Nekko Basara

Only diagram I've seen actually showing a VIFF move, was to vector the nozzles forward to the fully downwards position while at the top of a loop---being inverted at that point, that would actually force the plane downwards. (I believe most ideas on VIFFing are very a "Top Gun" inspired "putting the brakes on")

I've never seen it diagrammed, but from vague descriptions I imagined it just like your second description, as a way to dump speed rapidly while ascending, forcing a pursuer to overshoot (I understand that the nozzles on the Harrier rotate a bit past straight down, so they can apply some of their thrust vector to braking). It's a move I consider a bit dubious, in Top Gun or otherwise, because while it gives the pursuer only a brief and difficult shot before they overshoot and are in front of the maneuvering craft, the latter is left in a very low energy state - meaning if they aren't successful with a snap shot, they're in a very bad spot for any follow-up maneuvers.

Incidentally, I've heard that an unusual disadvantage of the F-14 in a dogfight is that the automatically-controlled wings let an opponent gauge its energy state at a glance. That may be something an experienced aggressor pilot can use to their advantage, but I wonder if any real-world opponent would have that skill.

EDIT: On second reading, I don't mean to imply that potential opponents are unskilled, only that they would not have a specific skill that could only be acquired by hours of dogfighting against real F-14s. Which, I guess, is largely a moot point, nowadays.

The discussion of mechanically possible but operationally prohibited maneuvers reminds me of something. Going back a few pages to the Falklands, I've seen a lot of words written on the topic of "viffing" by Harrier pilots, with many authors claiming the technique was used in the Falklands war. I've long been skeptical, both because it seems more novelty than practical maneuver, and because it is a defensive (reversal) technique, and - as folks noted - the Argentinean pilots were in no position to mix it up, let alone get Harriers on the defensive. But that's just my speculation - does anyone have more info?

Gunze is the answer. Thinned properly and its fantastic either for brushing or air brushing. I've almost completely moved over to it.

I'll second that. Tamiya is great for airbrushing, but miserable on a brush. Model Master brush-paints well, but I don't like how it airbrushes. Gunze is the only (acrylic) brand I've been very happy with both ways.

Is it still tough to come by in the US? I'm a bit out of the loop.

The same principal applies to the Tu-22 Blinder's conversion to the Tu-22M Backfire.

I didn't think that the Tu-22 and the Tu-22M were actually the same airframe - they certainly don't look it.

Wikipedia is a bit muddled on the subject, claiming that the Tu-22M was "derived" from the Tu-22, but then saying it was a "new aircraft" and what they had in common was the weapon system (the same could be said of the F-111B and the F-14...) Wikipedia also states that the naming was a ploy to get the program approved internally (it's not a new plane, it's a modification!) and then used to obscure its origins at the SALT II talks. Other sites I checked briefly seem to vary in their descriptions of to what degree the Tu-22M was a modification of the Tu-22 or a new design.

Maybe someone here has better info. I think it's safe to say it's at least not the Su-7/Su-17 situation of simply slapping on modified wings with minimal and largely unrelated changes elsewhere.

EDIT: I forgot that there was an Air Vectors page for the Tu22 & Tu-22M. According to Greg Goebel, the Tu-22M arose from a different company project than the Tu-22 (Samolet 145 vs Samolet 105), but "[to] enhance the notion that the Samolet 145 was a direct replacement for the Tu-22, it was assigned the service designation of 'Tu-22M'... Exactly who was to be fooled by the designation game is unclear, since the Tu-22M looked entirely different from the Tu-22. The only thing it really had in common with its predecessor, aside from a few assemblies like the bombbay doors, was the Kh-22 missile."

I have always boggled at the Su-17 family, and how simply and successfully the Soviets were able to create a VG aircraft out of a non-VG design. It certainly didn't have the full advantage of dedicated types, but it's quite a feat nonetheless.

