Forums of the Megaverse®

an idea i had, and had to write down to get it out of my head. i doubt i could actually use it though. this assumes my baltic states version of the EBSIS in robotech 2nd ed.. see my website for details.


EBSIS Space Forces 'Flight Deck Cruiser' aka "super ARMD"
hull classification CVGS (Cruiser, Aviation, Guided missile, Space)

Class; Space Vessel
crew: 1600 crewmen, 300 pilots and air group.

Length: 1410 feet 9 inches (430 meters)
Width: 564 feet 4 inches (172 meters)
Height: 180 feet 5 inches (55 meters)
Mass: 200,000 tons (operational)
Range: Interstellar

Layout:
similar to standard ARMD carrier design. twin rectangular catamaran hulls bracketing a central hull with protruding bridge, and extended aft engineering section. notable deviations from original design include thicker central hull mounting twin forward 'assault bays' with deployable ramps for destroid and shuttle operations below the bridge, twelves 'skyhook' launch and recovery bays for Veritech fighters on the ventral section of the central hull, and squarish not rounded aft engineering section with no docking connector system. the Catamaran hulls mount two large twin barrel anti-ship turrets dorsally near the front of the ship, with one turret facing the bow and the other facing the stern in stowed position. one turret is mounted in a semi-recessed section on the ventral aft of the catamaran hull. point defense turrets line the flanks, bow, and stern, and hull conforming missile tube arrays are mounted on nearly all facings but aft. the aft section of the catamaran hull is wider, the original design's external main thruster modules having been integrated into the catamaran hull itself and benefiting from a lower profile and superior armor protection. less notable, but important, is the dorsal surface of the central hull has been outfitted as a flight deck with elevators, arrestor landing systems, and protruding catapult systems. ventrally on the catamaran hulls are multiple Landing gear systems behind armored hatches. these systems were added because the vessel is fitted with Anti-gravity systems that allow it to operate in planetary atmospheres, and perform landing operations on planetary surfaces.

Power systems:
Primary - SLMH fueled high output fusion reactor
supplemental - 2 high output liquid Sodium cooled fission reactors
auxiliary - deployable solar panel arrays.

Propulsion :
multiple High Impulse Plasma thruster arrays (reverse engineered from zentreadi systems [performance on par with ASC ships])
Anti-gravity atmospheric drives
Fold Drive with Fold Battery System. (Fold battery allows for up to 100 light years of fold travel before requiring recharging)

Armament:
6 Dual Particle Cannon turrets (2 dorsal forward in back to back mount on each catamaran hull, 1 ventral aft facing aft per catamaran hull, in semi-recessed mount.)
64 VLS missile launch tubes (8 arrays of 8 tubes. two dorsal, two ventral, one bow, and two side per catamaran hull) with one 200kiloton yield Thermonuclear warhead guided missile in each tube.
320 VLS reloadable point defense launch tubes (10 arrays of 32 tubes. two dorsal, two ventral, two side, one front, one aft per catamaran hull) with one medium range missile per tube, 2 reload pallets per array in ready storage.
12 AK-63M1-2 30mm CIWS systems (turreted twin 6 barrel Gatling mounts, 6 dorsal, 6 ventral, located along outer edge of catamaran hulls)
24 Single barrel defensive laser cannons (dual gun turreted, 3 forward ventral, 3 forward dorsal, 3 Aft ventral, 3 aft Dorsal, useable as secondary anti-ship weapons)

defenses: thick armor plating on all hull surfaces, high output thruster systems for tactical evasion.

mecha Complement:
120 VF-1 Valkyrie Veritech Fighters (8 Squadrons of 15 aircraft. no FAST-pack capability)
42 Destroids (typically Uhlan Light Destroids with optional space adaption packs. 3 companies of 14)
2 Shuttle craft

Purpose: developed by the Baltic States with the intention of creating a supplement and alternative to the UEDF's space fleet, for defense of earth and non-ueg colonization efforts. construction began fall of 2020 in disguised underground shipyard in the Ural mountains. 3 additional ships of the class began construction in following years. arrival of the invid found only the first at 95% completion (lacked fold drive), the others little more than hulls. EBSIS remnant preserved the vessel as a potential offensive asset, keeping its location secret. vessel is expected by the renewed EBSIS to play a major role in re-establishing their political power on post-invid earth.

notable technology is the Fold battery system. unwilling to become reliant on a finite supply of alien fuel, the EBSIS was limited to fusion power, which normally is insufficient in energy density to power a fold drive while retaining a useful payload. the solution developed to this issue was to create an energy storage system capable of holding sufficient energy that would feed the fold dive, but which could be recharged by less powerful yet less bulky power systems. this allowed viable fusion powered fold travel, but only for a limited duration before the vessel much defold and recharge the fold battery, a process that can take several days. primary power is provided by the fusion reactor, supplemented by high output fission reactors. main beam weaponry requires fusion reactor output, imparting a 'fight or flight' limitation, as their use precludes the ability to charge the fold battery during that time. missile armaments and defensive systems require only fission power plants to be functional.

holy cow !!!!nice one

Com'on, Riga Spaceyards. We're not talking Duchy of Grand Fenwick here. Shipyards, and toss in a few crashed Zentraedi ships to scavenge for engines and gear. It's doable.

major coastal cities are not usually a good spot for secret underground spaceship building.

to be honest, while i did want to impress upon the need to keep the construction secret (after all the UEG and the EBSIS have a relationship at that point best described as "frenemies", the UEG wouldn't much like the EBSIS gaining interstellar defense and travel ability, even if it is a limited one. (especially if they did it without relying on a Zentreadi factory sats and protoculture fuel), i also was inspired by stargate..

