VF-1D 'The Tired. Old Debate'

[Radd]

Ok, now we've heard it all time and again. 'The VF-1D being a trainer is a Robotech idea and there is nothing in Macross that explicitely states it's a trainer of any sort'.

Now, is there any source that says beyond any doubt that the VF-1D is not a trainer? The compendium offered nothing on this, simply mentioning that it had 2 headlasers, like the VF-1J, and mentioning it among all the other VF-1 varients that are two seaters.

Now one of the arguments I've heard that the VF-1D is a trainer even in the Macross universe is it's colour scheme as seen in SDF Macross being bright orange, and that it's colours are similar to the VT-1 from 'DYRL?'.

Another argument against is the VF-0D, which is probably a direct predecessor if the number/letter schemes mean anything like that, seeing as the VF-0S and VF-0A both have direct decendents in the VF-1S and the VF-1A.

All of this is circumstancial, though, is there any solid evidence pointing either way?

[Mechamaniac]

Well, the Hasegawa VF-1D kit comes with decals that say Pilot and Trainer or sometning like that, that would be clue number one.

Also, you never see the D anywhere else, except for those wierd variants that show up in Max and Millia's wedding.

And, if you look at the design of the thing, not only is it a two seater, but the design of the head at least IMHO says something. I think the design of the head, having two distinct eyepieces signifies one for the instructor, and one for the pilot. More than likely, the instructor eyepiece would give more specific data that the trainer could use to coach the pilot etc. They would be oriented the same way that the seats are when in battroid mode. Remember in the second episode when Hikaru comes up out of the thing, and you see a seat above his on the big bar that slides up out of it in battroid.

So, assuming that none of the artbooks have a translation that signifies the thing as a trainer, isn't it enough that throughout the original series, that's all we see it being used for?

[daeudi]

the D probably is ALSO used as a trainer- but the mere fact that the one used in the first episode was fully armed says that is not its only role.

In the military, all the -D designation means is that it is a Dual seat variant, when the typical or -A variant is a single seat.

[The_Major]

Well it is my opinion that the VF-1D was strictly ment to be a Trainer as it is only seen in weird configs and the bright orange paintscheem that screams "Get outta my way im a noob" and as for it getting fully armed and ready to fly, hikaru entered the fight a little late in the game, and as such shows that not only was he asleep but that the VF-1D was the last to be armed, and the fact that it can be armed is no proof that its not just a trainer, as all trainers have hard points for live fire exercises and weapons trainin.

My conclusion, It is a trainer that was outfitted to fight when an unknown and Very numerous enemy force attacked.

and thats my 2 cents

[EXO]

Again, the only thing that would refute the fact that it's just a trainer are the letters "VF" which stands for "Valkyrie Fighter", as oppose to the Ostrich which is designated as a "VT" which of course stands for "Valkyrie Trainer". Of course each type is designated to some sort of rank or hiarchy in the system. I would assume it means that your not quite good enough to fight or if you are fighting, you're still not good enough to shoot at... But it seems that the color designates the fact that it's a trainer more than the head. But that's just speculation.

[wolfx]

Also, you never see the D anywhere else, except for those wierd variants that show up in Max and Millia's wedding.

Not quite. You also see one on the Mars episode. Same colors and everything, on guard duty with a gunpod.

[Skull Leader]

*Before I launch into my own explination, I would like to point out that the vast majority of Macrossworld members who want to debate this are standing over a VERY dead horse with a large shovel in their hands...

having said that, I will now proceed to beat the corpse that lies before me!*

Exo, I would argue that the V in "VF" actually refers to "Variable"... not "Valkyrie".

It's pretty plain to see that the VF-1D COULD be used as a trainer, but there is screenshot proof that they exsisted as standard service valkyries (a.k.a. "Bye Bye Mars", and "Wedding Bells"). Referring to the paint-scheme is a pretty weak argument, because it seems that a wide variety of paintjobs were employed by Valkyrie squadrons in Macross (hell, Max flies a dark blue valkyrie while Milia flies a bright red one...hardly less outlandish than the VF-1D). I am not going so far as to say that the Tan/Orange paintscheme is an as-yet unknown squadron-specific... merely that the color scheme in question clearly does NOT imply that a new pilot would be the only one flying it.

