Briareos9

Okay then why shouldn't the VF-19 advocates shut up about their FSW, canards, overflow units and how great they are seems as how canonically the VF-19F/S doesn't have them and the YF-19 that did was matched maneuver for maneuver throughout Macross Plus. Afterall other then projecting speculation onto it, how do you know? What's good for the goose is good for the gander.Also people need to remember, Movie wise at least, Guld literally ejected all limbs, had all of one gunpod left and switched it so he was doing max burn in atmosphere which he normally would not have done as it melts down the core. Of course, once he did the X-9 was burning up as his fighter was, and he still defeated it. Given the way it was burning up I got the distinct impression it also went into max overdrive disregarding safety limits as Guld did. He was keeping up with it reasonably well before doing so as well. As for the brawl: The YF-19 by the end of the brawl, had its head cannon destroyed, its FAST packs all destroyed, had went through 3 magazines, and apparently was out of missiles. The YF-21 had lost a hand while having a gunpod knocked away when getting close after driving Isamu to ground, and its left arm fuel FAST pack taken out but still had enough missiles left for a truly impressive swarm. Clearly the result wasn’t in the YF-19’s favor. If we're going to rehash it let's keep what happened straight, no?

dd? Sorry not familiar with that one. Okay I messed up, the built in guns are the same color, but the gunpods are what Guld openned up with Isamu with. I can only guess the others are so kind of targetting thing for testing purposes as it's not seen again. They're under the nacelles and the same color energy blast. Talk about purposefully making it it hard to tell, whether they're there or not.

And who was talking about the VF-19 there especially given the VF-19 doesn’t have guns in the arms? I made that claim and all you’ve done it brought up a technicality due to the wording. The spirit behind it still stands. Gun coverage on the VF-19 series is good only fore, and behind and above which doesn’t guard its six very well. VF-22S/YF-21 coverage is solid both fore and aft and the mini-missiles help deter anyone coming from any other direction. An enemy fighter will have a bigger problems approaching a VF-22/YF-21. Translation: it has a unit that only works in atmosphere helping it (better for the UNAF, but not the UNS) and the creators (Kawamori) held the VF-22S back from getting the new HMM-7 verniers in addition to improved engines. The VF-22 series still has the potential. Who, in reality, determined who won Project Supernova sir? And if he had went the other way what would the VF-19 be doing? You broke SoD, so all I’m doing is pointing out the greater extent of the SoD consequences. Based on what? The readouts say air is used as coolant/propellant giving it nearly unlimited range, nothing about the power source itself. Just because it’s propellant is air says nothing about its use of fuel. The fusion reaction might be heating the air as it goes past in atmosphere, for example. Sounds like a blatant maneuver to get something they shouldn’t exactly be able to get their paws on while avoiding a lot of red tape, instead of anything to do with development. Conceded. Then again beyond the FAST pack those leg bays are all the VF-19 has missile wise. If they did the design would be fatally flawed. All you’ve got on the VF-22S is it’d block the internalized form of itself. Which amounts to having magazine 1 & 2 and of course having to unload one and then switch. My point was it only has one set of leg FAST points if it was using the one type of pack it couldn’t be carrying another one. And when you look at the potential that comes more into question. Just dropping 210 kilograms had a major influence on the VF-22, but the VF-19 even with lower weight and higher thrust it’s not getting much. Kawamori tweaked stuff it would be balanced, but that doesn’t prevent the potential as well as the given from being looked at does it? My original contention was it was the Shinsei exclusive engines that gave the VF-19 its main advantage I think we’ve established this, with only the addition of the VF-22S not getting the newest verniers either. In addition they moved the gunpods from external mounts to internal mounts. Sounds to me like some creator person was working hard to hold it back how about you? Did anyone else notice that in the firing tests the lasers are kind of a redish pink, but the YF-21’s gun pods seem to be firing some sort of blue energy blast? In the rain it’s strafing with both and in the tests we see it being held again as the same. It’s catridge-less because unlike the YF-19 its gun pod is an energy gun. Why were people thinking they weren't there through most of the testing again? From the movie they seem to be basically always there.

