David Hingtgen

Yeah, but these toys aren't being cited for any actual danger to kids, they're simply "bad influences". There's a separate "dangerous" toy list, which is usually anything that shoots anything, or makes sparks, is pointy, etc. These are "anything that's not My Little Pony". And of course, not CLOSELY investigated, simply whatever has a "mean" name or they randomly read a character's bio on the back of the card. (Because they actually DIDN'T list the "Tortured Souls" from McFarlane when they came out----if they missed those, they obviously don't do even a half-assed job looking. If they're going to make lists like these, they could at least not miss the 6 worse ones by far) The second Tortured Souls line is tamer, IMHO. (Though I'm not too familiar with it)

Eh, maybe internal bays are too expensive/maintenance intensive to do for most planes. Maybe VF-5000's had them, but it was found it wasn't worth it, so they were abandoned for the VERY common VF-11. VF-11 is the F-16 of Macross--everywhere doing everything. Needs to be cheap enough to build a million of them. The VF-19 and -22 are like the B-2 and F-117---fewer, special purpose planes that are built in smaller numbers and can thus be full of expensive toys. (Though the VF-19 is more like an F-15E or some such--a large expensive plane trying to do everything, and does it quite well, but it's just expensive enough that we cannot have a million of them, just a fairly decent number to equip a few wings). I mean, look at modern planes. We've pretty much abandoned the variable intake. F-15 is likely the last plane to have one for quite a while. Simply not worth the weight/expense/maintenance for the F-16/18/22/23/32/35. Or maybe it's just now that they've improved internal bays, they're good/cheap enough to put them on the VF-19/22. If someone invents some new light-weight simple variable intake, I'm sure the F-37 or whatever will have it, and be Mach 2.5+

My main annoyance is that they obviously don't look TOO closely at each brand. Example: Transformers. They cite Razorclaw. How is HE the worst TF? (He's the new Tigerhawk repaint). They also cite the BW game. Huh? Far "worse" toys and games, even in the TF line. And of course, any time they don't list some McFarlane stuff means they totally ignored one of Toys R Us' aisles.... Based on previous year's lists, it's obvious they go by the NAME a lot of the time to go pick toys, rather than actually checking out each thing. I.E. "Gun Sniper" was listed as the worst Zoid last year, as opposed to those which wiped out entire cities on the show and have working spring-loaded missiles (the bane of parent groups)... And "Razorclaw" is one of the "harsher" TF names.

Retractable stacks comes up fairly often, but I bet they aren't because: 1. Why? They should be long in BOTH modes. Long in truck mode for realism/accuracy, and long in robot mode because that's how he's looked since 1984. 2. Sure don't look retractable to me.

Powerglide as an F-32? Sort of an homage, but too ugly IMHO. Yeah, the A-10 is ugly, but ugly in a good way, like the F-4. The F-32 is just plain fugly. It could have been superior to the -35 in every way and still would have lost on fugliness alone. (The Navy pretty much flat out said no to the -32, no matter what the results of the competition were, based on the intake) Tracks: the new Vette's pretty neat (though I haven't either end head-on) and the pics circulating around of the deep red one (real Vette, not TF) is a GORGEOUS color. However, if Hasbro cheaps out and does flat plastic it'll ruin it. Just go with medium blue. (You know, model cars REALLY need to be painted, especially metallic ones--Hasbro needs to figure that out) Starscream---YF-22 would work better than F/A-22. (More angular). Doubt Hasbro or Takara know the difference, though. F-15's are still being built, keep with that.... Sideswipe--agree with everyone who says it should be a Lambo, not a Viper. '99 Diablo is the best of the more recent ones IMHO. Didn't like the 2000+ Diablos, and the Murcielago does nothing for me. Or hey, why not a '89 Countach? Different, yet newer than the original LP400ish Countach. (Despite his stickers and various websites, G1 Sideswipe is anything BUT an LP500S--he's not really any particular one, but close to a LP400 with a few prototype parts--he lacks every single distinguishing feature of the LP500 series)

Apollo Leader (I'll watch the tape soon, I swear): F-16XL's main advantage over F-15 was range. It's a big sleek wing, with a TON of fuel inside. Huge lift/drag ratio, large quantities of fuel, and only one engine. And the enlarged fuselage was for one thing--more fuel. F-15's carry a big chunk of their fuel outside. And even the E often has 3 big huge drag-making externals, even with CFT's. And as Nied said, sleek enough to supercruise under the right conditions. (Though most any F-15/16 will supercruise if totally clean and light---Thunderbirds configuration, etc)

