anime52k8

smooth = retro = old. lots of panel lines and details = complex = modern.

OMG WANT!!! O.O

oh loardy!! wow, so much win at one time.

UGH... why!?! I was so dead set on passing this thing up and now I'm desperate to have one... I really don't want to bite the bullet until after I get back from the vacation I'm taking second week of January. what are the chances that there will still be some in stock when I get back? if there aren't any I'll probably be the only person hoping that future releases don't include the fast packs. (I don't care if they were used throughout the show, the valk looks better with out them. )

oh yeah, almost forgot. the uper body is now moved over the cockpit section by way of two swing arms on either side of the fuselage (like on the VF-25) hence the large extensions where the missiles mount (when it transforms, the missiles get flipped over 180 degrees with the swing arms)

ok, please don't kill me for this but... at some point a few days ago, I had a brilliantly stupid Idea. that Idea was something along the lines of "You know what would be awsome? a VF-4, combined with a VF-25" at that point I decided to start drawing up some sketches of something that looks more a less the same as a VF-4, but with lots of new details and reshaped parts so that it resembles a VF-25. the result so far is something I'm actually rather pleased with so far. In my mind it looks like a light valk from the same time frame and in a similar performance category as the VF-25/27 while still retaining the key parts that make the VF-4 so interesting and appealing. so without any further ado, here are the sketches so far. this would be the clean pencil version of the profile I drew initially. the idea with this is that I'm going to take it into photo shop and color it with some prototype style paint schemes. and this is the super super rough sketch of the battroid mode. ok, so couple notes on the design. first, as you can see the valk retains the semi-recessed missiles, but I had to eliminate the rear inner missiles from the legs because of space issues (with the VF-25 feet there wasn't enough room) the back part of the central fuselage is the same length and shape, but now breaks apart in different places; the part that ends up over the canopy start right after the canards, the square panel is now a sliding cover, and the head starts right after that part. also that little fin above the arm in fighter mode, originally it was going to be a fin on the head but because that looked goofy and wasn't quite in the right place anyways I decided to turn it into a type of close range melee blade weapon (think along the lines of the blade in the VF-27's shield.) so... Tell me what you guy's think, and please don't kill me...

so a Mig-29 that transforms like a VF-1? interesting, or maybe a Mig-25/31 (coolest mig ever in my opinion)

right after they shoot klaatu and Gort starts coming towards them, if you listen very closely you can here him say it. also it's "Klaatu barada nikto" with a k, get it right or we're all screwed. it sucks they cut the final speech though.

um you're thinking of the VF-11 in the OVA, Isamu caught Guld with the VF-11 after gulds freakout. then (as it's most commonly interpreted) Guld thinks about forcing Isamu's valk into the ground and the YF-21 just does it. after that Guld and Isamu go up on another test flight, with Isamu in the YF-19. then they fight and Isamu beats the crap out of Guld and then Guld pics up Isamu's gunpod and shoots him. I think in the Movie they combined the two into one incident and cut out the whole YF-21 vs. YF-19 fight. also I've always been under the impression that Guld loaded live ammo into the YF-19's gunpod because he was planing on forcing a fight with Isamu, at which point Isamu would end up shooting at him with live ammo so that it would look like Isamu tried to kill Guld and as a result be kicked from the project and probably court-martialed.

wow, you've really been missing out

it was until you dug it up...

oh yeah, almost forgot. I saw this in another thread: I think I understand why they decided to mount the legs so high up. they needed it up there for fighter mode, and in battroid mode they couldn't have it swing down like the model because it would interfere with the locking mechanism for the. there's a tiny pic right in the middle of the scanned page showing the crotch/hip area of the test shot, you can see how massive the locking mechanism is. I kind of think it's a good thing since it looks like the hip will be more secure. better than the little tab on the model anyways.

and you know this how? last I checked there had been an announcement of whether or not the super parts were going to be sold separately for the models. and looking at the model and the pictures of the prototype armor, it doesn't even look possible to mount the armor strait over the finished model like the DX. it looks like it will take a fair amount of part swapping to work.

can you do this with a v.2 1/60? I'm so doing that with my Max 1S once it comes out.

