jenius

LOL, so BBTS charged $200 for their YF-19 and then had them shipped via BOAT to the US? That's like prison sex for the toy world. You guys sure are die hard fans of great customer service... although I tend to think service begins with getting me my item promptly. Safe to say I'll never preorder anything from BBTS.

Mospeada? (from the updated Alpha reviews on anymoon.com)

I am absolutely lost as to the point of this discussion anymore... The VT-1 is a trainer, we all agree right? Maybe it doesn't make the most sense that it is a dedicated trainer but that doesn't stop it from being what it is. I mean seriously, if you want to pick a bird that makes the least amount of sense then you should really stab at the VE-1. Why make that thing transformable at all?

LOL, I haven't even applied a single factory decal to any of my Yammies. I can't say my total would change at all. I like the look of the done-up Yamatos but I don't trust my own ability in any of it to risk touching such an expensive toy... besides, there's something to be said of the clean and pure look too.

Kensei and Godzilla can take heart knowing that they still have only spent a fraction of what Lord Kung-Fu had. I mean, that guy even needs to calculate in the overhead from his climate-controlled warehouses buried deep within the sands of California's deserts. (How long does Lord Kung-Fu have to have not posted here before I should stop making fun of him?)

To be fair, I calculated that into my price, and anyone coming up with their own price could do the same. I get the feeling when someone is done calculating just the stuff in the sig, they'll be satisfied knowing that Godzilla has spent a LOT of money.

Well, his sig lets you know, just add a price

Matchbox was just a distributor for Bandai, they never made their own SDF-1.

Sometimes all ya gotta do is look up

For some reason, it seems to me like your YF-19 is gettin' ready to pistol whip that Ride Armor for being a glory hog.

I think no one would disagree with the following assertion: You COULD make a VT-1 combat worthy. The question is, did they? There doesn't seem to be any evidence of that. Obviously, before adapting trainers into fighters you'd send your fighters out first and there doesn't seem to be evidence from Macross that they had to resort to arming VTs. Now, onto the price thing. Let's say upon building the VE-1 they found the frame perfect for a trainer do to the seating arrangement and slightly greater space for sensory equipment or something like that. Now, having additional VT-1s may also mean they can be converted at a later date to VE-1s as well. Now say they only planned to make 100 VE-1s at a cost of $10. They now choose to make 200 at a cost of $17. The average cost of a VF-1D may be $16 but the VT-1 is better-suited and has upgradeable features the VF-1D does not. Eh, basically, who knows on the price issue, we could make a billion hypotheses there (unless the compendium actually covers that). The other consideration is that humans are so proficient at producing valks by the point the VT-1 comes around price isn't even an issue and the common thought is that students should have the best available equipment to train in.

That depends on what you're doing with the backpack overall. If you're planning on having the fins folded rather than splayed than yes, that would be incorrect. Again though, do what you want. You could always rationalize it by saying your's is a custom VT-1 with something specific in mind. Completely white without a hint of tan. I'm inclined to say that on all matters defering to the Yamato is the proper way to go (paint and arm armors). The Bandai toys are great and all but the chunky was never known for its anime-accurate-ness.

I don't believe it actually has arm parts. Bandai included a gun and arm parts but Yamato did not.

I'm a little confused why anyone has a problem thinking the VT is a dedicated trainer. The airframe exists for more than one vehicle (the VE-1). Maybe it was purpose built for the VE-1 to replace the cat's eye and then they realized "Hey, this air frame makes a heck of a lot better trainer than the VF-1D" and so they made some stripped Elintseekers, outfitted them with training equipment, and voila! dedicated trainer! It actually makes a lot of sense that way too as it makes building the VE-1 frame more cost efficient. Now, could you mount weapons on a VT-1? Sure, but why would you ever do that? If you wanted to get into a fight the more sensible vehicle would be a standard VF-1, if you wanted a fight with two people in the cockpit you'd grab a VF-1D. I wouldn't let any of that stop you though if you're making a model. Let canonicity be a "who friggin' cares" deal and do what you want.

So are you saying trainers in general seem stupid? Theoretically it could carry a gun pod, instead it carries a dummy gunpod for training purposes. A VT-1 will never see combat (unless some idiot on a date steals one) so it'd seem stupid to give it live ammo, no?

And you call yourself an addict!

Here's my understanding of it: I would presume the VF-1D still would exist as a two-seater fighter and would still have training variants as the VF-1D likely has some purpose beyond that of a 1-seater VF-1. The VT-1 is a strictly built training platform. It might work something like everyone gets their taste for the VF-1 in a VT-1 and then may move on to additional training in a VF-1D for eventually assignment to a VF-1D or that pilot then goes directly to a 1-seater VF-1 (like the VF-1J Hik trains in in the original series) or a VE-1. Yes Position of the instructor. Beyond that I would defer to the compendium. Seems like anywhere there's an active force that may require new recruits there would be VT-1s. I imagine if any Valk lends itself to non-military (in an agressive sense at least) applications it's the VT-1. As such, the trainers could be painted for whatever that other purpose would be. Are there squadrons of VT-1s with their own paint schemes? It wouldn't seem likely. EDIT - it also seems like the VT-1 is the same platform as the VE-1 so you could just consider it a repaint with different internals/externals. There may be other applications using the same frame as well where a two person crew would be appropriate. These other applications could eschew whatever training devices are present for combat devices or something like that.

Crap, I forgot the Mac+ 1/72 series and the 1/60 Q-Raus... Quote modified For the love of God, no one remind me of any other Yammy toys I may not have included...

Man... I try to avoid thinking about it.. Just using rounded ball park figures, since I don't remember the exact dollar amount spent on each. My prices listed also include shipping so I think this is a pretty fair estimate. 1/48 VF-1 Super Sets: $185 x 3 1/48 VF-1 Valkyries: $135 x 4 1/48 Delux Set Stealth: $200 x 1 1/48 LowVis Version 1: $195 x 2 1/48 Strike Parts: $55 x 2 1/48 GBP: $110 x 2 1/60 VF-1 (first edition): $40 x 2 1/60 VF-1 Super/Strike/GBP: $75 x 4 1/60 VE/VT-1 Elint/Ostrich: $75 x 2 1/60 VF-0S: $140 x 1 Survey says!?!: $2,685

Do they all get fast packs? Seems like some come with reflex missiles but no fast packs. I guess there's nothing really wrong with that... just looks a little different.

I own 4 Detolf cases and I absolutely hate the fact I can't do more valks in fighter mode. I liked Sebastian's modified Detolfs (he had a custom top and base made so that two would be combined into one). Just the same, I really think at some point I'm just going to hunker down and go with the huge custom cabinets.

This is what KK is talking about. It doesn't matter as much on the Yamato 1/60 version since the tail section lies flat even with the fins out.

It looks like Garland 2.0 should be coming out in 2007, it definitely seems best to cut your losses on the Garland 1.0. This thing sounds even worse off than the Toynami MPC Alpha! LOL

It's not a matter of training, it's a matter of rank. Having Max go from fresh recruit to Skull Leader within the timeframe of DYRL would be unreasonable. Having him go from a soldier of unknown rank to Skull Leader is preferable (as absolutely no extra explanations are needed). What year was DYRL made (in real life)? I don't think they were that hip to the uses of CGI just yet. It wouldn't make sense to ask why all sci-fi movies made in the 1980s didn't utilze a technology that is plentiful today... because people in the 1980s wouldn't have seen it coming. Beyond that your kind of nitpicking non-issues. Why is DYRL SDF-1 different from TV version? Because the animators had a bigger budget and wanted it to look cooler or more serious.

That one's all plot with not-so-much humor.