Yes, the -16XL was better to the -15E. A bit better, not a lot. However, it'd take a lot before it was ready. The F-16XL was only an F-16 as much as the Super Hornet is a YF-17. The F-15E was a D with modified FAST packs. It'd be ready way way sooner, way way cheaper. Now, the -22 vs -23, that's a different story. An F-16XL is not simply a new wing, it's a new, longer fuselage too. The new wing hides the fact that the fuselage is new. The only F-16 parts it has are the nose and v.stab. (And the engine would be seriously hurting for performance--Block 30C/30D/40 F-16's were lacking for power with a full load, only newer block 50's have equivalent power to a 25/30A/30B). F-15E's were lacking in power until recently with the F100-229E engine. Early F-16XL's I bet would have had little power reserve. (of course, had we gone ahead with more Super Tomcats, with the same engine, there'd be plenty of development and money to improve the F110 even faster) Also, the whole "F-15E's are still just as good at fighting as an F-15C" sounds really, really good to people. (Even though it'll likely never happen that an F-15E will engage in a fight with a MiG, etc). Cant say that for an XL. (I am not anti-XL or anything, I love F-16's (and -15)'s) Just pointing out some stuff, and spouting off my opinions.

My point would make more sense if I didn't forget the pic:

Re-winging a plane is prohibitively expensive. I'm surprised it was even half-way seriously considered. Cheaper to make a new plane than re-engineer a wing to fit something else. (And it's not like the -22 has all that wonderful a wing). Probably cheaper and more effective to just do F-18-style RCS reduction. (RAM in the intake is a good place to start with that curved big inlet) Anyways---yup, tails are the #1 problem for stealth. Best solution is no tail at all. Which is why the B-2 is the stealthiest plane, and will be for quite some time. YF-23 is far stealthier than the -22/32/35, due to having only 2 fins, and at a very shallow angle. Big vertical fins=radar reflectors. Firefox---a key point for "stealth angles" is making them all the same. Don't just put angles whereever. Have like 2 or 3 "angles" for the entire plane, and make every leading/trailing/side edge line up with them. YF-23 is the best example. See how the wings/fuselage/tail all have the same angles? Perfectly parallel. That General Dynamics ATF does it pretty well actually. It'd be stealthy if not for the tail. (and maybe intakes)

That was there in the theatrical version. Though the final scene referencing it(with Gimli on the orc) I think was new.

Nobody's mentioned He-Man yet? No matter how much I like the franchise as a whole, the movie was just BAD. Of course, I watch it every time it's on.

Am I the only one who liked AI? I got the same sense from it as Edward Scissorhands (my fave movie, it'd be perfect if someone besides Winona was in it) Anyways, of what I've seen, I really hated Wing Commander. Just, every aspect of it was painfully bad. And if we're branching out a bit, Street Fighter is even worse than that. (Though Ming-Na Wen in red tights is worth pausing for, if you come across it at 2AM or something)

Heh heh. The smoothly blended canard was part of my suspicion. (Man I feel stupid not noticing it was part of the wing repeated, I even turned up the brightness--should have turned it higher I guess). F-15 canards do not fit well, should be a visible gap, as well as an extension--it does not mount directly to the wing root. (No surprise, can't stick F-18 parts on an F-15 and expect it to fit). Still, got the overall shape of it very well, though I think the leading edge needed to be more angled back.

Has the new-style vectoring too, I see.

Getting it tomorrow, have only played the (short) demo so far. In a word, fast. The new ATB is *damn* fast. First button-mashing-required RPG. My current initial strategy: have everyone a warrior. Quick review of stuff: most special attacks, magic, etc take too much time. (Though they do high damage--I'm guessing they're only intended for boss fights, as you can take on average monsters just by whacking them). Hack and slash. (Or shoot, guns do a lot of damage). If you plan on casting magic, better already have someone a mage before you get into battle. Battles are fast and intense. FFX had very short battles (a good thing), these are far shorter. Nobody's lasted through the 2nd round.

Well that got MY attention! Hmmmmn. It's not the F-15ACTIVE, modified or not. (trust me). 2 possibilites IMHO: 1. It's a fake photo. If it is, it's a good one. Main clue is the rudder---it looks as if the antennas/receivers on the stab actually overlap the (new) rudder's hinge-line, thus preventing it from moving. I also don't like the serial number on the stab (if anything, this is an F-15DJ, which there are none with 075 for a serial), nor the coloring on the rudder. However, if this was faked, then the canard was too. If you lighten the pic, the canard has a different shadow than the rest of the plane. But since it's angled, that could explain that. Also it looks to me like the stabs have anhedral. Why would you do that to an F-15? (Or change the rudders like that). That's probably the biggest clue of all---there's no point whatsoever to modifying the vertical stab and rudder like that. It's just stupid and dangerous. (You generally do not chop up an aircraft's only source of yaw stability and control) Also, the canard isn't attached the way it "should" be. Yes, right canard, but fits too closely. The "real" one isn't a perfect fit. 2. There's been a major F-15 modification I don't know about, that nobody's ever even jokingly talked about. (Modifying JASDF F-15's). F-15 canards are nothing more than F-18 stabs. (Yes, F-15's are that much bigger, they use F-18 h.stabs, and control them the same way---standard MDC linkages and all that). You need F-18 parts to make an F-15 like this. Boeing would have SO put something like that on their website. Also, I can't find anything on the net about an F-15 modified like this, either by or for Japan. IMHO, it's a very very good fake pic. (If it's real, then I'm shocked and humbled).

