Jump to content

AVF Upgrade Candidates


Valkyrie Driver
 Share

Recommended Posts

The VF-22HG has limitations on its FF-2450C while in space (could be assumed that the same issue as the B model)

There's no mention of any kind of performance limitation on the VF-22HG's engines... virtually all VF's from Macross Plus onward have had their engine thrust cited as "maximum instantaneous thrust in space".

Considering that other than the YF-19, no other of that series uses the FF-2200B turbine or had reported cooliant issues.

The A & P variants use the lower output FF-2200, with none of the issues that the YF-19 had with the B model.

My point is that there's no mention of the cooling limitations the FF-2450B had in the craft that use the FF-2450C... you jumped to a conclusion based on a false premise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All told, the usage of destroids is somewhat unusual... most destroids were retired and sold off as construction equipment, or found their way to less dignified positions as target practice. Drones and cost-leader VF's like the Nightmare Plus were the rule. Frontier used the AIF-7S/QF-4000 and VF-171 jointly as their main fighters.

Destroids are really cool though. Sure they don't transform, but why does a mobile gun platform/walking tank need to?

Considering the debacle the VF-19 and VF-22 turned into, most of the emigrant worlds and fleets were probably chucking a little at the folly of the core forces, splurging on Shinsei and General Galaxy's unstable superstars before bowing to the inevitable with the Nightmare Plus.

As far as the UN Forces' potentially running away with itself, that's why after Latence's attempted coup, the government instituted a new watchdog agency to prevent exactly that... and then reorganized the military anyway to put it on a shorter leash.

What the source for this? Anything that can readily be found in English?

Well, considering this logically (sometimes counter-productive with fictional settings);

  • The FF-2450B of the YF-21/VF-22/22S had turbine limitations in space due to not having the cooling while in atmophere (& potential of melting the reactor core).
  • The VF-22HG has limitations on its FF-2450C while in space (could be assumed that the same issue as the B model)
  • Excessive heat in a thermonuclear reactors is usually not a good thing (causing melt-down or explosions)
  • The VF-9 seems to have less potential in its frame for the coolant loops to service, hence higher temptures are reached faster (& more chance of Boom!).

So, yeah, I think it is a default internally of the (FF-2450) turbine series.

Considering that other than the YF-19, no other of that series uses the FF-2200B turbine or had reported cooliant issues.

The A & P variants use the lower output FF-2200, with none of the issues that the YF-19 had with the B model.

The engine issues are most likely to be resulting from a loss of containment, that's more likely the cause.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Destroids are really cool though. Sure they don't transform, but why does a mobile gun platform/walking tank need to?

Well... mobility is king on the battlefields of Macross... that's why the destroids tend to get mulched by anything with the mobility of a VF. That, plus the cheaper alternative of building stationary gun emplacements on a ship's hull, are why destroids kind of saw their tactical relevance wane after the first space war.

What the source for this? Anything that can readily be found in English?

A little from Otona Anime #9, a little from Macross Chronicle, Macross VF-X2, etc. Mariafokina Barnrose was the one behind the watchdog agency, having been the orchestrating authority behind opposition to Latence prior to 2051. The Barnrose Authority gets a nod in the Macross Frontier novelization too.

The engine issues are most likely to be resulting from a loss of containment, that's more likely the cause.

There are other potential explanations... like cooking off the fuel tanks, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am trying to get away from the turbines for a moment and thought of something.

Both the VF-19 & VF-22 series lack a second seat that would be needed for quick/surprise 'rescue' operation that was supposedly a goal for Project Supernova (other than first strtike an 'enemy' operations area that is).

Sure, the YF-19 has the option for accomodating a passenger in a rear rumble ejection seat, though this is not mentioned for any other of the 19 series.

And I would like to know were s second person (other than lap) can fit in a VF-22.

Seems like that oversight was finally corrected in the AVF with the VF-25, VF-27 & YF-29 (YF-30 is back to being for single operator only).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Both the VF-19 & VF-22 series lack a second seat that would be needed for quick/surprise 'rescue' operation that was supposedly a goal for Project Supernova (other than first strtike an 'enemy' operations area that is).

There are tandem cockpit variants of the VF-19, and Master File also has a transport version of the VF-19 with no battroid mode that seats like six people. It should also be possible to fit a jump seat to the VF-19 1st mass production type.

And I would like to know were s second person (other than lap) can fit in a VF-22.

Based on the line art and VF-22 Master File, it doesn't appear that there's enough room to fit a duffel bag behind the pilot's seat... let alone a human.

Seems like that oversight was finally corrected in the AVF with the VF-25, VF-27 & YF-29 (YF-30 is back to being for single operator only).

The YF-30's cockpit is pretty much identical to that of the other 5th Generation VFs, so it's a pretty safe bet that it has the same covered jump seat arrangement that the VF-25 had.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are tandem cockpit variants of the VF-19, and Master File also has a transport version of the VF-19 with no battroid mode that seats like six people. It should also be possible to fit a jump seat to the VF-19 1st mass production type.

Okay the first production series (and even mokey models) to me look like the rumble seat could bee added, and the tandem I can see too....

Though a six seater that can only do Fighter/GERWALK modes? LOL

I do not know why I could see isamu taking a bunch of rookies out in said and the ones that don't puke during the flight he would have as his wingmen!

Edited by GuardianGrey
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well... mobility is king on the battlefields of Macross... that's why the destroids tend to get mulched by anything with the mobility of a VF. That, plus the cheaper alternative of building stationary gun emplacements on a ship's hull, are why destroids kind of saw their tactical relevance wane after the first space war.

