The Saint

I've certainly got plenty of personal gripes about Frontier, but I think you're being a tad bit harsh, Roy. Not quite sure what the age of majority in North America has to do with the appropriate age for teenage relationships (none of which went beyond minimalist kissing) within in a fictional work from an Asian culture whose age of majority is 20. And age of consent is 13. That's an issue with modern anime fan culture and technology, not the show itself. That's like blaming Star Trek for Picard/Riker slash fiction on the internet. If SDFM wasn't so dated, you can expect plenty of Roy/Hikaru slash, too. Go, scary fangirls. Most of Minmei (Ugh, impromptu shower) and Mylene for in-your-face fanservice, and 50% of Macross 7 for pointless fillers? Maybe now I'm being overly harsh.

Ontario, Canada.

Walk away man, he's not worth it.

Thank you. Should've pointed this out earlier. http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/sys...land-Image1.gif Comm antennas.

I don't really understand why Kawamori thinks the resurgence of super corporations post SW-I makes a lot of sense. The current corporate structures developed out of centuries of socio-political-economic foundations that were basically wiped clean by the Bodol Zer Main Fleet's bombardment of Earth. With the distinction/support between private and public wealth essentially destroyed, and the government becoming sole remaining stable provider, I would've expected something more like the United Federation of Planets to develop. In the rush to rebuild, it doesn't seem like it'd make a lot of sense to devote time and effort into re-establishing banking and self-owned private firms. Score one for corporatist culture mentality in modern Japan, I guess.

Because a sky full of tracers is much more pleasant to look at.

Are you in the navy? Are any of your male line a Phalanix system tech? Or a naval weapons architect? Most people in the armed forces don't know a lot about military affairs beyond their responsibilities. Sorry, but you don't get a free pass based on the credential of your family members. There is more to mounting weapon systems then vantage. As I said, mounting CIWS that high, which carries its own FC radar on its mount, creates problems. The higher the CIWS, the lower it has to depress to track a missile as it closes. That means you'll get the radar pointing into the sea, and the sea clutter will severely mess up the radar return. There is a reason why real world CIWS are mounted on the side of the hull for CVs. Much better vantage against sea skimmers, the primary threat. I'm not sure I understand what you mean by a great place to fire missiles. I assume you mean that where you suggest they put CIWS would also be great for missile launchers. Not sure all the sensors and comms would appreciate the hot gases, and I'm pretty sure the lack of flat deck space up there would make reloading an interesting experience. Finally, blindspots are a fact of life on any warship, but since they're ships, they can manoeuvre to unmask their batteries. And since apparently the Cheyennes can leave their nook and run around the deck, the Asuka doesn't really have any blind spot above the flight deck. I said FOD, Foreign Object Damage. Yes, CIWS fires penetrators, which uses a sabot to center inside the barrel. Those sabots are light weight, so they'll tend to decelerate pretty quickly once outside of the barrel. Mounting them on top of the island means a good chance of having a lot of them litter the flight deck.

I would, CIWS are typically mounted a little further away from all the forest of sensor and comm bits. At their location, 2 are shooting over the deck, discarding sabots would rain down and create a FOD nightmare. Also, all 4 would end up look "down" on sea-skimming missiles as they close, bringing sea clutter into view and messing up the radar picture.

How exactly do you figure that? Why would an aircraft need to accommodate a gun operating at a level that is self-destructive and tactically impractical? "We've included a useless setting in our accessory to your vehicle, and we demand that you build the rest of your vehicle to accommodate that one setting that you're never going to use"?

You're not going to get insane rate of fire from only 3 barrels, and the rate of fire can be mechanically or electronically moderated. In other words, just because it's a gatling-style cannon doesn't mean it has to fire at the highest possible ROF. Neither the M61 or GAU-8 are set for their highest ROF. Having multiple barrel isn't just for ROF perks, it's also about heat tolerance (a big issue in space). A gunpod isn't useful if it's designed to fire all its ammo in 0.5s and melt its barrels in the process.

No, it is not. T-80 refers to a specific model of Russian tank. Try to at least Wiki something like this before answering. Fighters today also don't transform, though... You can't keep using modern fighters as a comparison for why it wouldn't work in a fictional world with fictional fighters.... As KB pointed out, GAU-8's killing power is derived from going for the soft spot. Most people watch youtube videos of A-10s firing and cream themselves, without understanding the complexity behind what they're watching. How thin tank roofs (and certain spots on certain runs of certain Russian turret castings) are. How A-10s are actually suppose to shoot Mavericks at enemy tanks before getting gun happy. How Soviet AD would've killed so very many A-10s trying to use their gun if the balloon had actually went up, simply from the necessary flight profile for an optimal gun run. As for 20mm.... No, it does not shred armour very fast or particularly well. 20mm is a weak round, the Americans don't use it because it's the best, they use it because they've gotten used to it. Over in Europe, you're not likely to find a fighter gun under 23mm, with 27mm being very popular. It's also worth noting that most IFV don't use 20mm. The standard is 25mm, with 20mm being the low end for autocannons. Current world trend is towards replacing 20mm due to mediocre effective range and projectile weight. The world average for CIWS is between 25 and 30mm. The Americans skew it downwards with the Phalanx, everyone else is 25mm or higher. I don't think anyone has build a CIWS over 40mm. Unless you mean shipboard heavy cannons. I guess those are also autocannons, but they're more commonly referred to as artillery. Finally, a "55mm" round is missing an important set of number: "x ###mm". Without it, you can't tell how big the round actually is. Could be a stubby round for all we know.

I never said VFs are heavier than modern fighters, I was trying to say that in relation to the rest of the fighter, a VF holding a gunpod is about the proportions as a man holding a rifle. In addition, the strength of the VF must be taken into account, in addition to the stability of the gunpod itself derived from its mass. Considering that we don't have any technology close to duplicating the performance of actuator strength and structural integrity, I think saying that 55mm is too much more a VF is an underestimation of OverTech. Besides, they obviously have no problem on screen. Why struggle against canon in this case?

A 55mm round isn't that big when you consider the size and strength of the big robot firing it, plus the mass of the gunpod itself.

Death by Snoo-Snoo!

Because wireless isn't a more elegant solution, it's a more vulnerable solution. Having a frequency-agile wireless system won't protect you against a broad spectrum jamming intended on overloading your all receivers. In comparison, wiring through actuators and moving parts isn't that big a deal when you consider some of the stuff OverTech can do. The vulnerability of hard line to ECM compared to wireless is trivial, and you're not a giant EMCON headache. You can't build veritechs based on real science at all, so I think super dimensional effects wins this contest. Seems like Macross takes more real life inspiration of how things look and feel, rather than how real science works.