IAD

So, several steps closer to completion: Carbon wing spars are now installed, and the new intakes and nose/fuselage are now fully shaped, and looking very good. Tomorrow I should be able to get the wings attached, which give me my datum for the fin alignment. (One of those 'measure twenty times, glue once' steps.) ~Luke

Unfortuantely, I'm one of those lone-eagle types... I don't really know anybody I'd trust with my SV. Besides, experienced with similar airframes? What's similar to this?! (Joking!) I'll make sure to note down any strange characteristics, though I'm quite confident that it will be well-behaved. ~Luke

Ok, fine by me. Yes, as long as you don't mind, I planned on taking it up for a couple circuits, to make sure it was trimmed out, and what-not. ~Luke

Sean, quick question... Take a look at these photos... Note how the front face of the top thrust-vector vane is visible from certain angles... (As shown with the red arrow.) Is this acceptable, or should I rework the hinge-points to properly conceal the front face/pivot? On my ship, the mounting arrangement is slightly different, but much harder to maintain/assemble/disassemble, something that may have to be done, on occasion... (Particularly when painting.) On the other hand, my ship has the thrust-vector vane further inside the nacelle 'glove', thereby concealing the front face... This is an aesthetics-only issue, mechanically, it's fine now, and would be fine if I moved the pivot-point around a bit. ~Luke P.S. None of the vanes are glued to the pivots yet, nor are the pivots attached to the airframe. Any misalignments in the photos will be corrected.

Wow, that's quite a... Well... Monster. Looking great so far! [Mad Scientist] I wonder... Servos... Sequencer... Gyroscopes... RC-HWR..? [/Mad Scientist] ~Luke

Just so there are no concerns that I've degraded to an all-talk-and-no-build mode... Only two pieces of foam left to cut on the second SV! (Specifically, the control-run covers that go on the front half of the lifting body.) I've got the LEX glued in place, and except for the canards, all the control/lifting surfaces are now airfoiled. I recut the intakes, since the first set weren't very good... The new ones came out perfect, so I'm happy. I also cut the under-LEX fuselage section, which, once installed, will allow me to cut the electronics bay... Tomorrow I'll sand the new pieces to shape, and glue them in place. ~Luke

Well, if you have about $10,000 for gas turbines, etc... And are prepared to fly an airframe fully capable of killing someone, in the event of an accident. Aluminum would be a poor choice of material, in my opinion... Though very scale-feeling, it wreaks havoc on the radio gear, is relatively hard to work with, and isn't especially light. Fiberglass/carbon are the materials of choice. (Come on, this is a variable fighter! Composite construction all the way! ) 1:10 scale isn't impossible for an electric, I might add. Some EDFs put out 4.5 lb. of thrust... A pair of those would be more than enough for a 6' long VF-4... But designing/building/flying aircraft that size/weight are outside of my area of expertise. ~Luke

Making it bigger is generally easier, though expense is seemingly exponentially proportionate to dimensions, in terms of the power and control systems required... By the way, why is it that all the top-view of the VF-4 don't match the dimensions given in the Compendium? All of the drawings I've found have the wingspan too short... ~Luke

Wow, abnormally-magical-variable-fighters... OT, are we? Just another interjection: Looking at the designs, the SV-51 is obviously fighter-mode optimized. It still looks like a modern fighter jet, quite similar to the latest Russian designs. Not to offend VF-0 fans, but that thing is less aerodynamic than certain WWII aircraft! I know it's supposed to be vaguely based on the F-14, but... The F-14 is a work of art, in comparison. As to justification for adding any sort of transformational technology... As has already been mentioned, the ability to pull a thrust-reverse maneuver is combat useful, as is below-stall-speed maneuvering, thus GERWALK is (in the Macross universe) justifiable. Battleroid always struck me as just as exercise in eye-candy, but... Why not. In regards the motivations of the UN/AUN for their fighting... I think the beginning of Mac Zero makes it pretty clear... They're fighting for control of the Macross... And it's not a secret war... Cities being carpet-bombed by B-2s are really hard to cover up, especially nowadays. Anyway, Shin talks about the world waking up, concerning ETs... It seems that wasn't kept secret, either. But, this is a series involving transformable superfighters... Do we really need a reason to fight a war, aside from the fact we have transformable superfighters? ~Luke

