VF-1 being outdated?

[VF-1S Alpha]

As everyone knows (or if you don't know yet) our beloved VF-1 has a very "close" resemblance to the Navy fighter F-14. Okay, remember the TOP GUN Movie opening scenes? Remember Macross opening scenes? Does that bring good memories?

And as news are going now, the F-14's are being decommissioned all over the world, the latest was from Japan base and are being replaced with "newer" F-18s.

Now my point is that Kawamori really hit the spot with the "timeline" of Macross mechas (VFs), especially with the YF-19 and YF-21, and now and our real time line, we have the F-22 Raptor. So maybe, just maybe I hope that Yamato will do the Macross Plus 1/48 line...

Look for a "retired" F-14 near your aerospace museum anytime now...

And moderator, I am sorry if this is wrong topic to post!

Paulo

[Nightbat]

Maybe not the wrong topic to post but

Edited December 2, 2003 by Nightbat®

[Hurricane29]

1/48 Mac+ Valks= extremely expensive, and incredibly huge

1/60 Mac+ Valks= fair price, size of current 1/48s

[Legioss]

I'd want a 1/48 VF-19 Kai. Comes with speaker pods and a nicely sculpted Basara figure in the cockpit with his guitar. They could put in electronics so you push a button and he yells "ORE NO UTA WO KIITE!!"

[Draykov]

As everyone knows (or if you don't know yet) our beloved VF-1 has a very "close" resemblance to the Navy fighter F-14. Okay, remember the TOP GUN Movie opening scenes? Remember Macross opening scenes? Does that bring good memories?

And as news are going now, the F-14's are being decommissioned all over the world, the latest was from Japan base and are being replaced with "newer" F-18s.

Now my point is that Kawamori really hit the spot with the "timeline" of Macross mechas (VFs), especially with the YF-19 and YF-21, and now and our real time line, we have the F-22 Raptor. So maybe, just maybe I hope that Yamato will do the Macross Plus 1/48 line...

Look for a "retired" F-14 near your aerospace museum anytime now...

And moderator, I am sorry if this is wrong topic to post!

Paulo

I'm not sure where you're going with this. Military aircraft get replaced based on expense, changes in the global military mission, or when they become obsolete. I don't know what that has to do with 1/48 scale Macross Plus toys.

[Uxi]

I'm not sure where you're going with this. Military aircraft get replaced based on expense, changes in the global military mission, or when they become obsolete. I don't know what that has to do with 1/48 scale Macross Plus toys.

Eventually valks yellow, break (poor backpack hinge), and get replaced by better sculpted and more detailed larger scale new models by young buck companies?

I didn't get that from the original post, either.

[Druna Skass]

As far as VF-1 toys go I think it's about time to ease up on them and start making other VFs. I still want an Fz-109F to customize.

[vf1x]

1/48 Mac+ Valks= extremely expensive, and incredibly huge

1/60 Mac+ Valks= fair price, size of current 1/48s

yes, 1/48 mac+ valks would be enormously huge.

[imode]

1/48 Mac+ Valks= extremely expensive, and incredibly huge

1/60 Mac+ Valks= fair price, size of current 1/48s

yes, 1/48 mac+ valks would be enormously huge.

werd up to that!

[Blaine23]

Tonto confused.

The point of this thread is that because the F-14 is being decommissioned left and right (after years and years and years of service)... so Yamato should quit making VF-1 toys?

What the hell do these two things have to do with one another? Yamato will move on to making other valks... but I guarantee it'll have precious little to do with retirement of the similar real world F-14.

Yamato is making valk toys from a 20 year old anime. For fans of the show. Which is classic. Which is the point of making them, etc, etc.

I don't think Yamato and Kawamori have to keep current with today's military aircraft designs. That's never been the point of Macross and it shouldn't be.

If you're tired of the VF-1 toys, by all means quit buying them. Otherwise be patient and understand that Yamato is going to do what they think is best, not you.

[007-vf1]

Look for a "retired" F-14 near your aerospace museum anytime now...

Lucky thing I live 5 minutes away from the new Air and Space -humongous-over-the-top museum in Dulles airport in Washington DC.

[SirCampbell]

I'd want a 1/48 VF-19 Kai. Comes with speaker pods and a nicely sculpted Basara figure in the cockpit with his guitar. They could put in electronics so you push a button and he yells "ORE NO UTA WO KIITE!!"

No offense, bud. Macross 7 is kinda silly compared to the "original".

Anyway, I'm sure Yamato will start releasing others... but let's let them finish the VF-1 line. They may be outdated, but they're INCREDIBLE!!! Besides, this line is closest to actual military aircraft. Take your time Yamato (give our wallets a break), and keep the Valks steadily comin'

[SirCampbell]

Tonto confused.

