imai files - SDCSC & mospeada sketches

[rtsurfer]

The mass/size ratios in RT are a screwy due to the OSM and TY's idea of a "technological downgrade" post TMS.

More so the former than the latter, in all honesty. The mass-to-size ratios are a bit loopy because each show is about humanity's first alien war and first transforming mecha, which gets problematic because the settings of the original three show considerable variation on the technological advancement front.

That sounds like a good arguement for not importing the OSM stats without first adjusting them so each mecha better fits into the expanded universe. How things are depicted by the animation and dialogue as part of Robotech would be the only limitation, which leaves a bit of wiggle room and doesn't necessarily have to match the three source anime and their stats. There were a number of knowledgable fans who would have been more than happy to help suggest stat adjustments or check other people's work if HG had just ask. In fact it doesn't really make sense for the four realities to match up since they each came from a different place and are going in a different direction. Of course its probably easier to just adopt the OSM stats pretty much as they are and pretend technology took a nosedive, rather than trying to balance out the Robotech universe, make it more cohesive, and allow it to stand on its own.

[jaymz]

New proposal for the Vindicator problem.

The VF-X-5 program had more than one design in it.

Design one was akin to the VF-1X out of the 1st ed RPG's Strike Force sourcebook.

It failed at the prototype stage.

Design two was the Condor

It showed enough promise that it went into a testing run phase at which point it was deemed a failure. Later it was reworked into a battloid only design as an airbourne mechanized infantry unit.

Design three was the Vindicator

It had the most promise and was put into a limited production run (100-200 produced) with many taken on the Pioneer mission.
Production was stopped after the engineers went back to the drawing board and did some redesigning which resulted in the Alpha which as we all know went into full mass production and made up the bulk of the VF forces of the Pioneer mission. What we see in NG is Vindicators that were re-purposed for use in the final assault on Reflex Point including a shadow device and modified disruptor gunpod.


This would eliminate the need to determine a purpose for the Vindicator as it's purpose would be a general purpose fighter much like it's smaller offshoot the Alpha, as well as removing it as being an "extended/enlarged" Alpha in turn making the Alpha a "shortened/shrunken" Vindicator.

EDIT 2 - Alternate version - Vindicator scrapped and redesigned into the Alpha (thus still a shortened/shrunken Vindicator as opposed to the enlarged/extended Alpha). Later the design is revisited and reworked into a Battloid only mechanized airbourne infantry/close air support model to replace the COndor.





EDIT - I could also see many veteran pilot's using these and doing well since they are already used to piloting larger mecha anyway and leaving the smaller Alpha for the newer recruits/pilots. Could explain why there are enough surviving that they re-purpose them.

EDIT 3 - I think this is likely the least convoluted or complicated way to look at the conundrum that is the over-sized Alpha battloid seen in the series.

[Seto Kaiba]

It has occurred to me in the past that a lot about Sentinels vs. New Generation would make a heck of a lot more sense if we were to assume that the Protoculture sensing capabilities were an innovation of the Regess' forces [...]

You attached the wrong name to that quote there, chief...

Admittedly, you've got a good point there. Knowing that it took the UEEF twenty-odd years just to figure out how the Invid always seemed to know where they were doesn't really give you the impression that these are humanity's elite defenders.

That's not the only conflict they could have resolved if they had designed a completely new set of mecha for the Regent's Invid, instead of just reusing the GCM designs but apparently it was cheaper and easier not to create new designs.

Let's be realistic... it's not like Harmony Gold had a choice in the matter. Robotech's new animation has always been produced on the tightest of shoestring budgets, even back at the peak of Robotech's popularity in the mid-80's. Reusing designs and having the few new designs done in-house instead of by a professional design studio saves cash, and after engaging and then dismissing a top-shelf writing staff for Sentinels it's likely the budget was already in pretty dire shape.

As well, I don't think that any of the post-reboot canon actually says that the Regent's mecha have Protoculture Sensors: the Shadow Chronicles RPG deals with the Regess' Invid, and the only remaining canon concerning the war with the Regent is found in Prelude to the Shadow Chronicles.

Considering that the development of the shadow stealth technology is supposedly the end result of Edwards' study of captured Invid technology, and the UEEF was still caught up in fighting the Regent, there's a fairly good case for saying that the Regent's mecha had the same protoculture-sensing equipment as the Regess's forces did.

This got me thinking, how exactly are the Super Shadow Alpha Fighter & Beta different from the standard SA/B? Is there a size difference, a notable structural difference, new engines or just the add-ons?

According to AoTSC (pg85), they're stock Shadow Alpha/Beta units with experimental mods and armored booster packs that load the airframe to its limits. That's as specific as it gets, sadly. The only change they really talk about are the "armored booster packs".

If its just the add-ons, could the standard A/B & SA/B be modified to accept the super enhancements?

Based on the description in the book, I would say it's safe to assume they can.

I guess the thing that puzzles me the most is why they deployed untested WMD, the devastating Neutron S, but left the Super Shadows sitting in SSL?

Not technically an untested WMD... the Haydonites (claimed) to have experience with the Neutron-S warheads, and Rick Hunter was on a mission to test-fire one just in case the missiles were needed later. The UEEF test-firing went horribly awry (or horribly right as far as the Haydonites are concerned) and created that black hole they're stuck orbiting in the movie.

Of course its probably easier to just adopt the OSM stats pretty much as they are and pretend technology took a nosedive, rather than trying to balance out the Robotech universe, make it more cohesive, and allow it to stand on its own.

Realistically, it's pretty much impossible for Robotech to stand on its own as long as it consists almost exclusively of material from the original shows. Using the OSM stats is just the path of least resistance for stats, since it matches perfectly what's in the animation of the series. They've already taken a few tentative steps to non-destructive balance things out, but it's essentially a boondoggle because (as HG marketing guy Kevin McKeever put it) the management at Harmony Gold doesn't see much point in doing something that doesn't (directly) generate revenue.

New proposal for the Vindicator problem.

The VF-X-5 program had more than one design in it.

Generally speaking, if there had been another design programme competing with that for the VF-X-5, it would/should have been assigned a separate number of its own. IIRC, it was the VF-X-6 that started development on what would later become the Alpha, and numbers 4-9 are already spoken for.

[jaymz]

New proposal for the Vindicator problem.

The VF-X-5 program had more than one design in it.

Generally speaking, if there had been another design programme competing with that for the VF-X-5, it would/should have been assigned a separate number of its own. IIRC, it was the VF-X-6 that started development on what would later become the Alpha, and numbers 4-9 are already spoken for.

Yes I know. Though I don;t recall 8 being used......regardless, people seem to be so concerned that the Vindicator HAS to exist so to me at least makes the most sense. I am not saying it works 100% but it is the path of least resistance in making exist if you (meaning those that do not you specifically obviously) want it to exist.

EDIT - also there is precedence in reality of one design becoming another after some redesign and one design being changed but not changing the number. The YF-17 (Originally competed against the YF-16 and lost) became the YF-18 which eventually the F/A-18 and the F-16 frame being modified into the F-16XL which lost to the F-15E Strike Eagle.

Furthermore look at my proposal this way......the Vindicator was the final evolution of the VF-X-5 program. Design one would be the first draft so to speak then back to the drawing board. Design two, the Condor, was draft two and while better was still essentially a failure so back to the drawing board. The Vindicator was the final best version but not as good as they hoped so limited run and then back to the drawing board at which point they went with the VF-X-6 moniker and designed the Alpha. The VF-X-5 designs I am citing all have similar transformation sequences and size so it's evolution is not all that far fetched. So to me looking at the example of the YF-17 to YF-18 to F/A-18, at least on some small level, allows me to stretch my suspension of disbelief enough to let this work. I haven't exactly heard anything else that is less far fetched over all.


EDIT 2 - Furthermore I find it easier to believe the Alpha is a shortened/shrunken design based on the Vindicator than the Vindicator being a extended/enlarged version of the Alpha but that's just me.

[ShadowLogan]

@seto Kaiba

Sir, I fear you are doomed to disappointment.

I know, atleast for the foreseable future.

Eh... that doesn't really make a heck of a lot of sense. I mean, we know that the Beta is meant to do a fairly specific job. It's there to give the Alpha enough oomph to get orbital, and occasionally to operate in concert with the Alpha as a heavier fighter-bomber. There isn't the same rationale with the alleged "giant Alpha", because the supposed benefits you ascribe to its existence raise the same question that the RPG stats for the VF-1 do... the rather damning question "Why bother with a regular Alpha at all, then?".

And the giant Alpha would also be tasked with a specific mission profile that would require the Beta's longer legs for the regular Alpha. Such an approach could also be used to give it more fire power (which the Beta does bring, though in the g-Alpha isn't going to get the same amount).

As to why use a regular Alpha. I would have to say that it comes down to a high/low mix of VFs and doctrine requirements do not require the g-Alpha in those numbers (just like Beta availability you point out later). The smaller Alpha also means more can be carried by a single ship, trading some capability for numbers.

If they're running CAP or mid-range recon, then they're already operating out of a base or a cruiser within their operational range... waste not, want not, other circumstances like that transfer of units from surface to orbit (or vice versa) is going to be accomplished a lot more efficiently by a Horizon-T/V or similar.

I don't think the Horizon will be the most efficient manner to ferry just a single Alpha or a pair of Alphas as it leaves open a lot of unused capacity and from a resouce standpoint is much heavier than it could be.

The CAP and recon though would also allow a larger radius without assist.

The TREAD/Beta doesn't really offer that much improvement for the Legioss/Alpha when docked,

Not so sure about that. The Beta gives:
-6 external hardpoints capable of carrying a variety of ordance
-3 big engines said to "allows for high thrust capabilities for an Alpha Battloid for high maneuverability in close combat, " (-source Infopedia)
-the Alpha SRM load is ~2x, though technically not all of them are available so its more like ~25%
-five big cannons, though one is blocked for sure. The remaining four may still be available if they remain useable
-gives surface of Earth to Lunar surface flight capacity, minimum of one way plus a short dogfight, technically longer range if the pair operate like a Staged Rocket.
-depending on how flexible the bomb bay could be converted for regular missile use
-provides a "second seat", where a multi-person crew is ideal in certain missions

About the only place your descrption qualifies is the practical SRM load and possibly the cannons if they are rendered unavailable. Everything else is a marked improvement over the "base line".

@jaymz

Yes I know. Though I don;t recall 8 being used......

VF-1 Valkaryie
VF-2 ???? (unused)
VF-3 ???? (unused)
VF-4 Lightning (canceled Prototype)
VF-5 Condor (canceled prototype, spin-off Condor Battloids)
VF-6 Alpha
VF-7 Beta (canceled prototype)
VF-8 Logan
VF-9 Beta (revised & updated -7)
VF-10 AGAC

At one time the Infopedia did have a different number sequence with the Beta in the -12 slot (IIRC the others where basically the same). Currently this really doesn't leave much room for new VFs unless one goes out of sequence OR the various services each have their own sequence.

