Super Veritechs/Valkyries Question

[rexdarteskimospy]

Even though the Super Veritechs/Valkyries haven't come out yet for RPG Tactics I've wanted to know something for some time now-are these vehicles meant to fly in the atmosphere? When I played Robotech years ago the GM insisted they could fly with the added thrust from the FAST packs even though the extra weight and lack of aerodynamics caused a huge drag during the flight. Now, I just ordered the Manga-sized Macross Saga sourcebook so maybe this rule has already been brought up but if not, would someone be able to let me know?

[Maxgravity]

Even though the Super Veritechs/Valkyries haven't come out yet for RPG Tactics I've wanted to know something for some time now-are these vehicles meant to fly in the atmosphere? When I played Robotech years ago the GM insisted they could fly with the added thrust from the FAST packs even though the extra weight and lack of aerodynamics caused a huge drag during the flight. Now, I just ordered the Manga-sized Macross Saga sourcebook so maybe this rule has already been brought up but if not, would someone be able to let me know?

The RRT rulebook lists the Super Valks as having the Flight ability. Never underestimate the triumph of raw thrust over aerodynamics

-MaxGravity

[rosco60559]

Actually the normal fast packs on the legs and arms aren't the drag issue it's the missle launchers/boosters on the back. They were for space operations or launching into space not atmosphere ops. Go back to the cartoon, all the packs were jettisoned when re-entering the atmosphere. This might be something that needs to in the FAQ since it was meant for space ops only and in atmosphere all the added maneuverability would be lost due to drag.

[jaymz]

If they are not meant for atmosphere it will say as much in the book just like it does for the Lancer Space Fighter which is space only. Anecdotally they are never seen to operate in air for the reasons previously stated.

[Phaze]

Honestly, I don't have a problem with the Fast packs in atmo. If you put big enough engines on a brick it will fly... look at the F-4.

Nothing in the rules say they are limited to space flight. Fluff wise, just because you haven't seen them operate in atmo in the limited view of a few cartoon episodes, doesn't mean they can't.

[jaymz]

Actually there is full evidence they aren't used in atmo via a couple of episodes not to mention no sight of them in use ever.

But I digress. If rules don't say anything then they are useable as the rules do specify if something is space only. The Lancer sets the precedent for that.

[Forar]

I always took it as Rick jettisoned all the damaged armour/mechanisms he could before approaching earth because his fighter just got the crap kicked out of it, not because Super VTs were incapable of standard flight.

But agreed, while people can house rule for their own tables as they like, I'd be sticking with the books myself.

In universe fluff aside, also keep in mind that this is one of the most recognizable/popular figures of the series. I think the MAC-II and FPA were the only ones more requested. Limiting them to space only and thus limited their ability to see table time would probably conflict with how useful they'd be, which isn't something one wants to conflict the buying public with.

[rosco60559]

Flipping through my old books the boosters were only used to get the valk into orbit. The boosters added too much drag and killed any bonuses in atmosphere.

Yes I'm familiar with the f-4, that old school bus with wings at least looked mildly aerodynamic. As for fast packs the f-15 has been using them for years, they were streamlined down the side of the aircraft adding minimal drag.

[Phaze]

Actually there is full evidence they aren't used in atmo via a couple of episodes not to mention no sight of them in use ever.

Out of genuine curiosity, what episodes? You peaked my interest.

[jaymz]

The last 6 where it was not once every used earth side even though the added firepower and combat ability would have been VERY helpful. Something THAT effective if usable would have been and it isn't like the couldn't animate it so that isn't a viable reason as to why it wasn't used either. You have to remember, most good anime in Japan (unlike in North America) actually detail this stuff as part of the production process of the show to keep it all as consistent as they can.

Add to that they launched into orbit using a different booster system and only added the super parts AFTER docking with Breetai's ship for the factory satellite capture operation and well....if they were usable then they could have just used THAT instead of a completely and visibly awkward launch system to get to orbit yet they didn't. That and canon source material for Macross (SDF Macross specifically which is used by HG as well) states it is for use in space.

Also the RPG Sourcebook specifies that it is less effective in atmosphere (and is penalized when used in such capacity) and was designed to increase effectiveness in space (which RRT does NOT actually take into account in its write ups of the Super VF-1 units)

NOW:

All that being said....I'll use what is said in the rule book for my demo's and such. Only the Lancer Space Fighter is specifically stated as being "Space Only" as per the rule book so that is what we should do until such time we are told otherwise. For my personal house games.....I'll treat it as I treat my personal rewrites of it, which is a space only use fighter.