As near as I can tell, when the Macross "canon" universe is looked at as a whole, BOTH the VT-1, and the VF-1D existed together. As such, it would make sense that a pilot would start his VF training on the VT-1 and in later stages move to the VF-1D. The VF-1D could also serve as a 2-seater active-service fighter.... no doubt the presence of a second pilot would make things much easier in some respects. Either to serve as RIO or whatever.

I can't provide technical proof like some of the aircraft-gurus around here, but I think this is a pretty solid argument. (I would, however, invite anyone who thinks they can to prove me wrong.... after all that's why we're here... right?)

Edited April 15, 2004 by Skull Leader

[Gerwalker]

Is the Macross Perfect Book a canon source? Surely it is. Then just pick your copy of the book (if you don't have a copy pls log out from MW right now!!! ) and look for the black and white diagrams of the VF-1. I don't have it right now (I'm at work) so I can't quote the exact page but you would easily find a pic of the VF-1D cockpit that states something like: Student Seat and Capt. Dagger (I think it is in the same page that depicts a low-res cutaway battroid) So a canon source indicates that it is clearly a trainer, and advaced and armed trainer that is combat ready if you want.

[bsu legato]

Is the Macross Perfect Book a canon source? Surely it is. Then just pick your copy of the book (if you don't have a copy pls log out from MW right now!!! ) and look for the black and white diagrams of the VF-1. I don't have it right now (I'm at work) so I can't quote the exact page but you would easily find a pic of the VF-1D cockpit that states something like: Student Seat and Capt. Dagger (I think it is in the same page that depicts a low-res cutaway battroid) So a canon source indicates that it is clearly a trainer, and advaced and armed trainer that is combat ready if you want.

To be fair, that just indicates that VT-102 was a trainer. Can we really class every VF-1D as a trainer based on that one example?

[EXO]

Exo, I would argue that the V in "VF" actually refers to "Variable"... not "Valkyrie".

Thanks Skull Leader! You're absolutely correct. But then that's why your the Skull Leader and I'm just a CF.

[GreenGuy42]

Wasn't the Macross woefully low on resources through much of the war? I mean yes, the ship DID have its own manfactoring capibilities, but seems reasonable, given the size of the Zentran force, that losses probably outstripped replacements.

To my point... As stated earlier, the -1D HAD weapon hard points, and I'm sure it could handle itself in a fight as well as a single seater (at least in space.) It would make sense that the crew would press these trainers into service to shore up and major holes in their depleted squadrons until new fighters could be produced. That MIGHT explain the -1D's limited combat experience.

[Anubis]

I still say the D model served a dual purpose, as a trainer, and also for pilots coming off of two seaters like the F-14, as shown in M0 where Shin and Edgar get a D model VF-0 instead of sticking Shin in a A model. It would make sense not to break up the pilot/rio relationship if that's how they flew for years already anyway.

[daeudi]

I still say the D model served a dual purpose, as a trainer, and also for pilots coming off of two seaters like the F-14, as shown in M0 where Shin and Edgar get a D model VF-0 instead of sticking Shin in a A model. It would make sense not to break up the pilot/rio relationship if that's how they flew for years already anyway.

Best answer I've heard.

[Gerwalker]

Is the Macross Perfect Book a canon source? Surely it is. Then just pick your copy of the book (if you don't have a copy pls log out from MW right now!!!  ) and look for the black and white diagrams of the VF-1. I don't have it right now (I'm at work) so I can't quote the exact page but you would easily find a pic of the VF-1D cockpit that states something like: Student Seat and Capt. Dagger (I think it is in the same page that depicts a low-res cutaway battroid) So a canon source indicates that it is clearly a trainer, and advaced and armed trainer that is combat ready if you want.

To be fair, that just indicates that VT-102 was a trainer. Can we really class every VF-1D as a trainer based on that one example?

From a cientific point of you I agree with you. VT-102 could be the one and only one VF-1D in such role (possible but not probable)

[Mechamaniac]

*Before I launch into my own explination, I would like to point out that the vast majority of Macrossworld members who want to debate this are standing over a VERY dead horse with a large shovel in their hands...