I'd think that the Fleet's militia would have some destroids to fight off enemies, like when the Varauta invaded city 7, or when the Vajra got inside Frontier Island 1. I get that mobility is important but so is establishing a sufficient base of fire. There's a reason why infantry teams are built around the machine gun. You've got to have something that can quickly establish fire dominance over the enemy, unless that's what the Armor Packs are supposed to do.

There are other potential explanations... like cooking off the fuel tanks, etc.

Yeah, if engine heat is used to assist in expanding the hydrogen slush as I suggested a while back, it's possible that the engine could produce enough heat to cause explosive expansion in such a chamber, or it could be a containment breach, either option resulting in secondaries as the fuel tanks rupture and explode. I mean, we liked to use API ammo in the M2 machine guns in fighters during WW2, so that a fuel tank hit would cause secondaries.

Both the VF-19 & VF-22 series lack a second seat that would be needed for quick/surprise 'rescue' operation that was supposedly a goal for Project Supernova (other than first strtike an 'enemy' operations area that is).

There are tandem cockpit variants of the VF-19, and Master File also has a transport version of the VF-19 with no battroid mode that seats like six people. It should also be possible to fit a jump seat to the VF-19 1st mass production type.

I can't read Japanese, but the pictures in the Master file book seem to indicate that the Canopy was changed to a more traditional rear hinged configuration with the A model onward, meaning that getting a person into that area would be exceedingly difficult. I would also think that getting them in in a hurry as with a hostage rescue would be difficult. I'd think you'd more likely see the transformation limited version being brought in under A/B/C/D model air cover. Or B/D models would be used for that.

Seems like that oversight was finally corrected in the AVF with the VF-25, VF-27 & YF-29 (YF-30 is back to being for single operator only).

The YF-30's cockpit is pretty much identical to that of the other 5th Generation VFs, so it's a pretty safe bet that it has the same covered jump seat arrangement that the VF-25 had.

Either it was intended to have the second seat, and we just never saw it used, or more likely, since I believe the YF-30 was really done as a technology demonstrator it was never built with the second seat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reason for the YF-30 is clearly stated in-game and there are online translations and resources such as google at peoples fingertips as well.
Alternatively, one can always ask about the reason before pulling some new ill-thought out conjecture from their butts.

Why the hell people must make unsubstantiated guesses with no reason is beyond me. This isnt a goddamn Ro####ch RPG for chrissakes.

Conjecture should only be the last resort after all existing information has been examined.

/rant

Edited by Tochiro
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay the first production series (and even mokey models) to me look like the rumble seat could bee added, and the tandem I can see too....

Though a six seater that can only do Fighter/GERWALK modes? LOL

I do not know why I could see isamu taking a bunch of rookies out in said and the ones that don't puke during the flight he would have as his wingmen!

There are a lot of... unusual... variants in the VF-19 Master File.

The "VIP-calibur" is actually one of the less insane ones.

I'd think that the Fleet's militia would have some destroids to fight off enemies, like when the Varauta invaded city 7, or when the Vajra got inside Frontier Island 1. I get that mobility is important but so is establishing a sufficient base of fire.

For most purposes, a VF is perfectly adept at doing that... as seen in Macross Frontier, Macross 7, etc.. By the 2040's, the destroids were largely antiques and the only thing similar belonged to the civilian authorities.

The reason for the YF-30 is clearly stated in-game and there are online translations and resources such as google at peoples fingertips as well.

Why the hell people must make unsubstantiated guesses with no reason is beyond me. This isnt a goddamn Robotech RPG for chrissakes.

/rant

In their defense, very few of us on this site have a working grasp of Japanese or the patience to wade through something as appallingly unintelligible as the engrish spat out by Babelfish or Google Translate.

(It probably doesn't help that Macross Chronicle's YF-30 mechanic sheet doesn't actually talk about the reason for the YF-30 being made... only about its design.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seto - oh I understand that and agree completely.

And heck, I can think of 3 or 4 ppl in these forums who have also played the game and could provide said information quite happily if asked.

If asked.

My issue is with the irresponsible ass-backwards nature of the way some conjectures are being thrown out there. We all know how often unsubstantiated conjecture often gets mistaken as fact by others at some point or another further down the track. That's the way the internet works and it's especially applicable to Macross.

We have all experienced this sort of thing in the past and one would think that, as a result, most people would realize that the responsible course of action is to ask first, as opposed to throwing out baseless conjecture first and expecting people to correct their mistakes (I for one, appreciate all your hard work doing as much but not all of us have the time or patience that you do).

But either way, this foolishness has ground my gears the wrong way far too much for now and I don't want to derail this thread any further so I'm out.

I'm going back to putting together news stories while waiting for embargoes to lift, hoping that when I do post news and articles in the future they will actually be used and enjoyed by those who enjoy facts and reality, rather than spending all day wasting time on baseless speculation.

Tochiro out.

Edited by Tochiro
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as a hostage rescue Valk goes... just make sure it moves fast in battroid and GERWALK modes and carry the rescuee out in a trash can in your robohand.

If you're feeling ambitious, a padded trash can like the zentradi used to install spies aboard enemy vessels.

See, we don't need a second seat at all! :p

Hm... that maybe true & I used the wrong terminology.

Though be it an atomic (fission) or hydrogen (fusion) bomb, the result is that both go 'big badah BOOM!'