Furthermore look at my proposal this way......the Vindicator was the final evolution of the VF-X-5 program

If the Condor Battloids are an indication of the VT's Battloid looks then if it is not wearing add-ons IMO it has to transform like the Beta fighter (possibly the Logan would work here). Not the Alpha (which only works IMO if the Condor is in armor-addons, the snout and shoulder joint-guard areas make it very difficult for an Alpha transformation to work).

I really can't see the VF-X-5 having two radically different approaches to transformation and still being regarded as the VF-5. And there is no available number for a VF to spin off of here unless we do something like I mentioned above. And the current take is that the VF-5 and VF-6 where simultaneous programs in canon. If the Alpha started off Vindicator size then why the reduction in size (an increase in size is much easier to explain IMO).

Then again maybe it would have been better for HG to put the Condor into deployment use for Sentinels Period instead of the A/B as in the OVA/Comics/Novels. That would seem to work with the NG background dialogue.

[jaymz]

@jaymz

Yes I know. Though I don;t recall 8 being used......

VF-1 Valkaryie
VF-2 ???? (unused)
VF-3 ???? (unused)
VF-4 Lightning (canceled Prototype)
VF-5 Condor (canceled prototype, spin-off Condor Battloids)
VF-6 Alpha
VF-7 Beta (canceled prototype)
VF-8 Logan
VF-9 Beta (revised & updated -7)
VF-10 AGAC

At one time the Infopedia did have a different number sequence with the Beta in the -12 slot (IIRC the others where basically the same). Currently this really doesn't leave much room for new VFs unless one goes out of sequence OR the various services each have their own sequence.

Furthermore look at my proposal this way......the Vindicator was the final evolution of the VF-X-5 program

If the Condor Battloids are an indication of the VT's Battloid looks then if it is not wearing add-ons IMO it has to transform like the Beta fighter (possibly the Logan would work here). Not the Alpha (which only works IMO if the Condor is in armor-addons, the snout and shoulder joint-guard areas make it very difficult for an Alpha transformation to work).

I really can't see the VF-X-5 having two radically different approaches to transformation and still being regarded as the VF-5. And there is no available number for a VF to spin off of here unless we do something like I mentioned above. And the current take is that the VF-5 and VF-6 where simultaneous programs in canon. If the Alpha started off Vindicator size then why the reduction in size (an increase in size is much easier to explain IMO).

Then again maybe it would have been better for HG to put the Condor into deployment use for Sentinels Period instead of the A/B as in the OVA/Comics/Novels. That would seem to work with the NG background dialogue.

Heh I forgot about the Logan becoming the VF-8....my bad

As for the transforming Condor, it depends on what you use as the basis of the fighter look. The uRRG (http://ptn.home.xs4all.nl/Veritech/Condor.html and I have seen what look to be pencil drawings that are very similar this elsewhere) looks like it should transform a lot lot like an Alpha as it looks similar to the alpha in some ways in fighter mode. Furthermore, just LOOK at the Condor in Battloid mode. Aside from the proboscis that is where a head would be the rest looks very similar to an Alpha as well. Not sure what makes you think the Condor would transform like the beta....

It also still makes more sense to me than trying to actually come up with a valid reason to create a NEW VF that is just a bigger Alpha. The only loadout we have ever been given (Old RPG) make it marginally more effective (all of a ten extra SRMs) at BEST over a standard Alpha and imo make it a pointless unit.

[rtsurfer]

Yes I know. Though I don;t recall 8 being used......

VF-1 Valkaryie
VF-2 ???? (unused)
VF-3 ???? (unused)
VF-4 Lightning (canceled Prototype)
VF-5 Condor (canceled prototype, spin-off Condor Battloids)
VF-6 Alpha
VF-7 Beta (canceled prototype)
VF-8 Logan
VF-9 Beta (revised & updated -7)
VF-10 AGAC

At one time the Infopedia did have a different number sequence with the Beta in the -12 slot (IIRC the others where basically the same). Currently this really doesn't leave much room for new VFs unless one goes out of sequence OR the various services each have their own sequence.

Don't forget the VF-X-6 Genia, which places two mecha in the #6 position and gives the Beta the #7 & #9 positions -- plus two older previous designations as I believe at one time the Beta was not only the VF-12 but also the VBF-1. I think the Shadow Alpha was the VAF-7 at one time.
Besides the designations aren't as simple as "VF" this and that, as the Alphas used to be the VAF-6 now they're the VFA-6. The Beta was the VBF-9 and now its the VFB-9 and the VF-X-7 or is it the YF-7, the AGAC (previously designated the "Ajax") was the VFH-10, the YF-4/VF-X-4 (no name in Robotech) never made it out of the prototype stage, and shouldn't the "canceled prototype" Condor be the VF-X-5 or maybe the YF-5 instead of the VF-5 which was its designation when it wasn't considered a failed prototype. IIRC most of the mecha didn't even have numerical designations when the tv series actually aired back in the 80's. What a mess.
So really there are any variety of ways another Veritech, Veritech prototype, or Battloid could be fit into the designations.

BTW, maybe the "large Alphas" are refit VF-X-6 Genias, I believe they may have been a little larger than the Alphas that replaced or beat them out or whatever was the transition from Genia to Alpha.

[ShadowLogan]

@rtsurfer
I was looking at more recent incarnations of the list to be used in materials like the 2E RPG and the RT.com Infopedia. I figured the VF-X-6 Genia is the VFA-6 Alpha prior to a name change and moving beyond the experimental/development stage (the F-22 was originally to be called the Lightning, but was changed later to the Raptor, so a name change is possible).

I recall the 1E RPG's VF-# sequence would assign the VF-2 to the Logan as opposed to the VF-8.

@jaymz
I have looked at the Condor in Battloid Mode. A discussion (at RT.com) relating the Condor to the Alpha resulted in my current thinking that the Condor sould be nothing more than an Alpha in add-on armor (ala the Armored Battloid in "Miss Macross"). A self-contained transformation IMO has more in common with the Beta and Logan than the Alpha.

Unless the Condor is really in Gaurdian mode in the animation, the layout is prohibitive to following the Alpha's approach, but not for a Beta or Logan style:
-the snout is fixed, so the shoulder intakes likely don't rotate like the Alpha, and so would be like the Logan and closer to a Beta
-The arm/shoulder joints have a structure that looks like it would be more ackward (if not close to impossible) to transform Alpha style, but said structure would not impact the Beta or Logan's approach to the arms (which are basically the same)
-the Alpha's shoulder intakes rotate so the legs more or less don't move radically in transformation, given the above the legs would have to follow either the Beta (legs swing back only) OR Logan (hips & legs slide back) in a transformation
-the feet are fixed like the Beta
-about the only thing that might be Alpha like in the transformation would be the wings

I am not saying the g-Alpha needs to have its own VF-# that is seperate from the VF-6 line as in the past. So we avoid having to find a new # slot. Nor would I be opposed to the g-Alpha increase in size occurring over numerous models to what we see in the animation at the end of NG. Basically branching off into two sized lines a static size and one that has growth steps over time to what we saw at the end of NG.

The view I would take with the 1E RPG Vindicator, is that PB was correct in that the unit exists though they did get some of the stats wrong (Weapon systems and speed would be two items I would change for sure).

[glitterboy2098]

it's also possible that the project that created the condor also spun off the 'giant alpha', ala the LWF program that produced the YF-16/YF-17... the first going on to produce the F-16 Falcon for the airforce, the latter being picked up by the navy and developed into the F/A-18 Hornet.

it's possible the VF-X-5 program that produced the condor also had an alternate proposal or competing design that looked like a big Alpha '-6. when the project was dropped in favor of the beta, the Condor battloid was created..and when the production of Beta's failed to meet # requirements, the 'giant alpha' was pushed through an accellerated design finalization to fill the doctrinal gap. not unlike how the NATF (a navalized F-22 raptor) was supposed to replace the F-14's..but when the NATF got delayed (and later cancelled) the F/A-18E/F 'super hornet' was quickly developed to fill the gap.

the size of the 'giant alpha' would allow booster systems similar to the Beta's, possibly giving transorbital capability, and while nowhere near as well armed as a beta, the giant alpha could easily be packing 60+ MRM's in launchers similar to the smaller Alpha's layout. this would allow it to serve in many of the beta's battlefeild roles, albeit in a lesser capacity.

[Seto Kaiba]

EDIT - also there is precedence in reality of one design becoming another after some redesign and one design being changed but not changing the number.

Well, yes and no... it's not at all uncommon for a design to be changed and then issued a new number. Reuse of numbers, however, generally only occurs with a modification of an existing (completed) design. The "giant Alpha" might look like an Alpha, but there's really no way you could modify an Alpha into one. Likewise, with the prevailing theory in here being that this is supposedly a predecessor to the completed Beta, there's no way it could have a unique design number because 7 and 8 are taken by the Beta prototype and Logan respectively.

@seto Kaiba

Sir, I fear you are doomed to disappointment.

I know, atleast for the foreseable future.

Honestly, I'm not sure if that's optimism or pessimism there... yes, things will inevitably stay as they are for the foreseeable future, but the foreseeable future for Robotech looks a lot like another twenty year holding pattern in the making.

And the giant Alpha would also be tasked with a specific mission profile that would require the Beta's longer legs for the regular Alpha. Such an approach could also be used to give it more fire power (which the Beta does bring, though in the g-Alpha isn't going to get the same amount).

But that leads us right back to the all-important question of why the UEEF would even keep the regular-size Alpha around when they have a larger version in their inventory that neatly does everything the normal Alpha can't and negates the need for the Beta altogether. The so-called "Giant Alpha" as you outline it fundamentally undermines almost everything about the Alpha and Beta in canon...

I don't think the Horizon will be the most efficient manner to ferry just a single Alpha or a pair of Alphas as it leaves open a lot of unused capacity and from a resource standpoint is much heavier than it could be.

As per canon, the Horizon-T/V platform's cargo capacity is modular... they can fit a special fighter container or just sling the Alphas under the wings if they need to.

Not so sure about that. The Beta gives:
-6 external hardpoints capable of carrying a variety of ordance

Oddly, the line art only shows four... which are so small that only light ordinance could be reasonably carried on them.

-3 big engines said to "allows for high thrust capabilities for an Alpha Battloid for high maneuverability in close combat, " (-source Infopedia)

Which, when you think about it, doesn't actually work... the engines aren't equipped with thrust-vectoring nozzles, so they wouldn't confer any additional maneuverability. They're never shown demonstrating this supposed high maneuverability either. In the series, they seem less maneuverable than a "naked" Alpha, and in RTSC there's no difference visible.

-the Alpha SRM load is ~2x, though technically not all of them are available so its more like ~25%

IIRC, aren't most of them blocked off in fighter mode? It's only the two dorsal missile launchers that are accessible, and even then their line of fire is at least partly blocked.

-five big cannons, though one is blocked for sure. The remaining four may still be available if they remain useable

The center-mounted forward gun is definitely out, and other two are potentially out as well when in battloid mode. The forearm guns have a clear line of fire, but they're fixed-aft and thus not exactly helpful.