Yeah, I forgot to add this to my first post....

[RicePiece]

*Before I launch into my own explination, I would like to point out that the vast majority of Macrossworld members who want to debate this are standing over a VERY dead horse with a large shovel in their hands...

Yeah, I forgot to add this to my first post....

HAHAHAHA

[RichterX]

Remember that the number of the VF-1D Hikaru took was VT-102 as if Variable Trainer 102

In Zero the guys that are riding the VF-0Ds are also in adapting process to the Zero fighters so probably the use of the D Valkyries was originally training

[Radd]

So I guess this thread answers my original question...that there is no solid evidence either way. Just speculation.

[mikeszekely]

It's very likely that the VT-1 was used as a basic trainer, while the VF-1D could have been used for more advanced training.

I think we can all agree that VF-1Ds were used for training. The debate seems to be if training was the VF-1Ds main role.

Personally, I don't think so. I think that the VF-1D was intended for combat. I mean, for one thing, episodes where the VF-1D have been used in combat have already been pointed out. Second, remember that Misa was ordering Hikaru into battle. She didn't know who was piloting, but she obviously expected that particular VF-1D to participate in the battle.

But finally, remember that in Macross we only got to see Spacy forces, but we know that the UN maitains other branches. In the real world, the USAF tends to fly single-seaters, while the Navy prefers dual-seaters. It's a possibility that the Spacy prefers single seaters (maybe so they don't lose two pilots if something goes wrong with the fighter), while another group prefers dual-seaters. In fact, I'd say it's likely... Shin and Edgar look like they were Navy, and they fly a dual-seat VF-0D.

[azrael]

Where's Egan when we need him....

[Coota0]

I think it's probably both just like the F/A-18B/D, the F-15B/D, the F-16D and the F-5/T-38.

Both a trainer and an actual fighter.

Edited April 16, 2004 by Coota0

[VF-19]

I think it's probably both just like the F/A-18B/D, the F-15D, the F-16D and the F-5/T-38.

Both a trainer and an actual fighter.

One problem with going along with the "D" designation for trainer. The F-14D is not a trainer. It's one of the latest/later model of F-14s.

As for the role of the VF-1D, I'd say it's both a trainer and a 2 seater. The two camera system that was mentioned on the head, does work both ways. While the RIO does not always have the best visibility, he/she still is able to see outside the aircraft.

[Coota0]

I wasn't saying that the VF-1D was a trainer just because it had a "D" desiganation, what I was saying is that all of those aircraft are trainers, but are perfectly capable of loading up with ammunition and missles and fighting.

Hence the Mentioning of the F/A-18B/D, the F-5/T-38 and the F-15B/D all are trainers that can function like thhey're combatant counterparts in the case of the F/A-18D the Marine Corps uses it as a night attack aircraft and the F-15E was developed from testing either an F-15B or D airframe.

[The_Major]

Ok ive thought alot about this, gone over all the info posted, as well as realworld info and have come to a conclusion that everyone will like.

VF-1D is the series of fighter VT is a Trainer designation for Individual VF-1D's similer to the T and AT version of the Texan Fighter (WWII).

Then we have the VT-1 wich as seen in DYRL is a dedicated flight Trainer, as it doesnt even seem to have a normal head conviguration, just sensors equipment and a fake simulation weapon.

The VF-1D is a fighter as it is able to be loaded with a full combat arsenel, but has the VT Variant for live fire exercises, where as the VT-1 is a dedicated trainer.

[Aurel Tristen]

Ok, now we've heard it all time and again. 'The VF-1D being a trainer is a Robotech idea and there is nothing in Macross that explicitely states it's a trainer of any sort'.

Now, is there any source that says beyond any doubt that the VF-1D is not a trainer? The compendium offered nothing on this, simply mentioning that it had 2 headlasers, like the VF-1J, and mentioning it among all the other VF-1 varients that are two seaters.

Now one of the arguments I've heard that the VF-1D is a trainer even in the Macross universe is it's colour scheme as seen in SDF Macross being bright orange, and that it's colours are similar to the VT-1 from 'DYRL?'.

Another argument against is the VF-0D, which is probably a direct predecessor if the number/letter schemes mean anything like that, seeing as the VF-0S and VF-0A both have direct decendents in the VF-1S and the VF-1A.