While a VF-1's CG may be whack, r/c modelers use this magical stuff called "lead" to make any plane have whatever CG they want. Anyways, there ARE r/c VF-1's. And they have either (or both): Extremely canted and modified v.stabs, or thrust vectoring. Sure it's only 1D vectoring, but a ducted fan and a flap is good enough for a little model, provided it's fairly stable on the pitch axis. Bigger wings (or greater camber) are a given for most any r/c plane based on a fighter. (You sure won't get an perfectly scale F-16 to fly as-is, but you can make a lot of tweaks that won't affect the appearance that make it a rather docile plane).

There was a discussion about this a while ago. Basically, an *accurate scale* VF-1 will not fly. You can make something VF-1-ISH fly, but not a VF-1. Best bet might be to take an F-14 (they fly) and modify it to look like a VF-1. Or just scratch-build a VF-1 with mods needed to make it stable/controllable. Generally, you'll need bigger wings, bigger stabs, might need to cant the stabs out more/make them all-moving, and either a really good thrust vectoring system with a very forgiving/stable center of gravity, or do the all-moving canted stabs thing for pitch control. Also, you'll need ailerons, the real thing doesn't have them. (Well, that's debatable). A VF-11 is the most real plane, IMHO. No problem making that fly, just make the stabs big enough. (I know somebody made a YF-21, that'd work too, just not as well as an -11 IMHO)

I like my TF's as they were in the movie. That is my definition/standard of how they should look. Comic art changed, there were both well- and badly-drawn episodes (and now "extreme" statues), but the movie--that was like the idealized form of the show. Movie Prime=my perfect Prime. Same for any character. (Especially Megatron---his head/helmet was so often simplified, the movie gave as all those little angles and subtle depth) I do not like all the anime/mecha/buff versions coming out lately--glad I'm not the only one.

I really like Idolo's music. If you like ZOE, definitely get Idolo. Decent battles, good music, good story. (Hey, a "B" in anything from areaseven is pretty high praise)

Anubis--Battle Beasts. Earth/Water/Fire/Wood and Sun beats all! Or something like that. And yes, those. And they're from Transformers, in Japan. Go see here: http://www.x-entertainment.com/messages/524.html

I liked this a lot. And since it was only like $18 when it came out, a good value for an OVA. Anyways--Dolores is TOTALLY different. Yes, same world/era and some characters, but tone/idea is WAY off. Like FFX-2 and FFX. But, even more so. I mainly got Dolores because I like chick-mechs. But you've got to REALLY like chick-mechs to like Dolores. Dolores is like a very long, humorous, hi-jink filled version of Idolo. Though it does explain even more background. *MINOR* SPOILER ALERT FOR DOLORES ... ... ... ... ... ...... ... .... you'll see anubis ... ...... ...... ... ... ... ... And thus, while Idolo sets up the first ZOE game, Dolores sets up ZOE 2.

Hey, he had to reach over and push his own eject button to let his cassettes out. Soundwave must be an older TF, with little automation.

#1 complaint I've seen has been the whole server/worldpass thing. That alone is reason for me not to get it. (For there are few people I'd want to play with, but would LOVE to play with those few people). It'd be a long expensive process to get everyone together. Just not worth it. (In addition to me deciding not to get it the day it was announced) First FF ever I won't buy. ::waits for FF12, thankfully FFX-2's out next week:: Last time I checked, FFXI sold 1/4 the copies of FFX in Japan. Any more recent numbers? Hopefully Square learned their lesson with a 75% drop that we want FF to be traditional, not on-line.

IMHO, the best-looking all-black models are always done one of two ways: 1. "Serious paint chipping". Go find pics of P-61's. They define aircraft paint chipping. But a well-done model of a P-61 is usually going to win every prize at the show. LOTS of fine, thin, silver lines/spots where the paint is gone and the metal is showing through. Every rivet causes a little paint chip. 2. "Many shades of black". Usually done to F-117's, though IMHO it doesn't look right fort them as F-117's are the blackest black of all things. (Submarines and SR-71's are less black than an F-117). Anyways, it usually comes out best if you do it like wm cheng did for his YF-21--kind of random, angular patches of color, don't follow the plane's lines. 3. Want ready-made different blacks? Go check out the model railroad paints. I like polly-scale, and they make (from darkest to lightest) engine black, steam power black, oily black, and tarnished black (almost a purple-black). "Grimy" black isn't black at all, more like FS36076 or so. Engine black and steam power black are VERY useful---steam power black is as close to pure black as something can possibly be without being pure black. It's more like "90% flat black" as opposed to a purely dead matte 100% flat black. Reflectance is its only difference from engine black. (I have found that enamel blacks often are "deeper" blacks than acrylic---engine black isn't deep enough to touch-up some models painted with enamel, even though it's the blackest acrylic I can find around here)