David Hingtgen

Or reduce the resolution and/or frame rate. That's HUGE.

Word of advice: Go easy on the Goo Gone. Just get a napkin or something damp with just a bit of it, then work/rub it in.

Is there somewhere they actually mention a concrete reason for not making freighters in that massive thread? The pages I checked were the same as every other thread on every other aviation forum--it degenerated into an Airbus vs Boeing thread, citing subsidies vs govt contracts.

It's not unprecedented for a manufacturer to "ignore" freighters to focus on pax versions---Boeing did it for the 777. The 777 as a freighter was VERY much in desire YEARS ago, but only recently has Boeing offered it as such---that way they could get more 767 and 747 freighter orders. (The MD-11F was in even more demand, and had no pax orders at all---but Boeing wanted to spite MDC products so bad they actually cancelled outstanding orders--apparently it's better to not make money at all, than to make money with someone else's design for which you have no equivalent) MDC actually did it right with the MD-11---the first ones were freighters! No waiting. As for why Airbus is still not making A380F's when the situation is desperate: There's either a clause in the SIA/AF/LH/QF contracts that would be even more expensive than the money they're currently losing if they went ahead with the A380F, or the wiring is so messed up that even the far-less-wiring freighters have issues as well.

Well, since the only one built is currently several million shards imbedded in the dirt around Zhukovsky, that's unlikely. And it'd be kinda pointless, since the Su-30MKI is superior in every way, and IS in service.

The only reason the 747 has a hump, is because the long-term design goal was for it to be a freighter.

I'd much rather see it here at MW than Youtube. The conversion to Flash always seems to lower the quality IMHO. Plus it's easier to actually DOWNLOAD as opposed to stream, or convert and save...

Two-seat Flankers are all the rage. MKI, MKK, etc. Most "Super" Flankers are two-seaters.

Basically---yup. No A380F's until the pax version is fixed. Which is why half the A380F orders are now cancelled. You can't "skip" a customer and deliver someone else's planes first, it's just not done. (not without a lot of money changing hands and contracts---one of the few times I know of occurred when the Sultan of Brunei paid Lufthansa a lot of money to "takeover" one of their early A340 production slots--and even that was only possible due to someone else cancelling their order, making the "replacement" Lufthansa plane available much earlier) The A380 is physically fine, but the wiring for in-flight entertainment just doesn't fit and weighs too much. As for freight---just look at the 747. Like 90% of the last couple years of production has been freighters. And until LH's announcement, all orders for the new version was for freighters. On an unrelated note, Venezuela's first Flanker:

I still hope (but don't expect) Yamato to offer a new "foream inner half" or "gunpod handle" separately when the fix is done for version 2. Seriously, at most ONE piece is the problem---it's either the gunpod's handle, or one of the forearm pieces with the peg on it. They'd sell a zillion, and marked up to probably 1000 Yen for a 10-Yen piece of plastic, they'd make a decent amount of money, and all the 1st-release owners would be happy to have a "real fix" as opposed to "hacking away at the plastic to kinda make it work". Maybe there could be a big MW group buy or something. "We want 250 revised left inner forearms, please". PS--is it "handle" on a gunpod, or grip? Is there any defined terminology for a gunpod, or do we just apply the best gun terms we can? Trigger, barrel, and magazine are pretty obvious, but handle vs grip, and muzzle?

In Japan, the "numbers on the nose" are simply abbreviated versions of their serial numbers. Japan doesn't really have modex numbers. Macross almost always follows US Navy practices for their aircraft markings. In the USN, a modexes' last two digits indicate POSITION, not rank. And only a few. x00: CAG (wing commander) x01: Squadron commander x02: Squadron executive officer So all 3 above could (but unlikely) hold the same rank. Now, pilots don't get to fly "their" plane all that often. And you will rarely find the CAG in "his" plane, since there's always multiple planes painted for the CAG, and he can only fly one at a time. Also, x08 and x09 aren't used. (blame old, old computers and hexadecimals) Finally, 0 is never the first number. 100 is the lowest possible number. 00 and 000 have been used as jokes for short term, but never actually assigned.

Nope. The only ones out there have nose probes and ugly paint. AFAIK.

Yay! By January there should be quite a demand for YF-19 sets.

Next flame(ish) post gets deleted...