Same could be said of reactors going into uncontrolled chain reactions due to excessive heat build-up.

No worries. Just doing my part to raise awareness of the differences between fission and fusion.

Also, fusion doesn't really have chain reactions, controlled or otherwise. It's a lot harder to make a large atom split into two smaller atoms than it is two make two small atoms combine into a larger one.

Fusion reactions take a lot of energy to start(enough so that every real-world fusion bomb ever made uses a fission bomb as the detonator), and don't want to continue. It's the biggest problem facing real-world attempts to build a fusion power generator. On the upside, it also makes fusion reactors much safer.

The stars keep burning because they're utterly massive. With enough weight, anything will fuse. No fancy chain reactions required.

A fusion reactor is far different than a fission one, even though they're both "nuclear power."

Think of a fusion reactor as a jar full of REALLY HOT fire(and now all atomic physicists in the area are sobbing quietly).

If you stop feeding fuel into the fire, it uses up all the available fuel and burns out fast.

Edited by JB0
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reason for the YF-30 is clearly stated in-game and there are online translations and resources such as google at peoples fingertips as well.

Alternatively, one can always ask about the reason before pulling some new ill-thought out conjecture from their butts.

Why the hell people must make unsubstantiated guesses with no reason is beyond me. This isnt a goddamn Ro####ch RPG for chrissakes.

Conjecture should only be the last resort after all existing information has been examined.

/rant

So, wild conjecture in a thread that is itself wild conjecture, is inappropriate? Duly noted. Was it my Comment about the YF-30's purpose and the statement about the second seat that set you off? Because I'm pretty sure we discussed the YF-30's purpose a few pages back, and I'm pretty sure that's what the info we had was.

Now, I'm not going to apologize for not being able to read/write/understand Japanese, I wan't born there, I've never lived there, and learning Japanese is difficult through a computer, much less when technical jargon is involved. None of us are perfect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, some of the existing info is ridiculously hard to find. That's why we're lucky to have Gubaba and Seto around. Please remember, you have access to info most of the rest of us don't even know exists. Please be patient.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, some of the existing info is ridiculously hard to find. That's why we're lucky to have Gubaba and Seto around. Please remember, you have access to info most of the rest of us don't even know exists. Please be patient.

Agreed.

So let's just continue with our discussion.

As far as a hostage rescue Valk goes... just make sure it moves fast in battroid and GERWALK modes and carry the rescuee out in a trash can in your robohand.

If you're feeling ambitious, a padded trash can like the zentradi used to install spies aboard enemy vessels.

See, we don't need a second seat at all! :p

No worries. Just doing my part to raise awareness of the differences between fission and fusion.

Also, fusion doesn't really have chain reactions, controlled or otherwise. It's a lot harder to make a large atom split into two smaller atoms than it is two make two small atoms combine into a larger one.

Fusion reactions take a lot of energy to start(enough so that every real-world fusion bomb ever made uses a fission bomb as the detonator), and don't want to continue. It's the biggest problem facing real-world attempts to build a fusion power generator. On the upside, it also makes fusion reactors much safer.

The stars keep burning because they're utterly massive. With enough weight, anything will fuse. No fancy chain reactions required.

A fusion reactor is far different than a fission one, even though they're both "nuclear power."

Think of a fusion reactor as a jar full of REALLY HOT fire(and now all atomic physicists in the area are sobbing quietly).

If you stop feeding fuel into the fire, it uses up all the available fuel and burns out fast.

Your last statement also describes a jet engine too (all internal combustion engines really). So basically what we're doing is using superheated and ionized gas (plasma as resulting from fusion) to heat air that gets sucked in through the turbine blades (in atmosphere), and essentially superheat and ionize said incoming air to eject it out the back end of the turbine. While in space we're just using a magnetic field to squirt the plasma out the back. That seems like a really inefficient way to go about doing this, when you could just "burn" plasma all the time. It also seems like it would be more fuel efficient in atmo than in space, since you don't have to exhaust the plasma in atmo. Which means you could essentially just reclaim the "waste material" (the helium atoms, neutrons and electrons) to re use and recombine to replenish your fuel supply, through a separate fission system. Unless the "burner cans" are performing both fusion and fission at the same time, fusing Hydrogen atoms to get helium and fissing (that's probably not even the right word) the helium atoms to get back to hydrogen.

If I'm not mistaken that's sort of how the sun does it. The heavier helium sinks and undergoes fission becoming hydrogen which then rises to undergo fusion (I might be very wrong, my knowledge of astronomy, astrophysics, nuclear chemistry, and nuclear physics is practically nonexistent).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seto - oh I understand that and agree completely.

And heck, I can think of 3 or 4 ppl in these forums who have also played the game and could provide said information quite happily if asked.

If asked.

Yep, and I'm one.

Thanks to M3's insatiable appetite for art books, I've got three copies of the game... two limited editions, and one regular. Still can't get the bleeping YF-21 FAST packs tho. I suck at the Vanquish races. <_<

My issue is with the irresponsible ass-backwards nature of the way some conjectures are being thrown out there. We all know how often unsubstantiated conjecture often gets mistaken as fact by others at some point or another further down the track. That's the way the internet works and it's especially applicable to Macross.

While I do understand the aversion to "wild mass hypothesizing" (esp. after the whole Shaloom thing), the whole thread is about a "what if" scenario, so a certain amount of conjecture is probably OK, s'long as it fits with the documented facts.