-depending on how flexible the bomb bay could be converted for regular missile use

Doubtful, IMO... the bay is fairly small, and has a fairly small hatch as well. It would have to be a very short, very narrow missile.

-provides a "second seat", where a multi-person crew is ideal in certain missions

Assuming that the "backseater" in the Beta's cockpit is capable of assuming control of the combined craft. There is no evidence that this capability exists.

Don't forget the VF-X-6 Genia, which places two mecha in the #6 position and gives the Beta the #7 & #9 positions

Eh... not really, no. As the designation suggests, the VF-X-6 Genia is a prototype Alpha in early/mid development. In the absence of a competing design, the completed version of the plane would assume the number as VF-6... or in this case, VF/A-6.

IIRC most of the mecha didn't even have numerical designations when the tv series actually aired back in the 80's. What a mess.

Oh, that's perfectly true. At the time Robotech made its debut, and for quite a while afterwards, there wasn't any designation system in place for the mecha. Robotech's (re)writers never bothered to come up with one, because the series was only meant to be the flashy toy commercial promoting Revell's preexisting "Robotech" toy line. In a way, it's ironic they did that with the shows they did... since the original three shows were part of the industry movement that said that anime could be a medium for serious storytelling and sophisticated drama, not just a means to sell toys to young children. That Robotech survived as something other than a toy commercial is a testament to the quality of writing from the original three shows, particularly Macross, which was the whole reason they'd made Robotech in the first place and the most successful of Robotech's sagas.

It wasn't until the writers at Palladium books stuck their oar in years later and forced some semblance of organization on things that a designation system started to emerge. It took quite a bit longer for an official designation system to emerge, based primarily around HG's use of Macross OSM.



EDIT: Spelling!

[jedi078]

-depending on how flexible the bomb bay could be converted for regular missile use

Doubtful, IMO... the bay is fairly small, and has a fairly small hatch as well. It would have to be a very short, very narrow missile.

I've done an analysis of the Beta's bombay and so cargo/bombay area.....I will put this up a separate thread so as not to derail this thread. But the answer is yes the cargo/bombay area could be converted to house MRM/LRM's.

-provides a "second seat", where a multi-person crew is ideal in certain missions

Assuming that the "backseater" in the Beta's cockpit is capable of assuming control of the combined craft. There is no evidence that this capability exists.

IIRC most tandem two seat aircraft do not have flight controls for the RIO/WSO/EWO.

As it is the VBF-9A is defiantly not a two seater. I did make a two seat Beta where the sensor head and cockpit are swapped around.

[ShadowLogan]

But that leads us right back to the all-important question of why the UEEF would even keep the regular-size Alpha around when they have a larger version in their inventory that neatly does everything the normal Alpha can't and negates the need for the Beta altogether. The so-called "Giant Alpha" as you outline it fundamentally undermines almost everything about the Alpha and Beta in canon...

As I've said before, the REF doctrine may not require every VF in their fleet up to the standards offered by the g-Alpha. We see that with the Alpha to Beta ratio during the NG operation in Ep1 and later in Ep83-85 shows us the REF does not want every VF in their fleet to have access to the same capabilities during that time frame, and it is possible that the approach pre-dates the Beta's introduction.

As per canon, the Horizon-T/V platform's cargo capacity is modular... they can fit a special fighter container or just sling the Alphas under the wings if they need to.

Yes I know they have modular capacity, but the baseline craft is still capable of transporting 300 tons (1E Sent. RPG, don't have anything more recent) per bunker (or is that supposed to be w/both?) and you want to use it to only transport ~1/20th of that (assume two Alphas fully loaded in 1E RPG)? That is a lot of wasted capacity, even if it isn't configured to utilize it.

Oddly, the line art only shows four... which are so small that only light ordinance could be reasonably carried on them.

I'm going off the Infopedia writeup on the Beta. They say "3 x hardpoints on each wing capable of carrying long-range missiles or multiple ejection launchers"

The center-mounted forward gun is definitely out, and other two are potentially out as well when in battloid mode. The forearm guns have a clear line of fire, but they're fixed-aft and thus not exactly helpful.

Agree the Center gun is out. The Leg cannons might be blocked at times, but are still available. The Forearm guns though offer the ability to "cover" the rear flank to some degree even in fighter mode, plus it may be possible for the arms to deply (or rotate minimum) while connected (not sure if this image from the uRRG is fanart or OSM related but: http://ptn.home.xs4all.nl/images/coolab.jpg).

Which, when you think about it, doesn't actually work...

That was a quote direct from the Infopedia. While the Beta doesn't have thrust vectoring, the fact the legs are still deployable while connected gives it a crude form (see Legs manuever in NG#1 when Scott executes a breaking maneuver while connected during re-entry).

If used properly such a configuration noted in the infopedia would work, but the animation isn't supported by it (not the 1st time that has happend). You have 5-7 engines capable of numerous vector addition configurations using high thrust.

Doubtful, IMO... the bay is fairly small, and has a fairly small hatch as well. It would have to be a very short, very narrow missile.

And how does that stop them from using a regular missile as opposed to a glide bomb? Yes the missile size might be specialized, but there is nothing unique in that regard (pretty regular actually). Plus you have the Beta's Ramp (Marlene boarded in Ep83 via) that MIGHT allow larger ordnance to be expended that way than through the side hatches (really depends on the path from the ramp to the bay). Might only be useful in space for aerodynamic reasons (unless the bay can open at both ends to allow better flow).

Assuming that the "backseater" in the Beta's cockpit is capable of assuming control of the combined craft. There is no evidence that this capability exists.

Never said the Beta pilot had to handle flying the craft, but they could serve as a non-pilot crew functions as on the F-15E, F-14, F/A-18B/D/F/G, F-4G, SR-71, etc.

IIRC the only place we see Alpha/Beta crew coordination is in the Sentinels (Novels for sure, can't say about the old comics) and the RPG (1E & 2E, though will varying limits). From the show it seems like the Beta is not crewed indicating either the controls are frozen (making the pilot a passenger and why bother) OR the REF has a man power shortage of pilots. When Scott deploys the Beta (Ep83) it may have more to do with evening out the numbers (if ever so slightly) since ~75% of the Beta's SRMs are disabled while connected.

[Seto Kaiba]

I've done an analysis of the Beta's bombay and so cargo/bombay area.....I will put this up a separate thread so as not to derail this thread. But the answer is yes the cargo/bombay area could be converted to house MRM/LRM's.

Yes, I've read your analysis... it's substantially inaccurate in many of the particulars. The actual dimensions of the interior, the loading configuration, and the dimensions of the main bomb hatches don't support the notion that it could take anything even close to a medium range missile in size. I'll comment at greater length in your (separate) thread.

IIRC most tandem two seat aircraft do not have flight controls for the RIO/WSO/EWO.

Granted, that's true IRL... but the Legioss-TREAD combiner defies the usual conventions for tandem cockpit configurations by being two individually-operable aircraft stuck together due to one being under-capable and the other being a brick.

As I've said before, the REF doctrine may not require every VF in their fleet up to the standards offered by the g-Alpha.

So... your contention is that the REF/UEEF fleet doctrine is grossly and deliberately inefficient? This is why the "g-Alpha" is never going to be canon, because there's isn't an argument in its favor that makes sense. If the UEEF had the resources to solve the issue with the basic Alpha's capabilities, and voluntarily chose not to do so on a viable scale, it calls into question their sanity... both in not mass-producing the larger and more capable version of the Alpha, and in bothering to pursue the idea of the Beta.

We see that with the Alpha to Beta ratio during the NG operation in Ep1 and later in Ep83-85 shows us the REF does not want every VF in their fleet to have access to the same capabilities during that time frame,

Or, to draw on a much simpler and much more official explanation... the operational plans in both cases would've made equipping those planes that way inherently counterproductive to what they were supposed to achieve.

and it is possible that the approach pre-dates the Beta's introduction.

But again, if this idea predates the Beta's introduction, and they had the means and a design ready to roll that eliminated the very need for a Beta at all... why not use it? The idea that there is a "giant Alpha" fundamentally contradicts the established setting.

I'm going off the Infopedia writeup on the Beta. They say "3 x hardpoints on each wing capable of carrying long-range missiles or multiple ejection launchers"

I know, I'm just raising the facts of the actual design... there are only four shown, and the diagram doesn't show enough space to accommodate six unless those missiles are mounted one per hardpoint. (The art shows only triple-racks of small, short-range missiles that look rather like the unused short-range "first-strike missile" concept for the Legioss)

The Leg cannons might be blocked at times, but are still available.

Just going from the official line art in MOSPEADA: Complete Art Works (pg59), I'd be inclined to say the "leg" rotary guns are out... in fighter mode they're clear, but those gun mounts are fixed-position weapons, so there's a strong possibility that firing them with the Alpha in battloid mode could cause them to hit the forearms or knees. (I would assume, if the TREAD were designed for practical dogfighting, that they have the ability to move just slightly to converge their fire on a single target, but that only exacerbates the problem of Alpha body parts being in the way)

The Forearm guns though offer the ability to "cover" the rear flank to some degree even in fighter mode, plus it may be possible for the arms to deply (or rotate minimum) while connected (not sure if this image from the uRRG is fanart or OSM related but: http://ptn.home.xs4all.nl/images/coolab.jpg).

Insofar as the range of motion of the forearm-mounted guns in armo-bomber mode, they're fixed guns... no traverse capability to speak of. Their aim depends on moving the arms of the plane in armo-soldier mode. Unless an enemy was directly behind the gun itself, there wouldn't be any defensive application of them in armo-bomber mode.

That was a quote direct from the Infopedia. While the Beta doesn't have thrust vectoring, the fact the legs are still deployable while connected gives it a crude form (see Legs manuever in NG#1 when Scott executes a breaking maneuver while connected during re-entry).

Yeah, as I and others have illustrated before... sometimes what's in the infopedia doesn't measure up when examined with the yardstick of common sense. Quite a bit of the work I mentioned earlier toward non-destructively fixing the badly broken continuity is in the form of "informed ability"... like docking an Alpha battloid to a Beta increasing its maneuverability... where the reverse is actually shown by the animation. The only way it could work logically would be if the Alpha's four main engines were pulling their weight (and more) working as a set of incredibly inefficient high-output verniers. Not implausible, but it wouldn't make the plane's combat performance all that good...

If used properly such a configuration noted in the infopedia would work, but the animation isn't supported by it (not the 1st time that has happend). You have 5-7 engines capable of numerous vector addition configurations using high thrust.

Uh, what? Apart from the possibility described above, I do have to remind you that they're not thrust-vectored engines on the Legioss or TREAD. At least one of the engines is going to be blocked off (the "crotch" one) by the connecting bar, as shown in the line art, and it wouldn't be safe to operate the center-torso or forearm ones while there are live weapons held in those hands. That pretty much leaves the feet.

Plus you have the Beta's Ramp (Marlene boarded in Ep83 via) that MIGHT allow larger ordnance to be expended that way than through the side hatches (really depends on the path from the ramp to the bay).