Interesting idea... kind of puts me in the mind of the Daedalus II-class assault ships from Macross 2036, an ARMD with more dakka.

this was inspired by my idea of the "plug in Fold drive" for ARMD's, the Stargate Prometheus and Daedalus class ships, and Space Battleship Yamato (just finished watching Yamato 2199 ). though the fold battery idea was based on the KF drives of battletech, and the energy storage device mentioned in one episode of macross 7 (when Battle 7 connects its energy storage system to the city ships fold drive to let it escape the star)

glitterboy2098 wrote:this was inspired by my idea of the "plug in Fold drive" for ARMD's, the Stargate Prometheus and Daedalus class ships, and Space Battleship Yamato (just finished watching Yamato 2199 ). though the fold battery idea was based on the KF drives of battletech, and the energy storage device mentioned in one episode of macross 7 (when Battle 7 connects its energy storage system to the city ships fold drive to let it escape the star)

The "battery" part is pretty much straight OSM, actually... fold jumps require a LOT of juice, so depending upon the ship in question and how much of its reactor output it's willing to divert to the fold drive, the ship may have to spend hours, days, weeks, or even months storing up energy for a long-range fold jump. The economics of a fold jump's energy consumption got discussed a bit in Macross Frontier, where they talk about the impact moving up a planned 1,000ly long-range jump (and then making said jump in extremis after firing the ship's Macross Cannon) had on the living conditions aboard Island-1.

It strikes me as extremely reasonable to have a ship in Robotech that doesn't have protoculture to run a fold engine use some kind of robotechnology capacitor bank to store surplus reactor output for fold travel. I'd almost wonder why such a thing isn't present on every ship... it'd be an invaluable backup in case of any problems with the ship's reflex furnace (since most ships seem to only have the one).

As far as more guns goes... you can never have enuff dakka.

I like it. Good Soviet design philosophy...not as tech heavy, but it works, it works well and it carries lots of weapons...

-STS

yeah.. as the class type suggests, the Soviet battle-carriers were an inspiration.

You could probably still use a conventional shipyard to build smaller and more utilitarian aerospace craft, such as converting/repairing Reentry Pods for surface-to-orbit freight carrying...which would probably be about the limit of aerospace activity the UEG would safely allow the EBSIS(unarmed freighters, and if the UEG is feeling generous, toss the EBSIS a few supply contracts or licensed salvage ops in support of the orbital defense forces to maintain good will).
Though repair work on RePs could easily then translate into work on indigenous HLVs, similar to the 1960's/70's studies like 'Rhombus', only upgraded with salvaged Zentraedi shuttle A-G units and modified to use SLMH remass engines(as opposed to bulk liquid hydrogen), designs that would be considered 'safe' by the UEG, while still powerful enough to be able to make orbit from the northern latitudes(plus, given that the original NASA HLVs were meant to be launched from coastal launch pads/ponds, coastal construction and location isn't a problem).
The added bonus is, all the concern about whether the EBSIS would ever start arming the HLVs and RePs, or use them to carry fighters into near-orbit, draws attention away from where the REAL warship program is underway.

Liking this.

If you have someone who can do the art....what about giving the SDF-1 refit treatment to some Zentraedi scouts? Maybe a Few Monitors as well?

Chris0013 wrote:If you have someone who can do the art....what about giving the SDF-1 refit treatment to some Zentraedi scouts? Maybe a Few Monitors as well?

Given their frienemy status, I doubt the UEG would take too well to EBSIS salvaging whole Zentraedi ships. Especially since they'd be salvaging them as well for the Pioneer Mission. I'd imagine EBSIS salvage operations would be more covert, boarding and stripping a wreak rather then refitting it.

that was my thought too. plus i doubt they'd have too many ships intact enough to refit. the UEG could do it because they had Breetai's fleet and maybe a few other turncoats. ships crashed on earth would likely need a fairly major overhual. stripping parts (like say engines, antigrav pods, etc) you could justify.. especially if you sold the bigger stuff to the UEG and used the rest to build a domestic HLV fleet, but i don't think the hulls themselves would be useful other than scrap metal or maybe non-mobile bases.

though using the salvage operations to disguise and supply a secret ship construction project would be a fun what if.

honestly i've not turned my mind to the EBSIS space forces yet.. not sure how far i want to take them.

glitterboy2098 wrote:
honestly i've not turned my mind to the EBSIS space forces yet.. not sure how far i want to take them.