It's funny to me that Revell should spawn a discussion about generalizations, because no single generalization fits their kit line. To my knowledge, it comprises at least three very different types of kit:

1) Some of their kits are very old molds, dating as far back as the seventies. They may have poor detail and proportions, raised panel lines, excessive mold flash, etc. - all the issues you'd expect from kits of that age. I think this also includes the "off-scale" kits that are supposed to be 1/76, but don't always measure correctly even to that.

2) Some Revell kits are reboxings of other manufacturers' molds, typically Italeri or eastern European companies like Zvezda. These can also be somewhat dated and crude by current standards, but not all are; some of the recent molds shared with Italeri are pretty good, for example. And sometimes even if the kit is sub-par, it's of an unusual subject with few or any alternatives (like their 1/72 FW-189).

3) The last category is kits from Revell AG (Revell of Germany) made from about 2000 onward. These kits are almost all fantastic - competitive with the likes of modern Hasegawa, Tamiya, and Dragon kits. The ones I have personal experience with are their 1/72 planes and armor, and their 1/144 planes. They don't incorporate snazzy multimedia options, but they tend to be pretty cheap (although prices have gone up a lot in the past few years).

The trouble with Revell is that they release all of these kits together in the same box style, and it's hard to tell what you are getting without some online research. I've been "duped" more than once and ended up with a terrible dog of a kit because I didn't check. But, man, some of their modern kits are nice.

As far as events and endings from the series to movies, I don't know if it was in this thread or another, but someone coined a phrase of "head-cannon" taking the events you like the best and making them what "actually" happened. I'm just going to do that re: Frontier.

-b.

Not to be pedantic, but let's make that "head-canon," since we are in a fandom where many of the mecha actually have head cannons in various numbers denoting model/rank. ;-)

Now I have the theme to Microprose's "F-19 Stealth Fighter" stuck in my head. I played the hell out of that, way back when.

BTW, just out of curiosity, at Harder and Steenbeck airbrushes that much better than other brands? I know they're high-end and well engineered, but do they really make than much of a difference performance-wise to modelers?

I have a Harder & Steenbeck Infinity,without the quick-set endpiece, but with the airflow regulator for the handle and a couple of different needles/nozzles. I don't have much to compare it to, aside from an ancient Testors Aztek and a generic Iwata copy of the $25 variety (not a Master G23, but roughly equivalent). I gave up on the Aztek ages ago, but use the faux-Iwata for wide coverage and nasty substances, reserving the H&S for fine work. It has an incredibly smooth and light action by comparison, does super-fine lines with the right mix and medium (ink will go much finer than paint, for example), and is very easy to clean. The thing just screams "quality" from the minute you pick it up. The thing is, my skills don't. I am very much a novice with an airbrush, and always feel like I over-bought with the H&S. I know it can do amazing work, and sometimes I can manage to impress myself, but generally it's clear that the limiting factor is my skill.

I guess I'd say that if you really know how to use an AB, or are confident you'll put the time and effort into building that skill, then a H&S seems like a worthwhile investment. There isn't exactly a downside, except for the price and the relative difficulty of tracking down parts compared to more common brands. But if you are still fumbling around like me (for years!), I don't think you'll find it making a huge difference versus some of the cheaper alternatives.

Did anyone else notice the line about the damage level being set to "A" during the opening battle? I don't recall there being different damage levels in season one. I'm curious what this meant, and if it's going to be significant as season two moves ahead.

Build Burning Beargguy.

Yeah I assume there would be quite a bit of violent thrashing knocking water away in the last few moments of the tuna's confused and strange end.

I like to think there is a spiritual connection between that tuna and the whale in The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.

(Cue "Friends ~ Jikuu wo Koete")

A good trick for telling mock-up tanks from the real deal is to look at the running gear. Every family of tanks tends to differ in how many road wheels they have, how they are arranged, how big they are, whether the drive sprocket is at the front or the back, whether there are return rollers and how many, etc. When people modify one tracked vehicle to look like another, they generally can't change that. The result is like having someone in Nikes at a civil war reenactment.