As far as a hostage rescue Valk goes... just make sure it moves fast in battroid and GERWALK modes and carry the rescuee out in a trash can in your robohand.

If you're feeling ambitious, a padded trash can like the zentradi used to install spies aboard enemy vessels.

...

...

...

Part of me wants to dispute this, but the "padded trash can" is a documented piece of VF equipment from the original series. Max and Milia were such responsible parents...

Also, fusion doesn't really have chain reactions, controlled or otherwise. It's a lot harder to make a large atom split into two smaller atoms than it is two make two small atoms combine into a larger one.

Fusion reactions take a lot of energy to start(enough so that every real-world fusion bomb ever made uses a fission bomb as the detonator), and don't want to continue. It's the biggest problem facing real-world attempts to build a fusion power generator. On the upside, it also makes fusion reactors much safer.

The stars keep burning because they're utterly massive. With enough weight, anything will fuse. No fancy chain reactions required.

Strictly speaking, it's "with enough heat and pressure" anything will fuse. Mass is not necessarily a part of the equation, though it IS on OTM thermonuclear reaction power systems because the reaction there is catalyzed/moderated by trapped heavy quanta* in the engine's gravity controller.

* A form of exotic matter from super dimension space (fold space) which has almost inconceivable mass... so much so that, in sufficient quantities, it will auto-ignite in a fusion reaction when pulled into our universe. Heavy quantum is most commonly used for gravity manipulation, including stand-alone gravity control systems and the GIC systems that moderate and control thermonuclear reaction systems. It's also used as the detonation trigger in thermonuclear reaction warheads, the warhead material itself in dimension eaters, and in dimension energy weapons, which direct beams or bolts of heavy quantum fusion plasma (or possibly heavy quantum itself, in more recent cases).

So, wild conjecture in a thread that is itself wild conjecture, is inappropriate? Duly noted. Was it my Comment about the YF-30's purpose and the statement about the second seat that set you off? Because I'm pretty sure we discussed the YF-30's purpose a few pages back, and I'm pretty sure that's what the info we had was.

You could make a cogent argument that, even though being a technology demonstrator was not the YF-30's primary purpose, it did serve as one in a secondary capacity for the ordinance container system that Aisha was so proud of. She sure as hell seems to be of the opinion that it's the future of modularized VF weaponry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Max and Milia were such responsible parents...

Eh, babies are resilient, they bounce...

You could make a cogent argument that, even though being a technology demonstrator was not the YF-30's primary purpose, it did serve as one in a secondary capacity for the ordinance container system that Aisha was so proud of. She sure as hell seems to be of the opinion that it's the future of modularized VF weaponry.

I guess really what it boils down to is should the YF-30 really be the XF-30? Y doesn't mean just mean prototype, the Y denotes a pre-production prototype, while the X denotes an experimental prototype (I know some of y'all know this, but others might not). The JSF program skipped the pre-production prototype competition stage, and just compared the two experimental prototypes (X-32 vs X-35) where the ATF program compared pre-production prototypes (the YF-22 vs the YF-23). Those are just some real world examples that might provide context to the discussion. The Macross universe hasn't always been consistent in these naming conventions to my knowledge). So Those few that have access to that info are all the rest of us have to go on...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess really what it boils down to is should the YF-30 really be the XF-30? Y doesn't mean just mean prototype, the Y denotes a pre-production prototype, while the X denotes an experimental prototype (I know some of y'all know this, but others might not).

Aaaaaaactually... there's an explanation for that in the Macross 30 novelization.

You see, one of the ways the New UN Government regulates the development of military potential among its member "states" is that the various local governments are required to disclose the specifications of new mobile weapons and other military technologies that they develop for production to the "federal" government and military. Some proprietary information can be withheld at times, like the YF-24 spec that was shared with the emigrant fleets, but developing a new fighter or other weapon completely in secret is a violation of interstellar law.

Classifying the newly-developed Chronos as a pre-production prototype effectively allowed S.M.S.'s Uroboros branch office to put off having to make full disclosure of the new fighter's specs and technological advances to the government and military for a while.

The Macross Galaxy fleet pulled off a more complicated version of the same "cheat" by not only failing to disclose that a completed VF-27 had entered production, but also by trotting out a couple under-strength prototypes like the YF-27-5 for the public to gawp at for the purpose of spreading misinformation about the VF-27's level of capability.

(Though it would appear that, after the Galaxy fleet's role in the Vajra conflict became known, General Galaxy may have been forced to cough up the VF-27 spec... since at least one production model VF-27 is known to be operated outside the Macross Galaxy fleet by the Uroboros Hunter's Guild.)

The only thing for certain, it's not supposed to be VF-30.

Perhaps one day, but not now.

Edited by Seto Kaiba
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your last statement also describes a jet engine too (all internal combustion engines really).

Aside from the lack of moving parts, yeah. :)

Fusion is a lot simpler than fission, startup costs aside.

So basically what we're doing is using superheated and ionized gas (plasma as resulting from fusion) to heat air that gets sucked in through the turbine blades (in atmosphere), and essentially superheat and ionize said incoming air to eject it out the back end of the turbine.

I don't think ionization is a goal, but yes.

And releasing directly from the reactor isn't a goal, because it would leech energy you need to sustain your fusion reaction. I believe Valks use the heat from the reactor to superheat liquid hydrogen.

That seems like a really inefficient way to go about doing this, when you could just "burn" plasma all the time. It also seems like it would be more fuel efficient in atmo than in space, since you don't have to exhaust the plasma in atmo.