Based on the line art, (pg58, same source) I would have to say the ramp isn't an option at all... it doesn't actually lead into the bomb bay directly. It's a very small and very narrow inspection hatch leading to a very cramped ladder that takes you up into an equally small hatch in the front of the bomb bay. It's absolutely not containable to use it for ordinance ejection. (The bombs wouldn't be able to be any larger than what already comes out of a TREAD's purpose-build bomb hatches, and they'd be coming out SIDEWAYS if they had to slide down that ladder and ramp, a circumstance that isn't really conducive to missiles.

[ShadowLogan]

If the UEEF had the resources to solve the issue with the basic Alpha's capabilities, and voluntarily chose not to do so on a viable scale, it calls into question their sanity... both in not mass-producing the larger and more capable version of the Alpha, and in bothering to pursue the idea of the Beta.

well the basic propulsion deficiency is solvable w/o the use of a larger platform or Beta and all it requires is ditching the Cyclone.

The question is does the REF need every version of the Alpha to operate to those standards? US Military operates F-15 and F/A-18s in both single and two seat versions. So it is possible for different versions to exist that have different capabilities and roles. And replacements to be less capable (F/A-18E/F vs F-14D)

The REF may have already started producing Alpha fighters prior to the Beta cancellation and even with the introduction of the g-Alpha found it more cost effective to continue the r-alpha to be the dominant fighter. Cost is a factor that we can't quantify here, but we know cost is a factor (VF-X-4 program shows that) that could have favored production to a less capable platform.

But again, if this idea predates the Beta's introduction, and they had the means and a design ready to roll that eliminated the very need for a Beta at all... why not use it? The idea that there is a "giant Alpha" fundamentally contradicts the established setting.

The Beta likely offers more capability to a r-alpha than a g-alpha can be designed to have. The Beta concept was shelved for a period of time don't forget, but as the REF looked to the future they saw the g-alpha was "maxed out" (or close to it) and revived the Beta.

Do we know if the REF has 1 Beta for every 1 Alpha? And what is the source. Because as it is now, it looks like the REF was willing to have some Alpha's in a handicapped position compared to others.

I know, I'm just raising the facts of the actual design... there are only four shown

Is the entire wing shown or not? The only pics I've seen have been partial wing shots.

in fighter mode they're clear, but those gun mounts are fixed-position weapons, so there's a strong possibility that firing them with the Alpha in battloid mode could cause them to hit the forearms or knees.

Which is why I said what I did.

Insofar as the range of motion of the forearm-mounted guns in armo-bomber mode, they're fixed guns... no traverse capability to speak of. Their aim depends on moving the arms of the plane in armo-soldier mode. Unless an enemy was directly behind the gun itself, there wouldn't be any defensive application of them in armo-bomber mode.

They could still discourage one from approaching from the rear. More range of motion might depend on the Beta's mode though.

Uh, what? Apart from the possibility described above, I do have to remind you that they're not thrust-vectored engines on the Legioss or TREAD. At least one of the engines is going to be blocked off (the "crotch" one) by the connecting bar, as shown in the line art, and it wouldn't be safe to operate the center-torso or forearm ones while there are live weapons held in those hands. That pretty much leaves the feet.

There are between 5 and 7 high thrust engines available for Alpha/Beta combo when the Alpha is in battloid mode. The 3 are on the Beta, 2 in the Alpha legs for sure, the 2 forearm engines (possibly, I don't think it's ever used in B-mode)). My statement might be a bit confusing, each engine would be a Vector of force requiring the use of Vector Addition (http://www.physicsclassroom.com/Class/vectors/U3L1b.cfm) to get the final sum, which could allow for some higher maneuverability zones than using the weaker maneuvering thrusters combined with just the Beta's engines in f-mode.

Basically if we have two cubes. Cube 1 has 1 RL-10 Rocket Engine and 5 attitude jets. Cube 2 has 2 RL-10 Rocket Engines (1 per side, mounted 90deg apart) and 4 attitude jets. Which is more maneuverable? Vector Addition would show Cube 2 has greater maneuverability in some planes and overall.

[rtsurfer]

There's a piece of b&w art in uRRG's Beta entry and floating around the net which shows a Beta's wing with three hardpoints. It shows two racks of missiles inside and outside with a single larger missile mounted between them. Anyone know if this from the OSM or something the uRRG or another fan drew?

Does the Beta have thrust engines in its arms or is the thrust transferred from the legs into the arms? Can the Beta direct thrust aft from what looks like vents covering the stored hands or is the arm thrust limited to lifting using the vents on the bottom of the arms slightly forward of center in fighter mode?

[glitterboy2098]

Uh, what? Apart from the possibility described above, I do have to remind you that they're not thrust-vectored engines on the Legioss or TREAD. At least one of the engines is going to be blocked off (the "crotch" one) by the connecting bar, as shown in the line art, and it wouldn't be safe to operate the center-torso or forearm ones while there are live weapons held in those hands. That pretty much leaves the feet.

There are between 5 and 7 high thrust engines available for Alpha/Beta combo when the Alpha is in battloid mode. The 3 are on the Beta, 2 in the Alpha legs for sure, the 2 forearm engines (possibly, I don't think it's ever used in B-mode)). My statement might be a bit confusing, each engine would be a Vector of force requiring the use of Vector Addition (http://www.physicsclassroom.com/Class/vectors/U3L1b.cfm) to get the final sum, which could allow for some higher maneuverability zones than using the weaker maneuvering thrusters combined with just the Beta's engines in f-mode.

actually, thats a bit deceptive there.

in fighter mode you have 3 engines. the 3 at the aft end of the beta. the alpha's VTOL thruster is blocked by the connector, the two alpha upper engines and the two alpha lower engines are both blocked by the beta itself.

when the alpha converts to battloid model while still connected [1], the alpha's upper and lower (arm and leg) engines are clear of the beta's hull, but they're not well positioned to boost manueverbility. plus they're on frequently moving limbs which are generally busy aiming weapons and such.

it's worth noting that both units certainly mount low thrust manuevering thrusters for space use, probably on the nose, tails, wingtips, and inside of the legs...which will allow those thrusters to use lever arm effects to induce rapid changes of attitude. (being fairly small and light, alpha's and beta's don't have as many moment of inertia issues as a larger craft would deal with.


[1] aside from the shadow chronicles movie, is there any in show evidence of the 'battloid + beta' joined mode? i can't think of any off the top of my head...

[ShadowLogan]

in fighter mode you have 3 engines. the 3 at the aft end of the beta. the alpha's VTOL thruster is blocked by the connector, the two alpha upper engines and the two alpha lower engines are both blocked by the beta itself.

No argument, just indicating that the We are looking at the Alpha Battloid connected to the Beta-Fighter Mode due to a passage in the RT.com infopedia.

when the alpha converts to battloid model while still connected [1], the alpha's upper and lower (arm and leg) engines are clear of the beta's hull, but they're not well positioned to boost manueverbility. plus they're on frequently moving limbs which are generally busy aiming weapons and such.

While I would not say the manueverability is increased in all axises, the Alpha's legs would allow allow an increase along certain vectors. The frequently moving limbs could also play a role in moving the engine(s) into a more optimized position for some manuevers. IINM the use of the higher thrust main engines in place of manuevering thrusters would allow faster times (which could be inturpretted as being more manueverable).

[1] aside from the shadow chronicles movie, is there any in show evidence of the 'battloid + beta' joined mode? i can't think of any off the top of my head...

NG#1 we see numerous Alpha Battloid + Beta Fighter operating in a joined configuration. I don't think w/n the 85ep it is seen again. The Space forces don't use it (IIRC) in the last 3 episodes of NG either. Sentinels OVA might also have an example w/Karen & Max's test flight.

[rtsurfer]

I don't recall seeing any Betas with the ground forces attacking Reflex Point, granted we see only part of the force, but not having any just seems odd to me. Also, why did they just leave Scott's Beta sitting around somewhere near the battlefield instead of actually using it for the ground force assault?

Maybe the (oversized) g.Alphas are a REF Marine squadron.

[glitterboy2098]

I have to admit to being curious why someone would feel an over-sized Alpha that can reach orbit and carry greater firepower is a bad thing, but I do have to admit the overall capabilities of a Legios would be far superior to even the proposed Vindy...still, I likes the idear, so I am inclined to make it work anyhow...call me fickle if you want.

the general stance about it seems to be that a giant alpha like that would compete with the Beta.

personally i think that stance stems from trying to shoehorn the beta into more battlefeild roles than it was intended to perform. the beta fills two basic roles. FAST-pack booster for the Alpha (increasing it's speed, giving it trans atmospheric capability, and access to greater firepower), and Tactical bomber when operating seperately. it can double as an air-to-air fighter, albeit not as effectively. in a sense, the beta can be considered a veritech equivilent to the F/B-111, although the F/B-111 never had the ability to dock with an F-5 tiger II...

the giant alpha can't do these roles. equipped with beta style engines it could be transatmospheric, which would make it suited for an interceptor role. if the increased size was used to either expand the internal missile carriage (you could fit well over 90 alpha-style SRM's in there) or alter the munition's carried (you could fit 50-60 MRM's in there), it could double as a heavy attack plane. but it can't really be a bomber, and it certainly can't serve as a booster for an alpha.

in fact, the combination of high speed and extensive weapons carriage would make the giant alpha the equivilent to the F-15E strike eagle, which can carry a crap load of munitions while still able to reach speeds in excess of mach 2.

the shadow fighter looking models seen in the show might have been the equivilent to the F-15SE Silent Eagle, which is a F-15E strike eagle refitted to include stealth features.

[Seto Kaiba]

well the basic propulsion deficiency is solvable w/o the use of a larger platform or Beta and all it requires is ditching the Cyclone.

Assuming, of course, that there's a suitable way to rig a fuel line between the chamber the Ride Armor is normally stored in (which ends up under the armo-soldier's chin) and the main engines. If it were that simple and easy to resolve the operational endurance problem that necessitated the Beta in the first place, the UEEF would've likely done it decades ago, and screwed the idea of the Beta AND the "giant Alpha".

The question is does the REF need every version of the Alpha to operate to those standards?

Since the "Giant Alpha" doesn't exist and the Beta does, that should answer your question fairly comprehensively. The Alpha has only been produced at one scale, with variation for specific missions (enhanced atmospheric performance, enhanced stealth, enhanced space performance).

The REF may have already started producing Alpha fighters prior to the Beta cancellation and even with the introduction of the g-Alpha found it more cost effective to continue the r-alpha to be the dominant fighter.

Um... there's a logic problem here, one that's been pointed out by dataweaver. It's not going to be any less prohibitively expensive or problematic to make a "Giant Alpha" than it'd be to make the Beta. Indeed, it's going to require just as much if not more work, since increasing the size of the plane isn't as simple as just enlarging the size of each individual part. We also run into the obvious logical fallacy that there is no giant alpha in the earlier eras... we only ever see them in "Shadow" form.

Cost is a factor that we can't quantify here, but we know cost is a factor (VF-X-4 program shows that) that could have favored production to a less capable platform.