I've actually been playing Oblivion lately. Could be near the end, or need 50 more hours. Next big game I'm looking forward to is Mass Effect, but I'm not optimistic it'll actually make the project Q1 '07 release. But if Mass Effect shapes up to be as good as I hope, I'll buy a new TV for it. (Yes, I'm still playing my 360 on a 20in CRT)

Not yet! We haven't seen good Starscream pics. (AFAIK, just a bunch of concept etc) Also, Bumblebee goes with my main rant: you still can't tell what they turn into. He's so chopped up, that both robot modes are nigh-identical. The cars are plenty different enough that robot mode SHOULD look different. The body panels etc are chopped into such small bits, with that "transformation technique"---Prime, Jazz, Bumblebee, and probably Starscream could all have nigh-identical robot modes. Just make the "shredded sheetmetal bits" all the same triangles and trapezoids, and sprinkle them around the endoskeleton. Yes, you can at least tell Bumblee is a CAR. But no more than that. Whereas G1 Jazz was clearly a Porsche, Sideswipe could only be a Countach, etc.

From the "realistic" standpoint: That's almost perfectly 36440 Gull Grey. 1970's high-vis F-14 grey. As opposed to 1980's F-15 low-vis grey. It certainly is "fighter jet grey", just wrong service, wrong decade, wrong plane. Might as well have used MiG-29 colors.

Forgot about 1st run Alt Tracks' metallic blue (I even have one). I remember the first time I went into the store and saw the re-release Alt Tracks---I thought it was a different toy or a knockoff. The plastic is THAT different (and worse/cheaper) in appearance. Interestingly, the Thundercrackerish repaint of BM Jetstorm (Sonic Attack Drone?) is pale blue, but metallic pale blue. Looks a lot better than just plain pale blue. But still not nearly as neat as metallic deep blue.

The tech-specs of the seekers are all messed up. Basically--Starscream's techspech has Skywarp's numbers, and vice-versa. Otherwise, why does Skywarp have like 9's for intelligence and rank but low courage, while Starscream is considered very courageous, but dumb and low-ranking? The numbers directly contradict their own characters, but work perfectly if you switch them around. Beast Machines Jetstorm (the first and probably best Vehicon) has plastic very close to G1 Thundercracker. A bit more green (and G1 TC blue does have green in it, though it's very subtle) but very close. It's easy to do---note that most BW and BM plastic is metallic, it's just very subtle. BW Inferno is among the most metallic, Silverbolt and Tigerhawk are notable too. Hasbro has never stopped doing metallic plastic for TF's, it's only "how metallic" that varies over the years. Lots of RiD toys were slightly to moderately metallic. Cybetron seems to be about the most "unmetallic" in years.

Well for sheer quality, it's the best I've seen by far. I was looking hard for any unpainted areas, etc. And the paint is on quite thin, to preserve all the panel line depth. And it's not super-gloss nor super-flat, it's just right--"plasticky".

MP Skywarp: http://www.flickr.com/photos/18251255@N00/...57594400481435/ Repaint, or real? Sure looks molded in purple, light gray, and black to me. And most any repaint would probably use silver, not gray I think. First Classics, now MP. Why is TC always last lately? Still, this does not bode well IMHO---it's gray instead of silver. That's anime-accurate. That'd mean TC would be pale grey and pale blue, instead of the awesome metallic sapphire blue and silver G1 toy colors. ::edit:: If only I'd typed less, my post would have gotten in before ghostryder's...

Everyone might want to go check this thread: http://www.macrossworld.com/mwf/index.php?showtopic=20932 Out of box pics in battroid mode of final version.

You know you can always just buy F-14 Wolfpack decals if you want more markings--several variations, several scales. And the stuff printed by Microscale etc would be of even higher quality than the best "homemade" decals. Scale could be an issue---1/60 VF-0 vs a 1/48 or 1/72 F-14.

Would that be the Rafale's first export sale?

Ok, here's a quick rendition of the VFX-2 scheme. Now, a "real" VFX-2 VF-11 I think would incorporate all the normal VF-11 markings, like the stripes on the legs and ventral fins, which every other VF-11 has, but doesn't seem to be in the VFX version. So if you added black and yellow to the legs and ventral fins, you'd have a very cool VF-11---maybe continue the striping pattern on the rudder. Also, the wingtips are black and yellow, but it's hard to see. Finally---I used my "modified tailfin" version of the VF-11---the "official" sideview just does NOT fit Kawamori's drawings nor the anime', and the tailfin pattern from VFX won't fit at all---the VFX model is also similar to how I drew it.