I figure at the very least any post-Rain nation state on Earth with any sort of pull would want to have at least the ability to service communications and early warning satellites, geosysnch weapons platforms possibly. Then push for the ability to loft anti-spacecraft missiles or squadrons of aerospace fighters with the argument that defense starts as far out as possible from orbital bombardment range of their country. So a number of nations will have at least a StarGoose-style shuttle or more, if only to send personnel to the UEG space platforms(rather than wait for taxi service).
The UEG won't begrudge this level of light transport, but start getting antsy the bigger the payload capacity goes(since an HLV could just as easily unleash a honking big load of missiles or mines into orbit).

SRoss wrote:

Chris0013 wrote:If you have someone who can do the art....what about giving the SDF-1 refit treatment to some Zentraedi scouts? Maybe a Few Monitors as well?

Given their frienemy status, I doubt the UEG would take too well to EBSIS salvaging whole Zentraedi ships. Especially since they'd be salvaging them as well for the Pioneer Mission. I'd imagine EBSIS salvage operations would be more covert, boarding and stripping a wreak rather then refitting it.

You have 2 sovereign nations....what he EBSIS does is not the UEDF's business as long as the EBSIS is staying out of the UEDF's territory...and claiming salvage rights for whatever they get outside of that territory.

glitterboy2098 wrote:that was my thought too. plus i doubt they'd have too many ships intact enough to refit. the UEG could do it because they had Breetai's fleet and maybe a few other turncoats. ships crashed on earth would likely need a fairly major overhual. stripping parts (like say engines, antigrav pods, etc) you could justify.. especially if you sold the bigger stuff to the UEG and used the rest to build a domestic HLV fleet, but i don't think the hulls themselves would be useful other than scrap metal or maybe non-mobile bases.

though using the salvage operations to disguise and supply a secret ship construction project would be a fun what if.

honestly i've not turned my mind to the EBSIS space forces yet.. not sure how far i want to take them.

I could see that there might be a dozen or more ships that come down in the EBSIS's territory and the surrounding area. Maybe a ship that is damaged making a controlled crash into the ocean off the EBSIS coast. Capturing other Zentraedi ships that are being used as strongholds from some minor warlords they are fighting. I imagine they could cobble together a handful of ships over time.

Without a means of force projection into space the EBSIS will always have to worry the UEDF will just decide to be done with them once and for all.

The ARMD you describe would be part of that fleet and some converted smaller Zentraedi ships they have a force that has to be respected.

it's less "could they get a few ships" and more "could they actually power the things?" the EBSIS doesn't have a source of protoculture, and certainly can't get any from the UEG. and refitting them to use SLMH isn't likely to be very effective.. they'd basically have to be gutted and rebuilt completely, since all their tech relies on the density of power PC can produce.
and even if the ships have a supply of PC onboard, it will be finite. as is the UEG's supply prior to the recovery of the matrix in 2031. the UEG has a huge stockpile though, while the EBSIS wouldn't. and they'd likely husband their supplies to power their zentraedi allies mecha.

so building something totally new seems far more probable. i could see them building a similarly sized "Oberth II" using salvaged scout ship parts and the same sort of tech used in this updated ARMD type.. but redoing zent ships seems like a lot of work for little gain to them. the UEG could pull it off because it has fuel for them, and has the factory sat to make fitting human tech to them quick and easy. the EBSIS lacks all that.

glitterboy2098 wrote:it's less "could they get a few ships" and more "could they actually power the things?" the EBSIS doesn't have a source of protoculture, and certainly can't get any from the UEG. and refitting them to use SLMH isn't likely to be very effective.. they'd basically have to be gutted and rebuilt completely, since all their tech relies on the density of power PC can produce.
and even if the ships have a supply of PC onboard, it will be finite. as is the UEG's supply prior to the recovery of the matrix in 2031. the UEG has a huge stockpile though, while the EBSIS wouldn't. and they'd likely husband their supplies to power their zentraedi allies mecha.

so building something totally new seems far more probable. i could see them building a similarly sized "Oberth II" using salvaged scout ship parts and the same sort of tech used in this updated ARMD type.. but redoing zent ships seems like a lot of work for little gain to them. the UEG could pull it off because it has fuel for them, and has the factory sat to make fitting human tech to them quick and easy. the EBSIS lacks all that.

What if this becomes a protoculture 'arms race' of sorts....UEDF gets what is in there territory, EBSIS gets what is in their's and anything in unaligned areas, international waters and space is up for grabs...first come first serve. UEDF can't unilaterally say all protoculture is theirs without saying international waters and borders of those not aligned with them are null and void by UEDF decree when it comes to what the UEDF wants.

Same goes for colonization....the UEDF can't unilaterally say any habitable planets are automatically theirs without actually planting a flag (figuratively speaking) and having boots on the ground. Maybe there are Zentraedi technical specialist who are navigators who happen to know where some habitable planets are and it gives the EBSIS a leg up on planting some colonies.


Don't make the EBSIS out to be the weaker of the two. Aside from the SDF-1 and all its assets....the UEDF and the EBSIS are pretty much on equal footing after the RoD.

