Would it be like this on which Variable Fighter came first:
VF-X -> VF-0 -> VF-1
The VF-0 is such fucking bullshit.
Don't forget the F-14++
It's the true granddaddy of VF's
>>13459211
Why?
>>13459222
I wonder how different Macross would look it it was started out today, where the F-14 is dead and the F-18 is king.
>>13459295
Flankers
>>13459295
The VF's were ALWAYS a mixture of Tomcats and Hornets. The F-18 wasn't formally taken into service until '84, but it first flew and was made public in '78.
>>13459264
Huge-ass retcon that didn't fit into the timeline, doesn't make sense, and is totally bogus bullshit bullcrap that's stupid and sucks. Fuckin' shit. I mean, damn.
>>13459375
Not only that, >>13459098 doesn't seem to make sense with "which VF came first." I mean, wasn't the VF-X built as a testbed for the transforming sequence, and that the VF-0 was proof they worked out whatever kinks the VF-X had? Also, Focker having his own Pheonix (VF-0S) should indicate he's familiar with how Variable Fighters operate.
>>13459390
Nothing in Macross is canon.
>>13459436
only the max knifefight
>>13459052
really more like VF-X, VF-1, VF-0
The VF-0 only exists because UN Spacy realized they were going to need functional VFs before the FF-2001 Fusion Turbines were ready, so the VF-1 design was retooled to use conventional jet thrusters which is what the VF-0 is. So the design of the VF-0 was actually drafted after that of the VF-1 even though the VF-1 wasn't physically completed until later.
>>13459390
>wasn't the VF-X built as a testbed for the transforming sequence, and that the VF-0 was proof they worked out whatever kinks the VF-X had
If you note the years on the picture, its says the VF-0 was made in 2004, while the VF-X is in 2006.
Zero takes place a year before SDF, 2008.
That's 4 years after the VF-0 was made, and 2 years after the VF-X. With the following 2 assumptions
>VF-0 is the testbed for VF-1's tech
>VF-X is the testbed for the transformation
And the timeline
>2004, VF-0 is made to test the stuff that would go into the VF-1, energy converting armor, etc
>2006, VF-X is made to test the transformation system, this implies that the VF-0 didn't test it or it was a failure on the VF-0
>2008, VF-0 was thrown into battle to fight against the SV-51s because the engines for the VF-1 wasn't done yet
It would still work, if the data and enhancements from the VF-X's successful transformation system was applied to the VF-0 between the time from the X and Zero's events.
As to why they used the VF-0 in Zero, there are probably more VF-0s than VF-Xs, and if they had to make another model just to test the transformation system, it's probably less suited for combat since they might not have put in everything else that isn't relevant to the transformation system into the VF-X
>>13459375
>Huge-ass retcon that didn't fit into the timeline
It fits if you consider it as just a stopgap that also functioned as test bed for the 'real' VF (VF-1). It being lost and forgotten makes sense, with VF-1 completed there's no meaning to keep them around.
>doesn't make sense, and is totally bogus bullshit bullcrap that's stupid and sucks. Fuckin' shit. I mean, damn.
Calm down anon, now try articulate properly why VF-0 is such a bullshit
>>13459375
SDF fags are such whiny babies.
>>13459375
VF-0 is literally UN going 'we need a VF-1 before the VF-1 can be fully completed'
how is it BS?
>>13459495
So basically, if you're trying to make a jet fighter that turns into a robot, what do you test first?
>>13459568
>>13459568
Of course, the transformation system.
But the fact that the VF-X exists after the VF-0 means that either the first transformation system on the VF-0 failed so hard that they had to make another plane to test the transformation system on its own or the VF-0 was never intended to test the transformation system.
I personally think its the former.
Wasn't the VF-X a non-transformable test platform for the thermonuclear engines? The VF-0 was then for testing the transformation mechanisms and energy converting armor I assume.
>>13459264
You ever see Macross Zero?
The VF-0 feels way too advanced for a prequel machine.
Though, a lot of it comes from the CGI direction in the series. Things move ridiculously fast at all times. Even the transformation sequence for the 0 is so fast that it is first played IN SLOW MOTION before showing it in real time.
>>13459327
None of the VFs are based on the Hornet.
>>13461868
>>13459327
From an issue of Macross Chronicle published before Macross 30:
VF-0 - F-14
Sv-51 - Su-27
Sv-52 - Su-27
VF-1 - F-14
VF-3000 - F-14
VF-4 - SR-71
VF-5000 - F-16XL
VF-9 - X-29
VF-11 - Su-27
VF-11MAXL - F-16XL
VF-14 - SR-71
VA-14 - SR-71
VF-17 - F-117
YF-19 - X-29 + Su-27
VF-19 - X-29
YF-21 - YF-23
VF-22 - YF-23
YF-24 - F-22
YF-25 - F-14 + Su-27
VF-25 - F-14 + Su-27
VF-27 - F-14 + Su-27 + SR-71
YF-29 - X-29
VA-3 - A-6
VAB-2 - B-2
VB-6 - Space Shuttle + M50 Ontos
>>13461868
>>13461944
I would say the SV-51 is much closer to hornet than flanker, look at the shape of the wings and tail. Only the nose matches the Flanker's goose neck.
>>13462200
Official source and mecha designer says its design motif is the Su-27.
>>13462456
They can say it all they want, it's not going to make it look any more like one.
>>13462476
You can say it looks like a Hornet but you can't say that it's inspired by the Hornet.
>>13459098
What the fuck? Did they actually make the old Advanced Valkyrie designs canon? I mean I know they eventually folded the VF-9 into, but had no idea they adoped the rest of the deisns.
Always loved the Ghost Valkyrie for some reason, so weird.
>>13459222
