aurance

Thanks everyone, that was very helpful.

That’s some great info, thanks! I wish I could read those Japanese labels.

10 minutes ago, sketchley said:

I was looking through the Variable Fighter Master File books, and if they are considered a trusted source (they self describe themselves as not being part of the official setting), then there is a different mechanism being used inside the nozzle of the VF-25 and VF-31.  Specifically: the thrust redirection plates (what "pinch" the flow to increase speed) are separate from the nozzle (foot) assembly itself.

So, going back to Aurance's post with the side-diagrams, the Valkyries should be lumped into 2 categories:

• non-"pinched" nozzles (VF-1)
• "pinched" nozzles (VF-4, 11, 19, 25, 31)

Of the latter, it appears there are 2 versions:

• foot assembly doubles as "pinching" mechanism (VF-11, 19 style)
• foot assembly and "pinching mechanism" are separate (VF-25, 31 style)

 

 

It probably doesn't help that Kawamori-san designed the VF-25 as an homage to the VF-1.  🤷‍♂️

Awesome, thank you!

5 minutes ago, camk4evr said:

The VF-1 (and, presuumably, the VF-25) have additional structures (vanes maybe) inthe 'foot' section that would, likely, further constrict the exhaust. The other two nacelle/leg designs (-11 and -19?) probably removed or reduced those interior structures to reduce complexity/ make maintence easier.

This is the first reply that actually addressed my question. Thanks.😋

22 minutes ago, sketchley said:

We get what you're saying (refer to my comments on the F-22 above).

Those side on images are also a bit misleading.  Inside, the thrust vectoring vanes (foot assembly) open up, and it's really only where the vanes meet the fuselage (what becomes the ankle armour) is where it's at its narrowest.

Yes I know that too, but such a choke point does not seem to exist, or is much wider on the fighters on the right.

2 hours ago, Knight26 said:

Incorrect.

As with real world aircraft that have 2-D thrust vectoring certain design concessions have to be made.  A slight constricting of the exhaust, using more thermally resistant materials, allows the thrust vector exhaust vanes to more easily, and precisely, maneuver the exhaust flow direction, though at the expense of higher maintenance costs.  There is a reason why most countries did not adopt 2-D thrust vectoring IRL.   Also, if you watched animation, particularly Macross Plus, there is a scene where the feet/TVC vanes extend during pre flight demonstrating that they do, in fact, open wider for full thrust/afterburner operations, as real world aircraft do.

Also, you have to realize that the toys are scale models of the designs, and as a result the thickness of the materials and parts, as well as their full degree of mobility, are not necessarily consistent with the VF's "Real World" design dimensions.

Okay. I don’t think either of you are understanding what I’m saying. I’m already aware of the facts you two mentioned. And 'toys vary from real thing? Come on man, of course they do but that's not what I'm referring to. Let me try to add a drawing.

Seems like a deliberate change in design but my question was whether this was an in-world thing or just style. I guess we don't know. I should have clarified what I was pointing out.

31 minutes ago, sketchley said:

It's for the same reason that real world jet fighters have exhaust vanes: they compress the outflow to get greater speed at lower throttle settings.

The Macross era fighters you've mentioned were all designed when the F-22 Raptor was the big hot thing in aerospace news, thus a lot of those Valkyries emulate its thrust vectoring vanes.

There is, of course, artistic licence—Macross's fictional Otech allows for more heat resistant materials, thus enabling even more narrowing in the exhaust vanes.  However, some of what you're perceiving may just be the distortion caused from the 3/4 views that Kawamor-san tended to draw VFs at.  Also keep in mind that the top and bottom of a VF's thrust vectoring (feet) have dissimilar shapes, and that may be skewing our perception of how narrow (or not) the exhaust port may actually be.

 

As for turbulence... narrow, rectangular exhaust nozzles don't appear to negatively affect the F-22 in RL.  If there are any downsides to the shape, they appear to be outweighed by all the benefits those types of nozzles provide.

It's not, it's mainly from me looking at the toys. The -0, -1, and all the -24 derivatives have a much more open design though.

So the answer seems to be, just artistic whims.

So what’s the deal with the very narrow exhausts (feet) in majority of the valks from -4 to -19 when they’re folded up for fighter mode? Wouldn’t that cause a lot of turbulence and compression of exhaust gases? Is that a thing you would want for some reason?

3 hours ago, no3Ljm said:

Though I remember seeing him somewhere in the light shade of teal in the trailers. 

 

It's announcements like this, that I appreciate Bandai because they're giving us some wallet breather phase.

 

Oh, the teal looks nice.

@Skull One for very easy transaction, great communication with pictures, good seller!

22 minutes ago, PsYcHoDyNaMiX said:

@no3Ljm Thanks for linking pics. I'm going out on a limb here and saying.... yeah, they used the same head from the VF31A, lol.

Yeah, looking at them side by side they look identical.

That is a bogue-us color scheme! 🤪

I’ll see myself out.

3 minutes ago, derex3592 said:

Frontier and 7 had the BEST music.....come at me! 

That's not all that controversial, they all had great music! 🤩

I always liked how the lower arm missile pods fold up from fighter to battroid. It’s a bit more unique than the later “put a shield there” transformations.