A question to ask is how many submersible carriers / troop transports were out to sea. What orders did they get when Dolza's fleet showed up....launch all craft and fight to the end? Go deep and await instructions? Where was fleet command located? US? Europe? If in Europe...could those ships be recalled to European ports and end up under EBSIS command? If the commanders of those ships are from European countries did they take it upon themselves to go to European ports?

Lots of questions to be asked.

question.. given the rate of travel seen in shadow chronicles, how fast is fold travel? i listed 100 ly as a distance for each fold battery charge, but that was really just a "i need an umber" choice.ideally each charge should handle about a day's worth of travel, so i'd like a better ballpark figure.


(and before people trot out the "the master's folded from another galaxy!" stuff, i direct you to the Sagittarious Dwarf Elliptical, a galaxy that is being consumed by our own milkyway and interpenetrates it in several areas. including the area our sun calls home.. there was a a bit of a flap about it a few years back, when some observations suggested our solar system was part of the Sagittarius stream, not the milky way. later observations of relative movements proved otherwise. but this means that Master's could be in 'another galaxy' while still being quite close to us)

glitterboy2098 wrote:question.. given the rate of travel seen in shadow chronicles, how fast is fold travel? i listed 100 ly as a distance for each fold battery charge, but that was really just a "i need an umber" choice.ideally each charge should handle about a day's worth of travel, so i'd like a better ballpark figure.

You may actually be low balling it with the 100 ly figure.

Single jump distances are included in entries for Fold Capable ships, with farther distances requiring multiple jumps (though there really is nothing to support this from the animation IMHO). 1 Parsec = ~3.262ly. Figures can be found under "Range" in their respective stat block, but for quick reference:
SDF-1: estimate jumps of up to 750 parsecs (2,446.5ly)
Tri-Star: jumps of up to 115 parsecs (375.13ly)
Z.Flg: jumps of up to 180 parsecs* (587.16ly)
Z.Des: jumps of up to 140 parsecs (456.68ly)
M.Flg: jumps of up to 200 parsec (652.4ly)

Unless they are using a completely indigenous design and not salvaged Z. Fold Drives or "stolen" UEG plans, they should be getting x3 more range based on those examples. Charging time is another matter.

*180 parsecs works out to ~587ly. Unless the Zentraedi Flagship made multiple jumps to when transporting Vermillion Team/L. Hayes, it took 24hrs to cover this distance (dialogue). I don't recall off hand if the Flagship had escorts, but Azonia did so the radius is actually smaller (probably dictated by the slowest vessel in her fleet, weather that is the Scout ship or not...).

glitterboy2098 wrote:question.. given the rate of travel seen in shadow chronicles, how fast is fold travel? i listed 100 ly as a distance for each fold battery charge, but that was really just a "i need an umber" choice.ideally each charge should handle about a day's worth of travel, so i'd like a better ballpark figure.


(and before people trot out the "the master's folded from another galaxy!" stuff, i direct you to the Sagittarious Dwarf Elliptical, a galaxy that is being consumed by our own milkyway and interpenetrates it in several areas. including the area our sun calls home.. there was a a bit of a flap about it a few years back, when some observations suggested our solar system was part of the Sagittarius stream, not the milky way. later observations of relative movements proved otherwise. but this means that Master's could be in 'another galaxy' while still being quite close to us)

News to me! Great colliding galaxies, Gray Lensmen!

ShadowLogan wrote:

glitterboy2098 wrote:question.. given the rate of travel seen in shadow chronicles, how fast is fold travel? i listed 100 ly as a distance for each fold battery charge, but that was really just a "i need an umber" choice.ideally each charge should handle about a day's worth of travel, so i'd like a better ballpark figure.

You may actually be low balling it with the 100 ly figure.

Single jump distances are included in entries for Fold Capable ships, with farther distances requiring multiple jumps (though there really is nothing to support this from the animation IMHO). 1 Parsec = ~3.262ly. Figures can be found under "Range" in their respective stat block, but for quick reference:
SDF-1: estimate jumps of up to 750 parsecs (2,446.5ly)
Tri-Star: jumps of up to 115 parsecs (375.13ly)
Z.Flg: jumps of up to 180 parsecs* (587.16ly)
Z.Des: jumps of up to 140 parsecs (456.68ly)
M.Flg: jumps of up to 200 parsec (652.4ly)

Unless they are using a completely indigenous design and not salvaged Z. Fold Drives or "stolen" UEG plans, they should be getting x3 more range based on those examples. Charging time is another matter.

*180 parsecs works out to ~587ly. Unless the Zentraedi Flagship made multiple jumps to when transporting Vermillion Team/L. Hayes, it took 24hrs to cover this distance (dialogue). I don't recall off hand if the Flagship had escorts, but Azonia did so the radius is actually smaller (probably dictated by the slowest vessel in her fleet, weather that is the Scout ship or not...).

I would think all fold drives are salvaged....from the text on the Tristar. There may not have been an 'Earth' design until well into the Pioneer mission and after meeting the Sentinel races.