[Seto Kaiba]

Even though the Super Veritechs/Valkyries haven't come out yet for RPG Tactics I've wanted to know something for some time now-are these vehicles meant to fly in the atmosphere?

Strictly speaking, the answer to your question is "No".

The VF-1 Valkyrie's FAST packs are not meant to be used in atmospheric service, because their significant size and weight would be excessively detrimental to the fighter's maneuverability and ability to sustain flight. They'd only really be usable for a straight-line ballistic flights to extreme high altitude (we're talking 80-100km+) for interception purposes. You could say that it's "possible, but not remotely practical" to use the VF-1's FAST packs in atmospheric service.

I always took it as Rick jettisoned all the damaged armour/mechanisms he could before approaching earth because his fighter just got the crap kicked out of it, not because Super VTs were incapable of standard flight.

Considering where the missiles hit, most of the FAST packs were probably relatively undamaged... and evidence in both the original Macross and Robotech suggest they're sturdy enough to stay on during reentry... but the aircraft would handle like a cow in a supermarket trolley. Disposing of the packs would be much more advantageous, since their armament was depleted and there isn't a need for the extra fuel in atmospheric flight.

The last 6 where it was not once every used earth side even though the added firepower and combat ability would have been VERY helpful.

The firepower the FAST packs add is actually relatively minimal because of their size and disposition... most of the packs are just external fuel tanks for the main engines, and supplemental rocket boosters. You only really get the 24 micro-missiles up there in those HMMP-02 missile pods and the other six in the NP-AR-01 forearm packs. With the UUM-7 micro-missile pods that somehow were accidentally copied into the RPG from Macross sources but don't actually exist in Robotech, you can get double a Super Pack's micro-missiles without sacrificing any maneuverability.

[tdumontelle]

I think tournament vs. casual play will determine atmospheric use in some cases. I would hate to build an army with Supvalks and show up to a tourney and find no space tables thus preventing their use. For a casual game I would probably keep them in space for theme. I've been trying to see what the advantage would be to jetisoning the super-pack as there isn't a penalty to the stats.

Maybe a house rule or a rule update could give it an atmospheric advantage/penalty pair. i.e. - -1 pilot +1 Defense in fighter mode in the atmosphere to represent limited manouverabilty but extra stuff to take damage.

For tourneys there may have to be substitute army list rule. If you have a squad of lancers or supvalks at X points, you should also have a substitute squad at X points for atmospheric battles. Not sure about points, but in space you would bring lancers and for ground you could have destroids.

[rosco60559]

Like I said it should be in the FAQ eventually due to tournament play, or just talk it over with an opponent for a pick up game.

Now I got bored and looked it up, under penalties it says the whole thing was meant for space useyou loss 25% on all combat bonuses in atmosphere from the new edition for the rpg. From the first edition under notes the booster/launchers need to jettisoned upon re-entry. So that being found from the books it's a question of how true to the rpg do they want the game.

[Maxgravity]

They'd only really be usable for a straight-line ballistic flights to extreme high altitude (we're talking 80-100km+) for interception purposes. You could say that it's "possible, but not remotely practical" to use the VF-1's FAST packs in atmospheric service.

In real life, the penalties wouldn't be quite so harsh. To greatly simplify some stuff, let's just say that the lift provided by an airfoil is a function of speed and it's not an "on/off" type of thing. Also, the ability to maneuver is not tied to the ability to provide enough lift to fly.

What that translates into is that a FASTpacked Valk will fly as long as it generates enough speed to produce enough lift to offset the weight of the FASTpacks. Countering this is the parasitic drag fo the packs themselves, but there's the interesting part, drag is also a function of speed and the packs have relatively decent aerodynamic lines. The next result is that with the extra thrust, the Valk should have little difficulty achieving take-off speed (assuming a long enough runway), but will have difficulty going high speed with them because of the increasing drag. However, drag is also a function of air density and starts to drop dramatically at altitudes as low as 7 km.

The net result is that at a typical dogfight altitude, the FASTpacked Valk should be able to fly just fine and at a decent fraction of its regular speed. The major limitations are going to be A. Maneuverability as the control surfaces/RCS are designed for a smaller mass and suddenly the system has much more inertia to overcome compounded by the fact that the packs are shaped and oriented (probably intentionally) in a way that effectively turns them into giant rudders oriented to keep the Valk flying straight. B. That thing is going to be very challenging to land. Wing loading is a factor in stall speed and the packs significantly increase the wing loading of the Valk which means the landing speed is going to be much higher and the Valk is going to be losing dramatically more altitude in its turn in the landing pattern.