So you think just because the VF-22/YF-21 need to linearly shorten their main engine compartment it can’t mount a big of engines as the one that needs to severly bend in the middle (GERWALK mode) and squash it just before the nozzle to allow it to carry missiles? ?_? Not to mention that canonically before when it had Shinnakasu Industry engines it was getting While the YF-21 with Shinnakasu Industry engines was getting It’s quite simple Shinsei made a breakthrough in engine design that let them get their 56,500 kg equivalent up to 78,950 kg class. They’re design couldn’t accommodate as big of engines as the YF-21 or else you better start explaining why they’re such morons as to underdo their engines below the competitor. If General Galaxy had the technology especially as their fighter is hardier (much higher G tolerance) they’d be mounting engines in the 80 tonne class. If the VF-22 had such engines and newer better verniers with it’s OS revamped to accommodate would you still say the VF-19 has a maneuverability advantage? If we gave the VF-22S the same boost (VF-19S engine thrust-YF-19 Shinnakasu+VF-22 thrust) as goes to the VF-19S in engine performance it’d be carrying 87,660 kg class engines and getting a 18.77G thrust to mass ratio verse a 18.32 G thrust to mass for the VF-19S. Yeah the actual engine's weight will probably tweak that but the figure's still telling. It's only a matter of time before General Galaxy figures out a way to do it without corporate espionage or violating patents, only a matter of time. The VF-19A is implied to be for atmospheric given only it has the real FSW and canards, and its engines aren’t rated for maximum instantaneous in space. If they were they’re carrying 56,500 kg class and have nothing on the VF-22/YF-21 in the acceleration department. The key argument to the VF-19A being more maneuverable is those FSW and canards which are deleted on the F and S. Otherwise it’s conventional wings with verniers (VF-19F/S) vs conventional wings with verniers + a few extra things (VF-22S). Shinsei may have aimed more for the UNAF instead of the UNS with some of it's stuff seems as how the Supernova contract was with the UNAF, while the VF-22S's was with the UNS. The procurement issues like politics, cost, backroom maneuvers, what the UNAF top brass was looking for, etc. is unknown. What bugs me is the VF-19 has a AI control system so it's in many ways just for hold outs against the X-9. Makes me wonder if Sharon tweaked it to help Myung's boyfriend while she was at it. Given everything else she did just so Myung would get straightened out, and Isamu would recognize the importance of his feelings for her it wouldn't suprise me.

VF-19S vs VF-22S: translation: we need to go for the tweaked out VF-19 to even compete with just the plain jane production VF-22? Look at the code designation, the VF-22 was the advance production version and the VF-22S is just the production version. It doesn't say one way or the other, just they're converging energy cannons. As messing with the arms isn't listed in the upgrades they should still be. And?! That's like saying the VF-1S has four LASERs, sure but they're all smaller. Just because it has four smalls to a VF-1A's 1 big doesn't mean they're more powerful. You're getting 13MJ from the reactor over each pulse period either way so the VF-1A's would be doing what with the excess energy, just dumping it as waste heat? Personally don't buy it. Seems as how the PPBs basically envelope them unlike the VF-19 series' shield do they need to be? Proof?VF-19 The VF-19’s oragami transformation equipment takes up so much room it’s internal weapon systems could only somehow be crammed into its lower legs, around the engine. Personally I can’t see 6 MRHMs being crammed in there. Even the ones fired in Macross Plus seemed kind of big to be storing in there. VF-22S So you want to tell me over 1/10 of the fighter’s weight and a significant size difference (although not enough to affect things like its performance in the space-superiority role for being to big ) is just because they went to internal stowage with separate legs from the thrusters? I could always point out that unlike the VF-19 the main thrusters are not in the VF-22S’s legs, causing less of a need to make it fit around. Also the VF-22S’s guns collapse when not in use while the VF-19’s is always full size. Breaking of SoD. I could say Kawamori had the YF-19 win because he wanted to use both designs after putting the time in. You're kidding right? A fusion (thermonuclear) engine isn't a magical get something for nothing & violate the Second Law of Thermodynamics while we're at it piece of equipment. D-T or whatever it's using still counts as fuel. Prove limitation is actual production instead of people ordering them. That they'd need a prototype VF-19 by then but could just shell out the VF-22Ss doesn't go in the VF-19's favor. What were the conditions around this expiremental license? Was it a work around to let them get their paws on one? Expiremental in that the colony production facilities hadn't been used to make them, or what? Let's see for the VF-22S Converging Energy head unit +2 arm units facing rear. 2 Converging energy cannons facing fore. 2 gun pods facing who knows which way.VF-19: 5 Lasers clustered on head unit aft sort of, fore unlikely, upper arc the four lightweights only. Only the 1 aft sort of on the non squad leader combat version. 2 small bore lasers fixed in wing roots fore firing only. 1 GU-15 external gun pod. Prove the internal pallet points go to the micromissiles, seems as how it clearly states exclusive pallets. And they count mount them, use them, discard them and then use the internalized form because, why again? Yes they internalized them, but that doesn't prevent another external set from being stuck on, these thing are designed to be ejected you know. Those are pretty small for fuel storage. Plus you're strawmanning, they take up FAST point to the legs. Where did anyone state anything about them taking up internal storage, nevermind how that's even supposed to work? Those things hefty?Why is the P/Custom even coming up? They're not really combat versions and they're not exactly standard issue. Source?