Going solely by the 4 entries given...the smaller a ship gets the shorter distance it can fold.....but...I would think the scout would be faster...it is s scout after all. It's job is to get out there gather intel and get back.

well one thing I don't think that is taking fully into account is that unless something changed... robotech fold drives have a projected "inclusion field" that is bigger the bigger the ship is, and ships can also synchronize their fold drives to "boost the area of the inclusion field"

as I remember it the sdf 3 on its own can drag anything within ~50 miles of the ship with it through a fold jump (the radius may actually be bigger than that) and strategic placement of things like izukis with synchronized fields can expand that radius to hundreds of miles fairly easilly

it doesn't make sense that the distance would vary based on the size of the ship.. the speed ought to be consistent across a tech base, and we know its not a power supply thing since as pointed out, even the scout sized ships can generate fields big enough to hold a full zent flagship, and because they're using some sort of hyperspace/"other reality where things go faster" approach... and navigation issues ought to be consistent regardless of size as well. one reason that comes to mind for 'jumps' as opposed to just constant travel is heat.. in space you have to radiate heat away, but maybe fold travel messes that up, forcing you to store it. then the "jump" distance would be how long/far you could go before you have to stop and 'chill' to empty your heat storage system.

though most likely what happened is that the writer forgot the depiction in the show was of a a hyperspace like system, and thought it was a point to point "teleport".. the SDF-1's trip to pluto always seems to be what people remember, despite all the much longer trips later in the macross segment showing otherwise. but earth/pluto is such a short trip compared to star to star ("space is big" as the Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy would say..) that it would be over in an instant..

but hey, author screw ups like that just give opportunity for am ore interesting description as we try to justify and explain it..

glitterboy2098 wrote:it doesn't make sense that the distance would vary based on the size of the ship..

That of course assumes each Fold Drive on the different sized ships is standard in every detail, including size and number carried, which could effect the ultimate performance.

what i mean is, it doesn't make sense tat the size of the ship is a contributing factor. obviously different design is going to be a factor, but why should the specs scale completely with the size of the ship? from a military operations viewpoint, you'd want all your main ships to have the same drive specs in terms of speed and distance so that convoy/battlegroup ops are not limited. and you'd want a small subset of your vessels to have superior drive specs at the expense of other capabilities to serve as scouts/recon.

if the drive specs are changing based on size, there has to be another reason beyond the capabilities of the drive itself. since we don't see lengthy recharge times in macross saga or shadow chronicles, it can't be power needs. breetai's ship only has to pause for a few hours on its way to the factory sat, and the icarus was only in the blackhole system with the SDF-3 for a few minutes between its folds. so it has to be some other outside factor. heat makes sense.. while we don't see super huge radiators you still have to vent excess heat to space. fold seems to take a bubble of normal space along with the ship. since the resulting bubble is confined, radiation of excess heat would gradually increase the temperature of the vacuum in the bubble, degrading the ability to radiate heat. eventually you'd hit a point where the radiators no longer have a high enough heat gradient relative to the surrounding vacuum to work effectively.. and note this actually wouldn't require space to be much higher than the normal 3 degrees kelvin. since the standard operating procedure we see in the show seems to be a fold bubble not much bigger than the ship itself (the SDF-1's jump being one of the few exceptions), this would put a limit on how long you could travel before space itself causes problems for the ship. bigger bubbles, like the SDF-1's jump, probably use more energy to maintain, and would, presumably mean a slower trip.. but could be sustained longer, so the results probably even out.

Based on the examples though, the size of the ship relative to the others really doesn't seem to be a factor by the RPG. The SDF-1 is the second smallest ship on the list, but it has the fastest time. Now it is possible the SDF-1 is an anomaly as it is estimated, where the others are presented as proven.

Heat build up was an issue when the RFS was folded in "via miryia". Though I'm not sure if it is every explained why the ship dropped out enroute to the RFS beyond the encounter with the recon ship. The Fold back seems to be handled in one jump, and might have involved the flagship.

I would not consider just the size of a single generator, but also the size of the array for the Fold Generators (IIRC, we see an array in Ep3, though that might be a Reflex Furnace).

yeah, too many variables and unknowns. and the human ships are oddities too.. the tristar uses salvaged zent fold drives and powerplants, yet gets a smaller fold distance. so either humans really screwed up the connections, or something unrelated to the hardware is a limiting factor.

i really wish we had the drive specs for a zent scout or zent gunship.. those are the closest in role/size to the SDF-1. it may be the longer distance of the SDF-1 isn't an oddity, but merely an aspect of building for longer range.

still, i like my heat explanation.. it adds a nice element to the hyperspace approach.
again though, i suspect the author of the book in question forgot robotech's 'fold drive' was a starwarsy hyperspace and not a battletechy teleport..

