Page 1 of 1
Re: why no vf4?
Posted: Sun Apr 12, 2009 5:10 pm
by taalismn
Its existance is hinted in in the production art, and an advanced version of it appears in the short Macross Memories piece(that isn't part of canon Robotech)...as such, the only time we see screentime of it in the edited Robotech is as a desktop model Rick is toying with, so it MIGHT exist (if as a regular, non-transformable, aircraft), but simply doesn't merit mention(prototype, short-lived interim vehicle, unrealized successor to the VF-1 because the program got vaporized in the Rain of Death) or simply a speculative flight of fancy that got realized as a toy/model...
I personally favor the developmental aircraft angle, with only a handful of prototypes produced before the program was shelved in favor of the Alpha configuration, and the VF-4 test aircraft going on to serve as test articles for the Super Century and Conbat series aircraft...
Re: why no vf4?
Posted: Mon Apr 13, 2009 2:24 am
by tobefrnk
taalismn wrote:and the VF-4 test aircraft going on to serve as test articles for the Super Century and Conbat series aircraft...
It's rather nice and tidy that the VF-4 airframe has some similarity to the Conbat.
Re: why no vf4?
Posted: Mon Apr 13, 2009 5:03 am
by Colonel Wolfe
i can dig them up, but Ricks hand is not located on the VF-4 while it is flying, Rick is ho;lding the model by its middle area, which was clearly veiwable while the vf-4 was flying, and no hand was present holding it in the air.
Re: why no vf4?
Posted: Mon Apr 13, 2009 10:19 am
by taalismn
Colonel Wolfe wrote:i can dig them up, but Ricks hand is not located on the VF-4 while it is flying, Rick is ho;lding the model by its middle area, which was clearly veiwable while the vf-4 was flying, and no hand was present holding it in the air.
We don't see it flying during the TV series, only in the Macross short..
The Macross Memories uber-bible has a sketch of an interim VF-4 design between the one we see in the TV series and the Macross music video, that looks more like parts of a VF-1 and the super-FAST packs arranged differently, being tested in the missing time between 'Force of Arms' and 'Reconstruction BLues', though it's not certain if that's supposed to be a VF-4 development(or REdevelopment), or an alternate design line...
As for its similarites to the Conbat...well, you look at the SR-71 and the British supersonic testbeds, and you see the lineage of twin-engined SS aircraft right there...
Re: why no vf4?
Posted: Mon Apr 13, 2009 11:11 am
by drewkitty ~..~
The only time the
VF-4 Lighting III was animated in a show was in the
"Flashback 2012" in the
SDF-2 Megaroad-01 Launching animation.
Therefor, since it was not in the macross TV series it was not a part of the licensing agreement that let HG make RT.
Re: why no vf4?
Posted: Mon Apr 13, 2009 2:52 pm
by Colonel Wolfe
taalismn wrote:Colonel Wolfe wrote:i can dig them up, but Ricks hand is not located on the VF-4 while it is flying, Rick is ho;lding the model by its middle area, which was clearly veiwable while the vf-4 was flying, and no hand was present holding it in the air.
We don't see it flying during the TV series, only in the Macross short..
http://www.robotech.com/images/content/MEC_60_2_167.jpgHere is a still image opf the Yf-4 in flight.
and note no fingers holding it:
http://www.robotech.com/images/content/ ... 3_8109.gifand note where Ricks fingers are in this image.
And HG seams to think they have some Claim to its existance as something beyond a model:
http://www.robotech.com/infopedia/mecha ... .php?id=60FIGHTER MODE
Length:
13.4 m Height:
3.2 m Wingspan:
11.91 m Max speed at sea level: Mach 1.21
Max speed at 30,000m: Mach 4.18
I dont think Ricks Model is 13.4 METERS in lenght.
Re: why no vf4?
Posted: Mon Apr 13, 2009 5:29 pm
by taalismn
What episode did the first shot appear in?
As for the rest....Cross your fingers and hope for a 'Strike Force II: Secrets of Robotechnology' supplement...
Re: why no vf4?
Posted: Mon Apr 13, 2009 5:47 pm
by Chris0013
If they did not have any rights to it I do not think it would have shown up in From The Stars.....I think they have rights to the jet mode but the Battloid / Guardian only showed up in a video game and they did not have rights to those designs.
Re: why no vf4?
Posted: Mon Apr 13, 2009 6:05 pm
by Tiree
Chris0013 wrote:If they did not have any rights to it I do not think it would have shown up in From The Stars.....I think they have rights to the jet mode but the Battloid / Guardian only showed up in a video game and they did not have rights to those designs.
That's exactly how I understand it. - HG only has rights to the Jet Fighter mode, not the Battloid Mode. If they designed a new Battloid version, then they would have something 'New' and thus have something. The same can be said for the transforming Condor. There is no image proof, and thus there is no RPG Material stating it should. Other than a design note saying there is an experimental version.
Re: why no vf4?
Posted: Mon Apr 13, 2009 6:57 pm
by Colonel Wolfe
taalismn wrote:What episode did the first shot appear in?
As for the rest....Cross your fingers and hope for a 'Strike Force II: Secrets of Robotechnology' supplement...
First Appearance:
Episode 36 - "To the Stars"
Re: why no vf4?
Posted: Sat Apr 18, 2009 9:32 am
by taalismn
Robot Urchin wrote:gelgoog wrote:DYRL as a model. (i don't remember in the heavly cut robotech version of DYRL)
You mean Clash of the Bionoids from Celebrity Home Video's world-famous* Just-For-Kids collection?
I was pretty surprised to see the VF-4 in DYRL. It looks like Misa was surprised too.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3628/345 ... 21.jpg?v=0Oh, it has a different color scheme than the TV series version, so this one can't be used in the Robotech RPG.
