Chronocidal

The demo should be coming out sometime this week for PC and PS3, I dunno why the Xbox version came out first. I am looking forward to the PC demo still though, maybe it'll have files I can tweak a bit.

Just finished up the YF-19, the wings/tails/canards were a royal pain. Not only did many of those pieces have tabs too small to fold decently, a couple wanted me to fold the parts into shapes that were physically impossible (especially the canards). I had to modify a lot of tabs to make the assembly possible, and to be honest.. I know the wings are airfoil shaped, but for something the size of the canards, just a double thick layer of paper would've done much better. I squashed em pretty much flat trying to glue those miniscule tabs anyway. But anywho, it's done, and it makes a very nice model. I don't have a 1/60 Yammie to compare to, but it's roughly a foot long, and almost the exact same proportions as the Hasegawa aircraft kit. I'm really only disappointed with a couple of bits on it.. mainly the way the main fuselage attaches to the legs. There's a HUGE gap between the shoulders and the lower legs, and no matter how I tried to warp the body, I couldn't close that gap. I'm guessing it's probably a side effect of the thickness of the paper, but there were some serious issues with the underside, so I don't know. Anyhow, here's some final assembly pics for fun. I'll probably do the VF-11 next, then tackle that monster of a YF-21 he made. The VF-11 should be a walk in the park after this one

I'm gonna have to go with the "stupidest idea ever" party. Yes, the idea of turning the g-limiters off in an aircraft is cool (and actually rather realistic, since most aircraft these days have those systems, and you need overrides to perform certain maneuvers). But the implementation sucks beyond measure. Overall, the game was very AC like, and after reading the aircraft list, I was pretty much convinced that I'm going to buy the PC version (YF-17 and YF-23? I'm there ). Playing the Xbox demo tho, I'm not so sure anymore. It really depends. On the plus side, the graphics look pretty much up to par with AC6, and I do appreciate the aircraft selection (which was an utter disappointment in AC6). They do need to get their aircraft designations right tho, their F-16A is actually a C model. On the other hand tho, I think this game tries way too hard to cater to non-flight sim people. Face it, it's a niche you're not going to attract people to easily, and the more you try, the worse the game is going to get. Now.. ooh, limiter mode, you will kill this game in sooo many ways if left the way you are. After playing the demo, I went to the Ubi forum about this game, and there's already an extremely heated debate brewing over why you can't use the cockpit view (or any other view for that matter) with the limiter off. I registered just to vote in the poll/petition they have going. I could rant and rave all day about this thing. While the mode is a useful concept, they need a boot to the head about how air combat works. The viewpoint in that mode is beyond worthless. Generally, when I'm flying a plane, I like to see what's ahead of me. It's kind of a useful thing, especially when lining up a gun shot, or trying to get a target lock. I got so frustrated with the training mission, I almost chucked my controller thru the screen. There's one thing that view is good for, and it's evading. What worries me the most about this mode is the effect it'll have on multiplayer. It basically reduces air combat to flipping around the sky as fast as you can, and spamming missiles everywhere hoping to hit something. The people who actually care about aiming, and use the cockpit view, will get screwed over because they won't be able to keep up. If the view remains as is, I seriously doubt I'll ever bother with multiplayer, and then, I may as well just go back to AC. Now, I can see the reason that they limited the views the way they did. Lets face it, if you let people use cockpit view with the limiters off, everyone would fly that way, all the time. It's like they're trying to throw some sort of strategic decision in here, making people choose between being able to evade, and being able to attack effectively. Flipping between modes fast may give you an advantage, provided you don't get completely disoriented by the view swapping. It makes a weird demented sort of sense in that way. But by doing all this, they're throwing in an artificial limitation that looks like it's specifically aimed at leveling the playing field, just to give people who don't know how to play air combat games an advantage. Just face it Ubi.. if someone is actually playing this game, it's because he already knows how to play these games, and your artificial limits are going to make him want to slap the developers. I guess my only real hope in all this is that they might implement modes for multiplayer that don't allow the limiters to be turned off, forcing everyone to fly the hard (real) way. Those Su-47 aces at the end of the first mission weren't hard at all with proper throttle control (btw, I'm pretty sure it is still possible to stall the plane with the limiters on), and if the game can be fully played without touching the no-limiter mode, I'll probably get it. My final hope against hope is that the PC version will actually be able to be modded. Perhaps someone will figure out how to allow the views to switch, and let people fly relatively realistically, or even add more aircraft or missions to the game. I'd love to be able to patch in a bunch of VFs, and fly them around. The game already has thrust vectoring, multi-missiles, and VTOL capability implemented. I can easily see that turning into a working VF with gerwalk mode.

