishmash"  (due to variety of parts)

That Hakuna Aoba named his custom VF-0 for the Allied reporting name for the Mitsubishi A6M Navy Type-0 carrier-based fighter is an odd choice, to be sure... though he's not alone there.  Macross Galaxy developed a VF-22 variant named Schwalbe Zwei, the other name for the Messerschmitt Me 262.

Can't give it a new design number tho, since it's a one-of-a-kind custom aircraft for (nominally) nonmilitary purposes.  Calling it a "VF-0 Custom" feels a bit disingenuous since it's more along the lines of "disguised YF-25", but it's probably the most accurate since it WAS a VF-0 when Katori started and it still looks and transforms like a VF-0.

 

1 hour ago, deathzealot said:

Huh. If they could do that I wonder why the SMS crew didn't mock up a VF-0 for the Movie during Frontier?

11 minutes ago, Master Dex said:

Budget and time? CG is cheaper probably.

What @Master Dex said.

Granted, we don't know what the budget for Bird Human was... but given that the film was set to be the debut of a beauty pageant winner who presumably had no acting experience to speak of, it was probably closer in budget and scope to a Japanese domestic market film than an American big-budget Hollywood film.  Tens, rather than hundreds, of millions of dollars for a budget.  The most expensive film produced in Japan at time of writing - the 2013 animated fantasy film Kaguya-hime no Monogatari - had a budget of $49.3 million (US).  Budgets in the single-digit millions (US) are more typical for a character-heavy drama.  The estimated budget for the 2006 Death Note movie was $20 million (US) thanks to the use of CGI for its shinigami, comparable to what was spent on the hilariously camp direct-to-video Starship Troopers 3: Marauder.  

Purpose-building a handful of replica VF-0's and SV-51's similar to what was used on Uroboros for the dogfight scenes would probably have cost most, or all, of the film's budget... and hiring stunt pilots to fly them wouldn't have been cheap either.  They'd already blown a chunk of their budget licensing a Sheryl Nome song for the movie too... that can't have been cheap.

It's not clear if Strategic Military Services was hired for the film, or were simply volunteering their services in the name of some cheap advertising.  I'm guessing it's the latter.  Having the military support filming a movie ain't cheap either.  Adjusted for inflation, having the US Navy's F-14's fly outside of their regular duties for filming cost the film's budget around $19,000 per hour just to get the F-14's in the air.  Having SMS volunteer the services of highly trained fighter pilots and using their VF-25's for motion capture for CGI VF-0's that the filmmakers would add in post-production would have been a huge savings to the budget.  Their only other options would've been to appeal to the Frontier NUNS or maybe Mihoshi Academy's flight school.  SMS had the advantage that their VF-25s are similarly sized to the VF-0, where the Frontier NUNS's VF-171s are a bit smaller and Mihoshi Academy's VF-1C Valkyries are a LOT smaller. 

(In the Macross Frontier short story Actors Sky, the Bird Human movie's lead actor Akira Kamishima had to do some training in a VF-1C in preparation for reshoots because the film's director was unsatisfied with his performance in the cockpit shots... that probably would've cost a fair sum too.)

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Seto Kaiba said:

What @Master Dex said.

Granted, we don't know what the budget for Bird Human was... but given that the film was set to be the debut of a beauty pageant winner who presumably had no acting experience to speak of, it was probably closer in budget and scope to a Japanese domestic market film than an American big-budget Hollywood film.  Tens, rather than hundreds, of millions of dollars for a budget.  The most expensive film produced in Japan at time of writing - the 2013 animated fantasy film Kaguya-hime no Monogatari - had a budget of $49.3 million (US).  Budgets in the single-digit millions (US) are more typical for a character-heavy drama.  The estimated budget for the 2006 Death Note movie was $20 million (US) thanks to the use of CGI for its shinigami, comparable to what was spent on the hilariously camp direct-to-video Starship Troopers 3: Marauder.  

Purpose-building a handful of replica VF-0's and SV-51's similar to what was used on Uroboros for the dogfight scenes would probably have cost most, or all, of the film's budget... and hiring stunt pilots to fly them wouldn't have been cheap either.  They'd already blown a chunk of their budget licensing a Sheryl Nome song for the movie too... that can't have been cheap.