*=> (not really)
Also a much sharper, more angular design...virtually a different craft...
Re: why no vf4?
Posted: Sat Apr 18, 2009 3:44 pm
by Beatmeclever
Khyron_Prime wrote:I'm not allowed to post stats or anything Palladium-related on the Palladium boards, so I'll just stick with outright hypothetical discussion, for now:
Hypothetically speaking, what if someone (who may or may not be me) had a diagram of a generic fighter plane which outlines how if, hypothetically speaking, the wings, thrusters, engine area, and nosecone realigned themselves and moved, hypothetically speaking, into a humanoid form, thus giving the prodigious game master the opportunity to and tools required to, hypothetically speaking, turn any fighter plane of his choice from an F-4 to a MiG-29 or F-22 or, hypothetically speaking, a fictional fighter plane, into a humanoid re-configuration?
Were this to exist, the prodigious game masters, never content with awaiting a book to tell them how to run their games, could proceed and, hypothetically speaking, use their imagination to have any fighter plane, regardless of design, become a humanoid combat machine which, hypothetically speaking, would resemble the kinds seen in various cartoons designed during the 1980s.
If that happened, hypothetically speaking, would there continue to be answerless debates such as this one?
If something like that were to exist,
hypothetically of course, I'd have to ask, "Can you PM that to me?" I love to,
hypothetically, see something like that.
Re: why no vf4?
Posted: Sat Apr 18, 2009 5:27 pm
by Chris0013
Beatmeclever wrote:Khyron_Prime wrote:I'm not allowed to post stats or anything Palladium-related on the Palladium boards, so I'll just stick with outright hypothetical discussion, for now:
Hypothetically speaking, what if someone (who may or may not be me) had a diagram of a generic fighter plane which outlines how if, hypothetically speaking, the wings, thrusters, engine area, and nosecone realigned themselves and moved, hypothetically speaking, into a humanoid form, thus giving the prodigious game master the opportunity to and tools required to, hypothetically speaking, turn any fighter plane of his choice from an F-4 to a MiG-29 or F-22 or, hypothetically speaking, a fictional fighter plane, into a humanoid re-configuration?
Were this to exist, the prodigious game masters, never content with awaiting a book to tell them how to run their games, could proceed and, hypothetically speaking, use their imagination to have any fighter plane, regardless of design, become a humanoid combat machine which, hypothetically speaking, would resemble the kinds seen in various cartoons designed during the 1980s.
If that happened, hypothetically speaking, would there continue to be answerless debates such as this one?
If something like that were to exist,
hypothetically of course, I'd have to ask, "Can you PM that to me?" I love to,
hypothetically, see something like that.
I might
hypothetically want one PM'ed to me too...
Re: why no vf4?
Posted: Sun Apr 19, 2009 4:25 pm
by tobefrnk
CavScout wrote:There is no rule against posting images of alternative modes for vehicles is there?
I don't think so. As long as you don't post RPG stats. If this is not the case, then a number of our signatures would be suspect.
Re: why no vf4?
Posted: Mon Apr 20, 2009 12:23 pm
by taalismn
..Enough art that it shows up on fan-art size comparison charts...
Frankly, though, I think the VF4 battloid mode looks rather gangly and crude compared to the classic VF-1...so probably the only real improvement was in the speed and range of the fighter mode...
Re: why no vf4?
Posted: Mon Apr 20, 2009 5:43 pm
by tobefrnk
taalismn wrote:..Enough art that it shows up on fan-art size comparison charts...
Frankly, though, I think the VF4 battloid mode looks rather gangly and crude compared to the classic VF-1...so probably the only real improvement was in the speed and range of the fighter mode...
Yeah, I have never liked the look of the battloid mode of the VF4 and the whole semi-recessed missile launchers are quirky too.
Re: why no vf4?
Posted: Mon Apr 20, 2009 6:49 pm
by Jefffar
The VF-4 does exist within the RPG. It's mentioned that the VF-4 program was cancelled before the VF-4 entered production.
This is in line with what the Infopedia article that Col. Wolfe linked to states.
Re: why no vf4?
Posted: Tue Apr 21, 2009 1:22 am
by Chris
Robot Urchin wrote:gelgoog wrote:DYRL as a model. (i don't remember in the heavly cut robotech version of DYRL)
You mean Clash of the Bionoids from Celebrity Home Video's world-famous* Just-For-Kids collection?
I was pretty surprised to see the VF-4 in DYRL. It looks like Misa was surprised too.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3628/345 ... 21.jpg?v=0Oh, it has a different color scheme than the TV series version, so this one can't be used in the Robotech RPG.
*=> (not really)
Did you notice the Easter egg in that picture?
Look at the model plane NEXT to the VF-4...
It's an XB-70 Valkyrie ^_^
Re: why no vf4?
Posted: Tue Apr 21, 2009 5:14 pm
by taalismn
Chris wrote:Robot Urchin wrote:gelgoog wrote:DYRL as a model. (i don't remember in the heavly cut robotech version of DYRL)
You mean Clash of the Bionoids from Celebrity Home Video's world-famous* Just-For-Kids collection?
I was pretty surprised to see the VF-4 in DYRL. It looks like Misa was surprised too.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3628/345 ... 21.jpg?v=0Oh, it has a different color scheme than the TV series version, so this one can't be used in the Robotech RPG.
GREAT call there...
*=> (not really)
Did you notice the Easter egg in that picture?
Look at the model plane NEXT to the VF-4...
It's an XB-70 Valkyrie ^_^
Great call, there.
Re: why no vf4?
Posted: Fri Apr 24, 2009 2:37 am
by Chris
taalismn wrote:
Great call, there.
Thank you ^_^
