Noyhauser

According to boeing, they want this fighter to be in service by 2020~2025, which I thought might be kinda hasty. This is a slide from a boeing presentation that might give you a sense of how they perceive the market in the future.

(Courtesy of aviation week)

A bit late with this, but Boeing had a mockup this fall of their next generation fighter, the F/A-XX (I knew they had an projects on the books but never an actual model of it.)

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2010/05/boeing-fa-xx-concept-walkaroun.html

Is the Fujimi 1/72 Battle Sky Series No.1 F22 Raptor w/ Engine any good?

Really wish one of these companies would do another YF-23 kit. Can't find one anywhere.

Well I've heard its got pretty good... the only issue is with the weapons bays but those will be filled with bombs or slammers. Really its a question of cost. You basically have the option between Revell and Fujimi, which are pretty much even in quality, but depending where you are, one might be cheaper than the other. My Guess in the US or Europe its the Revell one.

Very very nice... the subtle weathering really adds to the model. Did you fill the legs with Plaster or something else?

I'm a fan of Faraci and am really glad he helped contextualize some of the same thoughts I had about "Inception". The film as a metaphor for the filmmaking process came to me following discussions with friends. I love that reading of the movie and it's also very strongly supported by the film itself. It was great to see a filmgeek site like CHUD not only get as excited as I was about Nolan's latest but really provide an intelligent, inspired analysis of the film. My usual hang outs at both IFC.com and slashfilm.com found the staff of each site guardedly enthusiastic and patronizingly extolling about the film. But take the good with the bad I suppose

The article was good, considering it all a dream does change my perspective on the movie. I guess it comes down to whether you consider the "real world" real, or whether it was all a dream. I'm going to geek out here for a second... Would it be accurate to consider Inception an film adaptation of the post-modernist writing style of authors like Paul Auster?

I enjoyed the movie.

Although, it seems like the "gravity" aspect was not consistent all the way down. When the van goes over the bridge in level 1, there's no gravity in level 2, but level 3 and limbo are unaffected.

I was also kinda disappointed there was no twist ending. There's the ambiguous element to the very end, where the camera cuts away just before the audience knows for certain whether or not Cobb is awake, but that's more of a waggling of eyebrows. From pretty early on you're given enough to piece together Mal's part in the story, so I kinda assumed there would be another level. Someone trying to plant an idea in Cobb or something like that.

I was also kind of disappointed that they didn't do more with the aspect of layered dreams. The element of time, and the idea that stuff continued to happen in the other dreams, both seemed kinda downplayed. Reduced to a car chase and one little zero gravity fight. I suppose that's a matter of time constraints. The movie was fairly long, even though I didn't realize that until it was over. I actually thought the movie had been really short until I checked the time.

I agree with what you've said Radd.

A bit delayed but I really enjoyed your fanimecon recording of Heidi's address... as a non-collector it was interesting to listen to.

Unless they give Frankenhornet a brother, it'll be one less... According to Wikipedia we've got 123 in service, but those numbers are from 2003... I'd say we've got about 100 in active service at the moment.

Actually there are less than that. In the last year they put quite a few of them into storage as a budget saving measure (partly to pay for the F-35 and Ops in afghanistan), so we're down to 78 total with this one down.

Glad to see the pilot is ok and no one else was hurt or worse. How many Hornets does the RCAF have in its inventory though?

This isn't meant to nitpick, but the RCAF doesn't exist (it was disestablished during Unification in 1968.) Its just "Air Command," "Air Force" or CF, but there has been talk of returning that formal designation.

That looked awfully close to the camera position. Hope the audience was in a different spot. Glad to see the pilot made it out alive.

It was on a training run, the actual airshow is this weekend.

Does it say "exceeds in every category" or "completely surpasses"? No. It doesn't. In fact, it's quite vague about how the VF-11 supposedly surpasses the VF-4 and VF-5000, though the previous paragraph seems to imply it surpasses them in flight performance, not necessarily other fields like armament. As such, most of my points still stand.

Also, it doesn't help to throw something sketchley pointed you to earlier today at me and act as though you'd known it all along.

Ah, because I did? What evidence prior to the Chronicle's publication contradicted the fact that the VF-11 was superior? And what actual evidence do you have (besides your inferences on weapons or whatever) that actually state the VF-4 was superior in some way to the VF-11?

The thrust of all the material states the VF-4 was unsatisfactory in some way (whether it be cost or capability) requiring a supplementary fighter during its service and a wholesale replacement by the VF-11. I really doubt anybody would claim otherwise.