It's not clear if Strategic Military Services was hired for the film, or were simply volunteering their services in the name of some cheap advertising.  I'm guessing it's the latter.  Having the military support filming a movie ain't cheap either.  Adjusted for inflation, having the US Navy's F-14's fly outside of their regular duties for filming cost the film's budget around $19,000 per hour just to get the F-14's in the air.  Having SMS volunteer the services of highly trained fighter pilots and using their VF-25's for motion capture for CGI VF-0's that the filmmakers would add in post-production would have been a huge savings to the budget.  Their only other options would've been to appeal to the Frontier NUNS or maybe Mihoshi Academy's flight school.  SMS had the advantage that their VF-25s are similarly sized to the VF-0, where the Frontier NUNS's VF-171s are a bit smaller and Mihoshi Academy's VF-1C Valkyries are a LOT smaller. 

(In the Macross Frontier short story Actors Sky, the Bird Human movie's lead actor Akira Kamishima had to do some training in a VF-1C in preparation for reshoots because the film's director was unsatisfied with his performance in the cockpit shots... that probably would've cost a fair sum too.)

Interesting. Figured a movie set in the future would have a bit more ease of time and money to shoot such a movie like Bird Human (thank you forgot the name for it). Still I can see where you are coming from.

On an aside. I did not know that Mihoshi Academy had their own Valkyries. I know they had the one display model on top of the school but I did not know they had ones that could be flown. Learn something new.

Edited by deathzealot
Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, deathzealot said:

Interesting. Figured a movie set in the future would have a bit more ease of time and money to shoot such a movie like Bird Human (thank you forgot the name for it). Still I can see where you are coming from.

Well, you have to remember that as affluent as the Macross Frontier fleet is... it's still a city-state of just ten million people1 out on the edge of explored space.

Local productions likely don't have the domestic audience to justify Hollywood blockbuster-level expenditures.2  The fleet does, after all, have only about 1/12th the total population of Japan.

 

37 minutes ago, deathzealot said:

On an aside. I did not know that Mihoshi Academy had their own Valkyries. I know they had the one display model on top of the school but I did not know they had ones that could be flown. Learn something new.

It's not something mentioned in the TV series proper... it comes up in the novelization, the short stories, etc.  Mihoshi Academy had a number of VF-1C civilian-use Valkyries that were used for practical training in their aviation/space navigation major.

From the sound of it, the VF-1C is a disarmed consumer-grade derivative of the VF-1A similar to how the VT-1C is a consumer-grade derivative of the VT-1 Ostrich.

 

 

1. Putting it in the same class, in terms of total population, as Bangkok or Seoul... and would be approximately the 34th most populous city if it existed on Earth today.  As a nation, it would rank 91st... behind Azerbaijan and above the United Arab Emirates.
2. To put it in perspective, the entire population of the Macross Frontier emigrant fleet would have to watch Bird Human three times to narrowly edge out the total number of tickets sold for Star Wars: the Rise of Skywalker in its opening weekend, and four times for Avengers: Endgame's opening weekend.  Not total ticket sales for either of those real world films, JUST their opening weekends.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Welcome to MW @BroTaku79

Funny you mention the VF-25   I was looking at one of mine yesterday and admiring its lines . And , imo , it's one of the Most versatile of the recent Macross Valkyries . While it's not my absolute favorite. I feel it's a solid platform .

Now if we could only get specs on the VF-24..

 

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

Welcome to MW @BroTaku79

Funny you mention the VF-25   I was looking at one of mine yesterday and admiring its lines . And , imo , it's one of the Most versatile of the recent Macross Valkyries . While it's not my absolute favorite. I feel it's a solid platform .

Now if we could only get specs on the VF-24..

 

It's probably the most versatile, but I think the 31s hot swappable equipment containers is the better direction.

As for 24, just assume everything is at 11, lol.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Master Dex said:

It's probably the most versatile, but I think the 31s hot swappable equipment containers is the better direction.

Yes. The container is quite versatile. I'm hoping to see more uses with it in the next Delta movie.

 

1 hour ago, Master Dex said:

As for 24, just assume everything is at 11, lol.

Haha. Yep:good:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly when I first watched Frontier I was not a fan of the Messiah visually, maybe because of the CGI and being in space, while I actually preferred the Nightmare Plus. It was only recently when I was rewatching Frontier that I started to like the Messiah more then I had in the past. Side note, I also right off the bat loved the Siegfried. Though that is visually not looking at the specs and what it has done during battle scenes.

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

Welcome to MW @BroTaku79

Funny you mention the VF-25   I was looking at one of mine yesterday and admiring its lines . And , imo , it's one of the Most versatile of the recent Macross Valkyries . While it's not my absolute favorite. I feel it's a solid platform .