It actually IS more efficient in atmosphere. Which is why they go to the trouble of heating air instead of just using space mode all the time.

Which means you could essentially just reclaim the "waste material" (the helium atoms, neutrons and electrons) to re use and recombine to replenish your fuel supply, through a separate fission system. Unless the "burner cans" are performing both fusion and fission at the same time, fusing Hydrogen atoms to get helium and fissing (that's probably not even the right word) the helium atoms to get back to hydrogen.

Welllllllllll... the thing is that while hydrogen and helium both fuse VERY easily, helium is a very difficult atom to split. It'd be a net energy loss.

Now, on the other hand, you COULD have a multi-stage fusion reaction. If you start with hydrogen, you fuse that to get helium, then you fuse helium to get something heavier. You could continue this until you reach iron, but you get successively smaller amounts of energy out(and when you fuse iron, you get less out than you put in).

If I'm not mistaken that's sort of how the sun does it. The heavier helium sinks and undergoes fission becoming hydrogen which then rises to undergo fusion (I might be very wrong, my knowledge of astronomy, astrophysics, nuclear chemistry, and nuclear physics is practically nonexistent).

Stars are purely fusion. They start with hydrogen, as they age and "burn up" the hydrogen, they start fusing the helium byproducts of their hydrogen fusion. In the sun, this is our end game. Sol isn't large enough to fuse anything bigger.

But in larger stars, that cycle of "burning" byproducts continues on through carbon, oxygen, neon, silicon, and magnesium, ballooning to ridiculous sizes as they do so. And then they try to fuse iron.

Iron doesn't release enough energy to support the giant ball of gas they have become, and they collapse under their own weight very rapidly. The shockwave hits hard enough to ignite a round of fusion like you won't see anywhere else. And this sudden burst of energy makes the star explode in a supernova that releases a cloud of literally everything on the periodic table(all fusion byproducts), leaving a superdense neutron star or black hole behind as a mark of the unfathomably large cataclysm.

Sustained fission reactions are (almost) all the results of human engineering, because the setup is fairly complex.

Outside of one REALLY WEIRD geological formation in Ohio, all known deposits of fission isotopes in the wild undergo nothing more than natural decay.

I am a total science nerd. I make no apologies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aside from the lack of moving parts, yeah. :)

Fusion is a lot simpler than fission, startup costs aside.

I don't think ionization is a goal, but yes.

And releasing directly from the reactor isn't a goal, because it would leech energy you need to sustain your fusion reaction. I believe Valks use the heat from the reactor to superheat liquid hydrogen.

It actually IS more efficient in atmosphere. Which is why they go to the trouble of heating air instead of just using space mode all the time.

Welllllllllll... the thing is that while hydrogen and helium both fuse VERY easily, helium is a very difficult atom to split. It'd be a net energy loss.

Now, on the other hand, you COULD have a multi-stage fusion reaction. If you start with hydrogen, you fuse that to get helium, then you fuse helium to get something heavier. You could continue this until you reach iron, but you get successively smaller amounts of energy out(and when you fuse iron, you get less out than you put in).

Stars are purely fusion. They start with hydrogen, as they age and "burn up" the hydrogen, they start fusing the helium byproducts of their hydrogen fusion. In the sun, this is our end game. Sol isn't large enough to fuse anything bigger.

But in larger stars, that cycle of "burning" byproducts continues on through carbon, oxygen, neon, silicon, and magnesium, ballooning to ridiculous sizes as they do so. And then they try to fuse iron.

Iron doesn't release enough energy to support the giant ball of gas they have become, and they collapse under their own weight very rapidly. The shockwave hits hard enough to ignite a round of fusion like you won't see anywhere else. And this sudden burst of energy makes the star explode in a supernova that releases a cloud of literally everything on the periodic table(all fusion byproducts), leaving a superdense neutron star or black hole behind as a mark of the unfathomably large cataclysm.

Sustained fission reactions are (almost) all the results of human engineering, because the setup is fairly complex.

Outside of one REALLY WEIRD geological formation in Ohio, all known deposits of fission isotopes in the wild undergo nothing more than natural decay.

I am a total science nerd. I make no apologies.

Preach on brother! I did a paper on black holes in the 9th grade that I absolutely loved researching. My classmates, after I'd delivered said report (and yes, I had to present it in front of the class) were not quite so excited by it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aside from the lack of moving parts, yeah. :)

Fusion is a lot simpler than fission, startup costs aside.

I don't think ionization is a goal, but yes.

And releasing directly from the reactor isn't a goal, because it would leech energy you need to sustain your fusion reaction. I believe Valks use the heat from the reactor to superheat liquid hydrogen.

It actually IS more efficient in atmosphere. Which is why they go to the trouble of heating air instead of just using space mode all the time.

Welllllllllll... the thing is that while hydrogen and helium both fuse VERY easily, helium is a very difficult atom to split. It'd be a net energy loss.

Now, on the other hand, you COULD have a multi-stage fusion reaction. If you start with hydrogen, you fuse that to get helium, then you fuse helium to get something heavier. You could continue this until you reach iron, but you get successively smaller amounts of energy out(and when you fuse iron, you get less out than you put in).

Stars are purely fusion. They start with hydrogen, as they age and "burn up" the hydrogen, they start fusing the helium byproducts of their hydrogen fusion. In the sun, this is our end game. Sol isn't large enough to fuse anything bigger.