ahh, didn't know there was a demo out, will have to check it out. Anyway, back to the regularly scheduled topic

*nods* Agreed.. Although, I still prefer all the previous AC games to 6 (stupid expensive DLC for that game just ruined it for me). The graphics in that are just beautiful though, comes with being a next-gen console game. HAWX does have 2 advantages to me though, mainly aircraft selection (AC6's blew chunks compared with the previous AC games) and the fact that there's a PC version, so I can use my HOTAS/pedals. Also, there's the hope that it'll be hacked to bits by the game community, and modded like crazy (it's got a Harrier, all we gotta do is use that as a base for a VF with gerwalk included ) That model's really turning out nice.. I wish I had a good set of plan views of the VF-25 though, any chance you can render some orthographic top/side/bottom/front/back views when it's done? Btw, I don't think you mentioned it, but which program are you building this in? If it's 3DS Max, I know a few tweaks to get it to run better system-wise. Polygons rarely produce much load, it's the more complex stuff like splines that really bog the system down for me. Well, that, and I tend to draw my base textures in 2048*2048 resolution.

Well, just a warning, 80k is pretty standard for stuff like MS Flight Sim now, but you won't find stuff like that in combat sims. MSFS only has one important plane on screen at a time really, so that one plane can be incredibly detailed. Combat sims aren't so forgiving, usually sticking in the 20k-30k range I think.. maybe even less, depending on whether they're meant for online play. The models in that new HAWX game don't look nearly that detailed.

Awww, but I want another scout craft Far as I remember the Sky Raven didn't come with it, and I don't know if they removed the mount. If they didn't remove it though, I could always use the old scout from my Crusader shuttle on it.

As nice as those would be, I doubt we'll ever see anything that matches the quality/accuracy of the F-22. That plane just has an abnormally ginormous cockpit, which is the only reason a regular figure will fit in there. Pretty much anything else is probably going to get giant bulbous cockpit syndrome to fit a figure. If they can pull off a decent F-14 I'll be waiting to buy a fleet tho. One question about the new raven... the pics a while back had some sort of wire plugged into the back of the plane. Any idea what this is? If they ran out of room for batteries, and had to make it plug into a wall outlet, I'm gonna die laughing.

Ok, I might be in trouble now, that ARC-170 looks good, espcially in that paintscheme. That thing must be huge though.

*nods in agreement* While they look absolutely cool if done right, some people fail to realize the difference between real life objects and computer polygons, and just start churning out paper versions of computer models without checking to see whether they're possible. Just because it looks cool in the computer doesn't mean it'll even be possible to build in real life. The YF-19 I'm working on comes very close to being impossible in some areas, mainly from a few tabs the size of a needle, and a couple of folds that make triangles about a millimeter wide, and 2 inches long. These types of shapes work great in a computer, but they're very hard to fold.

Holy crap, a 1/12 scale VF-1? As cool as that would be, I dunno where I'd put it And yeah, I agree, I want some of those fancy Ace Combat designs done. Really, part of the "beauty" of these designs is that there actually are no curves. Since they're based on computer models, everything is flat. It limits how good the model can be (especially since on the YF-19 there are several incredibly narrow folds that defy the physical properties of paper), but it also means if things are folded right, there's only one way for the surface contours to go. I see what you mean about the VF-11 though, I'm not familiar with it either, and looking at it now, it is tough to know where everything goes. The way he built the intakes is definitely a sticky part, since he didn't make the edges flush with the bottom of the wing. That, combined with the way the fuselage goes together actually makes the YF-19 look simple by comparison. The 19 is all modular, with the legs, arms, etc all being individual assemblies. The 11 looks like it has all those parts integrated into one big tube for the main body. Part of the difference may be the source material, since the YF-19 and YF-21 look like they're based directly off the Hasegawa kits, while the VF-11 is based off of who knows which version. Once I get the YF-19 done, I might try the VF-11 as well, so I may try and photo the assembly process. Btw, if you read the development blog on that site, you'll see he's got a few more Macross projects in the works.