The salvaged Fold Drives though may:
-still be damaged beyond humans ability to restore, but functional none the less
-had alterations done to them to fit into the smaller ships that effected their performance (thinking size of an array of Fold engines being shrunk)
-additional alterations in an attempt to make them more energy efficient impacted their performance

ShadowLogan wrote:The salvaged Fold Drives though may:
-still be damaged beyond humans ability to restore, but functional none the less
-had alterations done to them to fit into the smaller ships that effected their performance (thinking size of an array of Fold engines being shrunk)
-additional alterations in an attempt to make them more energy efficient impacted their performance

Just plain wear-down of key components.
"Quality of performance not guaranteed after first 250,000 light years. Please see your Fold Drive dealer about setting up a regular service plan. Remember, use only quality Fantoma Driveyards parts for maximum efficiency!"

@talismann
That would be another option if you view it as separate from damaged.

taalismn wrote:

ShadowLogan wrote:The salvaged Fold Drives though may:
-still be damaged beyond humans ability to restore, but functional none the less
-had alterations done to them to fit into the smaller ships that effected their performance (thinking size of an array of Fold engines being shrunk)
-additional alterations in an attempt to make them more energy efficient impacted their performance

Just plain wear-down of key components.
"Quality of performance not guaranteed after first 250,000 light years. Please see your Fold Drive dealer about setting up a regular service plan. Remember, use only quality Fantoma Driveyards parts for maximum efficiency!"

Hey Glitterboy2098...still kinda on topic of your overall EBSIS reboot...whatever happened to the design of your EBSIS veritech??

lack of real art ground it to a halt. might have to start all over again since so far i've not been able to do much more than "a VF-1 with parts rearranged" stats wise.

the art i did make will likely be repurposed as a conventional fighter.

glitterboy2098 wrote:lack of real art ground it to a halt. might have to start all over again since so far i've not been able to do much more than "a VF-1 with parts rearranged" stats wise.

the art i did make will likely be repurposed as a conventional fighter.

Well there are only so many ways one can transform a given design. Perhaps make the EBSIS unit a knock-off design that is at its core a VF-1, but with some alterations to explain the similarity. You already have them using a knockoff of the xxR-04 platform IIRC, so producing knockoffs of the VF-1 should be within their reach if they can acquire working model (defector) or salvage.

Then again does it have to assume a near perfect human shape form/appearance? What about a Bear?

ShadowLogan wrote:[Then again does it have to assume a near perfect human shape form/appearance? What about a Bear?

A quad's not really useful for punching out full-sized Zentraedi.

taalismn wrote:

ShadowLogan wrote:[Then again does it have to assume a near perfect human shape form/appearance? What about a Bear?

A quad's not really useful for punching out full-sized Zentraedi.

Bear's can go bi-pedal for short period of time. So they could swat/punch a full-size Zentraedi.

Bears (and some other quads) also have claws which can potentially be more damaging than a punch. And in those claws being designed/reinforced to penetrate armor much more so than a punch, and you could potentially injure a full-size Zentraedi to the point they start bleeding (I know game mechanics really don't reflect that).

ShadowLogan wrote:

glitterboy2098 wrote:lack of real art ground it to a halt. might have to start all over again since so far i've not been able to do much more than "a VF-1 with parts rearranged" stats wise.

the art i did make will likely be repurposed as a conventional fighter.

Well there are only so many ways one can transform a given design. Perhaps make the EBSIS unit a knock-off design that is at its core a VF-1, but with some alterations to explain the similarity. You already have them using a knockoff of the xxR-04 platform IIRC, so producing knockoffs of the VF-1 should be within their reach if they can acquire working model (defector) or salvage.

Then again does it have to assume a near perfect human shape form/appearance? What about a Bear?

what knockoff? they have a Defender Factory and the ability to build advanced weapons. Kaliningrad was a huge industrial center even in the 80's and 90's.. it would make sense that the UEG built some of their mecha factories there.

and they don't need to knock off a VF-1.. they can buy the real thing from the Sukhoi plants in the Amur Freehold in eastern Siberia.

my EBSIS might not be as powerful as the UEG is.. but it isn't the technology poor neo-soviets of the old RPG either.

and i actually tried to do a "cosmetically different VF-1" as my first effort.. kept looking like something from later macross spinoffs, and the more i fiddled trying to make it look different, the less i was happy with it. the FSW fighter linked to above was try #2 planform wise.

glitterboy2098 wrote:what knockoff? they have a Defender Factory and the ability to build advanced weapons. Kaliningrad was a huge industrial center even in the 80's and 90's.. it would make sense that the UEG built some of their mecha factories there.

Knockoff may be too strong a word, Clone might have been better. Unauthorized/unlicensed reproduction of said designs (from POV of the UEG) is what I was thinking of specifically, not necessarily a cheap imitation.

glitterboy2098 wrote:and i actually tried to do a "cosmetically different VF-1" as my first effort.. kept looking like something from later macross spinoffs, and the more i fiddled trying to make it look different, the less i was happy with it. the FSW fighter linked to above was try #2 planform wise.