But in larger stars, that cycle of "burning" byproducts continues on through carbon, oxygen, neon, silicon, and magnesium, ballooning to ridiculous sizes as they do so. And then they try to fuse iron.

Iron doesn't release enough energy to support the giant ball of gas they have become, and they collapse under their own weight very rapidly. The shockwave hits hard enough to ignite a round of fusion like you won't see anywhere else. And this sudden burst of energy makes the star explode in a supernova that releases a cloud of literally everything on the periodic table(all fusion byproducts), leaving a superdense neutron star or black hole behind as a mark of the unfathomably large cataclysm.

Sustained fission reactions are (almost) all the results of human engineering, because the setup is fairly complex.

Outside of one REALLY WEIRD geological formation in Ohio, all known deposits of fission isotopes in the wild undergo nothing more than natural decay.

I am a total science nerd. I make no apologies.

That may be one of the best explanations for the layman I've ever read about fusion. Carl Sagan and Neil DeGrasse Tyson would be proud of you JB0.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think ionization is a goal, but yes.

And releasing directly from the reactor isn't a goal, because it would leech energy you need to sustain your fusion reaction. I believe Valks use the heat from the reactor to superheat liquid hydrogen.

The energy sustaining the fusion reaction inside a thermonuclear reaction turbine isn't the heat and pressure of the reaction itself... it's the gravitational pressure of the heavy quantum manipulated by the engine's gravity inertia control (GIC) system.

In space, the VFs are using the plasma stream from the reaction as propellant, supported by a MHD plasma ion thruster in the rear of the turbine body. (In principle, it's not dissimilar from a Star Trek impulse engine.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aside from the lack of moving parts, yeah. :)

Fusion is a lot simpler than fission, startup costs aside.

I don't think ionization is a goal, but yes.

And releasing directly from the reactor isn't a goal, because it would leech energy you need to sustain your fusion reaction. I believe Valks use the heat from the reactor to superheat liquid hydrogen.

It actually IS more efficient in atmosphere. Which is why they go to the trouble of heating air instead of just using space mode all the time.

Welllllllllll... the thing is that while hydrogen and helium both fuse VERY easily, helium is a very difficult atom to split. It'd be a net energy loss.

Now, on the other hand, you COULD have a multi-stage fusion reaction. If you start with hydrogen, you fuse that to get helium, then you fuse helium to get something heavier. You could continue this until you reach iron, but you get successively smaller amounts of energy out(and when you fuse iron, you get less out than you put in).

Stars are purely fusion. They start with hydrogen, as they age and "burn up" the hydrogen, they start fusing the helium byproducts of their hydrogen fusion. In the sun, this is our end game. Sol isn't large enough to fuse anything bigger.

But in larger stars, that cycle of "burning" byproducts continues on through carbon, oxygen, neon, silicon, and magnesium, ballooning to ridiculous sizes as they do so. And then they try to fuse iron.

Iron doesn't release enough energy to support the giant ball of gas they have become, and they collapse under their own weight very rapidly. The shockwave hits hard enough to ignite a round of fusion like you won't see anywhere else. And this sudden burst of energy makes the star explode in a supernova that releases a cloud of literally everything on the periodic table(all fusion byproducts), leaving a superdense neutron star or black hole behind as a mark of the unfathomably large cataclysm.

Sustained fission reactions are (almost) all the results of human engineering, because the setup is fairly complex.

Outside of one REALLY WEIRD geological formation in Ohio, all known deposits of fission isotopes in the wild undergo nothing more than natural decay.

I am a total science nerd. I make no apologies.

I now know more than I did. And have more correct information (on stars and fusion at least).

Feeding the beast is wrong, JB0.

I don't know what you mean. Who doesn't like learning stuff?

Sorry. My inner scientist got the better of me.

Just be glad it wasn't my inner mad scientist, I suppose.

Glad some folks appreciated it, though.

I don't know what Gubaba's statement was supposed to be getting at but I learned stuff. Thank you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Gubaba was politely requesting I stop derailing this thread with walls o' text. Which is a justifiable complaint.

Fair point. However it is all relevant and pertinent information.

I still wanna see an upgraded Stampede Valk.

They did that, it was the VF-25 Armored...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Gubaba was politely requesting I stop derailing this thread with walls o' text. Which is a justifiable complaint.

Debatable... it was relevant, and served to clear up various misconceptions some folks had about the (over)technology under discussion.

They did that, it was the VF-25 Armored...

More or less, yeah... the YF-19's trial gun pack from early in Macross Plus had some shades of that too, with the big honking beam gun on its forearm. You could argue the Konig Monster variant that showed up in the teaser for Macross Frontier's second movie is the final realization of the idea, what with it having a pair of massive rotary cannons for arms in addition to everything else it already had.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to comment a few things...

<=== Engine, Turbines & Powerplants ===>

While I see were my misconception of the FF-2450 series having a flaw in its base design, my personal opinion is that it is still the majority of the issues for the VF-22 & VF-9.

For both the FF-2450B & FF-2500E had issues with cooling while outside an atmosphere, because they utilized the air as a cooliant (not just the cooling system of the craft itself) as well as propellent.

With the two models of the FF-2450 series, and I have not hear of any changes with the turbines to allow for the higher internal tempatures that risked melting down the core while operated at full in space.

Though, an odd curiosity. The VF-19F uses the FF-2500F, which has a higher output (711.23 kn) than the E-model (662.18 kn) of the series, though no mention of any heat issues (considering the 19F is a space optimized varient).