Isn't that a Robotech-ism? It might just be that I'm exhausted after a long day at work, but I don't remember any Macross publication that calls the VF-4 too expensive as a main VF or not capable enough to cover a variety of mission roles.

In the Macross Compendium notes for the VF-5000 and the VF-9 (which I was at the time the go-to resource before Chronicles) it was clear the popularity of these fighters was in part based on their affordability vis-a-vis the Lightning. I suspect this may have been stated explicitly in M3. The Chronicles stated explicitly that it wasn't effective in the atmosphere.

Just going by what we see of them in the canon depictions, the U.N. Spacy seems to like them just fine all the way up through the 2040s. Hell, they were even used as a test platform for newly developed spirita weapons during the war with the Varauta Army. The U.N. clearly still thought they were useful, since they did keep upgrading them to keep them in service as late as 2047.

Um the platform they used for newly developed spirita weapons was this:

Kinda looks like a VF-11 to me. Nothing suggests at all that the VF-4 continued after 2030 (actually everything stated contradicts this), unless you consider the option to use them as a playing unit in a Macross VFX definitive proof that its a mainline fighter.

Clearly superior in all areas? That's going to be a hard sell to make... after all, the VF-11 only carried missiles in its super parts, while the VF-4 didn't need super parts at all. Plus the VF-4 also had, by all accounts, six hardpoints for under-wing munitions, of which we never really see the VF-11 with any. Of course, there's the issue of the VF-11 having somewhat more main engine power, but the VF-4 also has two other sets of engines for which thrust ratings aren't known at the present time (a set of ramjets and a set of rocket boosters). The VF-4 has integrated forward-facing guns, while the only beam gun on the VF-11 faces rearward and it has to use its gunpod for any close-range engagements in all modes.

There ya go... I've poked a couple pretty sizable holes in the VF-11's alleged superiority in all areas, and I'm not even trying yet.

And yet despite all you've written, they replaced the VF-4 with the VF-11 which was stated to be superior in Macross chronicle. How superior? "shows abilities exceeding that of the VF-4, VF-5000 and so on in each regime, and was adopted as the UN Forces' main force VF" superior.

And having superparts isn't a negative in my mind at the least. They are considered an integral part of the design and not considering them is kinda self serving. A real world comparison would be to restrict any discussion on modern day fighters (F-15, 16) capabilities to their clean configuration. In reality it gives the fighter the flexibility that the VF-4 was lacking with. On weapons its tough to compare the VF-4's beam cannon versus the VF-11's gunpod... but we do know that every single fighter after the VF-4 carries one. If anything that suggests that beam weaponry exclusively was not considered sufficient.

So there ya go, thats how pretty sizable holes look like empty assertions.

GUBABA

I respect that.. You gave your reasons and what you liked and didn't like without spouting hate for someone else who enjoyed what you didn't necessarily like. You didn't berate me for bein a fan on Robotech, you didn't berate others who do either. You even said, as you've said else where, that there were aspects of Robotech that you liked... and it shouldn't be considered by anyone else to be a bad thing that you do.

So there is clearly ground for fans of both shows to get along. The past few posts kinda prove that. I'd like to get more fans to doing that... on both sides.

So thank you for your reply Gubaba.

For me.. My posts in this thread aren't about getting acceptance for Robotech in the eyes of Macross fans or vice versa... It's just about trying to establish some civil conversations and hopefully a little more understanding.

M.W.

See here's my problem Mark coming from an individual who was raised on Macross and never watched Robotech until I was much older. I can understand and even appreciate your desire just to have a rational basis for discussion and build a bridge of mutual respect. Unfortunately what you support actually works to the detriment of my own interests and enjoyment. For the past decade HG has prevented me from legally obtaining products which I want to enjoy. I'm basically paying 20~100% markups on Macross models and other products which HG has nothing even close to an alternative to.

Now I might have more sympathy and understanding for HG if it acted like a proper creative company that put out new and interesting products frequently. Unfortunately that isn't HG. It is an organization that oversees a moribund franchise. They hype up a small number of products for months or years, and then release something thats exceptionally mediocre. I see a company hell bent to defend its Intellectual property (which it obtained based on tenuous legal grounds) and squeeze every dollar out of them. By comparison Big West in Japan has been doing producing great series that have resulted in great products, yet they are unavailable here.

So I can understand you can distinguish robotech from macross cognitively. Unfortunately the reality is that legally they aren't separate and I and alot of people here are screwed because of it. By buying and supporting HG, Mark you're basically helping to support the very thing that takes away from my enjoyment. It makes it very difficult to have a constructive dialogue on this topic.