As explained above, a "giant Alpha" is going to essentially carry the engineering costs of an entirely original plane, if not additional cost from trying to retain an outward similarity to an Alpha. It'd be a monumental waste of resources, and one that doesn't make any sense on top of that. They would be voluntarily building two different planes to do the same job for the same circumstances, but one which is more capable than the other. Deliberately being inefficient and wasteful of resources isn't exactly part of the military mindset, especially at the point where resources are scarce and they're already on a war footing.

I know, I'm just raising the facts of the actual design... there are only four shown

Is the entire wing shown or not? The only pics I've seen have been partial wing shots.[/quote]
The wing is shown fully, yes... just two hardpoints on the wing surface, each with a triple rack on it.

There are between 5 and 7 high thrust engines available for Alpha/Beta combo when the Alpha is in battloid mode.

Go back and read my post again, it seems you missed a fair chunk of it that preemptively addresses the points you raised here.

There's a piece of b&w art in uRRG's Beta entry and floating around the net which shows a Beta's wing with three hardpoints. It shows two racks of missiles inside and outside with a single larger missile mounted between them. Anyone know if this from the OSM or something the uRRG or another fan drew?

It's not OSM. Stylistically, it looks more like something from one of the old comic books...

AFAIK, the only official line art showing the TREAD's wing hardpoints shows them with four (two per wing) carrying triple-rack missiles like the VF-1 commonly did in Macross.

Does the Beta have thrust engines in its arms or is the thrust transferred from the legs into the arms? Can the Beta direct thrust aft from what looks like vents covering the stored hands or is the arm thrust limited to lifting using the vents on the bottom of the arms slightly forward of center in fighter mode?

No. According to OSM spec, which is parroted by Robotech, the TREAD/Beta has only the three main engines and the sub-engines used for VTOL lift. There aren't any engines in the arms of the TREAD/Beta the way there are in the Legioss/Alpha.

in fighter mode you have 3 engines. the 3 at the aft end of the beta. the alpha's VTOL thruster is blocked by the connector

I have a theory about that, based on the OSM spec... I'm inclined to think, given that the TREAD's center-line engine is less powerful than the other two and that the docking arm in the art seems to connect the Legioss's aft VTOL thruster to that same area, that they're diverting thrust from the VTOL engine to boost the output of the TREAD's third engine.

when the alpha converts to battloid model while still connected [1], the alpha's upper and lower (arm and leg) engines are clear of the beta's hull, but they're not well positioned to boost manueverbility.

Not to mention the issues of the arm engines being positioned in a way that might endanger anything held in the hands...

[1] aside from the shadow chronicles movie, is there any in show evidence of the 'battloid + beta' joined mode? i can't think of any off the top of my head...

First episode, Genesis Climber MOSPEADA... that whole group of fighters that Stick's combiner mobilizes with does it. It doesn't help them much.

Those two round things on the sides of the Beta's cockpit, you know, the ones they use to think were LRMs? Those are supposed to be thrust bypass ducts, allowing something like 80% of the Alpha's thrust to be added the the Beta, letting them reach orbit.

Um... what? Where's this coming from? Also, 80%? The only engines they're in any position to connect to are the forearm ones, which would mean less than 33%.

[Drakenred®™©]

there are examples in the real world of manufactuers and organisations literaly "supersizeing" an existing aircraft to bascialy make a whole new aircraft

the F18 Super Hornet for example, or the -30 and -30B version of the Super Hercules(granted theres only 2 of the -30Bs(145.8ft wingspan vs 132.6 ft wingspan) for high altitude weather research)

[jaymz]

there are examples in the real world of manufactuers and organisations literaly "supersizeing" an existing aircraft to bascialy make a whole new aircraft

the F18 Super Hornet for example, or the -30 and -30B version of the Super Hercules(granted theres only 2 of the -30Bs(145.8ft wingspan vs 132.6 ft wingspan) for high altitude weather research)

That was already addressed a page or twp back in this topic Draken

[ShadowLogan]

@Seto Kaiba
re: Cyclone Bay
What are those two cable/tubes connected to the Alpha behind the cockpit we see when Scott board's his mecha on the Horizon-T? Because they could be propellant lines, and they are going in near the Cyc bay. Plumbing may be fairly simple to implement.

re: Cost
The cost comparision I am looking at is for a g-Alpha is compared to a r-Alpha, NOT to the Beta, AND at the production and deployment stages. From a development perspective the g-Alpha certainly can borrow from the r-alpha reducing cost. The main thing that could not be borrow would be the frame. The engines and the MM-60 equivalent systems could be new, modifications, or taken as is. They might even be able to borrow from the VF-1 or Beta prototype. It is foolish to think everything has to be "new" in a design.

re: Appearance
There is a shot at Point K that could show a giant Alpha, the problem is the only other reference object in the shot is an unknown. I used the cockpit zone and depending on the size between 5-10ft I can get ~30ft upto 50ft, plus the Alpha Battloid appears to be sitting on it's butt in an upright position (so would be bigger).

re: need for the Beta
While a Cyc storage bay conversion and g-Alpha address the propellant tank issue with the r-Alpha they do not negate the need for the Beta. There could be additional reasons for the Beta to exist that aren't mentioned.

re: A/B thrust
I had read your post. I think there is some misunderstanding going on.

I set down a range of the high thrust engines the combiner could use. Now I admit 2 of them are suspect (the forearm ones), that is why I did not say 7 flat, but gave a range.

I am also looking at the situation from a the view of Vector Addition Math. The Thrust each engine produces is a Vector quantity. To illustrate the Alpha Battloid's foot thrusters are at max thrust while pointing straight down, the Beta's 3 main engines are facing directly behind at full thrust. Vector Addition would result in the unit in a climb. Said climb will be faster than if the combiner used just manuevering thrusters instead of the Alpha's foot thrusters.

I see no reason the Alpha can't use it's foot thrusters. Such use would increase the mobility of the platform as it would offer greater degree of asymetric thrust than either platform can achieve on its own.

[Tiree]

I don't recall seeing any Betas with the ground forces attacking Reflex Point, granted we see only part of the force, but not having any just seems odd to me. Also, why did they just leave Scott's Beta sitting around somewhere near the battlefield instead of actually using it for the ground force assault?

Maybe the (oversized) g.Alphas are a REF Marine squadron.

There are some, but none seen directly in the attack. You do see a whole bunch of Shadow Beta's in Ep 84, pretty much all of them being destroyed.

So in theory they would be available and are being used. Even though the animation does not show them in use directly. In fact the only transforming Beta shown IIRC is Scott's team.

[Chris0013]

I don't recall seeing any Betas with the ground forces attacking Reflex Point, granted we see only part of the force, but not having any just seems odd to me. Also, why did they just leave Scott's Beta sitting around somewhere near the battlefield instead of actually using it for the ground force assault?

Maybe the (oversized) g.Alphas are a REF Marine squadron.

There are some, but none seen directly in the attack. You do see a whole bunch of Shadow Beta's in Ep 84, pretty much all of them being destroyed.

So in theory they would be available and are being used. Even though the animation does not show them in use directly. In fact the only transforming Beta shown IIRC is Scott's team.

This is what chaps my hide about it....the Beta is a damn good fighter / bomber that gets no real love. Almost like it is part of The Masters Era.....

[jaymz]

I don't recall seeing any Betas with the ground forces attacking Reflex Point, granted we see only part of the force, but not having any just seems odd to me. Also, why did they just leave Scott's Beta sitting around somewhere near the battlefield instead of actually using it for the ground force assault?

Maybe the (oversized) g.Alphas are a REF Marine squadron.

There are some, but none seen directly in the attack. You do see a whole bunch of Shadow Beta's in Ep 84, pretty much all of them being destroyed.

So in theory they would be available and are being used. Even though the animation does not show them in use directly. In fact the only transforming Beta shown IIRC is Scott's team.

This is what chaps my hide about it....the Beta is a damn good fighter / bomber that gets no real love. Almost like it is part of The Masters Era.....

That's MEAN....funny as hell but mean

[rtsurfer]

I don't recall seeing any Betas with the ground forces attacking Reflex Point, granted we see only part of the force, but not having any just seems odd to me. Also, why did they just leave Scott's Beta sitting around somewhere near the battlefield instead of actually using it for the ground force assault?

Maybe the (oversized) g.Alphas are a REF Marine squadron.

There are some, but none seen directly in the attack. You do see a whole bunch of Shadow Beta's in Ep 84, pretty much all of them being destroyed.

So in theory they would be available and are being used. Even though the animation does not show them in use directly. In fact the only transforming Beta shown IIRC is Scott's team.

Yeah, I believe it's suggested that there was a whole battalion of Shadow combos in ep 83, Reflex Point, but IIRC Sue says they were all destroyed. Well actually we only see two Shadow Combos plus wreckage so the rest of the battalion could be a variety of mecha types. Its possible the primary reason for the Shadow Betas in this instance is because Shadow Alpha Fighters apparently don't have VTOL capability unless they convert to Guardian, which some people claim they are not designed to operate in, or Battloid modes. The REF might have wanted to reevaluate their planned space attack which relied on Shadow Devices after losing a battalion with at least some of the mecha apparently using Shadow devices.

[ShadowLogan]

In fact the only transforming Beta shown IIRC is Scott's team.

Not exactly. The Blue Beta Scott used in NG#1 did "transform" while connected to the Beta. The result was the the "legs" deploying to slow the unit down, VTOL style. I would consider that a transformation because it is no different than when we see the Point K Beta use Gaurdain mode.

It would be more accurate to say the Beta Scott's team had is the only one shown with a pilot. Which has lead me to think the Beta should be a drone aircraft, and the one recovered at Point K is either a converted drone (more pilots than mecha at Point K?) OR the drones by NG are android pilots (less sophisticated version of Janice). Though the android doesn't necessarily explain the Shadow Alpha Drone have a restyled cockpit.

[jaymz]

Though the android doesn't necessarily explain the Shadow Alpha Drone have a restyled cockpit.

Andoirds don't necessarilly need to be able to look around and use their own visual sensors/cameras while piloting thus a see through canopy/cockpit is un-needed.

[glitterboy2098]

if you've got android pilots, why bother with modified planes at all though? just stick them into normal planes.

the fact that the shadow drones resmble the alpha drones seen earlier in the show, and their modified cockpits have similarities to the QF-3000E Ghost drones of the macross era, this implies to me that that the alpha drones and the shadow drones are true UAV's, their cockpit replaced with autonomous flight computers and a secure wireless command-control-communications system.

[rtsurfer]

There's a piece of b&w art in uRRG's Beta entry and floating around the net which shows a Beta's wing with three hardpoints. It shows two racks of missiles inside and outside with a single larger missile mounted between them. Anyone know if this from the OSM or something the uRRG or another fan drew?

It's not OSM. Stylistically, it looks more like something from one of the old comic books...

AFAIK, the only official line art showing the TREAD's wing hardpoints shows them with four (two per wing) carrying triple-rack missiles like the VF-1 commonly did in Macross.