All of this is circumstancial, though, is there any solid evidence pointing either way?

The VF-1D is a Dual seat version Variable Fighter which is used as a trainer, a forced recon unit and can be used as a combatant with live-fire rounds. The proof that it is used as a trainer is the fact that 'Stud Seat' (Student) and 'INST - CAPT - DAGGER" (Instructor) as well as VT-102 were written on the side of the cockpit.

[The_Major]

and so the arguement ends

[Ivan]

I'm surprised that no one mentioned the VF-17D, which is definitely not a trainer.

[David Hingtgen]

The Navy and Marine F/A-18D's are very different planes. The Marine version is NOT a trainer. It is just like an F-14---the rear seat is for the WSO, nothing more. No 2nd set of controls. The Navy bought F-18D's for trainers, the Marines have a lot more stuff on their Hornets (dedicated all-weather night-attack versions) and thus need a second guy to operate it all. There are many Marine Hornet squadrons made up of nothing but the D-model. Mainly the VMFA(AW) squadrons.

PS---don't forget the F-4D. (Another "not a trainer", though like all F-4's it has 2 seats). Of course, way early USAF F-4's had 2 pilots and no RIO! They soon realized the Navy way was better.

Interestingly, there will be no F-22 trainers. 2-seat F-22B's were cancelled.

Edited April 16, 2004 by David Hingtgen

[RichterX]

I'm surprised that no one mentioned the VF-17D, which is definitely not a trainer.

Because it is not a two seater comparated to the trainer variant VF-17T

[Gerwalker]

The VF-1D is a Dual seat version Variable Fighter which is used as a trainer, a forced recon unit and can be used as a combatant with live-fire rounds. The proof that it is used as a trainer is the fact that 'Stud Seat' (Student) and 'INST - CAPT - DAGGER" (Instructor) as well as VT-102 were written on the side of the cockpit.

That's what I said already in page 1 of this thread quoting MPerfect book, but I had not the details then:so at least the VT-102 is a trainer having an instructor seat and a student seat.

I think that the discussion on the "D" denomination is futile without considering what fighters with a "D" variant were known by the time Macross was aired (or at least when the linearts with their final denominations were released)

For instance:

quoting from here: Tomcat Alley Site

-the designation F-14D was originally used to describe a downgraded version of the F-14 proposed to the Navy in the 1970's (maybe our VF-1D follows the same idea too)

-The first flight of an F-14D (i.e. prototype) took place on the 23rd of November 1987 (Macross was five years old then)

[Druna Skass]

I still say the D model served a dual purpose, as a trainer, and also for pilots coming off of two seaters like the F-14, as shown in M0 where Shin and Edgar get a D model VF-0 instead of sticking Shin in a A model. It would make sense not to break up the pilot/rio relationship if that's how they flew for years already anyway.

Along with that my opinon as has been that the Ds were used for special roles like Wild Weasels, or ground/anti-ship assaults.

[Druna Skass]

Hmm, 30 replies for a dead horse topic...

Did someone inject and resurect this horse with the T-virus...

[RichterX]

Hmm, 30 replies for a dead horse topic...

Did someone inject and resurect this horse with the T-virus...

No it was with the G-virus

it keeps one mutating each time it is killed

[tetsujin]

*Before I launch into my own explination, I would like to point out that the vast majority of Macrossworld members who want to debate this are standing over a VERY dead horse with a large shovel in their hands...

Yeah, I forgot to add this to my first post....

HAHAHAHA

What is that? A dog?

[Coota0]

The Navy and Marine F/A-18D's are very different planes. The Marine version is NOT a trainer. It is just like an F-14---the rear seat is for the WSO, nothing more. No 2nd set of controls. The Navy bought F-18D's for trainers, the Marines have a lot more stuff on their Hornets (dedicated all-weather night-attack versions) and thus need a second guy to operate it all. There are many Marine Hornet squadrons made up of nothing but the D-model. Mainly the VMFA(AW) squadrons.

My point was that both F/A-18D's were the same airframe with different avionics (The controls can be put back into the backseat of any Marine F/A-18D its just takes a while)