hehe... I saw that part and thought that it was funny. The "extra self Defense" capability was that the F-117 can be loaded with 1 or 2 AIM-9 sidewinder missiles, but in practice they never flew with them. and that still doesn't qualify it for the F designation. the A-10's regularly carry AIM-9's for self defense, doesn't make them fighters. I think the best explanation I ever heard for why they called it the F-117 was because when they first entered service the air force wanted only the best pilots to fly them, and those pilots wouldn't be caught dead flying something with an A designation. the real reason though is that for years before the F-117 was developed, the USAF had been acquiring and testing Soviet built aircraft. These aircraft were given the designations F-112 through F-116, which were sequential with the old Pre-1962 system (and therefor pre-institution of the the Tri-service convention) of which the various century series aircraft are part of (i.e. F-100, F-105, F-111 etc. etc.) anyways when the F-117 was introduced, rather than giving it the correct A-11 designation they decided to name it F-117 in sequence with this series of Russian aircraft, so that if someone cam across this aircraft designation somewhere, they would be more inclined to think it was soviet aircraft rather than some new stealth attack plain.

ok, I'm referring to the section that's red in your color coded guide well if you look at the fighter mode image there's one panel line that's right behind the canards, and then there's the beige colored square and just behind that are the two little dashes, and that's it. on the batroid there's the beige square and the two little dashes. but the end of that part is two short for it to match up with the line thats behind the canards in fighter mode. and then there's the head which sort of just comes out of nowhere. I think you'd need to add seems in the fallowing places (red lines) to make it work, (and the third blue line is the missing panel line from the head)

MERRY CHRISTMAS!!! holly crap, is it really only a couple days from Christmas?!? I've been so busy with school I hardly had time to notice. I don't know if I've gotten any wrapped gifts yet, haven't checked. (tree's in the upstairs room, which is cold as all hell.) I got a copy of adobe CS3 design premium around September and CoD:WaW the week it came out and that counted as my Christmas gift from my parents, also my mom was planing on giving me a few disney pins wrapped on Christmas, but so far my dad's managed to spoil every christmas gift in the house. also I ordered a Queens Blade Nanael figure for myself but considering its been in transit for 3 weeks now from HLJ I'm beginning to think the postal service lost it. if it's not here by the end of the month I'm going to contact them. anyone know how HLJ is about replacing/refunding for lost/damaged goods? :EDIT: lucky me, my figure final arrived today!

I kind of want to point out that none of the official drawings of the VF-4's fighter mode match the way the batroid mode is drawn. spacificaly the portion of the center fuselage just behind the canards. the panel lines don't match up with the corresponding parts on the batroid at all.

oh oh, almost forgot to mention this, the F/A in F/A-18 is an anachronism. the rules of the tri-service system actually says you can't have forward or back slashes in designations only numbers, letters and dashes. the hornet should actually be AF-18. (just like how the electronic warfare varient of the super hornet is the EF-18G growler) an attack aircraft is an aircraft that is designed to engage ground targets, but is smaller than a bomber and typically operates in a close air support role. the VF's are multi-roles, and while attack is in there list of mission profiles, planes that can do swing missions/switch quickly between roles tend to just use the primary mission letter so they don't have ridiculously long designations. also it's not F/A-35, it's just F-35. they dropped the /A just like they dropped the /A on the F-22 the F/A-18 is designed to attack ships, ground targets on land, and to shoot down inferior Com-block aircraft. the AV-8 is designed to take off from small ships and support Marine forces on land. the F-35A is designed to attack land targets and shoot down com-block crap, the F-35C is designed to supliment/ Replace legacy hornets in the same role and the F-35B replaces the AV-8 harrier in the same role. Batroid mode on a valk allows it to engage enemy mecha up close and on the ground. the GERWALK mode lets it act like a helicopter. and valks have the capability to attack ground/naval targets. so you could argue for it being used as an attack aircraft.

