Chindenathus Posted March 9, 2004 Share Posted March 9, 2004 I'll start this off with my two questions. VF-19: My big question about the design was, how can it have the required "Stealth Profile" for the Macross era and still have FSW (Forward Swept Wings). YF-21/22: What do the 'Fastpacks' do for these craft? Dig in Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted March 9, 2004 Share Posted March 9, 2004 Asides from the VF-17, any stealth valk has active stealth, not passive stealth. As in, there's a really high-tech little box that the pilot flips to "on" when he wants to be stealthy. You could equip an UPS truck with that, and then it'd be stealthy. Pure tech, not design. Remember, little tiny things can make a plane's radar cross section go up 100-fold. YF-21's canopy bumps alone would make it un-stealthy. If you want to be stealthy by physical shape, every little cubic millimeter must be shaped right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imode Posted March 9, 2004 Share Posted March 9, 2004 YF-21/22:What do the 'Fastpacks' do for these craft? Dig in Probably what Fastpacks have always done for Macross valkyries. More fuel and more missiles. If you look at the YF-21, all those black diamonds are micromissile launchers. Each half of the undercarriage fastpacks have a visible set of 2 micromissile launchers. Among other things... http://www.anime.net/macross/mecha/united_...yf21/index.html see Armament Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxjenius81 Posted March 9, 2004 Share Posted March 9, 2004 YF-21/22:What do the 'Fastpacks' do for these craft? The FAST packs for the YF-21 serve as additional armor plating on the arms/tail shields and on the ventral fuselage doors. The fuselage door packs also serve as micro missile launchers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindenathus Posted March 9, 2004 Author Share Posted March 9, 2004 DH: So basically "Ovetechnology saves the day again. IM/MJ81: It always struck me that these componenets just exist because all the other 'Variable fighters have them. Looking at my 1/72 figures (regular and FP) and my model kit (1/72 jet-mode only) the design has much more room to mount extras nearly everywhere except where they are designed to fit. The underside plates cause landing concerns (IMO) you don't want a "Low Rider" Yf-21 when trying to land. As for the arm pods .. Shrug well they are there but that's about it. Most of what these components accomplish could have mounted in a attachments in a more even and visually striking manner like a low trapezoidal block to mount on the outer surfaces of the engine/leg covers (The back pack for battroid) or between them if the middle of the dorsal area is not occupied by a S-Fold generator. They just seem "There", I don't find them very dynamic looking. Not at all like the VF-1.. series fastpacks and boosters. And the YF-21/22 is such a dynamic and aggressive look variable unit especially in fighter mode. Still looks like a line-backer with ballerina ankles in Battroid mode though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted March 9, 2004 Share Posted March 9, 2004 Most aircraft do add stuff up top. (Most any avionics "hump", and F-16 CFT's) A-4 and F-8 are about the earliest jets I can think of with prominent additions to them as they evolved. The F-15 (and valks) are the only ones that put it along the sides of the belly that I can think of at 4AM... (going to bed now) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxjenius81 Posted March 9, 2004 Share Posted March 9, 2004 I never said they were all THAT good, I just said what they did. I like the idea of conformal FAST packs rather than the bulky blocky things that the earlier fighters had. I mean dont get me wrong, I love them, but they probably increase the radar signature many times over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JB0 Posted March 9, 2004 Share Posted March 9, 2004 DH:So basically "Ovetechnology saves the day again. Actually, the concept works now. It's just a matter of getting the hardware in place. You just have to emit an inverse radar wave to reduce or eliminate the original one. Optimally, you match ampitudes of the reflected wave, rendering your plane totally invisible to radar at minimal power(since your plane's already absorbed a lot of the power). A VF's internal fusion generator gives it the power, it just needs the equipment to measure incoming waves and emit counter-waves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted March 10, 2004 Share Posted March 10, 2004 It'd be quite difficult for that to work when faced with multiple radars. An SR-71 once had no less than 280 Soviet radars tracking it (they were testing new ECM stuff). Surely, there'd be overlaps etc, that you couldn't counter one without amplifying another. Then there's the sheer power factor----a dedicated AWACS could just overpower it, that no small fighter would have enough power to absorb and counter it. Still the best way to try to get a stealth---use so much power, that even if only 1-trillionth of the signal makes it back, it's enough to detect. Or like above--use so many radars from so many