Heh.. I love coincidences like this. My office has just been going through a random papercraft fad, mostly simple box caricatures and the like. Me, being the aircraft nut, built a couple of Ojimak's planes, then stumbled onto the YF-19 and YF-21. After my first iteration on copy paper failed, I went and bought some 65 lb stock, and tried again. So far, this one's been going well, I've got a couple of pics up of the progress on both tries. First off, the diagrams. From what I've tried, I believe the light blue lines are valley folds (crease away from you) and the dark blue are mountain folds (crease toward you). That should help a little. The biggest drawback is that the instructions don't actually show the tabs, or where they go, so that takes some experimentation. Some tabs are actually a bit too big for the areas they're meant to go into, so they may need trimming down. For folds, I generally hold the piece up to a light, and fold it over a metal ruler to get a sharp edge. Most folds I'll only lightly crease, since that's usually all you need, unless you really need a sharp corner. Remember, these models are made out of computer polygon models, and any quad face and be made 2 unique ways, with opposing triangles. Many of the creases are meant only to help the quad faces bend the correct way to make the desired shape. What really takes the most practice here is figuring out the proper order to do things in. Making things in an order that allows you access to the interior of the model until the last possible moment is crucial. The VF-11 seems to have the same sort of nose structure as the YF-19, a set of rings. I actually found the most useful way to build the nose is one piece at a time, alternating top and bottom. Build the very front of the nose first, and then add either the next top or bottom piece alternatively. This way, you can press down on the tabs on the inside of each as you glue, and if you let the previous structure dry well, it will give you a solid construction to glue new pieces onto. It's also easier to fit the pieces together this way, since you don't have to line up the tabs from one whole ring on the inside of the previous piece. The real key is to not glue anything to the outside of a sealed box. If you have to press something down on the outside of a closed form, you'll probably crush it. So, it takes a lot of thinking ahead. Now, if you really want to strengthen things later, you can spread a thin layer of glue over the whole model, or at least key structures. I did this with one of Ojimak's flying models, and coated the entire nose in glue after it was done. For stationary models this isn't such a big deal, but if you plan to fly them, they can crush VERY easily if they crash. One thing about paper I found out from experience: the YF-19 WILL work with standard copy paper, but only just barely. To be honest, with the YF-19, thin paper can be a blessing in some areas, because there are many layers of paper going together, and since these are based off computer polygon models, thickness is NOT taken into account in the design. My first version was actually closer to 1/72 than 1/60, since it was printed using an option to fit to the printable area of the paper. The smaller size may have helped. The rear fuselage on the YF-19 is very complicated, and can be tricky to put together if you don't crease the paper in the right places. I didn't crease the fuselage pieces enough on my first one, and though it's okay, it's a bit warped, because without the creases, the paper decided to bend where it wanted to, in the direction it wanted to. That's why my second version has every crease made very carefully. One last thing that isn't really necessary, but helped me a lot with the more complicated pieces: a hobby knife. I did the first version with scissors at my office, and while it worked, it wasn't great. The new version I've been cutting out entirely with an Exacto knife, and it's helped to keep the pieces very cleanly cut. K, for the pics The one with the nose already attached is the first one I tried. In order to attach it, you have to glue the rear portion of the nose tube to the top of the main body. On my first one, I built the whole nose first, and holding the nose down to it crushed the body. On the new one, I glued that rear portion to the upper body panel before I even built the body. The bottom view shows the difference good creases make. On the first one, I didn't crease the bottom, and when I tried to attach everything, it warped. I wound up having to slit two seams with a knife, and retape them in order to make a shaping crease. The bottom of the new one though is nice and even. Edit: Holy crap, I just realized how much I wrote. Sorry for the length, but I hope it's useful info.

Oh come on... I don't need any more big X-Wings.. and sheesh, does that mean this one comes with a figure and an astromech AND LADDERS?? *sighs* Oh well.. time to make more room on my shelf then. Btw.. anyone happen to have any spare FX-style X-Wing nose cones they'd be willing to sell? I hate the stupid child-proofed "flew into a wall" nosecone they started putting on these. "Oh no, the long stabbity guns are no problem, we've added a little blunt bit to the ends. But that chiseled rubber nosecone is just too dangerous to be left alone."

Well.. to be honest, I can deal with the handle a lot better than I can with the design. Please, someone tell me that they didn't make the fuselage into a pump action missile launcher, because that's what it looks like. And, apparently someone's gotten "cool boxy spaceship" mixed up with "fast aircraft." While I know I would've loved this years ago (seriously, 12 missiles? I would've loved to have that much ammo as a kid), I miss the resemblance the original had to an actual aircraft. Whoever decided that "intake lights" were a cool feature needs to get up close and personal to some real jet intakes in operation. Btw, is it just me, or did someone just.. well, forget the rotor blades on that gunship? I mean, ok, it could be a hovercraft.. but the stub of what could've been a propeller just makes it look like someone decided, "Nah, in the future, helicopters will have invisible propellers."