On powerplants, it seems the newer reactor cores are also utilized in the ADR-04-Mk.XV Super Defender & Cheyenne II.

<=== Destroids ===>

While it seems they have not had allot of screen time, it seems the ground pounders are not going away either.

I also appologize for this divergence for the moment.

Following the point of the prior entry, it seems the Destroids are not a 'dead' line of mechs...

Heck, it seems by the last line of the description for the ADR-04-Mk.XV Super Defender, there may be an equal number (if not greater) of Destroids than VF in some fleet/planet garrisons.
That, coupled with the Frontier's use of the Cheyenne II, it would not be hard to percive an Advanced Destroid & Drone defensive plan/responce.

For mobility, that is a tough one to speak on. With the trusters & turbines that they have, any VF may get to a location faster than a Destroid, though the Destroid is ment to be in the area already for defensive responce.

On ground speed & maneuvering, we lack information... If the original (tv) series data is applied, the MBR-04-Mk VI Destroid Tomahawk & lighter ADR-04-Mk X Destroid Defender (which both use the same leg assembly) would be able to run-down a grounded VF-1 in battroid mode.

We do not know either how fast either of the series three models (ADR-03-Mk III Destroid Cheyenne & Cheyenne II) are on their rollers.

Which leads to the spceulation...

Even though not really armored in any fasion, could a Destroid Work unit use a gunpod in a last ditch defensive situation? (thinking back to the origins of the "Sea Bees")

<=== YF-30 ===>

I believe I read that this unit's pod is suppost to be interchangable, and one of was as an auxiliary propulsion unit.

I maybe reading into this too deeply; with the FDR of the Chronos, the pod might be able to hold a Multi-use fold system powered by Super-dimensional energy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For both the FF-2450B & FF-2500E had issues with cooling while outside an atmosphere, because they utilized the air as a cooliant (not just the cooling system of the craft itself) as well as propellent.

Well, yes. Why WOULDN'T you take advantage of an additional cooling mechanism if it was available and easy to implement? I mean, the very act of using the air as a propellant MAKES it a coolant.

It's simply far easier to cool an engine in atmosphere than space, because you CAN dump heat into the air. It's very hard to get heat out of a spacecraft since there's nothing to conduct that heat into. So you have to radiate it out, but... radiant cooling still works in an atmosphere. So you cool better in air than out of it in most situations(the big exception being high-speed atmospheric drag).

It's not a design oversight so much as a technical limitation. They opted to design a ship for maximum atmospheric performance and gimped space performance instead of gimping performance all-around just to keep the numbers pretty and even.

Which leads to the spceulation...

Even though not really armored in any fasion, could a Destroid Work unit use a gunpod in a last ditch defensive situation? (thinking back to the origins of the "Sea Bees")

That's a good question!

And, I figure it depends on a lot of factors.

The arm can probably handle the recoil if the destroid is meant for heavy labor, but aiming could be a bit iffy with no actual targeting software present.

And there's the question of if the hand can actually actuate the trigger. The Spartan comes to mind immediately as a machine that clearly has hands but could equally clearly never use a gunpod.

Assuming, of course, the gunpod isn't reliant on some sort of computer data link to operate. The presence of a physical trigger DOES suggest that any possible data linkage is optional, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I see were my misconception of the FF-2450 series having a flaw in its base design, my personal opinion is that it is still the majority of the issues for the VF-22 & VF-9.

That'd be an opinion unsupported by fact, but in the absence of any further explanation from Macross's creators it's as valid as any other unsubstantiated theory.

For both the FF-2450B & FF-2500E had issues with cooling while outside an atmosphere, because they utilized the air as a cooliant (not just the cooling system of the craft itself) as well as propellent.

All thermonuclear reaction turbine engines use intake air as a coolant and propellant while operating in atmosphere... that's literally how they produce thrust. Instead of burning hydrocarbons to heat intake air, they dissipate heat from the reaction into intake air in the space behind the high-pressure compressor stage.

Though, an odd curiosity. The VF-19F uses the FF-2500F, which has a higher output (711.23 kn) than the E-model (662.18 kn) of the series, though no mention of any heat issues (considering the 19F is a space optimized varient).

The VF-19 engine designations are somewhat messy and convoluted at present due to a typographical error in Macross Chronicle that was copied by Master File. When they started messing around with engine model numbers, they accidentally messed up their engine thrust numbers for the VF-19F/S type and produced a logical impossibility (as noted on M3). As a result, there's a fair bit of confusion and contradiction as to which models of VF-19 use which engine, in which I generally recommend citing the more recent set of model numbers but retaining the original thrust values for the F and S variants, which neatly solves the problem.

Once the more egregious conflicts are tidied away, it appears that the FF-2500 series engines were only used on the prototype... with the 1st mass-production type going back to the less overkill FF-2200 and the 2nd mass-production type going to more stable FF-2550 series engines.

The overheating problem may simply have been resolved by material improvements or design changes in later models of engine, and/or changes to the airframe itself.

On powerplants, it seems the newer reactor cores are also utilized in the ADR-04-Mk.XV Super Defender & Cheyenne II.

About a 25% improvement in output, which is pretty small compared to some of the jumps the VFs have seen in output.

While it seems they have not had allot of screen time, it seems the ground pounders are not going away either.

I also appologize for this divergence for the moment.

They're not exactly staging a comeback... I apologize in advance for the problems caused by clumsy phraseology over there on the Compendium.