1 hour ago, Master Dex said:

It's probably the most versatile, but I think the 31s hot swappable equipment containers is the better direction.

As much as I like the VF-25, I'm not sure I'd agree with the idea that it's the most versatile of the modern Macross VFs.

Granted, it fills a lot of roles in the TO&E of an emigrant government defense force... but it achieves that by having a bunch of highly specialized variants on top of the standard type and the expected model conversion trainer.  It has a dedicated command variant, a dedicated reconnaissance-in-force variant, a dedicated marksman variant, a dedicated ELINT and AWACS variant, and that's not touching on the other weird corner case variants in Master File like a variant specifically for deploying the Armored Pack, a dedicated aggressor variant, a dedicated planetary survey variant, etc. etc. etc.

The VF-31 is, I think, a far more versatile aircraft since the same model can be easily converted to fill almost any role through hot-swappable modular equipment.

 

 

3 hours ago, Bolt said:

Now if we could only get specs on the VF-24..

1 hour ago, Master Dex said:

As for 24, just assume everything is at 11, lol.

Nah, this one goes up to 24.

 

 

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

As much as I like the VF-25, I'm not sure I'd agree with the idea that it's the most versatile of the modern Macross VFs.

Granted, it fills a lot of roles in the TO&E of an emigrant government defense force... but it achieves that by having a bunch of highly specialized variants on top of the standard type and the expected model conversion trainer.  It has a dedicated command variant, a dedicated reconnaissance-in-force variant, a dedicated marksman variant, a dedicated ELINT and AWACS variant, and that's not touching on the other weird corner case variants in Master File like a variant specifically for deploying the Armored Pack, a dedicated aggressor variant, a dedicated planetary survey variant, etc. etc. etc.

The VF-31 is, I think, a far more versatile aircraft since the same model can be easily converted to fill almost any role through hot-swappable modular equipment.

Admittedly I was thinking there was likely reasons beyond that that'd give favor to the 25 but as my statement goes I actually do agree with your reasoning for the 31.

I'll tell you one thing, from a pure aesthetic standpoint I like the 31 much more, and the transformation is definitely better. I own DXs of two 31s and the 30 it's derived from and only the 29B on the other side for a reason lol.

39 minutes ago, Seto Kaiba said:

Nah, this one goes up to 24.

You sir have defeated me at my own game.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Seto Kaiba said:

The VF-31 is, I think, a far more versatile aircraft since the same model can be easily converted to fill almost any role through hot-swappable modular equipment.

Would that make the VF-31 a RAID array?

(or perhaps more like an air RAID array? :p )

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

Admittedly I was thinking there was likely reasons beyond that that'd give favor to the 25 but as my statement goes I actually do agree with your reasoning for the 31.

I'll tell you one thing, from a pure aesthetic standpoint I like the 31 much more, and the transformation is definitely better. I own DXs of two 31s and the 30 it's derived from and only the 29B on the other side for a reason lol.

One thing about Macross that I've never been super fond of is the way the New UN Forces gets stuck operating a dozen different variants of one model of aircraft simultaneously... the kind of arrangement we saw with the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th Generation Main Variable Fighters is way more realistic.  Don't get me wrong, I get that the goal is having multiple variants so a toy partner like Bandai or Arcadia can run out a dozen different variants of one master mold.  I just like the more realistic take because, as an engineer, I cringe a little every time I think about what a maintenance nightmare it must be to have to stock or manufacture-on-demand replacement parts for a half dozen different variants all at once and sometimes all for just one unit.

There was, at least, a reasonably good excuse for the VF-1J being an early block-only variant that was actually a competing proposal for the format of the standard VF-1 variant.  I like the realism in that with the late block VF-1, the VF-4, the VF-11, VF-171, and VF-19 1st mass production type they had standard variants that were one aircraft fits all.  Same as with the Macross II VFs.

I guess you could make a bunch of variants like the VF-25's work if you had a big and wealthy government with a lot of money to burn... but something like there's one or two highly flexible variants instead of six or more specialized ones makes a lot more sense in terms of initial cost and operating cost.

(TL;DR I've lost my mind thinking about the practical aspects of operating large numbers of giant robots.)

 

2 hours ago, Master Dex said:

You sir have defeated me at my own game.

1 hour ago, pengbuzz said:

Would that make the VF-31 a RAID array?

(or perhaps more like an air RAID array? :p )

Then @pengbuzz came along and blew us both away... 