Wait... Let’s take two steps back here. From what I remember of David’s previous analysis the VF-19A/YF-19 was better in either yaw or pitch and the VF-22’s wings are better at rolling, but there was no clear advantage either way. Note something though azrael: only the VF-19A, which is specifically designed for atmospheric use, has the canards. Both the VF-19F and VF-19S replace them with verniers and at least the VF-19S has rather conventional wings. So basically you just backed yourself into “well the dedicated atmospheric version of the VF-19 can compete with the VF-22S in atmosphere.” It’s pretty bad when you break tradition and need a separate atmospheric and space fighter, ne? Especially when the runner up can compete with both in their specialized environment. That doesn’t speak well for the VF-19 series instead of for the VF-22S, if you have to specialize to just compete in the given area something seriously wrong here. You're falling back pretty quickly here aren't you azrael and not even bothering to check? No the guns have their own bays. It talks about the micromissiles launchers and then says exclusive internal pallets and it's a might? It's clearly 3 Standard internal pallets, plus exclusive pallets for the minimissiles, plus special weapon stations for the gund pods. Now tell me again why the YF-19s internal standard pallets shouldn't be equivalent to the VF-19's internal pallets? You're the one claiming the VF-19 is a better deicated bombtruck against the stats, burden of proof is on you, not me. So lets see some actual proof, instead of hedging.

I'm limited to using data I can actually get. VF-19 Compendium entry The Custom doesn't count and the data's just the way it is. "Two Stonewell/Roice B-7 standard internal pallets" From VF-22S entry: "Three standard internal pallets. Micro-missile launchers with four exit ports on the forward dorsal section to the sides of the engine nacelles. Micro-missile launchers with four exit ports on the ventral fuselage to the rear of the engine nacelles in Fighter mode or on leg storage bay cover panels in GERWALK and Battroid modes. Exclusive internal pallet(s)." The VF-22 is a bigger, heavier bird that can carry more based off its given stats. The part you quoted is where I pointed out the YF-19's are listed as that the VF-19's are listed as Little Rock launch systems and described as pallets. If they're using standardized pallets and the VF-19 is carrying two, while the VF-22 is carrying three plus a micro-missile system with its own exclusive pallets whose the more well rounded? From what I can decrypt all the VF-19 has over the VF-22S stat wise is its more powerful engines and lower mass. Maneuverability can't really be taken from them and what I do know would indicate it's close enough pilot skill is the deciding factor instead of the machine under them. The VF-22S is a tonne heavier and is bigger so I don't see why it can't actually be carrying more. The YF-21 didn't have those pallets true, but that was before the leg redesign. The VF-19 doesn't appear to have anything so drastic done to it going from YF to VF. I'm only using the YF data for the data I can't get from the other entry. Weapons procurement involves a lot of politics. The M-14 was adopted because of politics not it was better then the FAL for general use. It's not beyond them to actually have everything predetermined and rig it. General Galaxy has never had one of their fighters become the mainline, while Shinsei has. Even the BCS was more of a proof of concept item, the YF-21 Prototype #1 should have still been on Eden with its conventional control system after the Sharon Apple incident. The YF-19 went through 7 test pilots, a engine change, and was still kept on. I wouldn't rule out things like that they might have been biased against a VF that didn't look like a VF either. The VF-19 is not necessarily better for GP just because it got the contract.