Speaking of the VF-1, doesn't the OSM list it with only 2x hardpoints per wing while Force of Arms/Love Drifts Away shows a number of Super & standard VF-1's with 3x per wing?

[jaymz]

From what I recall of FoA Rick only had weapons on two hardpoints.

[Chris0013]

From what I recall of FoA Rick only had weapons on two hardpoints.

http://images.yuku.com.s3.amazonaws.com/image/jpeg/0bb2516466dac4e18e2c16935fc3c89f46247c9.jpg

[jaymz]

From what I recall of FoA Rick only had weapons on two hardpoints.

http://images.yuku.com.s3.amazonaws.com/image/jpeg/0bb2516466dac4e18e2c16935fc3c89f46247c9.jpg

That could be chalked up to an animation error as later during hte the actual battle you see rick in battloid mode, wings out and only two hardpoints on each wing....Iirc you see Max and Myria that way as well.

[Colonel Wolfe]

From what I recall of FoA Rick only had weapons on two hardpoints.

http://images.yuku.com.s3.amazonaws.com/image/jpeg/0bb2516466dac4e18e2c16935fc3c89f46247c9.jpg

That could be chalked up to an animation error as later during hte the actual battle you see rick in battloid mode, wings out and only two hardpoints on each wing....Iirc you see Max and Myria that way as well.

Animation error, or people seeing things wrong... as its described that you mount 2 LRM's on the outer hardpoint.

[rtsurfer]

From what I recall of FoA Rick only had weapons on two hardpoints.

http://images.yuku.com.s3.amazonaws.com/image/jpeg/0bb2516466dac4e18e2c16935fc3c89f46247c9.jpg

That could be chalked up to an animation error as later during hte the actual battle you see rick in battloid mode, wings out and only two hardpoints on each wing....Iirc you see Max and Myria that way as well.

Animation error, or people seeing things wrong... as its described that you mount 2 LRM's on the outer hardpoint.

How do you mount two missiles on the same hardpoint without some kind of mount which clearly isn't visible when Rick launches all six missiles?

[Colonel Wolfe]

Animation error, or people seeing things wrong... as its described that you mount 2 LRM's on the outer hardpoint.

How do you mount two missiles on the same hardpoint without some kind of mount which clearly isn't visible when Rick launches all six missiles?

hey, ask Harmony Gold (or Sojimbo Kawamoron, the designer of SDD-macros)... they the ones who say that is configured that way.

from Robotech.com

4 wing hardpoints (2 per wing) each capable of carrying:
- 3 x 300mm medium range missiles, or
- 1 (inner) or 2 (outer) x 533mm long range missiles, or
- 1 x short-range multiple ejection 150mm missile launcher containing 15 missiles

fru, the SDD-Macros Compendium.
http://macross.anime.net/wiki/VF-1_Valkyrie#Armament

Four pivoting underwing hard points for twelve AMM-1 hybrid guided multipurpose missiles each with four stabilizers which extend during launch (three on each hard point), twelve MK-82 LDGB conventional bombs (three on each hard point), six RMS-1 large anti-ship reaction missiles (two on each outboard hard point and one on each inboard hard point), four UUM-7 micro-missile pods (one on each hard point) each carrying up to fifteen Bifors HMM-01 micro-missiles, or a combination of the above missiles.

[jaymz]

From what I recall of FoA Rick only had weapons on two hardpoints.

http://images.yuku.com.s3.amazonaws.com/image/jpeg/0bb2516466dac4e18e2c16935fc3c89f46247c9.jpg

That could be chalked up to an animation error as later during hte the actual battle you see rick in battloid mode, wings out and only two hardpoints on each wing....Iirc you see Max and Myria that way as well.

Animation error, or people seeing things wrong... as its described that you mount 2 LRM's on the outer hardpoint.

How do you mount two missiles on the same hardpoint without some kind of mount which clearly isn't visible when Rick launches all six missiles?

Yeah pretty much every description gives the VF-1 2 per wing with one being able to mount 3 missiles each 2 large missiles on one and the other mounting 1.

I do believe the show the VF-1 in DYRL using 3 per wing though.....

[Seto Kaiba]

What are those two cable/tubes connected to the Alpha behind the cockpit we see when Scott board's his mecha on the Horizon-T? Because they could be propellant lines, and they are going in near the Cyc bay. Plumbing may be fairly simple to implement.

Good eye... when I get a chance later, I'll dig out my 4x magnifying lens and have a go at the caption on the line art (M:CAW p64). I doubt they're propellant lines though, the way they're connected has them feeding into the slots where HBT cells normally sit. Perhaps a fuel pipe to allow the Legioss to be kept on hot standby without depleting the cells?

The cost comparision I am looking at is for a g-Alpha is compared to a r-Alpha, NOT to the Beta, AND at the production and deployment stages.

Then, all things considered, you should be looking at a disadvantageous condition for the giant Alpha. As I and others have pointed out, "borrowing" is not likely to happen because the innards of the plane would have to be completely redesigned to function at the larger scale. It'd be essentially designing an entirely new plane, ala the F/A-18E/F.

There is a shot at Point K that could show a giant Alpha, the problem is the only other reference object in the shot is an unknown.

Could be, but more than likely isn't. Remember, there was no such thing as a giant Alpha in MOSPEADA.

While a Cyc storage bay conversion and g-Alpha address the propellant tank issue with the r-Alpha they do not negate the need for the Beta. There could be additional reasons for the Beta to exist that aren't mentioned.

Isn't this a "Shrug of God"? You're arguing that negating the explicitly and repeatedly-stated primary reason for the Beta's existence doesn't negate the need for the Beta's existence? I'd say you're trying to have your cake and eat it too, but I've never really understood why that idiom works... it's perfectly reasonable to want to eat a cake that you have.

I see no reason the Alpha can't use it's foot thrusters. Such use would increase the mobility of the platform as it would offer greater degree of asymetric thrust than either platform can achieve on its own.

I'm not ruling out the main engines in the legs... the ones I said were unlikely to be viable for that kind of maneuvering (yes I'm familiar with the math) are the one in the center chest and the ones in the forearms. The one in the "crotch" is off-limits anyway.

It would be more accurate to say the Beta Scott's team had is the only one shown with a pilot.

Which means, most likely, that the Betas were simply being operated unpiloted... which is the most common arrangement we see, and a godawful waste in my opinion. (Especially in Prelude, where we see dumped Betas crashing and breaking apart)

Which has lead me to think the Beta should be a drone aircraft, and the one recovered at Point K is either a converted drone (more pilots than mecha at Point K?) OR the drones by NG are android pilots (less sophisticated version of Janice).

But there's no precedent for mass-production of the JANICE system... she was supposedly one of a kind right up until her first body's destruction, and from then on she was definitely one of a kind as a synthesis of human and Haydonite technology.

if you've got android pilots, why bother with modified planes at all though? just stick them into normal planes.

Precisely... the one example of android technology we see in Robotech would have no trouble whatsoever negotiating his/her/its way around a cockpit designed for humans. Thus, no need for a special "android" cockpit configuration.

this implies to me that that the alpha drones and the shadow drones are true UAV's, their cockpit replaced with autonomous flight computers and a secure wireless command-control-communications system.

Bingo! Give the man a prize! What little text there is to describe the Dark Legioss drone's onboard systems does describe it as a true UCAV. It could presumably be operated by the human ground crew remotely the way we see the normal drones doing earlier on (and how modern Predator drones work), or it can function semi-autonomously using an onboard AI which takes simple directives from the flight controller the way drones in Macross do. No androids need apply.

Speaking of the VF-1, doesn't the OSM list it with only 2x hardpoints per wing while Force of Arms/Love Drifts Away shows a number of Super & standard VF-1's with 3x per wing?

Not quite.

It's entirely true and 100% correct that the VF-1 only has four hardpoints. It's also quite possible, and indeed done quite often, for a VF-1 to mount six of the RMS-1 anti-ship reaction missiles on those four hardpoints. How? Well, they say that a picture is worth a thousand words, right? There is sufficient room on the wing for the plane to use a side-by-side mounting of two RMS-1's on a single hardpoint. It's how those planes in the series carry six of 'em when there are only four pylons. The same is done w/ the 4 RMS-1's and two UUM-7's in DYRL, as the art linked shows. (Yes, there is art for it from the series, but this is the best view of the component I have on hand.)

How do you mount two missiles on the same hardpoint without some kind of mount which clearly isn't visible when Rick launches all six missiles?

Easy... you use a side-by-side mounting pylon like the one shown in the line art I linked to above. Two missiles, one pylon, no waiting, and it's not much different in size or in shape from the normal pylon that occupies that position.

I do believe the show the VF-1 in DYRL using 3 per wing though.....

Nope! It's only ever been two hardpoint stations per wing for the VF-1 Valkyrie. It wasn't until the VF-4A came along that we got a VF with six hardpoint stations on the wing.

[dataweaver]

Minor digression: "Have your cake and eat it, too". The bottom line is that as long as you have the cake, you haven't eaten it; and once you eat it, you no longer have it. Thus, you can have your cake, or you can eat it; but you can't do both.

This raises the question of why someone would want to keep the cake instead of eating it. I could come up with some answers to this (e.g., keeping a piece of your wedding cake for sentimental reasons); but really, there's no point: the idiom isn't about which choice is preferable; the point of the idiom is that the two choices interfere with each other. Personally, I prefer variations of it such as "you can't turn left and right at the same time" or "brakes and gas don't mix."

[rtsurfer]

How do you mount two missiles on the same hardpoint without some kind of mount which clearly isn't visible when Rick launches all six missiles?

Easy... you use a side-by-side mounting pylon like the one shown in the line art I linked to above. Two missiles, one pylon, no waiting, and it's not much different in size or in shape from the normal pylon that occupies that position.

Are the side-by-side mounting pylons cloaked? Seriously, are these side-by-side mounting pylons (which are very obvious in that illustration) ever visible in the actual animation? I didn't see them.
I might have some waterfront property on the moon for sale, any takers?

Besides, the LRMs in the animation appear snug to the wing and equally spaced. Going by that illustration and the toys/models, they should be suspended away from the wing with the outer two missiles closer together than the middle missile is to the inside one, but they're not.

[Seto Kaiba]

Minor digression: "Have your cake and eat it, too". The bottom line is that as long as you have the cake, you haven't eaten it; and once you eat it, you no longer have it. Thus, you can have your cake, or you can eat it; but you can't do both.

Ah, then it's definitely a good fit for the "giant Alpha" problem. Thus far, every attempt at rationalizing it has run aground on the problem that the alleged benefits of the giant Alpha invariably undermine the very existence of the Alpha, the Beta, or both. Why would UEDF and/or UEEF top brass even bother with the Alpha when there's another fighter being built simultaneously that has all of the same benefits and virtually none of the weaknesses? It gets more problematic when one of the weaknesses eliminated also eliminates most of the reasons for the Beta's existence... heavier armament, greater endurance in space, and a more powerful suite of engines.