Honestly, as someone who used to work as an instructor in aviation, I can see the FASTpack Valk becoming the equivalent of the F4U Corsair. The Corsair's aerodynamics made it a challenging fighter for green pilots fresh from wartime fast tracked flight schools. So much so, that it earned the nickname "The Ensign Eliminator" for its habit of killing rookie naval flight officers(ensigns). I see a lot of similarity between that situation and the UEDF's wartime child pilots.

-MaxGravity

[Seto Kaiba]

What that translates into is that a FASTpacked Valk will fly as long as it generates enough speed to produce enough lift to offset the weight of the FASTpacks. Countering this is the parasitic drag fo the packs themselves, but there's the interesting part, drag is also a function of speed and the packs have relatively decent aerodynamic lines.

Well, there's a couple of problems with that particular train of thought...

The first, and most obvious, issue is that the VF-1's FAST packs with a typical combat load add enough mass to put the VF-1 8,000kg over its maximum take-off weight with just the main engine thrust. You're not getting that plane off the ground without resorting to the NP-BP-01 booster pack's rockets.

The second issue, related to the first, is that the NP-BP-01's rocket engine has an aggressively short continuous burn time at its full output. It was designed and built to be used in space, for short bursts of high acceleration. The booster has 150 seconds of fuel at full power, and then it's done.

The third issue is that the design of the packs is pretty poor, aerodynamically. You've got nice, slab-fronted square-edged boosters with a high profile (they sit almost as tall as the VF-1 itself does), AND the aerodynamic profile of the ventral fuselage is negatively impacted by dropping the legs down to make way for the NP-FB-01 leg packs with the CTB-04 conformal tanks. That's a significant (massive!) drag increase which is going to make controlling the plane a fresh kind of hell, and put a lot of extra strain on the main engines.

The fourth issue is that using the FAST packs in atmosphere is unnecessary. The VF-1 doesn't need the extra fuel and verniers that are most of the mass of the NP-BP-01 and NP-FB-01 packs in atmospheric flight. Its engines are at their most fuel-efficient during atmospheric operation, giving them an effectively unlimited sortie range. The weapons it adds are pretty minimal, amounting to a mere 30 micro-missiles... you can get the same in a smaller, lighter package and just hang it on the wing.

[Maxgravity]

What that translates into is that a FASTpacked Valk will fly as long as it generates enough speed to produce enough lift to offset the weight of the FASTpacks. Countering this is the parasitic drag fo the packs themselves, but there's the interesting part, drag is also a function of speed and the packs have relatively decent aerodynamic lines.

The first, and most obvious, issue is that the VF-1's FAST packs with a typical combat load add enough mass to put the VF-1 8,000kg over its maximum take-off weight with just the main engine thrust. You're not getting that plane off the ground without resorting to the NP-BP-01 booster pack's rockets.

Or bolting on some RATO's/JATO's which is the standard way of getting a bird past MTOW airborne.

{quote] The second issue, related to the first, is that the NP-BP-01's rocket engine has an aggressively short continuous burn time at its full output.
[/quote]

My bad, I was remembering them as liquid fueled throttleable rockets.

slab-fronted square-edged boosters with a high profile (they sit almost as tall as the VF-1 itself does), AND the aerodynamic profile of the ventral fuselage is negatively impacted by dropping the legs down to make way for the NP-FB-01 leg packs with the CTB-04 conformal tanks. That's a significant (massive!) drag increase which is going to make controlling the plane a fresh kind of hell, and put a lot of extra strain on the main engines.

Rounded =/= aerodynamic, it's just one way of doing it and oft times not even the best way. The front end of the packs are a sloped plane which is a perfectly valid aerodynamic shape, and thanks to their narrow rectangular design, the packs have a relative low surface area to mass ratio facing into the relative wind during forward flight further minimizing their drag.

Also, I'm not exactly sold on the concept of the lowered legs being a massive drag penalty given that they are mostly in the burble zone created by the GU-11.

-MaxGravity

[Seto Kaiba]

Or bolting on some RATO's/JATO's which is the standard way of getting a bird past MTOW airborne.