Following the point of the prior entry, it seems the Destroids are not a 'dead' line of mechs...

Heck, it seems by the last line of the description for the ADR-04-Mk.XV Super Defender, there may be an equal number (if not greater) of Destroids than VF in some fleet/planet garrisons.

That, coupled with the Frontier's use of the Cheyenne II, it would not be hard to percive an Advanced Destroid & Drone defensive plan/responce.

In practice, the destroids might not be completely extinct... but they're clinging to existence by the fingertips most of them don't have.

You'll have no doubt noted these are not "new" destroid models, but rather refurbished versions of decades-old models used locally by one fleet or other... and that they're the only (sarcastic fingerquotes "new") models to appear after the First Space War. They're not all that common either, if Macross Chronicle is any indication. The Mechanic Sheet discussing the Vanquish-related vehicles of 2058 doesn't mention any other users for the Super Defender besides its developer, Macross Galaxy. The Cheyenne II's mechanic sheet seems to be leaning the same way, discussing only that the Macross Frontier fleet has them principally because they wanted something that could operate inside the domes easily (without messing up the pavement), and that they often aren't even manned.

Which leads to the spceulation...

Even though not really armored in any fasion, could a Destroid Work unit use a gunpod in a last ditch defensive situation? (thinking back to the origins of the "Sea Bees")

Very likely, yes... there is precedent for civilian-level destroid-type vehicles being able to operate military-grade weaponry, such as the City-7 police mecha in Macross 7 being equipped with spare VF-11 gun pods, and the ground-based counterparts using heavy bazookas that look oddly like the RX-78-2's.

I believe I read that this unit's pod is suppost to be interchangable, and one of was as an auxiliary propulsion unit.

I maybe reading into this too deeply; with the FDR of the Chronos, the pod might be able to hold a Multi-use fold system powered by Super-dimensional energy?

They don't explain what "auxiliary propulsion units" means. I'd guess that it means a booster rocket or possibly fuel tank. They have fold boosters for fold travel, and the models available in the 2050's are already reusable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

About a 25% improvement in output, which is pretty small compared to some of the jumps the VFs have seen in output.

Although the SHP (?) ratting for the reactors is up only 25%, the kW output for the auxiliary generator of the one used by the ADR-04-Mk.XV is upped over 86% over the Mk.X

Though, we are not given the kW for the VF-turbines after the VF-1 to make a comparision for electrical potental, or the reactors output.

Though considering that no one seems to really want to improve them (let us face it, the VF are cooler and how many UN ads show off the 'droids?).

There also has not been a need to upgrade the reactor as much as the VFs due to them not having as many energy draining systems added to them.

A scary thought; a MBR-07 upgraded with more modern (2040+) everything (armor plating, ordance & verniers) with a FF-2550 series reactor powering a PPBS.

In practice, the destroids might not be completely extinct... but they're clinging to existence by the fingertips most of them don't have.

You'll have no doubt noted these are not "new" destroid models, but rather refurbished versions of decades-old models used locally by one fleet or other... and that they're the only (sarcastic fingerquotes "new") models to appear after the First Space War. They're not all that common either, if Macross Chronicle is any indication. The Mechanic Sheet discussing the Vanquish-related vehicles of 2058 doesn't mention any other users for the Super Defender besides its developer, Macross Galaxy. The Cheyenne II's mechanic sheet seems to be leaning the same way, discussing only that the Macross Frontier fleet has them principally because they wanted something that could operate inside the domes easily (without messing up the pavement), and that they often aren't even manned.

That most likely is true. though in theory it is easier to update a Destroid compared to a VF, due to the philosophy of their modular design.

Need better armor platng? Just make sure it is molded like the old one...

More fire-power required? Change out what is in the weapons mount... (as did with the Super Defender)

Very likely, yes... there is precedent for civilian-level destroid-type vehicles being able to operate military-grade weaponry, such as the City-7 police mecha in Macross 7 being equipped with spare VF-11 gun pods, and the ground-based counterparts using heavy bazookas that look oddly like the RX-78-2's.

The RX-78-2 line got my brain on the tangent of what if...

What if a mecha-otaku in the Macross universe wanted to build a unit based of an older (any prior to 2009) anime series.

The "Pimp My Valkyrie" is a partial example of, another would be someone trying to turn a Destroid Work into a VOTOM or Heavy Gear unit...

They don't explain what "auxiliary propulsion units" means. I'd guess that it means a booster rocket or possibly fuel tank. They have fold boosters for fold travel, and the models available in the 2050's are already reusable.

That, or what the EW (Electronic Warfare) package is suppose to do... considering said unit (assumed) has a 3rd gen active stealth system...

I know we have talked heavily on stealth; though has there ever been a unit in Macross that was made to look either bigger than it was, or more numberous (by manipulating sensor retuned for false positives)?

I can not seem to find my refernce material for the real world tests using drones that had exaggerated radar returns do to their fuselage design (said unit radar return supposedly as big as the B-52 that launched it).

On this, I could imagine the panic if a Ghost fighter with similar 'false positive' design showed up, though read on sensors like a VB-6 or bigger to the com-operator.

Though I do have doubts (on what I know at the moment) that the YF-29 & YF-30 (or derivatives from) will make main-line VF status for the NUNS. because of the (supposed) rarity of the fold quartz in quantity for.mass production (considering that the YF-29 development was haulted in 2057, becuase of the lack of).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...