So, yeah... I guess the proponents of the "giant Alpha" are definitely trying to have their cake and eat it to by presenting a scenario in which the UEEF deliberately selects inferior planes and sinks enormous amounts of resources into them when they've already got this other plane that can do the same jobs better.

Are the side-by-side mounting pylons cloaked? Seriously, are these side-by-side mounting pylons (which are very obvious in that illustration) ever visible in the actual animation? I didn't see them.

Yeah, they are visible in the animation... mostly in the front-on glamor shots. Like I said in my previous post, they do appear in material from the series. I picked the art I did because it offers the best view of them. One such shot is right after the eyecatch in Ep27 "Love Drifts Away", in which there's some VF-1 Super Valkyries with that configuration visible as the camera pans over the formation. They're much more readily visible in DYRL. As far as the OSM and animation are concerned, the VF-1 has four wing pylons. That's been a fact since day one, almost thirty years ago.

Besides, the LRMs in the animation appear snug to the wing and equally spaced. Going by that illustration and the toys/models, they should be suspended away from the wing with the outer two missiles closer together than the middle missile is to the inside one.

Um... yeah, at the risk of pointing out the painfully obvious, the Super Dimension Fortress Macross series wasn't exactly animated on the biggest of budgets or with the best studio staff around (thanks to Tatsunoko-supplied subcontract animators AnimeFriend and StarPro), and as a natural result the level of detail in the animation suffers occasionally. You may find that there's another flaw in your reasoning... the VF-1s in the series keep their wings swept further back than the full-extension shown in that art, which would make the missiles on the rotating pylon mounts look closer together. Another view with the wings swept back a bit more does show that it would be perfectly possible for them to look evenly spaced or very close to it.

[rtsurfer]

Are the side-by-side mounting pylons cloaked? Seriously, are these side-by-side mounting pylons (which are very obvious in that illustration) ever visible in the actual animation? I didn't see them.

Yeah, they are visible in the animation... mostly in the front-on glamor shots. Like I said in my previous post, they do appear in material from the series. I picked the art I did because it offers the best view of them. One such shot is right after the eyecatch in Ep27 "Love Drifts Away", in which there's some VF-1 Super Valkyries with that configuration visible as the camera pans over the formation. They're much more readily visible in DYRL. As far as the OSM and animation are concerned, the VF-1 has four wing pylons. That's been a fact since day one, almost thirty years ago.

Yeah, there are plenty of VF-1s and Super VF-1s visible with the 6 LRM (3 per wing) configuration, such as in fleet formation pans in Ep27 after the break/eyecatch. I was asking if there are any visible examples of a *side-by-side mounting pylon with 2 LRMs on it*, not examples of the 3 per wing LRMs? If there is an example of a 2 LRM mount in the animation I haven't seen it, maybe you could provide a screen cap.
I understand the OSM provides the VF-1 with only 4 wing hardpoints (2 per wing) but that claim may not be supported by what's seen in the tv series animation. They don't always match up, for example I believe the dimensions of the VF-4 Lightning III in the source material were wrong for nearly twenty years.

Besides, the LRMs in the animation appear snug to the wing and equally spaced. Going by that illustration and the toys/models, they should be suspended away from the wing with the outer two missiles closer together than the middle missile is to the inside one.

Um... yeah, at the risk of pointing out the painfully obvious, the Super Dimension Fortress Macross series wasn't exactly animated on the biggest of budgets or with the best studio staff around (thanks to Tatsunoko-supplied subcontract animators AnimeFriend and StarPro), and as a natural result the level of detail in the animation suffers occasionally. You may find that there's another flaw in your reasoning... the VF-1s in the series keep their wings swept further back than the full-extension shown in that art, which would make the missiles on the rotating pylon mounts look closer together. Another view with the wings swept back a bit more does show that it would be perfectly possible for them to look evenly spaced or very close to it.

Sure, sloppy animation and level of detail sometimes make it difficult to determine whether something was animator error or intentional and just not reflected correctly in the OSM.
I still disagree, just because I don't take the OSM as an absolute doesn't mean my reasoning is flawed. The 3 missiles would appear to have the same relative position to each other whether the wings are fully extended or swept back if the missiles remain parallel to each other which they apparently do. Can't really tell anything from comparing those two illustrations you provided as they are at different scales, different perspectives, different features, and drawn slightly different.
Don't really see how the 3 missiles could appear evenly spaced if 2 were on a side-by-side mounting pylon, which I have yet to find in the animation. The (S) VF-1s seen in the formation pans are from varied perspectives and still appear evenly spaced.

[jaymz]

I still disagree, just because I don't take the OSM as an absolute doesn't mean my reasoning is flawed. The 3 missiles would appear to have the same relative position to each other whether the wings are fully extended or swept back if the missiles remain parallel to each other which they apparently do. Can't really tell anything from comparing those two illustrations you provided as they are at different scales, different perspectives, different features, and drawn slightly different.
Don't really see how the 3 missiles could appear evenly spaced if 2 were on a side-by-side mounting pylon, which I have yet to find in the animation. The (S) VF-1s seen in the formation pans are from varied perspectives and still appear evenly spaced.

Animation just isn't always accurate. Just look at the debate that occurred over the frakin' nose lasers for 20 years. In some cases you just have to take the OSM at face value and in this case I would. We never see a VF-1 carrying three pylons worth of ordnance at any other time. I believe it is in the first or second episode we see Roy escorting Rick and he has two pylons on the wing each with 3 missiles on them. There are also the other odd scene where we see the VF-1 in battloid (again later with Rick, Max and/or Myria) with wings extended and only 2 hardpoints of ordnance. I don't think a scene where it is a mass of mecha and ships should be the scene that is used as a measuring stick. Hell it pretty hard to even pick out the VEFR-1 that is that scene unless you are looking for it.

[ShadowLogan]

Perhaps a fuel pipe to allow the Legioss to be kept on hot standby without depleting the cells?

I thought the HBT cells are in the intake/shoulder pods and these tube/cables appear to go behind the cockpit. While the tube/cable is twisting it still looks to stay lined up w/the cockpit/nose section.

As I and others have pointed out, "borrowing" is not likely to happen because the innards of the plane would have to be completely redesigned to function at the larger scale. It'd be essentially designing an entirely new plane, ala the F/A-18E/F

But it does happen in real life. The F-117 used components that where taken from other aircraft. I know it borrowed from the F-16, which is smaller by ~15ft in length, ~4ft in height, ~10ft wingspan. The engines are also in the same family as the F/A-18's (which is still smaller than an F-117).

This shows that you can take hardware from a smaller platform and put them in a larger platform and expect them to work.

Could be, but more than likely isn't. Remember, there was no such thing as a giant Alpha in MOSPEADA.

As an AE this is starting to become a pattern with distinct shots and is no longer confined to the same episode and even a non-Shadow unit.

You're arguing that negating the explicitly and repeatedly-stated primary reason for the Beta's existence doesn't negate the need for the Beta's existence? I'd

While the Alpha's short legs can be removed w/o the Beta, all the benifits the Beta brings are still retained. The extra tankage on the Beta still remains to give bigger legs. The Beta also brings more firepower in a combo than either Alpha size alone. I don't think the g-Alpha would remain compatible with the Beta.

The REF likely would also go with a mix of sizes to maximize resources. The r-Alpha takes up less space than a g-alpha on the deck, so a ship can carry more of them. The r-Alpha would likely be cheaper to produce and operate, but it does so with a trade off in overall capabilities.

Which means, most likely, that the Betas were simply being operated unpiloted... which is the most common arrangement we see, and a godawful waste in my opinion. (Especially in Prelude, where we see dumped Betas crashing and breaking apart)

With a military force making questionable decsions like this you expect a rational explantion to work in the g-alpha and Beta issue?

But there's no precedent for mass-production of the JANICE system... she was supposedly one of a kind right up until her first body's destruction, and from then on she was definitely one of a kind as a synthesis of human and Haydonite technology.

Well I was thinking of a less sophisticated version of JANICE, consider it a knock-off because IIRC even her original body was recovered from the SDF-1. Maybe a JANICE sized GMP bot would have been a better description. I thought of Janice because she was a VF Pilot in Sentinels (Novels and 1E RPG).

[rtsurfer]

I still disagree, just because I don't take the OSM as an absolute doesn't mean my reasoning is flawed. The 3 missiles would appear to have the same relative position to each other whether the wings are fully extended or swept back if the missiles remain parallel to each other which they apparently do. Can't really tell anything from comparing those two illustrations you provided as they are at different scales, different perspectives, different features, and drawn slightly different.
Don't really see how the 3 missiles could appear evenly spaced if 2 were on a side-by-side mounting pylon, which I have yet to find in the animation. The (S) VF-1s seen in the formation pans are from varied perspectives and still appear evenly spaced.

Animation just isn't always accurate. Just look at the debate that occurred over the frakin' nose lasers for 20 years. In some cases you just have to take the OSM at face value and in this case I would. We never see a VF-1 carrying three pylons worth of ordnance at any other time. I believe it is in the first or second episode we see Roy escorting Rick and he has two pylons on the wing each with 3 missiles on them. There are also the other odd scene where we see the VF-1 in battloid (again later with Rick, Max and/or Myria) with wings extended and only 2 hardpoints of ordnance. I don't think a scene where it is a mass of mecha and ships should be the scene that is used as a measuring stick. Hell it pretty hard to even pick out the VEFR-1 that is that scene unless you are looking for it.

I don't believe there are nose lasers in the OSM, but they are in Robotech. Another example is the 3 laser VF head, not in OSM but in Robotech. So Robotech sometimes follows the animation rather than the OSM.

The two pylons per wing with 3 missiles each seems to be the primary configuration used by the VF-1s. That doesn't preclude the VF-1 from having a third hardpoint which is used with a 3 single missile per wing configuration as seen in FOA. Perhaps when they use the 3 missiles per pylon with 2 sets it requires extra space between the two center missiles to assure a safe launch. BTW, those 3 missile x 2 pylons are visible a number of times in the tv series while the supposed pylon holding the 2 LRMs isn't.

Which scene are you referring to where Max, Miriya, and Rick's wings are extended in Battloid? In FOAs, they either have the 3 LRMs or no missiles when seen in Battloid.

Besides the formation pan scenes there are a number of FOA close-ups on Super VF-1's carry 3 LRMs which seem to be evenly spaced, including Rick, Max & Miriya.

In addition to the VEFR-1, there's also a VF-1 with tail missiles and an Orguss VF/Destroid, both of which also appear in other episodes.

[jaymz]

I still disagree, just because I don't take the OSM as an absolute doesn't mean my reasoning is flawed. The 3 missiles would appear to have the same relative position to each other whether the wings are fully extended or swept back if the missiles remain parallel to each other which they apparently do. Can't really tell anything from comparing those two illustrations you provided as they are at different scales, different perspectives, different features, and drawn slightly different.
Don't really see how the 3 missiles could appear evenly spaced if 2 were on a side-by-side mounting pylon, which I have yet to find in the animation. The (S) VF-1s seen in the formation pans are from varied perspectives and still appear evenly spaced.