:rofl:

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

One thing about Macross that I've never been super fond of is the way the New UN Forces gets stuck operating a dozen different variants of one model of aircraft simultaneously... the kind of arrangement we saw with the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th Generation Main Variable Fighters is way more realistic.  Don't get me wrong, I get that the goal is having multiple variants so a toy partner like Bandai or Arcadia can run out a dozen different variants of one master mold.  I just like the more realistic take because, as an engineer, I cringe a little every time I think about what a maintenance nightmare it must be to have to stock or manufacture-on-demand replacement parts for a half dozen different variants all at once and sometimes all for just one unit.

There was, at least, a reasonably good excuse for the VF-1J being an early block-only variant that was actually a competing proposal for the format of the standard VF-1 variant.  I like the realism in that with the late block VF-1, the VF-4, the VF-11, VF-171, and VF-19 1st mass production type they had standard variants that were one aircraft fits all.  Same as with the Macross II VFs.

I guess you could make a bunch of variants like the VF-25's work if you had a big and wealthy government with a lot of money to burn... but something like there's one or two highly flexible variants instead of six or more specialized ones makes a lot more sense in terms of initial cost and operating cost.

(TL;DR I've lost my mind thinking about the practical aspects of operating large numbers of giant robots.)

 

Then @pengbuzz came along and blew us both away... 

:rofl:

Oh in this I am fully agreed, as both an aerospace engineer and an Air Force maintainer veteran lol. My job for the latter was to work on one version of the engine used in a specific block of F-16C, and it wasn't the latest block, lol. So having multiple models on top of that would be a nightmare. In my engineer hat I see it much as you. Many of one type is much more preferable to mass production.

As for pengbuzz with the pun steal, we can only defer to the future what can do better.

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

I guess you could make a bunch of variants like the VF-25's work if you had a big and wealthy government with a lot of money to burn...

Did someone say SMS..?

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Bolt said:

Did someone say SMS..?

Nope... because SMS doesn't actually own any of the VF-25's or YF-25's they're depicted as operating in Macross Frontier and its related materials (e.g. Macross the Ride).

Those aircraft - and the aircraft carrier they're operating from - are property of the Macross Frontier fleet's New UN Forces on loan to SMS as part of SMS's contract to be expendable mooks testing the fleet's next-gen weapons in live combat.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Bolt said:

What?? I thought SMS was flush. And owned those birds.. oh well. Back to flying cargo..

Oh, SMS's parent company Bilra Transport IS flush with cash... they sponsored the Macross Frontier fleet's mission into Vajra space.

However, having random civilian corporations buying next-gen military hardware that the military itself doesn't have yet?  That'd be a big NOPE for pretty much any government.  Xaos is in the same boat WRT its VF-31's.  They're on loan from the Brisingr Alliance New UN Forces for field testing under a similar contract.

It's not clear how many of SMS's VFs are actually owned by SMS, since even Isamu's VF-19EF/A is privately owned, not SMS-owned.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So question.

You mentioned that information on variants and such earlier but I musk ask. Wouldn't having variants of a same model unit be cheaper then trying to develop a whole new unit for the same mission. Since these different variants would share parts thanks to them being pretty much the same unit with some differences.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, deathzealot said:

You mentioned that information on variants and such earlier but I musk ask. Wouldn't having variants of a same model unit be cheaper then trying to develop a whole new unit for the same mission. Since these different variants would share parts thanks to them being pretty much the same unit with some differences.

Well, that depends on what kind of mission profile you're talking about...

However, in the VF-25's case we're looking at the opposite problem.  The actual differences between its variants are so small that there's really no need to have most of the variants at all.  Monitor turrets aside, they're functionally identical aircraft that differ only in some optional software, calibrations, and tuning.  Install the S-type's command support software onto the VF-25A and you've eliminated the need for a dedicated command variant.  Install the flight control and fire control calibrations and engine tunings from the F-type and there's no more need for a dedicated reconnaissance-in-force variant.  We know from the two previous VF generations and one of the VF-25's competitors that ELINT/AWACS capabilities can be modularized to the extent that a normal VF can fill the role just fine with the addition of a FAST Pack or container.  There's no need for a dedicated recon variant like the RVF-25. All in all, the only variant that justifies its existence is the VF-25G... which operates in a very narrow role and requires specialized camera systems and fire control system enhancements to do its job as a designated marksman unit.

The VF-25F, VF-25S, and RVF-25 could all be eliminated and their functions covered by the VF-25A and VF-25B without difficulty... simplifying the logistics of maintaining a fleet of VFs and keeping costs down at the same time.  The VF-31 is exactly like that... you have the VF-31A and VF-31B and that's it.