That's a possibility, yeah... though one would have to wonder where you'd stick it to avoid damaging the verniers on the NP-FB-01 packs or mounted armaments. There's very little free space on the airframe with the Super Pack mounted.

The second issue, related to the first, is that the NP-BP-01's rocket engine has an aggressively short continuous burn time at its full output.

My bad, I was remembering them as liquid fueled throttleable rockets.

Official spec from the VF-1's designer has it as a gas-hybrid rocket... which is also throttle-able. It's more an issue of there being very little actual fuel for the rocket as a result of its size. You'll get a couple minutes of burn time out of it, and then you've got a fairly substantial chunk of deadweight clinging to the top of the airframe.

Also, I'm not exactly sold on the concept of the lowered legs being a massive drag penalty given that they are mostly in the burble zone created by the GU-11.

's not just that the legs are dropped, with the arm packs in place and the gunpod hanging below those, you've got a fighter that has effectively almost tripled its exposed forward profile.

[Forar]

Thanks for the posts, Max. That's some interesting stuff.

[Maxgravity]

Or bolting on some RATO's/JATO's which is the standard way of getting a bird past MTOW airborne.

That's a possibility, yeah... though one would have to wonder where you'd stick it to avoid damaging the verniers on the NP-FB-01 packs or mounted armaments. There's very little free space on the airframe with the Super Pack mounted.

I am guessing the easiest way would be to sling them on the hard points. Not ideal, but I figure that if you are humping the fast packs up into atmosphere, there's a compelling reason and the lost firepower is just part of the "convenience tax" associated with that.

Official spec from the VF-1's designer has it as a gas-hybrid rocket... which is also throttle-able. It's more an issue of there being very little actual fuel for the rocket as a result of its size. You'll get a couple minutes of burn time out of it, and then you've got a fairly substantial chunk of deadweight clinging to the top of the airframe.

Again, it's a far from ideal compromise, but if they are throttleable then you can probably justify a 5-10 second burn on the takeoff roll to get up to takeoff speed.

It's not just that the legs are dropped, with the arm packs in place and the gunpod hanging below those, you've got a fighter that has effectively almost tripled its exposed forward profile.

Yeah, we need someone to program the thing into X plane to get a full idea, but I suspect that a big chunk of the limb packs are resting in the shadow of disrupted air created by the head pod and GU-11.


-MaxGravity

[Seto Kaiba]

I am guessing the easiest way would be to sling them on the hard points. Not ideal, but I figure that if you are humping the fast packs up into atmosphere, there's a compelling reason and the lost firepower is just part of the "convenience tax" associated with that.

That wouldn't make any sense, though... you could have the extremely heavy Super Pack and 30 micro-missiles, or you could have greater agility and control with twice as many missiles hanging off the wing without the pack and without impeding the VF-1's normal takeoff.

That's a big part of why they don't use FAST packs on the VF-1 in atmosphere... most of the pack's features are totally unnecessary there, and actually hinder (rather than boost) performance and endurance.

Yeah, we need someone to program the thing into X plane to get a full idea, but I suspect that a big chunk of the limb packs are resting in the shadow of disrupted air created by the head pod and GU-11.

I doubt it, but I'll see about getting it programmed into X-Plane.

[Ice Dragon]

It was discussed already, the Super VF can fly IMHO in athmosphere, but orbital reentry is difficult and damaged FAST-packs should be jetsionized before reentry.

[Jerell]

It MIGHT be able to fly, but it I think it would drop performance in atmosphere. FAST packs were made for space, that's where they used them in the show, and in DYRL, I hope the game limits them to space as well.

[jedi078]

In the Tactics rule book there is nothing that states a Super VF cannot fly in atmo nor are there any penalties incurred.

The Macross Saga source book it specifically states that if a VF-1 is using the FAST PACKs in atmosphere there is a 25% penalty to ALL combat bonuses.

In universe fluff aside, also keep in mind that this is one of the most recognizable/popular figures of the series. I think the MAC-II and FPA were the only ones more requested. Limiting them to space only and thus limited their ability to see table time would probably conflict with how useful they'd be, which isn't something one wants to conflict the buying public with.

This is probably why there is a difference between the FAST pack equipped VF-1 in tactics and the RPG. That and people would cry if the Super VT was limited to only space battles.

Personally if I was going to a tournament, I'd bring all my minis so that I could create an army that suite the terrain. This is after all a tactics game, and you'd want your army to suit the terrain.

[Jerell]

Well the Super VF is BA... I can't fault people for liking them.