Disclaimer: This post does not indicate intention, only ability: The VF-4, at ~1:25 scale would be 24" long, with an 18" span, and some 105"^2 of wing, including the canards. Total weight would be approximately 9 oz., as opposed to the SV, at 12.6 oz, but thrust would be the same, or higher. (7+ oz. of thrust.) No adjustment to the intake/exhaust areas would be required. Thrust vector would be feasible, and of higher effectiveness than that of the SV. I'm off to work on the second SV, before I waste another day doing CAD models! ~Luke

Wait... The VF-4... Is that the ship that Vinnie has in that comic of his? Hmmmmmm... It is. Nice big canard, good bit of wing... And the intakes/exhausts don't look too crowded. (Exhaust might need a bit of adjustment.) But the SV-51 still looks better. (Much more real-world, which is a big plus to my eye.) Sean, don't worry, with the level of head-banging trickiness these things represent in terms of carving and rigging, I'll be in no particular hurry to further deplete your savings account. I've got all the control surfaces cut out, by the way. Getting closer. ~Luke

A VF-0S will be the next Macross project I work on, but a YF-19 is possible... (Eventually. ) ~Luke

Oh, OK. In regards a limited fleet of variable aircraft... Assuming there's no anime magic involved in the development time of variable fighters, these things are going to take a LONG time to develop, probably close to all of the 5-6 years they had to work with... I don't think they 'stopped to start training' so much as they only were capable of putting two variable craft (with full support) into production, presumably with developmental work going on for a nuclear SV. Aside from the fact that the SV and Octos (both being variable vehicles) likely took years to develop, fielding the AUN mobile units to support the weapon platform(s) they had committed to would take considerable development time and production resources. In all probability, it's not that they willingly stopped devising new weapons, but instead they were intent on fully supporting the weapons they were fielding, and it was taxing their capabilities. Regarding ceiling advantages: "...if the roles were reversed and the VF was on the attack they could fly at altitudes where the SV-51 would be unable to intercept..." Timing the burn-times on the micromissiles launched against Shin's F-14 (30 seconds) and assuming the 14 was outrunning the missiles at about 2500km/h, the range of the missiles is ~20km... The ceiling difference is only 2.5km. In short, the SV might not be able to get in ultra-close, and head-kick the VF-0 into submission, but still could make itself a pain in the neck. Higher ceiling was better in the days of gunfighters, but introduce the missile, and things change... ~Luke

True. The F-86 Saberjet had higher speed and better handling, but the MiG 15 could outclimb it, and had a higher ceiling. Then again, watching the type of fighting that variable fighters usually ended up in, (close in dogfights) and the effectiveness of BVR (beyond visual range) countermeasures, I would tend to doubt that a higher service ceiling would contribute much to combat capability. (Especially with a difference in ceiling of only 2500 m, about 1.5 miles, easy missile range.) Range is a more significant disadvantage, compared to the VF-0, though the SV was eventually to be replaced with a nuclear-turbine-powered design. Assuming the nuclear version would have retained the distinguishing features of the SV-51, it would have been a very impressive aircraft, I would imagine. This is now rather far removed from the original political dicussion, though... Sorry guys, I shan't do it again! ~Luke

I was also thinking about the amount of time it would take to build a highly customized submarine, obviously designed specifically for the SV-51. The UN aircraft carrier that supported the VF-0 squadron looked pretty conventional, except for the destroid emplacements, which, for all we know, could have been retrofits, anyway. I'm inclined to believe (my possibly biased opinion) that the SV-51 represented a better weapon system than the VF-0, and possibly even the VF-1, depending on how you score things. The SV is more like an F-22 (expensive, complex, and very stealty) as opposed to the VF-1 which brings to mind an F-16. (Smaller, presumably cheaper, easier to maintain, etc.) However, in combat, I'd prefer the SV-51. The Longbow-style 'periscope' is quite a feature, and any claims that the SV transformed too slowly aren't apparent in Mac Zero. 3D thrust-vector would have given it a maneuvering edge, as would the full-flying canards, and a whole mess of flaperons. Active stealth is another nice-to-have. The integrated weapons were also more extensive on the SV... A pair of 20mm cannon make for good offensive dogfight capability. Lastly, the aerodynamics and fighter-mode capabilities make more sense than the variable geometry wings on the VF-0/1, considering the application. (I love the wings-as-airbrakes feature Nora uses against the rookies in Ep. 2...) Interestingly, some of these same features showed up 30 years later, in the YF-21. (3D TV, active stealth, and more control surfaces than you can shake a stick at, variable-anhedral wings, etc.) Testimony to an aircraft ahead of it's time, I think. In terms of complexity/maintenance... I think pretty much any variable fighter would be a royal pain to maintain. Of course, being the only [known] SV pilot* in world tends to shade my views more than a little... ~Luke *Flew a scratch-built 1/24 scale RC ducted fan job...