There's a really narrow sort of niche where, if an aircraft can't fill a particular role, a new variant can be made to do so adequately instead of it being more efficient to have a dedicated model that does that job better right off the bat.  For instance, the VF-4 was an excellent space fighter but the very design choices that made it such an excellent space fighter made it kind of a sub-par atmospheric fighter.  The problem was significant enough and fundamentally tied to the VF-4's design such that it couldn't really be addressed with a new variant, so the VF-1 served alongside it, then the VF-5, and VF-5000, and several other atmospheric-focused 2nd Generation VFs.  Contrast that and, say, the VF-19.  The VF-19 was a good multi-role all-regime fighter but the NUNS wanted a space fighter... so since it was already a good multirole fighter in air and in space, the simplest approach was a new variant optimized to operate in space (the VF-19F/S type).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Couldn’t the various 25 variants actually be what you suggest Seto? They’re standard 25A’s with the various retrofits and different monitor turrets installed, and to recognize that, their designation letters are changed in the field? 
 

Is it actually written somewhere that all the variants are purpose-built?

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

Couldn’t the various 25 variants actually be what you suggest Seto? They’re standard 25A’s with the various retrofits and different monitor turrets installed, and to recognize that, their designation letters are changed in the field? 
 

Is it actually written somewhere that all the variants are purpose-built?

Nope... if that were the case, we'd expect to see them written up along similar lines to the Xaos Valkyrie Works VF-31 Custom Siegfrieds.  

The VF-25F, VF-25S, and RVF-25 are written up as production variants.

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

Nope... if that were the case, we'd expect to see them written up along similar lines to the Xaos Valkyrie Works VF-31 Custom Siegfrieds.  

The VF-25F, VF-25S, and RVF-25 are written up as production variants.

That’s pretty slim evidence that those would be much more difficult for maintenance regularity than the -31 series.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, aurance said:

That’s pretty slim evidence that those would be much more difficult for maintenance regularity than the -31 series.

Not as much as it sounds, cause if they're all production run then the differences are big enough to denote that and the parts and labor to maintain them all have to be handled distinctly. It balloons fast. But for whatever reason Frontier decided they wanted it that way (I know I'm not Seto, but I'll say it's a case of "Screw the rules, I have money" lol)

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

That’s pretty slim evidence that those would be much more difficult for maintenance regularity than the -31 series.

The problem isn't in the frequency of scheduled maintenance... it's in the logistics of stocking variant-specific parts when you're operating six different variants of the same aircraft from the same carrier.  Logistically, minimizing the number of variants in concurrent operation is always the best idea.

 

2 hours ago, Master Dex said:

Not as much as it sounds, cause if they're all production run then the differences are big enough to denote that and the parts and labor to maintain them all have to be handled distinctly. It balloons fast. But for whatever reason Frontier decided they wanted it that way (I know I'm not Seto, but I'll say it's a case of "Screw the rules, I have money" lol)

Exactly why the Frontier fleet thought it needed so many different variants is unclear... since most of them are little different from the base model.  A Command variant seems like something done more out of tradition than actual necessity, since the VF-4, VF-11, and VF-171 all got along fine without it.

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

The problem isn't in the frequency of scheduled maintenance... it's in the logistics of stocking variant-specific parts when you're operating six different variants of the same aircraft from the same carrier.  Logistically, minimizing the number of variants in concurrent operation is always the best idea.

 

Exactly why the Frontier fleet thought it needed so many different variants is unclear... since most of them are little different from the base model.  A Command variant seems like something done more out of tradition than actual necessity, since the VF-4, VF-11, and VF-171 all got along fine without it.

Right, I’m saying that I’m not sure the 25 parts variance is significantly more onerous than majority of the fighter lines before.

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

Right, I’m saying that I’m not sure the 25 parts variance is significantly more onerous than majority of the fighter lines before.

On a per-variant basis, that's probably correct... the issue I'm getting at is the VF-25 has something like 2-3x the number of variants that usually in service concurrently in any one place.

Unless they're in the middle of a transition/upgrade, you'd expect to see just two fighter-role variants at a time... a single-seater and tandem cockpit version of the same specification as we see in the real world on the F-15, F-16, and F/A-18.  The VF-4 had the VF-4A/B, and VF-11 had the A/B/C and D types, the VF-19 had the A/B and C/D types, it's speculated the VF-17 had this with its A/B type, the VF-25 has it with its A/B (and in Master File C/D), the VF-31 has it with A/B, etc.  

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...