Nied

Actually the intentional leaks are part of the campaign. Half of these websites were found by decoding various bits of information embedded within the leaked MP3s themselves.

I made a promise David not to let this turn into a general music discussion thread so try to keep this pretty specific. Speaking of which while I agree that a marketing campaign shouldn't overshadow the work itself I'd disagree about that being the case here. One: releasing some of the music from the album is integral to the campaign (the USB keys in bathroom stalls), and two: all the material in the campaign ties into the album itself (according to Reznor it's a concept album about totalitarianism and the end of the world). Now is that pretentious? Of course it is, but this is NIN we're talking about here, every album or single is a numbered "Halo" (Year zero will be Halo 24), and every single album says "Nine Inch Nails IS Trent Reznor" pretension is just part of the experience. Besides the game is fun and interesting, I can't get upset if Trent is entertaining me with something other than music.

I just realized the RS article left out two sites. This one went up right after the academy awards. Poor Martin Scorsese, he would have gotten a second Oscar! Also NIN has three of the leaked tracks up on their myspace page.

matt26:45-46 You can see it beeing typed in as you move that section of the login box into place. It actually references a bible verse Mathew 26:45-46 in which Jesus tells his disciples he's about to be arrested, literally "Behold the hour is at hand." And yeah I got a kick out of the water thing too, shades of my sig.

So Nine Inch Nails has a new album coming out in April. Unlike other bands that might be content with a TV commercial or an add in Rolling Stone Trent Reznor has gone and created one of the most bizzare viral marketing campaigns I've ever seen. Rolling Stone actually does a pretty good rundown of the thing (Marketing campaign? Game?) here I would also watch the Year Zero trailer first (watch it at night with all the lights out to get the full effect. Also note that since that RS article was written a new website was found that suggests that what we are looking at are websites FROM THE FUTURE! (you have to say this in your best 1950's sci-fi film announcer voice) sent back in time somehow using quantum computers. This is also the only reason I think I can get away posting this in the "Anime or Science Fiction" forum. So to open this up, has anyone else been following this? What the heck is this presence thing? And is Trent Reznor brilliant, crazy, stupid or all three? *note that this thread is to discuss the whole Year Zero phenomenon, it's not a general NIN discussion thread, there's a perfectly good Music superthread in here if you want to do that.

The VF-11 stores its missiles inside the forward section of its FAST pack boosters. It hasn't been shown in an anime but according to the Macross Compendium it has underwing hardpoints to carry missiles as well. Here's a good rundown of how the VF-11 transforms:

MATS says 37 new build F-14Ds vs 18 re-builds. You might be thinking of F-14Bs, of which the majority were re-built F-14As (48 vs 38). I specifically remember reading an article in Combat Aircraft with quotes from maintainers saying the F-14D's APG-71 radar was significantly harder to keep FMC than the AWG-9 on F-14As and Bs so it's not just the systems that weren't upgraded that were a problem.

To be fair brand new Tomcats were known to be maintenance nightmares as well. The F-14D was supposed to be a hangar queen like the A and most of them were built between 1990 and 1992. I'm sure old Hornets are getting to be PITAs now that they're getting on in years but every thing I've read says the F-14 was that much worse at the same age.

Didn't notice the MZ23 references. However I thought the sector 7G reference to the Simpsons, Homer has worked in Sector 7G of the Springfield Nuclear power plant for years now. Of course it could be both.

There's actually a brief glimpse of an Alpha prototype in the "From the Stars" comic that does a decent job of bridging the stylistic gap between the two, complete with "screw" style multipurpose hook/handle vernier thrusters and a more rounded VF-1 like nose. Speaking of SC I have yet find it near me here in San Francisco. Granted I haven't been looking to hard (mostly stores near my office in the financial district), but so far I haven't seen it in two Borders, a Virgin Megastore, and CompUSA. Makes me miss the Tower Records that used to be less than a block from my apartment. Any Bay area MWers seen it in the city?

I believe the Rafale has a launch bar specifically so that it can cross deck with US carriers, though I'm having a batty of a time finding a photo to illustrate this.

I'm pretty sure the ASRAAM was designed to use the exact same rails as the Sidewinder so I don't think there's any need for different rails. Here's a good rundown of the HUG program. I'm not seeing any engine upgrades, just structural and avionics, I could have sworn I read about the RAAF buying new engines too, though it may not have been part of the HUG program. There's some good shots of ASRAAMs mounted on RAAF Hornets here. I'm sure more can be found at places like airliners.net but I'm at work so I don't have a lot of time to look them up.

Ah but it isn't a minor detail because it's telling of the internal structure of the mecha. The N-ger has a head because the pilot has his head inside it while his arms stick into the upper arms of the mecha. The Q-rau is sans head because the pilot keeps her arms inside the torso of the mecha. The EB's shoulders are way to low to have the same cockpit scheme as the Q-rau. That's exactly my point. The EB's torso doesn't taper in the front because the chest cannon has been replaced with a missile launcher. And as you yourself pointed out it's quite narrow in the center, far to narrow to use the same kind of cockpit scheme as the Q-rau which is a good indication that it isn't based on it. How the pilot sits in the mecha is a good indicator of it's internal structure and thus a good indicator of what mecha it's based on, if any. I'm sorry I'm just not seeing it. You're the one with the high quality scans, any chance you could whip up an illustration? Agreed, but stylistic similarities don't really point to structural similarities, and that's what we're discussing here. If someone (Supervision Army, Anti-UN forces or whatever) reverse engineered another mecha stylistic similarities aren't going to give you much of a clue as to what they started with. I would say that whoever built the EB started with the frame of an N-ger but then gave it an armament closer to the Q-Rau's (possibly to combat it?) which happened to give it some stylistic cues that makes it look similar. To take my Supervision Army theory further, perhaps the SA only had access to N-gers when they started building their forces, and to counter the Q-rau forces they faced during the war they fitted it with a large missile armament and an extra set of cannons making it look somewhat superficially like the mecha it was meant to face.