So, that's a dead giveaway that the tank in the video isn't a Tiger. The real thing would have interleaved road wheels and a big drive sprocket at the front, and no uneven gaps between the road wheels like you see between the first and second set.

Edit: Renegadeleader, sorry, I was typing as you posted. Hope this didn't come off like an overly long answer to a short question.

Of course, another clue is that there's only one running Tiger I in the world, and that ain't it ;-)

My wife and I just watched the first episode of TRY - she turns to me and says, "We're back!" It was just as much fun as the first season, and we're excited to see what a central character Fumina looks to be. Also had a good laugh at the "Dee-zert" battle arena.

Don't forget the smoldering love triangle of season 1, Gamlin and Docker competing for the notice of Captain Kinryu.

Just out of curiosity, why is this? Is it because of thrust vectoring engines or that the idea of variable geometry wings are too cumbersome and heavy to make it worthwhile?

I think that the general consensus is that advanced static wing shapes can match enough of the aerodynamic versatility of variable geometry wings without the massive penalties in weight, volume, and mechanical complexity.

Also - relevant to the F-14/F-23 hybrid concept - variable geometry is basically incompatible with stealth, because stealth shaping relies in part on limiting radar reflectivity to specific aspects. This is why on stealth aircraft you typically see that any shapes which aren't curved and blended have edges that align with (that is, are parallel to) a few specific angles. The leading edges of the wings match the leading edges of the tail, the edges of the intakes, the edges of the sawtooth cuts on any panels, etc. Having wings that change angle would mess this up in a big way.

When I see the f-35, I can't help but think of old GI Joe toys or the original Kenner Starwars vehicle toys with the over sized/wide canopies so figures could be placed in them. From what I heard it doesn't even give the pilot better viability either.

Oh, you hit the nail on the head as far as I'm concerned. I always thought the F-35 looked like an F-22 minus any and all grace, but your description is spot on. It's the GI Joe version of the F-22; the lines are approximately right, but the proportions, especially the canopy, are totally out of whack. And, yeah, you can tell at a glance that its rearward visibility can't be much good.

As far as the X-32 goes, I'm not calling it beautiful. It was the sort of pretty, to me, that comes from an aircraft built to do a job from start to finish. In its case, that job was to fly like a Harrier, be stealthy like an F-117, and take up a minimum of space like an A-4. Which is why the end result looked like the ungainly mix of all of those. Ungainly, but pretty in its way.

I've noticed these runner quality issues more and more since Bandai switched back to Polystyrene from the ABS they were using for awhile. They're definitely using a different blend of PS than they were 5 years ago, though. It's a lot less dense. The light weight is good for joints, but it is a lot more brittle and it makes it hard to get a clean cut on a lot of parts, which is mostly a problem on parts where the gate is on a large surface.

From what I've seen, most kits have a sprue or two of ABS for the parts that will undergo the most stress. My impression is that details cast in it are a bit softer and its surface hardness is much lower - you can scratch it with a fingernail. I assumed that's why it isn't used throughout. It sure is a pleasure to clean up sprue marks on, though.

From what I've seen, the X-32's intake was part of its downfall when it came to vertical landings.

I wonder if that had anything to do with the later reconfiguarion of the chin intake. Although I though that was related to high-speed airflow.

My RG Z'Gok arrived today. I've only had time to build the legs. Some quick thoughts:

-This kit is different. Like, yeah, the Zakus were kind of different than all those Gundams, and to an extent Exia was pretty different from the One Year War/SEED kits, but the Z'Gok is the most different. It's not difficult, though, as long as you make sure that you push the first piece you put on the heel of the inner frame foot all the way on.

-There seems to be a lot less pieces. Probably partly because you don't have any weapons or a ridonkulous backpack (I'm looking at you, every SEED kit in the line...), probably partly because he doesn't really have a head, either.