I know this has been sort of done before, but I can’t seem to recall any indication of an actual side-by-side quantitative analysis using the Compendium data. VF-19 vs VF-22 VF-19F (Shinsei)------------------------------VF-22S (General Galaxy) Maneuverability is approximately equal. Differences have more to do with the pilot then the machine. updated VF-4----------------------------------transforming Q-Rau 2-D independent thrust vectoring------------3-D independent thrust vectoring Can use Fold Booster--------------------------Can use Fold Booster 2 fixed forward facing energy guns-----------2 semi-fixed rear and forward firing guns 1 fixed rear facing laser cannon--------------3 rear facing energy weapons 1 gun pod with clips----------------------------2 “cartridge-less” stealth gunpods 1 shield w/ PPB---------------------------------2 shields, one on either arm in concert w/ PPB --------------------------------------------------4 Micro-missle ports both top and bottom, standard 2 internal pallets (48 MM or 12 MRHM total)-3 standard internal pallets --------------------------------------------------Low observable stealth construction Active Stealth system-------------------------Active stealth system since first design (YF-21) If the Active Stealth System was so good by itself why did General Galaxy, which basically developed the technology, build a fighter with a stealth agility trade-off and low observable stealth construction? Using YF data on max loading: In atmosphere ~28,759 kg above mass empty-----------------29,657 kg above mass empty In space w/ fold booster ~37,352 kg above mass empty-----------------38,755 kg above mass empty If max loading retained with production weight (VF-19F used as lightest true combat, VF-19A is same) In atmosphere 28,959 kg above mass empty------------------29,867 kg above mass empty In space 37,551 kg above mass empty------------------38,965 kg above mass empty Max Loading VF-1 normal: 23,750kg-23,150kg (VF-1X) above mass empty Super: 52,800 kg above mass empty Base weight VF-19A 8,750 kg---------------------------------VF-22S 9,340 kilograms VF-19F 8,550 kg VF-19S 8,620 kg General Galaxy fighter can carry approximately 1 tonne more, while weighing little under one tonne more. Due to the greater thrust the Shinsei Industry fighter most likely is much more fuel hungry. 7 different test pilots with test related casualties----1 Test pilot, died taking out X-9 Ghost with 42,700/67,500 engines (atmosphere/space)---Same exact engines as YF prototype Note: these replaced the original 56,500 kg engines with which it would have had inferior acceleration to the YF-21 Production model mounts: VF-19A 56,500 kg engines (likely in atmosphere rating)---41,200/65,200 kg engines VF-19F 72,500 kg engines (Space) VF-19S 78,950 kg engines (Space) Thrust to mass ratio (ie thrust/mass empty) VF-19A:12.91 G--------------------------VF-22S (atmosphere): 8.82 G VF-19F:16.96 G--------------------------VF-22S (space):13.96 G VF-19S:18.32 G YF-19: 15.43 G VF-1X: 2.17 (mass empty 13,850 kg) VF-1X (w/ EF-2001 booster thrusters ie Super Valk): 14.06 G (for 150 seconds) VF-11: 6.33 Using empty mass of FAST pack system from VF-1 readout VF-22S (w/ 2 EF-2001 booster thrusters): 25.22 G VF-19F (w/ 2 EF-2001 booster thrusters): 27.70 G Max Thrust with max loading data from YF data VF-19F(space): 3.15G-------------------------VF-22S (atmosphere): 2.10G YF-19 (atmosphere): 2.27G-------------------VF-22S (space): 2.70G YF-19 (space): 2.93G Max speed in atmosphere VF-19A (10km) Mach 5.1+------------------VF-22S (10km) Mach 5.07 VF-19A (30km+) Mach 21+-------------------VF-22S (30km+) Mach 22+ Max rate of climb S/L 68 km/min--------------------------------------61.9km/min G limits VF-19F +35.5/-19.5----------------------------VF-22S +60/-45 One thing worthy of note is the deployment time. The original VF-1 Valkyrie was only in production for 9 years since it’s equivalent of Project Supernova (2007-2015). The VF-4, which replaced it as the main variable fighter in 2020, stayed in production for only around ten years (2012-2022) being replaced itself as the mainline fighter in 2030. The VF-11 was scheduled to be replaced by the winner of Project Super Nova in the 2040s. By 2046 the Seventh Neo-Macross colony fleet only has three VF-19s. Meanwhile the VF-22 accepted in 2042 and has been replacing the VF-17 in service. The VF-19 with its greater acceleration seems to be a better interceptor. The VF-22S seems to be a better deep penetration bomb truck. The VF-22 seems to make better use of its pair of PPBs. The advantage of the VF-19 can be directly tracked back to its newer Shinsei produced engines, which without it’d not be competitive with the VF-22S. It is only a matter of time before General Galaxy can get their hands on such engines. Seems as how the YF-19 readout referred to its pallets as “Two Stonewell/Roice B-7 standard internal pallets” these are probably the same sort of thing as the three carried by the VF-22S. This should allow the VF-22S to carry the same sort of stuff while always having mini-missiles handy for dog fighting. I dare say this and the more guns pointing several which ways, makes the VF-22S a better dogfighter, as the maneuverability isn’t that different. The VF-22S with its solid back would seem well suited to carrying backpack FAST packs, although they’d likely interfere with it’s low observability construction unless specially made. The VF-19’s VF-4 style origami transformation would seem likely to make it harder to use backpack FAST packs, although we know they do. Additionally the Project Supernova FAST pack of the YF-21 type could be worn without interfering with anything else. It increases arm shield armor and missile complement. The VF-19’s Project Supernova type FAST pack however takes up the leg points for the launchers and adds some rather pointless plates to the shoulders. They also appear to just have holes to allow the normal veniers to function instead of additional ones making it questionable whether they’d want them over a standard pack in that area.

