David Hingtgen
-
Posts
17130 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Gallery
Everything posted by David Hingtgen
-
I think the more important thing is to prioritize what's truly needed, rather than just saying 'we want everything'. IMHO a great deal of attention needs to be paid to the conformal missiles, as their appearance is critical to the VF-4 and one of its most unique features. Having a VF-1's gunpod too may be nice, but not at the expense of the former.
-
I took the belt and chest locks off mine, via removing the pins.
-
A few spares (not just one) would be nice. Of course, this is Yamato---gives everyone spare YF-19 canards (did anyone on the entire planet actually need them?) but doesn't give spare screw or intake covers that always fall off...
-
Shorter version of above post: I don't really care how they do the missiles, so long as they are done very crisp and cleanly to show that they are NOT "just bulges on the airframe" but separate distinct parts.
-
I agree with most everything Kyp Durron said--it's the VF-4, it carries its weapons on its body. Loading it up with external pylons and gunpods is like putting a bunch of stuff under an F-22's wings---you're missing the point of why it was designed the way it was. The F-22 is notable for INTERNAL missile carriage to remain stealthy. Just because it CAN carry stuff under the wings, doesn't mean it SHOULD nor would it do so very often. VF-4's should be clean and sleek, with missiles embedded in its skin to remain sleek while fully armed. I do want the missiles removable though, if for no other reason than it would result in a super-crisp color differentiation. Having "painted bulges" just wouldn't give the same effect, and there'd be fuzzy edges, missed spots, etc. Actually having a separately molded/painted part would make sure there's no issues there. The desert camo VF-4 looks quite good because of just how "distinct" the missiles are IMHO. The more obviously differentiated they are, the better a VF-4 looks IMHO. Hmmn---really though, so long as the missiles are separate pieces, they could be permanently attached/glued in. Just so long as they are molded independently of the main body. Anything but "molded as a bulge on the body then painted to look like a separate part". They must be "physically separated" from the fuselage, even if they are permanently attached later.
-
Same for Leader Jetfire, actually. Wouldn't have been perfect, but getting rid of the giant lights-n-sound box would have made for a whole lot less undercarriage. (and if they hadn't have been lazy and actually made the turbine-legs from the turbines!) The whole engine nacelles are giant hollow kibble, instead of actually housing the legs inside. Put arms where the box was, put the legs inside the engines, and you've gotten rid of a whole lot of bot kibble...
-
Obscurity is irrelevant, the only thing that matters is AWESOMENESS. And the VF-4 is very awesome indeed. (if nothing else, it's different, it's not in the VF-0/1/3000/25 family of "classic valkyrie fighter mode" shape)
-
I too thought the silhouette looked like Mylene.
-
How times change---"we've got way too many P-38's, let's just dump them all in a big pile to get rid of them".
-
Yes, the Typhoon did come to mind, as being among the newest planes with conformal carriage. I've always thought the forward troughs of the Tornado were a great example--they're among the "deepest" I can think of. (a Tornado's rear ones are not recessed) ::edit:: And here's a good one showing an F-4's:
-
Almost all the official art shows the external armament---but people don't realize they're looking at it! I think a lot of people miss that the "long skinny humps" all over the VF-4 *are* the missiles. There's 12, after all. (3 on each leg, 2 on each forearm, 2 under the nose) They're conformal missiles, to a degree even greater than the F-4/F-14/Tornado do. You just rarely see them "fired off" with a recessed trench left in the valk--though at least one drawing shows this: http://www.macross2....-4/vf-4-la3.jpg That's the only drawing I know of that shows "what's left when the missiles are fired off"----looks very much like modern conformal-carry missile launchers. Kind of a shallow trench. In short--it doesn't need pylons on the wings (there's not much room anyways) because it's already carrying a decent load all over the fuselage. If they're colored a different shade of grey than the rest of the valk, they're easier to spot. :;edit:: Highlighted for clarity: Just look for the grey humps that all look the same. They're not structural bulges of the airframe itself. It's a unique and cool feature of the VF-4. Whoever made the model in the previous above seemed aware of this, as they painted them with typical USAF missile striping, made them a different color than the main fuselage, and they clearly have exhaust nozzles. Hey Graham---could you make sure Yamato is aware of this? They should be painted a different color than the main fuselage, and even making them removable could be one heck of a neat feature. Just make sure they don't sculpt them on as "part of the valk itself". They should have a distinct nozzle at the back end, like on the model above. They should not "taper off and blend" at the rear. They should be more "cut off". They should look "stuck on" and not "part of the valk itself". Making them removable would be the only way to have a "bare" VF-4, as well. Some "standard missile striping" would go a long way towards making them look like missiles---again, just like the model in the previous post. (it's a REALLY good example, Yamato should definitely reference it for how the missiles should be done)
-
http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2012/01/picture-lockheed-reveals-conce.html
-
Lockheed unveiled their F-22 replacement proposal: Huh. Looks kinda like a certain F-22 competitor, only flattened. So we could apparently have had the F-22's successor, years ago, had we just gone with Northrop in the first place...
-
Never doubt HFH's generosity nor awesomeness, for he will provide for us all.
-
That's my thought.
-
Hmmn. The G-variant is by far the best-known of the VF-4's, but the best-known scheme is Hikaru's of course---but presumably he wouldn't have been flying the G-variant. Or perhaps the G-variant is externally identical to the VF-4A, etc. (the "finned" head could be like the VF-27β, where there's two different head options for the same variant)
-
Yeah, only really works on those where the hands tuck into the shield, rather than having the shield sit on top of the arms.
-
If you slice an F-14 right down the middle, you basically have a traditional airfoil cross-section.
-
The computer and electronics super geek thread
David Hingtgen replied to azrael's topic in Anime or Science Fiction
That's how I "erased" my last PC's hard drive. Or maybe 2 PC's ago. Either way, cheaper and easier/faster than using any program IMHO. -
All Things Video Games Thread: II
David Hingtgen replied to Wanzerfan's topic in Hall Of The Super Topics
The first time you die in Bastion will likely be one of your all-time fave moments. Trust me. -
I was going to make a follow-up comment to Graham's about body lift but didn't. I'd assume the VF-4 actually gets more lift from between the nacelles than outboard of them. Like an SR-71 does. I'd love to see some numbers for fighters, especially say F-14, F-15, and F-16, to compare different configurations.
-
Hmmn. True. And I rank animation over polygons for "what is canon"...
-
Thing is, if they follow their only canon appearance, they would be pastel, even more than their VF-22's are. The above art is more of a "how they SHOULD look" and not "how they DID look".
-
The MW Automotive Thread 5.0 GT
David Hingtgen replied to areaseven's topic in Anime or Science Fiction
The sad part is not the crash itself, but that she then GUNNED THE ENGINE AFTERWARDS to try to get unstuck, and had to be coached that perhaps backing up slowly may be the better option... Or maybe she wanted to cause even further damage after the initial scrape. -
Cool Russian stuff: (check out 5:45 in on the second one)