Holy crapballs!

1 hour ago, pengbuzz said:

At least some of them may have went to McDonald's to use the drive-thru instead.

There is one factory satellite dedicated entirely to Big Mac.

2 hours ago, no3Ljm said:

Just posting here bigger clear promotional images from the last movie.

Oh, beautiful. Thank you

47 minutes ago, VF-Zero said:

I love big robots and i can not lie... The other bothers can't denia 

Guys and Girls, i wasn't around since the 2008, Is Yamato still making Transformable 1/60 Valkyrie models ? I bearly remember hearing something like Yamato bankrupted or someting at some point... But i didn't check the information out. I want to live in denial, If it's true. I only have VF-0S Transformable model from Yamato. I'm a Big Macross Zero fan.  I was going crazy for the Macross Models, Yamato were doing back in the day, but i was just a student back then.... I didn't have the money... 

Now, i'm back to get all the Yamato Valkyries i want, if they didn't bankropted... If they bankrupted ( i don't see any Yamato models on BBTS), i will get the Bandai ones. Is Bandai the Flag Carrier after Yamato for VF models ? The upcoming VF-25 Massiah anniversay edition looks amazing, i will definetly get it.  

Welcome back, fellow collector. 😁

Do we have any background info on the Zentran language in DYRL? I always liked the sound of it.

On 1/13/2022 at 6:40 PM, MacrossJunkie said:

I used an Xacto knife to shave down the pegs in the wings some. No left over scratches and looks pretty clean that way. 

Now it fits in snugly.

Fixing that I think also helped other fitment issues or maybe it's because I transformed it to battroid and back again. 

I don't have to extend the tip of the gunpod anymore to get the peg at the tip to slot into the hole at the underside.

Also the arm/bicep covers now no longer really have a gap on either side or at least it's to a degree I find acceptable. It's mostly in how you position the arms.

Instead of having the arms pushed up against the underside of the wings, I pulled it down at the elbows as much as I could.

On 1/11/2022 at 11:34 PM, Chronocidal said:

Don't blame you, it's not even illustrated in the instructions.  This is why I am so confused as to why the parts even move to begin with.

The two sides of the arm not attached to the folding arm shield are not directly attached to the arm itself, they're on sliders.  There's really no good way to grip it, but if you push the outside of the arm toward the elbow, it helps the guns sit level in fighter.

Photos will probably help.  I might have missed something in the instructions, but couldn't read them anyhow.  

The part with the blue paint slides.  It actually moves farther than I thought, making a weird quarter-cuff around the wrist in the full extension, and moving back behind it in the opposite direction.

Here's a different angle, showing the blue section pushed back toward the elbow.  The bit outlined in pink is part of the wrist that should be sticking out past the blue slightly to make sure the gun has enough clearance to lay flat against the arm.

It's entirely possible I missed this as a step in the instructions, but I didn't see anything calling out sliding those panels in either direction.

  

This is exactly what's happening in the pics above, but like I said, I didn't see it in the instructions at all, and those pieces are a royal pain in the arse to actually move, because there is nothing to grip them by (and I think mine may have even been glued down by a sloppy assembly).

If those armor bits aren't slid as far toward the elbow as possible, they inhibit the gun from rotating enough to lay flat on the underside.

 

On 1/22/2022 at 4:05 PM, manfred17 said:

I was still not happy concerning the mis-aligning canons issue.

So here what I did : sanding again, little by little, and check the result each time.

It is long but I managed to get quite a good result.

On the first pic, you can see were I did the sanding.

Here we go 

32 minutes ago, JB0 said:

With the way they use missiles in Macross? Ammo. Lots of ammo.

I can believe that.

@Chronocidal @MacrossJunkie @manfred17

I’ve played with this and transformed it back and forth a few times now. Unfortunately the wing/gun fitting issue doesn’t seem like a QC problem; rather it appears to be careless design so it will plague all copies of this. The fixes mentioned by the three fellow members listed above will ALL help, namely: 1) push back the forearm sheaths as far back to the elbow as possible for fighter, 2) shave down the wing-to-leg pegs, 3) shave down the block to which the rail guns are attached. I’m sorry I don’t know how to quote all the appropriate posts but they all have posted very helpful pictures in this thread.

Wow! That looks great!

1 minute ago, deathzealot said:

You do know modern aircraft carriers actually have fast food restaurants in them don't you? Or at least that is something I heard second-hand from my Navy Veteran of a step-father.

Oh I know. Markets and leisure spaces too.

5 minutes ago, pengbuzz said:

Pizza?

Listen, I said Prometheus, not Dream Boat 🍕🚢

5 hours ago, Seto Kaiba said:

It wasn't my intention to criticize your math, and I apologize if it came off that way despite my intention.

I was just affirming that, yeah, that's probably how the M.A.T. group arrived at their original number before using that as a springboard to jump into the more up-to-date details and why the linear scaling of the crew size doesn't quite work as TehPW had posted previously.

Given, but berthing for 5000 people, maybe double the number of aircraft loadout of Nimitz, and a lot less onboard fuel storage necessary still leaves a large amount of extra room in a Prometheus proportionally compared to said Nimitz. Which is used for… what, other than more people and more FutureTech equipment? Cargo?