The point of this thread is that because the F-14 is being decommissioned left and right (after years and years and years of service)... so Yamato should quit making VF-1 toys?

What the hell do these two things have to do with one another? Yamato will move on to making other valks... but I guarantee it'll have precious little to do with retirement of the similar real world F-14.

Yamato is making valk toys from a 20 year old anime. For fans of the show. Which is classic. Which is the point of making them, etc, etc.

I don't think Yamato and Kawamori have to keep current with today's military aircraft designs. That's never been the point of Macross and it shouldn't be.

If you're tired of the VF-1 toys, by all means quit buying them. Otherwise be patient and understand that Yamato is going to do what they think is best, not you.

Word...

[myk]

My local aerospace museum at the Miramar airfield has had an F-14 for quite some time now. As I drive by it, I dream of blasting my old high school with missiles, then following up with a few good strafing runs....

Once again, I can't help but be amused at how "tired" of the VF-1 everyone is, nor can I help but remember a few years ago when

VF-1's existed only on e-bay, destined to be owned only by the few people that were insane enough to pay outrageous prices...

It is a good time to be a Macross fan, gents.

"When you have everything, it seems like nothing....."

-Horatio/CSI

[91WhiskeyM6]

You can blame Ronald Reagan for the retirement of the F-14 Tomcat. Because of Reagan's Defense spending from 1980 to 1988(Star Wars, ICBM "Peacemaker", cruise missiles, Pershing, 600 ship fleet, M1 Abrams, M2 Bradley, B-1B excalibur, B-2A Spirit, ATF program, Ohio class SSBN subs, etc)drove the Russians broke. No Cold War, no TU-95 Bears and Blackjacks for the AIM-54C Phoenix.

[hellohikaru]

Its B-1B Lancer not Excalibur.

[David Hingtgen]

Just FYI, the B-1A is the Excalibur.

As for whiskeyM6---whoa! Everybody knows the F-14 is dead due to Cheney. No ifs ands or buts. It was like a personal vendetta of his to get rid of it, to the point of ordering the jigs to be destroyed, to ensure no more could be built, and that no spare parts could be made to keep them flying in the future. Grumman was pretty much offering new F-14D's 50% off, and the Navy was asking for them, but still Cheney ordered something to the effect of "any more requests for more F-14's from the Navy will result in reprimands for whomever asks for them". So much for carriers and their air wings having a voice... Type in "Cheney" and "F-14" and you'll get a lot of hits.

[Radd]

1/48 Mac+ Valks= extremely expensive, and incredibly huge

1/60 Mac+ Valks= fair price, size of current 1/48s

yes, 1/48 mac+ valks would be enormously huge.

werd up to that!

Huge, but certainly not as huge as some of the people in these forums seem to think. They're also not likely to be as expensive as some people seem to think they will be.

[bake_art]

As for whiskeyM6---whoa!  Everybody knows the F-14 is dead due to Cheney.  No ifs ands or buts.  It was like a personal vendetta of his to get rid of it, to the point of ordering the jigs to be destroyed, to ensure no more could be built, and that no spare parts could be made to keep them flying in the future.  Grumman was pretty much offering new F-14D's 50% off, and the Navy was asking for them, but still Cheney ordered something to the effect of "any more requests for more F-14's from the Navy will result in reprimands for whomever asks for them".  So much for carriers and their air wings having a voice...  Type in "Cheney" and "F-14" and you'll get a lot of hits.

What's up in Cheney's butt? why this seemingly personal vendetta against one of the most gorgeous looking fighter aircraft in the world (second to the VF-1 though, of course )

In fact, whatever happened to the swing-wing design, how come none of the new planes incorporate this design anymore? too costly to maintain? (I know this topic has been brought up before in the old forums, but I can't access them anymore since the old forums are offline)

Edited December 4, 2003 by bake_art

[Draykov]

What's up in Cheney's butt? why this seemingly personal vendetta against one of the most gorgeous looking fighter aircraft in the world (second to the VF-1 though, of course  )

Perhaps he's in bed with Boeing (manufacturers of the Tomcat's replacement: the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet).

[Skull-1]

The Tomcat is gone because the F-14 community resisted an air-to-ground role until it was too late. By the time the writing was on the wall it didn't matter any more. Also, the F-14 spends more time in the shop per flight hour than the Hornet, is not as efficient, and is bigger. There are other reasons....but....

The decision to axe the Tomcat was made during the Clintoon "Administration" so don't blame Cheney.

[VF-0S FAN]

Can someone post any pics of the F-18 and F-22 ?

[ewilen]

Don't know where you're getting your info from, Skull-1. Just follow David's advice and type "cheney" and "F-14" into Google to find a host of pages with the history of the decision.