Please look at the post dated 9.15.2008. It's called "Levi watches Macross Frontier so you and I don't have to. I think this means I owe him a cake or something":

http://sdf5x.blogspot.com/2008_09_01_archive.html

'>

http://sdf5x.blogspot.com/2008_09_01_archive.html

My criticism about the 365 thing was that, sometimes a cake is just a cake.

Yeah, reading the guest review, he says that he enjoyed most macross series and that his general problem with Frontier is that its highly derivative of SDF (which is an opinion quite a few people share.) That seems to be the opinion of JLS as well.

You'll have to read up on your Macross history: http://www.macrossroleplay.org/forums/index.php?topic=2264.msg35166#msg35166

Probably the greatest error is the part about the VF/A-14. Namely, it was involved in a competition with the VF-11 to determine the next main fighter of the UN Forces to take over from the VF-4 / VF-5000 main fighter combi.

I remember reading somewhere that the competition between the VF-11 and VF-14 was called project "Nova", but I'm not sure if it was a canon source or not.

My bad, I haven't seen the Macross Chronicle stuff... thinking about it now its just a bad error on my part; the VF-14 was of the VF-11's vintage, not a 2020 fighter. Regardless the overall point stands; the VF-4 was just too expensive as a mainline fighter, couldn't really cover all the mission roles required and was partially supplanted by a series of other fighters, or never fully replaced the VF-1 in service. The VF-11 offered an airframe that was clearly superior in all areas and affordable for a large number of users.

Interesting topic and I concur that the VF-11 is likely the most produced VF in terms of sheer numbers in service.

If certain fleets such as the Macross 7, ended up eventually replacing all their VF-11 with the VF-19 on a 1-1 basis, post-Protodeviln war (as seems to be infered by the recent Hi-Metal information refering to the 19 as a mainstay fighter), the total number of VF-19 produced could easily reach higher than 2000+. Although I feel that due to the cost and complexity of the VF-19, a 1-1 replacement was unlikely. However, given that the VF-19 is a far more capable fighter than the VF-11, it may have been decided that a smaller quantity, say something like a 1-2 replacement was acceptable (all pure speculation on my part).

Not sure I agree with the estimate figures for the VF-171 though, they seem a bit on the high side. Just my gut feeling is that in the 2050s, manned craft numbers have been trimmed drastically, so that there is only a skeleton force of manned VFs and unmanned craft (Ghosts) now make up the bulk of the forces. Although again, this likely varies, as we have seen from fleet to fleet and planet to planet.

Please feel free to correct me if any of the above speculation on my part has already been contradicted by officially published info.

Graham

I agree with you here. It seemed to me as if the VF-11 is the F-16 of its day (and what the F-111 was intended to be originally.) The VF-4's disappointing cost and performance caused the proliferation of partial replacements: the VF-9, the VA/F-14, and the 3000/5000. However by 2030 it was clear that this was costly and the performance of these stopgaps weren't at all satisfactory. The VF-11 appeared at a time to replace an entire generation of fighters affordably and with colony fleets reaching their maximum extent. The VF-19 also seems to be costly and with the threat diminished, it wasn't procured to the same extent. It may have remained a elite fighter, and a whole generation of low cost alternatives appeared instead to replace the VF-11 (the VF-171, VF-19P and Ghosts.) In reality the VF-19 may have been a repeat of the VF-4. Also consider that the main threat to colonies and macross fleets are Zentredi, or scattered rebels, which offer a pretty consistent threat capability. Thus there isn't so much a need for continually producing high capability fighters.

Oh, one last point.

First off its intended to be really informal and open to anybody at any skill level. Really the only requirement is a love of macross which I expect most of your already have. Just join the banter, post some progress pics and have fun.

Hi guys,

A few of the guys I build with at Swanny's Models forum realized we shared a passion for Macross models and want to showcase how great these kits are. Thus we decided to start a group build over there, that should run for the summer and into the fall. Swanny's is kinda like a macrossworld. Its run by Matt Swan, and he does reviews and movies with modelbuilding tips. Its a really positive forum with none of the cattiness you might see in some of its larger brethren.

One of the things I've always been proud of is the amazing skill that exists in Macrossworld, so I was hoping some of you might be interested to join the build over there and showcase your efforts. Swannys has a ton of great skill as well, and a few of them have signed up to participate. I'd love to see a productive collaboration between the two forum communities.

Hey Cool8er, I'm excited to see your build up... your stuff is pretty gold. Quick question; why didn't you use a resin saw for cutting those pieces? Using the dremel just seemed to make more of a mess than its worth.

Ah, right I forgot.