positions, that something will reflect somewhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JB0 Posted March 10, 2004 Share Posted March 10, 2004 It'd be quite difficult for that to work when faced with multiple radars. An SR-71 once had no less than 280 Soviet radars tracking it (they were testing new ECM stuff). Surely, there'd be overlaps etc, that you couldn't counter one without amplifying another. Then there's the sheer power factor----a dedicated AWACS could just overpower it, that no small fighter would have enough power to absorb and counter it. Still the best way to try to get a stealth---use so much power, that even if only 1-trillionth of the signal makes it back, it's enough to detect. Or like above--use so many radars from so many positions, that something will reflect somewhere. Darn... If you used tighter beams, you can partially equalize the power disparity, since the guy looking for you is on a wide scan and you already KNOW where he is, because he's advertising the fact to everyone. But those have to be far more precise... If you can get your profile low enough, then everything else starts getting in the way. If you can take your return down to a speck of dust's, then the air itself will cloud out your radar signature. Or does dust not have a radar signature? Just started thinking about wavelengths. It could be that it's only intended to defeat fighter and missile radar systems. But that's not as useful... Too bad you don't still have the VF-1 laser turret. You could just lock on and drop a couple megajoules of photons into the other guy's radar. Best countermeasures available right there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zentrandude Posted March 10, 2004 Share Posted March 10, 2004 i believe that todays radar would be very differnt than the the macross 2040+ radar. instead of shooting microwave energy and listen for the reflections i see it of more a higher tech like a system that senses the material or the gravity or anything we cant detect in a small unit today. active stealth would pretty much be the only way to defeat a system thou passive may work for so much the passive design would be diffent too. why make a off angled bird when the baddies sensors can sence the gravity it has. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Macross_Fanboy Posted March 10, 2004 Share Posted March 10, 2004 Before Keith can say anything....... PINPOINT BARRIER PUNCH!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Macross_Fanboy Posted March 10, 2004 Share Posted March 10, 2004 (edited) Hey, I was just discussing this with a Macross II fanboy, how can the YF-19 break through the atmosphere in 48 seconds? Wouldn't going that fast kill Isamu and wreck the -19? Or does it have to do with that (english dub) "air force" control system? He says Macross Plus is ignoring physics and what happened to Guld shouldn't have happened(even though I told him how badly the YF-21 was being pushed to get at the X-9)...David, enlighten me and anyone else that started thinking about what I said. Well, before I could make a point, the Macross II fanboy logged off, I think I got him...hehehe, don't mess with someone that watches "real" Macross. Edited March 10, 2004 by Macross_Fanboy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VF-19 Posted March 10, 2004 Share Posted March 10, 2004 I'd like to point out that Eden, while Earth-like, probably has a different sort/size/composition of an atmosphere. But considering he was going straight up, and as long as he wasn't accelerating, he would be fine. When you feel G-forces, you're feeling the change in direction as your body resists the change. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxjenius81 Posted March 10, 2004 Share Posted March 10, 2004 Well as VF-19 pointed out Eden isn't Earth. Not everything will be the same. If you look in the compendium, it even makes note of that and shows slightly different specs for Earth vs Eden. While it took Isamu 48 seconds to reach atmospheric service cieling (so the edge of space, not space), it is noted that this is on Eden so one would imagine it wuold have a different cieling on Earth. Even at the maximum rate of ascent for the YF-19 (65,000 meters per minute) the fighter is only traveling at a "mere" 3900 kph so not terribly fast even if he accelerated fast, certianly not enough to kill a human. Guld probably pushed the YF-21 to the limit which is over Mach 20 and was constantly accelerating as the Ghost probably didnt go straight to its limit, it probably worked its way up trying to kill the pilot in the process. As for the active air force control, i have no idea what that does and would like to know myself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retracting Head Ter Ter Posted March 10, 2004 Share Posted March 10, 2004 If you look at the TV series or DYRL, even the VF-1 series were pulling incredible gees when doing their combat acrobatics. But you could probably put it down to animation errors and creative licence. 