not quite. with the US tri-service, letters are added right to left, with the first letter being aircraft type. type would be things like V for VTOL, S for spaceplane, H for helocoptor, etc. etc. the next letter would be the the primary mission: F for fighter, B for bomber, C for cargo, etc. etc. then modified/secondary mission: A for attack, R for reconnaissance, E for electronic warfare etc. etc. then you get the status code: Y for prototype, N for Predominantly modified test aircraft, G for permanently grounded, etc. etc. Now here's the interesting thing, conventional fixed wing aircraft don't have a letter for aircraft type so they just skip strait to the primary mission letter. hence why all the tomcat is just F-14, and the warthog is just A-10 anything that isn't a fixed wing airplane gets a special letter, that's why helicopters have H, and the harrier in the US is AV-8. (odd thing about that, all helicopters are numbered sequentially whether there attack or cargo or transport but fixed wing aircraft get separate numbers for each mission because numbering is based on the right most letter. whats odd is that while the harrier is of the V series it's numbered sequentially from the A series) since the V in VF stands for Variable aircraft (or in the real world VTOL, which does work) the V should come before the F, since F just equals mission. if a plane were to have the designation VF using the Tri-service system, it would be a conventional fixed wing Fighter that has a secondary capability as a staff transport. (interesting combo) um no. Boeing planes are often abbreviated B-(insert number here) in the civilian sector, but in military service the sequential numbers and mission spacific letters just like everything else (the 747 in military service is designated C-18, the 727 is C-22, and the US doesn't operate 737's so there is no designation for them) the only one that uses Boeings' in house numbers is the KC-767, but the first letters still match. also where did you get the part about Boeing produced all but 2 of the USAF's bombers? sure Boeing built most of them but even if you restrict it to operational bombers only, I can still rattle off more than a half dozen off the top of my head: B-24 liberator = Consolidated; B-25 mitchell= North American; B-32 dominator = Consolidated; B-36 peacemaker = Convair; B-57 hustler = Convair; B-1 lancer = Rockwell; B-2 spirit = Northrop Grumman. OK, technically North American and Rockwell were bought out by Boeing, but since all of North American's bombers were retired before that happened, they don't count. the B-1 can go either way. :EDIT: also the YF-19/21 designations are wronge for several reasons. first since it should be FV instead of VF, it should be YV-19 for prototype variable. but because you don't drop the mission letter when naming prototypes (example: YAH-56) it should actually be YFV-19.

more like they used something that SOUNDS like american tri-service system. if they used real nominclature, they all should have been FV's with the FV standing for Fighter VTOL. (since from right to left it goes basic mission (F), then vehicle type (V)) SV-51 would mean anti-submarine warfare VTOL also the YF-19/YF-21 should have been the YFV-19 and YFV-21. and technically, since all valks are space capable the could technically be considered space planes, and therefore should either be FS-1 (for fighter spaceplane) or FVS-1 (for fighter VTOL spaceplane) which means the YF-19 is really the YFVS-19 ok, I think I like SK's system better.

I can't believe they actually included a photo of the little shopping cart wheels on the box.

damnit Jenius, you're making me want buy one. I don't even like robotech or Mospeada, heck I don't even know why I want one of these but I do now... WTF?!?

you call that stealth?!? look at those 90 degree angles, so not stealthy! and where are the chines? you can't have stealth with out chines! seriously though, not to sound rude or cold, but I honestly think Aurelin Hawk needs to grow up. what schizo said and the way he said it came off as rude, sure. but reacting to such critiques by becoming indignant and equally rude, then throwing the internet of equivalent of a hissy fit (deleting all one's post then storming off and swearing to never come back) just because someone voiced there opinions in a lest than tactful way shows a level of immaturity that (if he has any plans of pursuing art seriously or at least making it anything other than a private hobby anyways) he really needs to get past. I'm an artist, I'm studying to become a commercial artist in college right now, and I can say from experience that if you have any plans of showing you're work to other people you have to be able to take harsh criticism. when you put your work out there people are going to tell you what they think and there not always going to be nice about it. you have to learn to take criticism and make something constructive out of it, and you need to learn be the bigger person, and not let someone who's being rude get to you. I'm saying all this not to be mean, I'm saying it because it's a truth I learned the hard way and because I see this kind of stuff all too often. this isn't the first time I've told someone this, and the wurst part is that most people don't listen. the kind of people who need to here this tend to think that I'm just being a jerk like everyone else. hmm... well I'm going to get off my soapbox now and let you all get back to your normal activities.

there's a big difference between writing a letter to the national archives and having them send you photocopies of blueprints that already exist and they've got just sitting around in storage, and contacting a animation studio in another country and asking them to draw up schismatics for a ship from a show they made 25 years ago just so that one person can more accurately finish a model. if you can get a hold kazutaka miyatake and convince him to take a break from whatever real work he's doing to draw up some schetches for the part of the ship that's not shown, or even do a fully detailed schematic, that would be absolutly awesome and probebly the coolest thing ever. but it's not going to happen. :edit: OMG 666 post! this thread is now EVIL... and apparently I'm a bridge bunny now.