The F3H Demon's failure was due to a poor engine. Had it had a good engine, it might have lasted longer in service?

Wasn't the performance of the F4D Skyray was considered superb but that the problem was that it was asked to do multi-role when it was designed for high-altitude interception?

The Demon (as well as the Cutlass) used the Westinghouse J40 engine, which was intended to run a whole generation of USN fighters. Problem was that it never came close to its promise, it routinely was about 1/3 to 1/2 less powerful than contemporary engines like the Allison J71 and the PW J57. That would have made a considerable difference in both aircrafts' performance.

Never liked the F4D, F7U is "attractive in a weird sort of way"----so long as it's one of the early ones, not the more common "bulged canopy" version.

I completely agree with that, for the same reasons I like the FH Phantom and the late model F2H Banjos; long proportional fuselages. The bulging canopy on the production Cutlass kinda ruins that line.

Sir, I am offended by your insinuation the F-104 isn't the single most attractive jet fighter ever built.

Actually I think its one of the ugliest fighters ever... its just a single tube with short stubby wings. one big bleh.

On a second look you are correct about the F4D, I think I had it mixed up in my head with it's delta winged (but far less attractive) contemporary the F7U Cutlass.

I kinda disagree. I've recently had the pleasure in building one and I think its really got great lines.... just terrible engines.

(shameless plug.)

Wow the Wyvern is huge!

I know! I was actually kinda surprised by its size too.. Its actually fairly sleek; it was always intended to have the ability to engage other fighters in addition to being a bomber.

Great lookin' kits there Noyhauser! Really wonderful finishes all around.

I love the look of the Cutlass. You can see relations to other planes, but there's really nothing else like it! I just picked up a book on it yesterday at my LHS. I've got the big (Academy?-Minicraft?) 1/48 kit in my stash, but deciding on a painted vs natural metal scheme will be a big decision.

How was that Fujimi kit to build? And how did you do the weathering over the natural metal? If you don't mind my being nosy.

Thanks Jardann. I love the Gutless too, its a pretty interesting plane with an tortured history as your book will attest to. Actually its going to be the first of several builds on early US Navy fighters for me (the Vought Pirate, McDonnell FH Phantom and Banshee, and the Ryan Dark Shark). The kit you have is actually a Hobbycraft kit (from what I've heard) which is fairly meh and needs a lot of love. You should look here for some inspiration.

The Fujimi kit was a great build... I'd actually recommend it to anyone. There wasn't anything that really stuck out in my mind that was problematic, with the exception of the decals which marred what was a great build. Weathering required a few things... I have several hues of Alclad II paints, the most useful being Dulled aluminum. Several of the worn panels, like over the engines, were done with it and then polished out. Other panels were done with different aluminum hues... (Using alclad is one of my favorite parts ) Then it was decaled, sealed with future, then I used an oil wash for the panel lining. I usually use black and burnt umber artist paints thinned and used liberally over the surface. After an hour I wipe it off with a paper towel in the direction of the airflow or gravity. Finally I top coated it with floquil flat, but to be honest it doesn't need it (the oil wash actually acts like a flat product.)

Hope that helps!

Awesome Andromeda model! That was one of my favorite Star Blazers ships as a kid! I really liked all the ship designs of that show!

I agree... its really well done, as are most of the models on here. I'm always struck by the quality that macrossworld puts out. For such a small modeling community there are some great kits.

I've been building quite a bit lately with alot of 1940s~50s aircraft... I think this is the most relevant.. a Fujimi 1/72 F7U-3M Cutlass from the Bounty Hunters (aka skull squadron)

The other one I finished recently is a 1/72 Westland Wyvern (with a Hawker Sea hawk I did ages ago on the left)

Enjoy,

Cheaper alternative? Sure

http://aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story.jsp?id=news/asd/2010/06/03/01.xml&headline=Pentagon%20Recertifies%20JSF,%20Cost%20Increases&channel=defense

So, the F-35 has a flyaway cost of $133M per unit, as opposed to $92.4M a few months ago. Geez, a couple more revisions, it'll cost more than the -22.

So, less capabilities, not that much cheaper than the -22, one wonders why Gates was so adamant in shutting down the -22.

Because that price is almost certain to drop significantly once production gets underway and the US and all its allies start buying JSFs. By comparison the F-22's costs actually haven't decreased that much and aren't likely to over time because of all the features; moreover there is no way in hell the US would have bought sufficient numbers of the fighter to bring the cost down significantly. For comparison, FY2000 Super Hornets cost about 90 million each (and I believe the initial estimates had them around 110 million), now they are around 60 million. So its nowhere close to a fair estimate of cost.