Also (if Mislovrit was asking specifically about RAAF legacy Hornets) the RAAF put it's F/A-18As through a similar programme which IIRC was called HUG (Hornet UpGrade). It's broadly similar to an F/A-18A+ but with some added structural strengthening and ASRAAM support.

All true although it does bear a bit of a resemblance to the pre-crash Macross as well. Like I said it's just a personal theory of mine, one which I'd be happy to give up if some real info were to come to light.

Fair enough I was going off the line art and show which have a sitting Q-Rau towering over both Zentrans and Meltrans, while a fully standing N-Ger is only a head or two taller than a Zentradi soldier. I wouldn't be surprised if Dave Deitrich pulled the 18.1m height from the same orifice he pulled the whole "Renegade power armor" back story from. In the opening of M+ it certainly doesn't look much bigger than a VF-11 which would actually make it smaller than a N-ger. Actually the N-ger has three thrusters on it's back in a right-center left configuration, the ones on the back of the EB while smaller are in nearly an identical configuration. The problem is that while the Q-rau and YF-21 are practically an upper chest with legs and arms sticking out, while the N-ger and EB both have an identifiable abdomen and pelvic areas. The fact that it has a head is far more than a minor detail, one of the defining features of the Q-rau family is how the main sensor is so deeply embedded into the front of the mecha, with the rest of the structure rising above it. The EB does exactly the opposite taking the N-ger's relatively narrow chest and adding three missile containers around the upper chest in a horizontal configuration. Actually if you look closely at the structure you can see that the EB has a relatively narrow torso with a much wider back (entirely made up of the missile containers). If you look at the top down drawings in the Miyatake design works it's more clear. There's nowhere near enough room for the pilot's arms to fit inside the chest like the do on the Q-rau, they'd have to stick them into the upper arms ala the N-Ger. Now it's my turn to do a double take. The I can clearly see three segments in the EB's arms. Further while you're right has straight hands, that actually makes it different from both the N-Ger and the Q-Rau as both have inwardly curving forearms. Other than that the big difference is that the EB has a big gun and a missile launcher jammed into it's bulged forearms, while the N-ger leaves it's blank. Those tails are more hip amour than anything else, and while they stylistically mirror the Q-rau, structurally they're completely different in that they mount from a different location and appear to be actuated (vs the Q-raus fixed tail). The N-ger actually has a similar hip armor though it's quite a bit smaller on that mecha and lacking the vernier thrusters of the EB.

The size is too small to be a Q-rau for one. Also the thruster arrangement is nearly identical to that of the N-Ger (9 thrusters in groups of three spread across the back and legs, plus one 'crotch' mounted thruster vs the Q-Rau's two back mounted thrusters). It looks to me like whoever built the Enemy battlesuit took a N-Ger, replaced the chest and back mounted cannons with missile launchers and shoved some light cannons in the forearms (which are quite close in shape to the cannonless ones on the N-ger, they even have five fingered hands instead of the Q-Rau's three fingered claws). The torso is also completely differently shaped from the Q-Rau, it has a distinct head while the Q-Rau just has a main sensor embedded into the top of the torso, it lacks the Q-rau's distinctive "tail" nor does it have the Q-rau's big shoulders (where the driver puts her arms). If you want a good candidate for the Supervision Army's version of the Quedluun-Rau look no further than the Queadluun-Quilqua. Anyhoo I don't want to derail your thread as I'm actually quite interested in getting some hard info on the "Renegade Power Armour" myself. Perhaps we can take this discussion to another thread or PM?

I always thought it looked more like a Nousjadeul-Ger myself, structurally they look closer. This isn't official but I always thought those suits were the Supervision Army's version of the Nousjadeul-Ger. A lot of the styling cues are similar to the (SA related) Varauted mecha, and it wouldn't surprise me if the SA reverse engineered the NG the same way they did the VF/A-14.

That is until it ran out of gas three minutes into the flight. I hadn't thought about that. Lightnings rivaled the US Navy for striking paint schemes in that era.

IMHO the last really good looking military aircraft from the UK (discounting the Typhoon of course) would be the Avro Vulcan. Now there was a pretty aircraft.

Or the single seat version. Honestly with the engines stacked on top of each other, the weird cheek mounted missiles, the odd overwing tanks and that bulged belly tank making it look pregnant I have never understood why so many Britons think it's a good looking airplane.

It's funny that we're basing many of our judgments on the same article in Combat Aircraft. The writers use quite a few rhetorical flourishes to make the J-10 sound like an original aircraft but when you look at the actual facts presented in the article it's pretty clear that the J-10 is just a Lavi knock off.

The Typhoon certainly isn't ugly but I wouldn't say its the prettiest aircraft in the world. IMHO the Rafale definitely wins the prize for best looking eurocanard.

If the Chinese aerospace industry were as young as say Iran's I'd agree with you. But they've been building airplanes since the '50s and they still haven't progressed beyond reverse engineering someone else's designs. They have gotten better at pretending they come up with original aircraft (they at least copy concept aircraft now), but they've never progressed to actual originality. To use your example, by the next generation of aircraft both the USA and USSR were producing wholly original designs, while the Chinese have gone through several generations of reverse engineered aircraft.

Based off of a design Mig came up with for a lightweight export aircraft called the Mig-33. It was gong to be the Soviet Union's version of the F-5 but the fall of communism killed it. Eventually the design got sold to Chengdu and viola FC-1. The Chinese slapped some bigger LERXs and some diverterless intakes on it and called it their own.