I also got the carbon reinforcements done on the lower fins. These things are about the strongest single component on the entire airframe. (Note that I still need to install the mounting plates that keep them from chewing up the slots I mount them in.) ~Luke

I don't usually post out here, but being an SV-51 fan (in the extreme)... Everybody says the AUN stole the variable fighter technology from the UN... However, in Mac Zero, Nora is pretty clear on who stole what from where. (My subs have her saying "it's just the transformation system they stole from us...") Is there a Compendium entry, or something, that says otherwise? (It seems that even if the technology was stolen by the AUN, they did a better job of using it than the UN... The VF-0 is a block, aerodynamically speaking, compared to the SV-51. ) Also, it would see that the SV was developed considerably sooner than the VF-0. Nora and Ivanov apparently had developed combat tactics which couldn't have been picked up from flying MiGs, etc.. "Schwalbe-2, formation D-Quick!" Compare this to the VF-0, that was being combat-deployed for the first time in Mac Zero. (Note also how Nora and Ivanov speak of the UN 'newtype'... While they've been flying the SV-51s apparently for some time.) Lastly, the AUN support systems for the SV squadrons are much extensive and more tailor-made for the purpose, than the UN. I mean, custom submarines to launch from, modular boosters, etc..? It seems odd that in the time it takes the UN to the build the VF-0 and develop the VF-1, the AUN can build several squadrons of SVs, with 'accessories', and at least one submersible aircraft carrier. Logically, it would seem to suggest the AUN actually had the technology to begin with, thus they had more time to develop workable weapon systems. Now, of course, all my logic is to naught, if the Compendium says the AUN stole the VF technology. ~Luke

Got all the control runs in place, just waiting for the glue to dry/foam, so that I can sand everything flush. ~Luke

And here are a few pictures... Really, nothing stunning/hasn't-been-seen-before, but... First, the usual partially-assembled overall... Note the nicely sanded wings. After that, a few showing the process of getting the cross-sections fixed up and symetrical, and finally, rounding out with a couple shots of the nacelle tops, which still need work. (And, of course, the mandatory thrust-vector-vane shot. ) Oh, never mind. It mixed them all up, so there is no order... Oh well. (Note also that some of the photos were taken before I sanded the airfoil into the wing.) ~Luke

Yes, they make the lower fins quite nearly indestructible. (Which is good, since you land on them...) Techincally not carbon-fiber fins, though... (I wish.) More like 'carbon-fiber-rod-reinforced-sheet-foam-tissue-skinned-fins'... But that's a bit of a mouthful. I ended up sanding the airfoil into the wings, instead, though. CF fins tomorrow. I did get the cross-sections fixed up nicely, and sanded in the faces for the fins to mount to... (Tricky job, done using a jig, to ensure the faces are parallel to the aircraft centerline, and at the correct angle.) All things considered, much progress was made today. ~Luke

Ok, here's the first half of the update: (Pictures later tonight.) I've been filling in the gaps around the nacelles... At this point, I think I've got them worked out well enough. At least I hope so... The weather is so humid, the filler I'm using takes some time to dry... :mad: I've also glued together the front and rear halves of the lifting body. (Finally.) However, in the process of doing that, I found some errors in the cross-sections around the wing root, which I'm addressing now. (Have to let the filler dry.) Hopefully by the other half of this update, I'll have the pushrod runs installed, which in turn allows me to attach the LEX assemble. In the mean time, I'm going to go build the CF-reinforced lower fins. ~Luke

Yep, I'm gluing the airframe into a coherent whole, so-to-speak. So far everything is nicely aligned, though I need to adjust the size of the gap between the 'shin guards' and the nacelle tops. (Bit excessive, in some places.) ~Luke

Just back from a week at Cape Cod. I should have things to report by tomorrow, though. ~Luke

Of course! Except for some structural improvements on yours, the two ships should be practically identical. ~Luke

If I ever get there, it should be about the same. Moving along on the SV(s)... Got the new motors installed in my ship, so the thrust is up 2.5 oz., compared to the first flight. Thrust/weight ratio of 1:1.68, as I recall, as opposed to 1:2.5 before. (Good numbers, 1:3 is widely considered minimum.) Still no test-flight, but it should be good, when it happens. I've started installing pushrod runs on your ship, and everything's falling right into place. The rear half of the body is pretty much assembled, and things are generally looking good. (I also finished opening up the ducting, which was a big job, which I'm very happy to be done with. ) ~Luke