Which is understandable since Macross VFs IMHO tend to follow the spirit of the VF-1 design, unlike in RT where they seem to re-invent the approach more often. Would the old G1 Transformer Seeker Jets be cosmetically different, or would that be to close to copyright for comfort?

part of the problem is that the more sukhoi elements i add to the VF-1 design, the more it looks like a VF-0..

to be honest, i'm not sure its really needed, given that they have VF-1's all the way up to the invid arrival.. 30 years is pretty much on par with the lifespan of real world planes now. plus they have the Orzel, which lacks Battloid mode but is a locally developed veritech of sorts.

You may want to consider them developing an indigenous model type (A/D/J/S/R) w/n the VF-1 family though to meet changing needs. Even Block types would be appropriate. That would allow them to have VF-1s that don't operate exactly as the VF-1s the UEDF would be familiar with.

EDIT:
It is unlikely that the VF-1 in its 30year service would not receive updates and such. The -1R standard may not be available to them to (depends when it actually comes out and your factions separate from the UEG), so there is room to add new models and such.

glitterboy2098 wrote:part of the problem is that the more sukhoi elements i add to the VF-1 design, the more it looks like a VF-0..

to be honest, i'm not sure its really needed, given that they have VF-1's all the way up to the invid arrival.. 30 years is pretty much on par with the lifespan of real world planes now. plus they have the Orzel, which lacks Battloid mode but is a locally developed veritech of sorts.

Regional variants, using divergent technologies/manufacturing methods.
Using the basic VF frame, but incorporating modular elements, such various wing plans, might be a way of initially testbedding new hardware, then producing distinctive new hardware(brute force VTOL thruster lift Gerwalk mode makes a good backup to save the whole aircraft during a testflight if a new wing shape loses lift).

i'd actually love to have an Su-27 derived VF but since i don't want to use art that isn't legally available OSM, palladium creation, or fully original, i'm not sure if can pull that off. (one fun bit about such a unit though would be the inevitable Su-34 bomber equivalent. )

i've considered a domestic variant or two.. just tougher to do actually. the VF-1 is already pretty good, so i'd not want to mess it up too much.
one idea i'd had was an 'interceptor' version using the Su-27's Passive electronically scanned array (PESA) radar.. because it can track and target for up to 4 air to air intercepts simultaneously, letting one fighter launch multiple volleys at different targets at once. maybe beef up the underwing hardpoints for more carriage of MRM's. (or to allow it to carry triplets of AIM-120 AMRAAM's. ) possibly toss in a IRST as well so it can do long range visual only missile shots against one target, without breaking EMCON. or an attack version with built in SRM launchers on the back and legs. etc

I think all you really need is some stylistic changes....different wing design (forward swept or F-15 type {decepticon jet} wings), maybe redesign the feet so the forward part of the feet is a split design. Just things to change the overall silhouette of the plane.

Gryphon wrote:
Oh, and here’s a thought: does it have to be a variable fighter chief? Is there any reason they couldn’t come up with their own airborne battloid design instead?

True; we KNOW the Female Power Armor is a bastard in aerial combat, and in the old revised edition Return of the Masters book, the RDF Strike Battloid was a favorite. Something along those lines would be worth looking into(though the problem of art would still remain if you wanted to accompany a writeup with something visually spectacular).

taalismn wrote:

Gryphon wrote:
Oh, and here’s a thought: does it have to be a variable fighter chief? Is there any reason they couldn’t come up with their own airborne battloid design instead?

True; we KNOW the Female Power Armor is a bastard in aerial combat, and in the old revised edition Return of the Masters book, the RDF Strike Battloid was a favorite. Something along those lines would be worth looking into(though the problem of art would still remain if you wanted to accompany a writeup with something visually spectacular).

I would have to assume that Palladium owns the art since it is their book. Maybe make it a little larger than the original write up but smaller than a VF Battloid.

Possibly even use the Heavy Assault Battloid from RotM and some of the designs from Strikeforce. Re-purpose them into Recon Destroyer and Juggernaut types.

Gryphon wrote:ShadowLogan might have the way of it here actually. There was supposed to be a variant of some sort (VF-1B maybe? SETO!!!!!) that had most of a VF-1S sensor package and head sensor turret (and maybe engines, but don’t quote me on that part), that occurred in the Macross universe, so something similar in Robotech wouldn’t be out of place.

Maybe a quad light laser like the VF-1S has, and none of the command data links the newer books ascribe to command mecha. A few other tweacks, like a 10% boost in speed, a +1 to one or two combat modifiers, and maybe a slight tweak to sensor systems, and you can have a VF-1 variant that works.

There was also a variant that really did move on to half a dozen hardpoints instead of four, though space restrictions on the wings still limited it to only LRM class weapons, but now it could carry eighteen MRMs or half a dozen MLOPs instead. I believe (again, don’t quote me, and aka Seto for specifics) the GU-11 underwent a change that actually did make it magazine fed…I think they called it the GU-11D maybe?