Holy crap that was epic. Best Macross montage I've ever seen, hands down.

That looks good. I think if I ever get enough kits, I may customize one into a VF-24, just for the heck of it. I love delta designs. As for the dihedral, I'm pretty sure it's just an artifact of the fact that you have to build the kit yourself, and if parts don't fit perfectly, the wings are going to bump against the legs, and not fold entirely flat. I think even the DX version has this to a degree. I've only seen a few shots of kits that the wings were flat on, and they were EXTENSIVELY detailed, meaning the builders probably were perfectionists to an extent, and may have modified parts to get them to fit that way.

Well, dunno how many of you have ever bought any of the large B-Wing releases, but I decided not to pass on it this time (though I would have preferred the original markings, the red Dagger squad paint isn't bad at all). It was a bit expensive compared to the X-Wings and A-Wing I have, but oh well. Since it's still the old ROTJ mold from the 80's, and I've never owned one before, I can't say for certain what's new and what isn't, but I'm fairly sure they've given this ship the same cockpit treatment that they did the new A-Wing, if it wasn't that way already. The adjustable control handles are a nice touch, and the painted/molded details in the cockpit look good. What I thought is really interesting with this one is the interchangeable guns for the wings. Unless I'm mistaken, the original always had the plain movie-styled guns, so that's probably nothing new. But the addition of the alternate missile launchers is a nice touch, not for the missile launchers (while they do look rather cool as guns, the launcher springs suck like a hoover), but for the fact that they actually took the time and effort to cater to both the collectors and the kids. I'm really just glad they didn't replace the normal guns outright. Functionality is pretty simple and effective, the cockpit rotates very smoothly, landing gear work well, and the wing mechanism is nearly flawless (doesn't quite reach 90 degrees) and rock solid, unlike the goofy s-foil mechanism in the large X-Wings. The pilot is nicely done as well, very detailed/posable, and came with a small sidearm blaster. If I can find my camera soon, I'll put up a few close ups if anyone's interested. My biggest annoyance with Hasbro recently is their lack of understanding in how things should be packaged. The last couple SW ships I've gotten have been rubber-banded and twist-tied to death. This wouldn't be such an issue on it's own.. it's just that they always manage to wrap bands around the soft parts of the ships. Long pointy things like gun barrels are always made with soft vinyl now, and Hasbro needs to have it beaten into their heads that long bendable objects are not things you want to use as tie-down points. The barrels on the B-Wing are only slightly stressed on the cockpit, and not too deformed fortunately, but my EpIII Obi Wan fighter was not so lucky. The rubber bands around the guns on that bent them completely out of shape.

Btw, I don't think the wings are actually supposed to have any dihedral.. I don't remember seeing it in the series at all (though I could be entirely wrong here), it always seems to appear on the toys and kits though. Seems like no one can ever get the wings fully level, and it's always bugged me.

I've had it in mind to actually piece together a decent top/side view from the pics in the bandai kit directions.. there are several orthographic projection bits in there for various parts, and they could probably all be assembled into a schematic, given enough work. Personally, I'm really missing having a Hasegawa kit of this now. Their kit diagrams were always a rock solid reference for VF CG models.

Oh man.. I actually hadn't seen that B-wing before... *resists urge to order instantly*.... *fails*

You thinking Roy's TV uniform? If so, I think it's just Hikaru's with gray instead of white, and blue instead of red, with black trim. There may be yellow, but I can't remember where it might be.

If you're not scared to take apart the A-wing, I found a quick fix for the floppy canopy and gear. The gear are held in place when up or down (kind of a ratcheting action) by little "teeth" that are screwed into the bottom of the ship. If you tighten those up a bit, the gear are harder to move up and down, but they also don't droop. The canopy I fixed by wrapping a small rubber band around the internal part of the sliding bump.. there's actually a nice notch carved out of that part on mine. The band keeps a bit of tension on the canopy when closed, because it presses up a little on the canopy's sliding peg.

Just noticed, the SMS patch isn't really wrong, it's just rotated. Spin it around so the M is on the bottom, and it'll look a lot better.

Huh.. I always just thought it was a problem with miscommunication, and someone misheard "T-Wing" as "B-Wing".

Off topic completely, but you don't know how long I've wanted someone to register as "KlanForever" and use a Misa avatar And yes, that is an awesome Misa VF. *simultaneous drool/nosebleed*