[Draykov]

Can someone post any pics of the F-18 and F-22 ? 

F/A-18E

F-22

Edited December 4, 2003 by Draykov

[VF-0S FAN]

Thanks

I really prefer the F-14 ( nostalgy ? )

[bake_art]

The Tomcat is gone because the F-14 community resisted an air-to-ground role until it was too late.   By the time the writing was on the wall it didn't matter any more.

Even if the F-14 resisted the air-to-ground role the navy still requested 137 of them, but Cheney just gave them a mere handful. Also I've read somewhere that thf F-14 can be equipped for ground role as well.

Also, the F-14 spends more time in the shop per flight hour than the Hornet, is not as efficient, and is bigger.    There are other reasons....but....

Actually the F-18 has a shorter range and can carry less armaments compared to the F-14 (see this interesting article here)

   The decision to axe the Tomcat was made during the Clintoon "Administration" so don't blame Cheney.

It seems to be done for the sake of budget cuts, but why did Cheney go so far as to order the destruction of all F-14D toolings? (thereby guaranteeing no future upgrades and maintenance)

Edited December 5, 2003 by bake_art

[David Hingtgen]

The friggin F-14*A* rocked at bombing. No upgrades needed. The Black Aces beat out every A-7 and F-18 squadron in the Navy to win the best ATTACK squadron award. Take that Hornet-lovers!

The F-14D should be able to out-bomb just about anything, just there's so few they don't even compete. Big heavy plane=stable bombing platform.

F-14's already fly air-to-ground, and they're very good at it. Didn't anybody watch CNN/Fox News this March? Every VF-2 and VF-31 plane I saw was loaded with bombs, and more than once I saw them on CAS over US tanks and troops. (The best was a live-on-air tank battle, and they called in for CAS, and two Tomcats showed up in like 1 min, unswept their wings and went to work--very cool)

Finally--nowadays, the plane means little, it's all the technology strapped on. Add LANTIRN and JDAMS and you've got a pin-point bomber. You could make an F-5 more accurate than an F-111 with a few electronic pods and gizmos. Strip a Super Hornet of its targeting lenses and pods and it's no better bobming than an F-4.

F-14's can simply carry a lot more stuff and fuel, because they're way bigger with more powerful engines. It's why F-15E's are much preferred to F-16C Block 50's most of the time---more and bigger bombs. They share a lot of equipment, LANTIRN pods etc, but the F-15 is simply that much bigger and tougher.

Finally--even though the threat is much lower now, F-14's still beat the pants off of most anything else for high-speed interception. The F/A-18E is NOT a replacement for Super Tomcats in the air-to-air role.

And of course, there should be Tomcats carrying hordes of AMRAAMS--they were supposed to be the very first plane to get them in the USA. (VF-111 should have been the first to get F-14D's, with AMRAAMS--would have been the premier air-to-air squadron in the Navy at that point)

Finally (again)---yes, F-14's need as much maintenance as a steam loco. But that's no reason to kill it off, would it have been THAT hard to keep the line open for the last ones requested, and for spares to keep the others flying? I mean the A-6 line is still ok, for spare WINGS to be made! They'll fly them until they're 90....

[Coota0]

Also, the F-14 spends more time in the shop per flight hour than the Hornet, is not as efficient, and is bigger.    There are other reasons....but....

Actually the F-18 has a shorter range and can carry less armaments compared to the F-14 (see this interesting article here)

The hornet does have a shorter range, and while the takeoff weight is less, the Hornet has more hardpoints.

But my big question is what does any of that have to do with what skull-1 said?

The Tomcat does need more maintnance time per flight hour than a Hornet, and the Tomcat is bigger, and efficiany in the military is measured in turnaround time, and maintance time, I don't have aclue what you're basing your thoughts on.

And if you're basing your efficiancy idea on fuel consumption the hornet has more efficianet engines,but the Tomcat carries more fuel

Do I think we should get rid of the Tomcat? No, not without a proper replacemet. I think the same thing about the Intruder.

[Aegis!]

This topic is incredibly interesting although it´s awfully off-topic.

I still don´t understand the relationship between the F-14 being outdated and the VF-1 over production

Anyway , in regards to the VF-1 , even though most of us wanted this kind of quality toys for YEARS I still think the VF-1 is being prioritized over other valkyries while we could have plenty of variety , I mean , Macross isn´t just about the VF-1 , otherwise the sequels would be worthless and the franchise would be officially dead by now.

[Nied]

The decision to axe the Tomcat was made during the Clintoon "Administration" so don't blame Cheney.

No the decision to kill the F-14 was in fact made by Dick Cheney himself. It was also his decision to destroy the manufacturing jigs for the F-14 (ensuring that building more would be a costly afair), and he spearheaded efforts to kill the A-10 (though that was fortunetly reversed in time by the next "administration").