Animation just isn't always accurate. Just look at the debate that occurred over the frakin' nose lasers for 20 years. In some cases you just have to take the OSM at face value and in this case I would. We never see a VF-1 carrying three pylons worth of ordnance at any other time. I believe it is in the first or second episode we see Roy escorting Rick and he has two pylons on the wing each with 3 missiles on them. There are also the other odd scene where we see the VF-1 in battloid (again later with Rick, Max and/or Myria) with wings extended and only 2 hardpoints of ordnance. I don't think a scene where it is a mass of mecha and ships should be the scene that is used as a measuring stick. Hell it pretty hard to even pick out the VEFR-1 that is that scene unless you are looking for it.

I don't believe there are nose lasers in the OSM, but they are in Robotech. Another example is the 3 laser VF head, not in OSM but in Robotech. So Robotech sometimes follows the animation rather than the OSM.

The two pylons per wing with 3 missiles each seems to be the primary configuration used by the VF-1s. That doesn't preclude the VF-1 from having a third hardpoint which is used with a 3 single missile per wing configuration as seen in FOA. Perhaps when they use the 3 missiles per pylon with 2 sets it requires extra space between the two center missiles to assure a safe launch. BTW, those 3 missile x 2 pylons are visible a number of times in the tv series while the supposed pylon holding the 2 LRMs isn't.

Which scene are you referring to where Max, Miriya, and Rick's wings are extended in Battloid? In FOAs, they either have the 3 LRMs or no missiles when seen in Battloid.

Besides the formation pan scenes there are a number of FOA close-ups on Super VF-1's carry 3 LRMs which seem to be evenly spaced, including Rick, Max & Miriya.

In addition to the VEFR-1, there's also a VF-1 with tail missiles and an Orguss VF/Destroid, both of which also appear in other episodes.

Just because they allowed certain things to be doesn't automatically mean everything can be. Just because they allowed the three head guns (which was stretch at best and should not have been allowed) and the nose lasers (I have to admit the explanation was a decent one and this is about the only thing I allow even though I have my own way to deal with the g-Alpha issue) doesn't mean you have to allow anything an everything since the Orguss and tail missiles haven't been ok'ed. In other words, why even argue about this? The OSM allows for the VF-1 to carry 3 large anti-ship missiles. Does it matter if it is two hardpoints or three since in any other scene where it isn't carrying large anti-ship missiles, the VF-1 only has two hardpoints of ordnance? EDIT - Besides the kind of detail you are asking for just doesn't exist in the series' animation. I chalk it up to "it was easier to draw them that way".

Again sometimes the path of least resistance makes the most sense and to argue about it is quite pointless.

[rtsurfer]

True, I guess it doesn't really matter how it carries the 3 LRMs per wing. The reason I originally mentioned the 3 LRMs & hardpoints was to suggest that the Beta might actually have 3 hardpoints per wing when the OSM says it only has 2. Wonder if it could have side-by-side hardpoint pylons to convert it from 2 to 3 or maybe even 4 per wing?

The Shadow Fighters and Betas in the tv series' final battle might be the last produced in the -6 & -9 series, and the g.Alpha might be the first fighters produced in the -11/12/? series. The odd looking Alpha at Point K could be a g.Alpha prototype/experimental.
If you want to include SC, perhaps the reason those Super Alpha-Fighters & Betas (potentially upgraded Shadows) on SSL weren't finished was because they were beat out by the new g.Alpha.

[jaymz]

Anything is possible. I make the g-Alpha part of the VF-X-5 program (yes I know others have poopooed the idea but to them )

Oh i also added an edit to the above post...

[ESalter]

First, we know the DoZ had some sort of space capability, because the Masters thought it possible the DoZ might have recovered the SDF-1..from somewhere else in the universe no less.

True; I meant "space combat fleet."

Second, we know they had a war capable space presence because that was in part what the Zentraedi were intended to suppress.

Was it? The series tell us very little about relations between the DoZ and the Zentraedi, and I'd guess DoZ is a category, not an organization.

If the Alpha/Shadow Alpha production facilities are automated, it might have simply been a matter of changing the settings so that the machines fabricated larger SA parts. Which were then attached to either an also upsized SA frame or another mecha's frame. Alphas/Shadow Alphas and Betas were apparently the primary large mechas being produced at the time so if they were going to produce a limited run heavier armored mecha they might temporarily use one of those production lines, hence it looks like a larger SA.

So the "Vindicator" was designed to take advantage of an existing production pattern? That's clever, but I still don't think it works; why would every substructure be scaled up exactly the same way?

1 - Not everything would be scaled up the same obviously. Perhaps it is a basic Alpha frame with larger external parts thus why it is larger and looks the same because larger external parts were easier to fit to the basic Alpha frame?

Then wouldn't it be the same size as an Alpha, and all scrunched-up?

The A-6/EA-6 might not be the best example, but it does illustrate that craft can physically grow between models. Not all the changes can be the result of the cockpit in every instance.

But when RL aircraft are resized, it due to the addition of larger components to the original frame — the Vindicator looks identical despite sharing no common parts.

Are the Shadow Alpha-Fighters & Shadow Betas NEW off the production line or are they Shadow REFITS of existing Alphas & Betas with new paint jobs?

The Shadow-Alpha is structurally distinct, so it's more than a paint-job, at least.

For that matter, how many of the capital ships are Shadow refits with a new paint job rather than brand new Shadow vessels?

The ones from "tNG" are "paint jobs," while the ones from tSC have new fiddly bits attached; I can only guess how that relates to new construction.

It has occurred to me in the past that a lot about Sentinels vs. New Generation would make a heck of a lot more sense if we were to assume that the Protoculture sensing capabilities were an innovation of the Regess' forces, and not a standard-issue feature shared by all Invid. It would neatly explain why Scott was as surprised as anyone by Rand's assertion that the Protoculture systems were attracting the Invid, and it would mean that mecha and spacecraft designed to go up against the Regent's Invid could make do with more traditional means of stealth et al.

Didn't the Zentraedi have a protoculture detector in "Season's Greetings"?

This got me thinking, how exactly are the Super Shadow Alpha Fighter & Beta different from the standard SA/B? Is there a size difference, a notable structural difference, new engines or just the add-ons?

Just the last, AFAIK.

If its just the add-ons, could the standard A/B & SA/B be modified to accept the super enhancements?

That's how it was done back in "tMS," IINM.

I guess the thing that puzzles me the most is why they deployed untested WMD, the devastating Neutron S, but left the Super Shadows sitting in SSL?

IIRC, their shadow devices hadn't been installed yet.

I have looked at the Condor in Battloid Mode. A discussion (at RT.com) relating the Condor to the Alpha resulted in my current thinking that the Condor sould be nothing more than an Alpha in add-on armor (ala the Armored Battloid in "Miss Macross").

That seems unlikely to me. The Condor and Alpha have almost no common details, and little of the Condor detailing suggests the functions add-ons show.

From the show it seems like...the REF has a man power shortage of pilots.

I assume this is the reason for the Alpha-Drones.

There's a piece of b&w art in uRRG's Beta entry and floating around the net which shows a Beta's wing with three hardpoints. It shows two racks of missiles inside and outside with a single larger missile mounted between them. Anyone know if this from the OSM or something the uRRG or another fan drew?

The underwing ordnance was based upon a picture on the first page of the Mospeada section of the ARTMIC Bible; though not seen in the show, this capability is plausible, and we included it.

Since a detail of the color picture is next to the "External hardpoints" section, I assume that's what they're referring to.

Those two round things on the sides of the Beta's cockpit, you know, the ones they use to think were LRMs? Those are supposed to be thrust bypass ducts....

I've wondered what those were! What source did you use?

Also, why did they just leave Scott's Beta sitting around somewhere near the battlefield instead of actually using it for the ground force assault?

For that matter, what about Rand and Rook's Alphas? For that matter, what about their Cyclones?

re: Cost
The cost comparision I am looking at is for a g-Alpha is compared to a r-Alpha, NOT to the Beta, AND at the production and deployment stages. From a development perspective the g-Alpha certainly can borrow from the r-alpha reducing cost. The main thing that could not be borrow would be the frame. The engines and the MM-60 equivalent systems could be new, modifications, or taken as is.

In terms of components, it has no parts in common.
Since the leg is enlarged, I would assume the engine is enlarged along with it. (It would have to be, to keep comparable performance with increased weight.)
To stay an "MM-60," it would have to carry an enlarged missile that scales up exactly like the plane!

This is what chaps my hide about it....the Beta is a damn good fighter / bomber that gets no real love.

I assume some things are so obvious they just don't need saying...

It would be more accurate to say the Beta Scott's team had is the only one shown with a pilot. Which has lead me to think the Beta should be a drone aircraft....

I don't known; all drone aircraft in Robotech have distinctive "cockpits."

As I and others have pointed out, "borrowing" is not likely to happen because the innards of the plane would have to be completely redesigned to function at the larger scale. It'd be essentially designing an entirely new plane, ala the F/A-18E/F

But it does happen in real life. The F-117 used components that where taken from other aircraft. I know it borrowed from the F-16, which is smaller by ~15ft in length, ~4ft in height, ~10ft wingspan. The engines are also in the same family as the F/A-18's (which is still smaller than an F-117).

This shows that you can take hardware from a smaller platform and put them in a larger platform and expect them to work.

But the Vindicator doesn't use Shadow Fighter hardware; for example, a normal Shadow Fighter head would appear disproportionately small.

Could be, but more than likely isn't. Remember, there was no such thing as a giant Alpha in MOSPEADA.

As an AE this is starting to become a pattern with distinct shots and is no longer confined to the same episode and even a non-Shadow unit.

I think it unlikely that the show's artists would draw five distinct designs then turn around and reuse them as separate, "large" mecha.

But there's no precedent for mass-production of the JANICE system... she was supposedly one of a kind right up until her first body's destruction, and from then on she was definitely one of a kind as a synthesis of human and Haydonite technology.

Well I was thinking of a less sophisticated version of JANICE, consider it a knock-off because IIRC even her original body was recovered from the SDF-1. Maybe a JANICE sized GMP bot would have been a better description. I thought of Janice because she was a VF Pilot in Sentinels (Novels and 1E RPG).

IMO, this is creating a major new narrative element to fix, at most, a very minor problem.

Animation just isn't always accurate. Just look at the debate that occurred over the frakin' nose lasers for 20 years.

Good times.

WRT Valkyrie wing hardpoints:
A lot here depends on the exact positions of the missiles: does the location of the outside 3-MERs correspond to that of the outmost large missile or the space between the two outside missiles? Both missiles and wings are drawn inconsistently so it's hard to tell.
I'll note that all the shots of large missiles show them aligned with the leading edge of the wing, instead of each other.

In addition to the VEFR-1, there's also a VF-1 with tail missiles and an Orguss VF/Destroid, both of which also appear in other episodes.

And don't forget Twin-Box!
Also, what other episodes does "tail-missile" appear in?

[T]hey allowed the three head guns (which was stretch at best and should not have been allowed)....

What do you have against Three-Laser?