48 secs to 60-65km from standstill is still nuts though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted March 10, 2004 Share Posted March 10, 2004 If we go with 60km up, in 48 secs, you only need (average) Mach 4.5 to do it. I know we had a LONG thread about this before, but Knight26 is the one who calculated out all the numbers. (I probably could, but not without re-learning basic physics of acceleration, G's, etc--which I don't feel like doing tonight) As has been mentioned, velocity and acceleration are totally different things. Still, even a YF-19 doesn't have near the power to accelerate like that. Sure, if you started at high speed and could maintain it, you could do it easy. But from "stopped on the runway" no way. I wonder if Isamu meant more like "48 secs from very low altitude". Not taking into account the time needed to take off and accelerate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxjenius81 Posted March 10, 2004 Share Posted March 10, 2004 Clock probably starts running at take off, maybe as soon as a positive rate of climb is recorded. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Macross_Fanboy Posted March 10, 2004 Share Posted March 10, 2004 Yeah, that's what I'm thinking, the clock started at sea level...I don't know, I'm only in high school! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted March 10, 2004 Share Posted March 10, 2004 For a legal international air record, clock starts at brake release. (Of course, the YF-19 wouldn't legally be a plane according to their rules) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retracting Head Ter Ter Posted March 10, 2004 Share Posted March 10, 2004 (edited) For a legal international air record, clock starts at brake release.  (Of course, the YF-19 wouldn't legally be a plane according to their rules) So can one cheat by having the plane smoke down the runway with the wheels locked at 200 kph and doing the brake release just before lift off? Or heck, just take off with the brakes still applied! Anyway, looking at the power to weight ratio of the YF-19 and assuming its got a cd of 0.000000001, it still doesn't seem possible for it to pull that 48 sec stunt unless Eden has a really really thin atmosphere which somehow doesn't seem realistic given its earth like gravity and other conditions. (well, that big ass white bird thingy shouldn't be able to fly too if it was earth). I just assume Isamu was talking out of his ass. Edited March 10, 2004 by Retracting Head Ter Ter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxjenius81 Posted March 10, 2004 Share Posted March 10, 2004 Talking out his ass maybe.....but it is in the compedium. Like David said, it probably was from low altitude. I havent seen M+ for a while, but I think Isamu was making a low level flight before pulling up and heading for the ceiling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted March 10, 2004 Share Posted March 10, 2004 Nothing ruins a plane faster than overheated wheels and brakes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retracting Head Ter Ter Posted March 10, 2004 Share Posted March 10, 2004 Nothing ruins a plane faster than overheated wheels and brakes. Yeah but it will be a special F-15 Rules Lawyer Streak Eagle variant with really bald and slippery rubber compound tyres that lock with minimal force? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Macross_Fanboy Posted March 10, 2004 Share Posted March 10, 2004 Yeah, he was. It was low level flying(nap of the Earth...err...EDEN...methinks) then he pulled straight up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daeudi Posted March 10, 2004 Share Posted March 10, 2004 It'd be quite difficult for that to work when faced with multiple radars. An SR-71 once had no less than 280 Soviet radars tracking it (they were testing new ECM stuff). Why did they bother? LMAO It's not like anything made by the hands of mortal men could EVER catch it, much less knock it down. Yes, he was flying low and fast before he pulled up and made for the black, so possible he means from sea level... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F-ZeroOne Posted March 10, 2004 Share Posted March 10, 2004 For a legal international air record, clock starts at brake release. (Of course, the YF-19 wouldn't legally be a plane according to their rules) Okay, I'm curious - do their rules specifically mention "no transforming robots!"...? Or does two wings, a couple of engines, and a fuselage not count as sufficently airplane-shaped enough by them...?! For the record, BTW, I've always assumed Isamu was talking about 48 seconds from a low altitude, not the ground. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted March 10, 2004 Share Posted March 10, 2004 According to "the rules" anything that can reach space, isn't a plane, it's a spaceship. Thus they won't give the X-15 most of its records. YF-19's can go in space, so they're not a plane. daeudi--well, it got REALLY interesting, when they had an engine failure, and were down to 40,000ft and Mach 0.9, after having alerted pretty much the entire Warsaw Pact to their presence. Came real close to a major incident, as many MiG's were scrambled, and quite a few US planes were launched out of Japan and Korea to intercept the MiG's to protect the Blackbird. Luckily, the engine failure happened close enough to "home" that the Blackbird got out of Soviet airspace before it was in serious danger, and everything was called off. PS---SR-71 isn't invincible. It has taken a grand total of one small piece of shrapnel, at altitude. Many missiles have gotten fairly close to it, but only the one exploded close enough to actually make contact. The SR-71 is high and fast enough to avoid like 99% of stuff. But not *everything*. It also helps that the SR-71 is moderately stealthy, and has a LOT of ECM gear. It's not simply high and fast---it's got as much ECM as most dedicated Electronic Warfare planes. Many missiles launched at it were quickly jammed and went off course. If it didn't have such an advanced ECM suite, many more missiles would have gotten close, possibly hitting them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twich Posted March 11, 2004 Share Posted March 11, 2004 I have a question, which is not necessarily limited to the VF-19/VF-22S. I was watching Modern Marvels on the history channel last night, and they were talking about Commercial jets....anyways, they said that the most powerful engine for a commercial jet was made for the Boeing 777, and each engine was capable of producing 90,000 lbs of thrust or 40909 kgs of thrust per engine. Now if I recall correctly, the VF-19S has an engine thrust of 78000 kgs of thrust per engine or 171600 lbs of thrust per engine and the VF-22S has something like 60000 kgs of thrust (or 132000 lbs). Even though the max power is only 60% of max while in atmosphere, I still think that the amount of power is insane...the reason being is that it seems that a valk would be able to power itself and accelerate while going straight up only on one engine because the power of the engine exceeds the weight of the plane. Given the empty weight of a VF-22S at 9000kg...add maybe a total weight of 30-35k kgs with fuel and full missle load...it just seems that the power of the engine is just too much... Why do the later valks have so much power? Is it because that amount of thrust is needed to escape Earth's Gravity? Or is it some other reason? I would really like an explanation for this, so if anyone can help me out, I would greatly appreciate it. Thanks Larry T. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted March 11, 2004 Share Posted March 11, 2004 Heh, must have been an older ep. The current high-end engine is the GE90-115B. 115,540lbs thrust. Contingency rating of over 127,000lbs. (Airliners are my true passion). Anyways---power=acceleration and climb-rate. That's pretty much it. And as you mentioned, if you want to get to space, you need insane power. The full power of the Space Shuttle is 7.7 million pounds. Need Mach 25 for orbit, takes a lot of power to get to that speed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Posted March 11, 2004 Share Posted March 11, 2004 Okay, I'm curious - do their rules specifically mention "no transforming robots!"...? Or does two wings, a couple of engines, and a fuselage not count as sufficently airplane-shaped enough by them...?! LOL...maybe THEY know something we don't Graham Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retracting Head Ter Ter Posted March 11, 2004 Share Posted March 11, 2004 I have a question, which is not necessarily limited to the VF-19/VF-22S. I was watching Modern Marvels on the history channel last night, and they were talking about Commercial jets....anyways, they said that the most powerful engine for a commercial jet was made for the Boeing 777, and each engine was capable of producing 90,000 lbs of thrust or 40909 kgs of thrust per engine. Now if I recall correctly, the VF-19S has an engine thrust of 78000 kgs of thrust per engine or 171600 lbs of thrust per engine and the VF-22S has something like 60000 kgs of thrust (or 132000 lbs). Even though the max power is only 60% of max while in atmosphere, I still think that the amount of power is insane...the reason being is that it seems that a valk would be able to power itself and accelerate while going straight up only on one engine because the power of the engine exceeds the weight of the plane. Given the empty weight of a VF-22S at 9000kg...add maybe a total weight of 30-35k kgs with fuel and full missle load...it just seems that the power of the engine is just too much...Why do the later valks have so much power? Is it because that amount of thrust is needed to escape Earth's Gravity? Or is it some other reason? I would really like an explanation for this, so if anyone can help me out, I would greatly appreciate it. Thanks Larry T. You know, even with that kind of crazy power and low weight, 48 secs from brake release to orbit is still quite impossible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F-ZeroOne Posted March 11, 2004 Share Posted March 11, 2004 According to "the rules" anything that can reach space, isn't a plane, it's a spaceship. Thus they won't give the X-15 most of its records. YF-19's can go in space, so they're not a plane. "Hey, mister, those darn well better not be hands I can see up this fuselage!" Thanks for clearing that up, David. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.