There also happens to be a small but finite chance all the matter making up your present body's probability fields will decide to simulataneously jump to the sun any time now. Sure they could be in combat, but that doesn't mean they'll be worthwhile as combat units. ----------------------------------------------- Bringing up the utility robotics and cybernetics in a discussion about mecha only emphasizes that some people don't get such technology in not limited to anthropomorphic implementation. Modern AA guns are robotic devices for example. As for combined arms, yes I'd rather not have the mecha and have had that money used to make something that wouldn't get me and its operator killed for no good reason. It's the basic economics concept of opportunity cost, if I waste mucho dolores on junk that money isn't going to buy the stuff that's actually needed. You don't need a mecha to kill a mecha anymore then you need to strip down and use a sharpened stick to fight Zulu warriors instead of modern equipment. I doubt the comments people would give for pulling that kind of stunt instead of using rifles, machineguns, and tanks wouldn't be high for your intelligence. Just about all components in a modern force have a given role, and it's not just to kill their counterpart in the enemy's forces. A M-72 LAW or RPG-7 right through their cockpit should be quite sufficient for most of them. The question is what do they do well and can they add something or are they a lame-duck? So far going through theoretical roles and with the long list of inherent design problems I've found I'm leaning way towards they're just a lame duck. Even their maneuverability isn't really there as they are going to have a harder time accelerating, getting up to speed, and once they do stopping or changing direction suddenly will be a not so minor problem. The high center of mass means attempts at big changes in momentum cause a significant moment, which isn't a problem on cenventional drive systems or walkers. Additionally walkers do the low speed direction changing maneuvers better as they, for instance, don't necessarily need to turn around. This isn't a eval like that which said they couldn't go to the moon. Those type of evals are based on knowns to determine what you can and can't do. This is an eval that says "okay you have this machine" now let's look at it's operational parameters, design requirements, and what it could actually be useful for in relation to other machines based on basic physics and actual warfare principles/roles. I acknowledge they're might be stuff my paradigm isn't letting me pick up on which is why I've screened this on various boards and made greater attempts with each upgrade to be as thorough as possible.

Take it as you will. EDIT: Seems as how the site I'm kind of hosting this off of has come back from the dead I'll take the one poster's advice and link with just the intro here. It is generally better to not have it suffering the effects of having to be hacked up and spotted welded to fit within required length to post. Especially when you lose half of it for the trouble. An Evaluation of the Practicality of Mecha for Military Applications Version 1.31I circa 4/24/05 [introduction only] This essay attempts to compile the various worthwhile arguments surroundings mecha. It is also intended to inform the reader about various weapons systems and their advantages/disadvantages. Table of Contents I.) Definition II.) Size matters III.) Maneuverability IV.) Locomotion V.) Terrain VI.) Transformation VII.) Armor VIII.) Weapons IX.) Adaptability X.) Accuracy XI.) Target Profile XII.) Stealth XIII.) Control System XIV.) Maintenance XV.) Arms and Legs XVI.) Cost XVII.) Design Optimized for Terror Weapons? XVIII.) Mini-mecha XIX.) Power Armor XX.) Power Loaders XXI.) Case Examples XXII.) List of Noteworthy Hardware Full Version located here For the person who was wondering about EMP

Which just furthers the support behind them using large caliber, low velocity shells which'd pretty much just bounce off a real MBT.

Thank you very much. The previously posted figure is actually in error. I forgot to transform RPMs to RPS, I must have been more tired when I did that calc then I thought. I apologize to anyone I may have messed up with that.

What are the bhp and shp in the Destroid readouts supposed to be: Using: http://www.acronymfinder.com/ The most appropriate would seem to be base horsepower and shaft horsepower respectively, but is there a official one? Also is the 3,300 m/s for the Defender class Destroid muzzle velocity, at Macross Compendium, from a source with high canonocity? Afterall if each round was just 250 grams at the rate of fire and muzzle velocity there'd be a force of greater then 90 US tons on each arm.