-The sticker sheet is the smallest I've seen in an RG.

-The plastic feels a little different. The pieces themselves are engineered with the usual fit and precision you'd expect from a Bandai RG kit, but the runners feel lighter and more brittle. I had one piece come off the runner as I was taking it out of the packaging, and a couple of times I'd start to nip a piece off a runner only to have a chuck of the runner fall off. Several sprues have holes in them. Don't know what to make of it, especially since the model itself doesn't seem to be suffering adversely.

Hope to have it done (with pics) maybe tomorrow.

By coincidence, I also just got the RG Z'Gok and I am working on it this weekend. I'd echo just about everything you said. This is a strange kit for a Real Grade. Having built the HG Beargguy, this feels a lot like that kit (or an Acguy) with a RG frame built into it. The armor is mostly large pieces with less surface detail than other RGs, owing to the "cartoony" look of the suit. I'm not disappointed, per se; it's accurate to the subject, but it's not going to provide the lengthy, detailed build of some other RGs. Also, for all its simplicity, it's hard not to think there was a cost-cutting decision regarding the "Iron Nail" claws not being chromed. The way they come on their own white sprue, when the only other white piece of the entire kit (the cockpit hatch) is specially injected on the "A" sprue, suggests that a special treatment was planned for the claws at some point.

Regarding the plastic quality, the use of a metallic-swirled plastic for some parts like the propeller blades gives me a "cheap" vibe just because I associate that stuff with toys, but everything seems crisp and solid. I've encountered a few vacuities on the sprue like you mentioned, but I've also seen those in other RG kits. As long as a part isn't "short-shot," I don't see any harm to it.

I'm bashing a First Grade Gundam & HGUC Powered GM and GM Custom into a 1/144 Gundam Ver.Ka

I'm not familiar with Katoki's take on the RX-78, but I love what you are doing, electric indigo. It addresses two of my private gripes with the original Gundam: the string-beany arms and the stubby feet.

Bless you.

Having just recently re-watched the episodes where first Rex and then Akiko (both possessed by Sivil) throw themselves at Basara, I have to agree that Basara is doing more than just specifically ignoring Mylene because she's immature. He is just flat out oblivious. I think it's mostly a devotion to his music, but it also feels a bit like a joke that "doesn't play." Although I did get a chuckle when he told Akiko that she was stepping on his hot dog. Symbolism?

I know everyone with more money to spend on models than me is totally excited about PG Unicorn. But for me, who likes his Gunpla in 1/144, I think the kit I'm most excited for right now is HGUC Crossbone Gundam X-1. RG Wing Zero EW is of course a must-buy as well.

I am agonizing over the PG Unicorn already. It's probably my favorite suit, and in what feels like the ultimate format... but it's also (with the LED frame) about as much money as every Gundam kit I bought in the last year put together. Ouch.

But, yeah, the RG Wing Zero - all of the RG Wing kits, in fact - are no brainers. You just cannot beat Real Grade for value.

Now you know I'm crazy, because I always liked the X-32. To my eyes, it was the A-7 "SLUF" reborn for the 21st century.

Sprey does tend to forget occasionally that all the best fighters of their respective eras were, with few exceptions, the very best and most expensive that their nation could provide. The Supermarine Spitfire had such a protracted development process that it was very nearly cancelled. The F-14 was very nearly unaffordable, even for the U.S, and that was, at first, a single-mission fighter.

And the F-14's development really starts with the F-111, which was an expensive failure from the Navy's point of view.

The F-111 may be the best analog that we have for the F-35, as a high-budget, high-profile program to leverage cutting edge technology to produce an aircraft with variants meeting the varied needs of different services. What's the lesson there? It was a mixed bag, producing a huge amount of wasted spending and tremendous delays with the ultimate failure of half of the program... but also producing a very capable and effective strike aircraft, and laying the groundwork for a great fleet defense fighter.