[bake_art]

Also, the F-14 spends more time in the shop per flight hour than the Hornet, is not as efficient, and is bigger.    There are other reasons....but....

Actually the F-18 has a shorter range and can carry less armaments compared to the F-14 (see this interesting article here)

The hornet does have a shorter range, and while the takeoff weight is less, the Hornet has more hardpoints.

But my big question is what does any of that have to do with what skull-1 said?

The Tomcat does need more maintnance time per flight hour than a Hornet, and the Tomcat is bigger, and efficiany in the military is measured in turnaround time, and maintance time, I don't have aclue what you're basing your thoughts on.

And if you're basing your efficiancy idea on fuel consumption the hornet has more efficianet engines,but the Tomcat carries more fuel

Do I think we should get rid of the Tomcat? No, not without a proper replacemet. I think the same thing about the Intruder.

hehe, it seems that my eyes decided to skip the words "spends more time in the shop per flight hour" when I was reading Skull-1's post...

I didn't know that F-14's were very maintenance hungry compared to F-18's... so Cheney's decision to kill the F-14 program is sorta more feasible now (I still don't like it though )

sad to see those beautiful babies go...

[David Hingtgen]

Older planes need more maintenance, unavoidable. 5 year-old 747-400's need less maintenance than 10-year-old 747-400's, even if built to identical specs as part of the same large order.

Also, the F-14 is simply a much older design "ease of maintenance-wise". The F-14 was the last "old-style" with the F-15 being the first "new-style". F-15's will be around for a LONG time because of that. F-14's were basically designed so that "maintenance is possible", while the F-15 is "maintenenace is quick and easy". Want to open just about any hatch to get to a component on an F-14? Undo 3 latches, get out a screw driver, undo 30 screws, and disconnect every single wire by hand. On an F-15 or F-16? Open a latch, 2 or 3 screws, and quick-disconnect the one big wire/cable bundle. 20 secs instead of 20 mins. F-15's can have an entire engine+afterburner removed and reinstalled in under 20 mins.

Of course, it's a lot cheaper to keep your maintenance-intensive F-14's than buy a bunch of new planes... (Since Navy planes need constant maintenance anyways, due to the environment---paint and primer, 24/7). Also, F-14D's are a lot better than A's, new reliable engines, new reliable electronics, etc.

[Draykov]

I mean the A-6 line is still ok, for spare WINGS to be made! They'll fly them until they're 90....

I was under the impression that all variants of the A-6, save the EA-6B, were retired and replaced by Hornets.

Edited December 5, 2003 by Draykov

[David Hingtgen]

EA-6 will be around for a little while longer. My main point is--they're much older than Tomcats, and have been out of production for a long time. But the lines/jigs are still ok, to make new parts. And literally, new wings, since they wear out after 35 years...

But Cheney ordered the F-14 jigs destroyed, to specifically prevent new parts. That's just unheard of. You never destroy the jigs, not until the design is so old nobody would need parts/the manufacturer can't support it. F-4 jigs are gone, but most everything else newer is still around. I think you can still get C-2/E-2 parts for example. But 1990+ build F-14's could fly for 20 more years, if they had parts. So instead of the Navy being able to fly planes for decades and get their money's worth, they'll be forced to scrap relatively new, modern planes (newer than the F-16C and F-15E for example) as soon as they run out of parts.

I mean, think of it this way: Buy a new 2004 car. Then, in 2005, the manufacturer stops supporting it (not because they want to, they've got orders for many more--but Cheney says no)---so no parts, no repairs, nothing. Just what's left at the dealership's warehouse. You're pretty screwed if something happens to it, and out of a lot of money. And your only option is to buy a new car that costs twice as much. It may be better in some ways like fuel economy and trunk space, but it's smaller and not nearly as fast, with less power. That's the F-14D vs F-18E story. F-14D's are pretty new and in good shape generally. But there's no parts available, and major repairs can't be done (since you generally need to send back to the factory for anything really serious). Many squadrons which had switched to F-14B/D's had to switch back to A's because there weren't enough parts available to keep them flying. (A's were made for 20 years, plenty of spare parts for a while back then--but the B and D were killed off as soon as they started making them). So D's were restricted to like 1 squadron per 2 wings, to ensure enough parts to keep a fully operation squadron at all times, rather than multiple squadrons with half their planes out of service wanting parts.

[Draykov]

My main point is--they're much older than Tomcats, and have been out of production for a long time. But the lines/jigs are still ok, to make new parts.

Gotcha.

This is pretty interesting for those interesed in the fate of the F-14 (though, it's nearly 4 years old).

Edited December 5, 2003 by Draykov