While you might want an entirely new design, that might be a better bet really. The other option is to “shop” around deviantart and such for another image, and then request permission to use it on your site, or even commission one. My recommendation would be to look at Kodai-Okuda’s Macross side story stuff though, as its really, really boss, if somewhat limited. (In fact, EVERYONE should go and take a look at his nexus Arcanum setting, its appears to be a cross between Mobile Suit Gundam and Macross, with all new art done by himself apparently.)

to be honest, i don't want to just steal ideas from the various Macross continuations.. if i was going to do that, i'd just grab the VF-0 artwork, claim it as a VF-1 successor built by Sukhoi, and be done with it.

the tech base between original macross and robotech is too different anyway.. even before you get into debates over whether tech in robotech improved or not. (i think it did, but not in the "everything got faster, better, stronger" way macross went.) so there is some real issues with adapting an idea from later macross works over to robotech anyway. there are small stylistic elements i might adopt (like the internal weapons bays in the legs, like the VF-11 and later craft, or mounting MLOP pods on the dorsal surface of fightermode/back of battloid mode like the VF-0, the idea of a physical shield that forms part of the transformation sequence, etc.) but not all that many of them.

Oh, and here’s a thought: does it have to be a variable fighter chief? Is there any reason they couldn’t come up with their own airborne battloid design instead?

technologically? they could probably do it. the VF-1's engines would suffice for such a craft's thrust, they'd just need better placement. in terms of doctrine though? not sure. flying battloids seem to be more of a UEEF doctrine.. my EBSIS is combining the original UEDF mecha doctrine with a hybrid NATO/Russian conventional forces Doctrine.

of course, the "space adapted" Ulhan light Destroids would basically be this kind of thing.. Destroids fitted with rockets and thrusters to allow effective space use.. on the ground they could certainly be used for flight on par with a Condor at the very least. (in space it would be rather more like something out of Gundam. just minus the swords/melee combat and with effective guided missile systems. ) but i doubt that is what you were thinking of.

glitterboy2098 wrote:to be honest, i don't want to just steal ideas from the various Macross continuations.. if i was going to do that, i'd just grab the VF-0 artwork, claim it as a VF-1 successor built by Sukhoi, and be done with it.

+1 on the lack of use of OSM.

You could limit the changes to internal features primarily. External changes could be kept small to.

The EBSIS in 1E did have their version of VF-1 ("Strike Force") with battloid only, but it could be used as the basis for a 2E VF-1 variant. You'd only really need to do F mode image since B mode is provided (and I don't see it used in your EBSIS mecha page) and there is enough obscured (rear) that it could be hiding more Russian features, G mode could be kept optional since between the two modes. Just a thought.

glitterboy2098 wrote:technologically? they could probably do it. the VF-1's engines would suffice for such a craft's thrust, they'd just need better placement. in terms of doctrine though? not sure. flying battloids seem to be more of a UEEF doctrine.. my EBSIS is combining the original UEDF mecha doctrine with a hybrid NATO/Russian conventional forces Doctrine.

Well the EBSIS have to have some form of flying battloids doctrine due to the VF-1s. So it could expand/evolve differently than the UEDF/UEEF.

A properly designed non-transformable battloid could operate as a fighter, and offer much of the same benefits of a Veritech w/o the complex transformation system IMHO. They would have to pay much more attention to aerodynamics in this case compared to the VFs (in battloid) and other units though, unless they end up with a very high T/W ratio to over come their design.

Tail-sitters where explored in the past ('40s-50s) and Battloids (nt or VF) could be thought of as operating on similar principles.

the old RPG's Surgut battloid i'd planend to make an invid period rebuild of damaged VF1's.. or maybe the Amur freehold's own homegrown battloid design, using VF-1 parts. as a full veritech, it kinda sucks.

if i was going to use the Vf-1 as a base, i'd do something like..hmm..

"Airborne assualt" build - build in lower leg extensions (similar to super packs but more streamlined and permanent) with stealth fighter like missile bays inside them. maybe fill them with SRM hardpoints inside to provide additional defensive firepower in all modes. you could fit 8-12 SRM's into each leg that way. and fit a narrow tower-shield between the legs in fighter mode, to which the GU-11 would mount. in guardian/battloid it would provide extra defense. the dorsal wingglove area would gain a pair of ECM modules. fighter mode flight speeds reduced, but fuel endurance increased. (weaker engines drawing on the same fuel tanks.)

"interceptor' build - lower leg extensions same as the "airborne assualt" build. no shield, but forearms would gain vambraces similar to super packs, but have stealth fighter like missile bay in each.. should be able to carry one MRM each, or 2-3 SRM's. sensors revamped to use the same multi-targeting radar option on the Su-27 Flanker's, as well as a IRST for long range visual intercepts without use of radar. (basically the aircraft equivalent of sniper shots)

this would fil lthe EBSIS's doctrines for VF's.. airborne superiority, and air mobile ground support.

glitterboy2098 wrote:the old RPG's Surgut battloid i'd planend to make an invid period rebuild of damaged VF1's.. or maybe the Amur freehold's own homegrown battloid design, using VF-1 parts. as a full veritech, it kinda sucks

Any reason it couldn't do all three (nt-b, IMU, and EBSIS VF-1 model), with it being noticeable which one when seen from the back, which isn't visible in the one shot?