Why do VFs even bother with fighter mode when they get nothing out of aerodynamics and logically battroid mode would be better suited for broad thrust vectoring and movement?
>>13996728
I should specify that I'm referring to space combat specifically.
>>13996728
as with all things, the answer can only be found in gerwalk
>>13996732
Even gerwalk is less suited to space combat than battroid
I am like 80% sure VFs are faster in fighter mode than Gerwalk. If you GOTTA GO FAST you would use Fighter
Something something verniers
THRUST VECTORING OWNS THE SKY
THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSS ZERO STYLE!
Because fighter mode is objectively the most sexiest mode.
Basically in space it gets a higher top speed in a straight line due to all the thrusters pointing in one direction. Or at least that is how Zeta Gundam justified all its transforming mobile suits.
>>13996736
Speed is not something that depends on the shape of your craft when you're in space. All that matters is the amount of thrust you can bring to bear.
For that matter, there's no real reason why a battroid would be nimbler in space either, because there's no such thing as friction in space. None of the space battles that we see in any /m/ show or series is really realistic outside of maybe LoGH.
At the end of the day, the real reason is because it's cool. We watch these shows for the robot on robot action and pink and purple explosions, not really for any semblance of obeying the laws of physics.
>>13996728
Smaller target, though gerwalk also provides that plus arm mobility for shooting.
>>13996764
>LOGH
>realistic
lmao
>>13996764
What does matter is center of mass. The Gerwalk form lowers the center of mass, while the thrusters remain in their usual spot.
This means the thrust is slightly off center and the pilot has to compensate, which may use more fuel.
So while aerodynamics don't matter, mass distribution does. Or you're going to be doing flips and shit and be kinda outta control.
>>13996728
The same reason we have the Zeta
>>13996728
Battroid mode has a lower thrust output because the generations use more energy compared to fighter mode.
>>13997127
>Battroid mode has a lower thrust output because the animation creators wanted transforming plane-robots likely for merchandising reasons.
>>13996728
VFs are both space and atmospheric combat vehicles. The fighter mode was optimized for speed in atmosphere, might as well use it in space.
Fighter is for speed in space. Its the form optimized for speed in atmospheric conditions, why wouldn't it work just as well in space as long as vernier thrusters help in the turning? The engines are aligned and pointed in the same direction. In battroid or gerwalk, the engines do not necessarily align and point in the same direction even though they can. In fact, they tend to point in different directions using the knee joints to turn and maneuver quickly. Fighter is the only form where the only movement of the engine is from the "nozzle" of the engines.
>>13996764
AMBAC for GEARWALK and Batroid modes. Plane mode is functionally what gundam done with transformable frames - it allows all main thruster to be aligned with machines longitudinal axis, with vectors as close to center of gravity as possible.
>>13996828
Pretty much this.
>>13996782
Frame integrity for high G turns maybe?
>>13996815
Fuel is not an issue with Valkiries, reaction mass might be.
>>13997127
Or maybe some of the thrust goes into auto-balancing whole plane. Thou with thrust to weight ratios of over 60, who cares..
>>13998490
See above.
In show, any macross show, GEARWALK is eighter used to hover, do the Gundam's Dom impersonation or for really broken vector changes while flying.
Remember that one scene in Zero, where Shinn dogfights Nora and we can briefly see "Exceed transformation limit"? Thing is, the faster you go, the harder G's will hit you while you are trying to turn. Before Plus, there was no ICS system mounted on Valkiries. Now, if on board system allowed for free transfomations at any time, plane would rip itself apart, while beating pilot into Gould impersonation. Now, if you have a plane, even with thrust vectoring, it's lot easier to design airframe solid enough to withstand forces at work. Add freely moving legs with most of mass stored in them and you get a deathtrap at high G values. Pretty much until YF-24 Evolution and its variants, physical and material limits dictated three forms doctrine. Now, in space at least, there is no logical reason to use transformation at all, as joints of valkiries are pretty much short railguns and can be locked down with enough current.
>>13996728
Multiple reasons.
The first is that fighter mode exists so the VF can fly in an atmosphere as well, and lots of the same optimizations for thrust and speed carry over. Even if the aerodynamic element loses focus once they are in space, the rest still apply. This also makes it easier for VFs to transition from space to air and vice versa under their own power, something that they do often.
The FAST and Super modules, what the VF is using in the OP image, are also designed to be used on plane-mode VFs. In the early versions of that equipment, pilots would be forced to ejected the modules before they transformed to any of the other modes, because they got in the way of transformation/didn't fit on the other forms well. These provide a lot of extra thrust that is useful in space.
Finally, VF design means that while in Battroid and Gerwalk mode, the engines produce much less thrust. This is an optimization for safety reasons.
Basically, VF's at top speed move so fast that the pilot would flat out die if not for the protective buffer of the gravity counterweight/intertial battery technologies. Basically techs that reduce the g-forces on the pilot so they don't turn to a red milkshake. This speed is is only achievable using the engines, so its on during plane mode.
Because Battroid mode is assumed to be running around on foot instead of rocketing around, the inertial battery is not needed for the pilots protection in this mode. So, instead, while in battroid mode they turn the force-softening effect inside out and apply it to the armor of the VF instead of the cockpit, meaning that the pilot feels more G forces (while the G forces are much lower) but you can hit the VF with a truck and it will barely feel it. This takes a LOT of power, and where do you think they get it? You guessed it, they redirect energy from the engines that they are assumed to not be using in this form.
So plane mode is faster because the engines are not being gimped.
>>13996794
DELETE THIS
>>14001369
neither of those gets are /m/
>>13996728
>>14001398
Gets are dumb anyway. As are people who care about them.
>>13996728
Because F-14s in space capable of transforming into giant robots is a hell of a selling point.
>>13999547
>Finally, VF design means that while in Battroid and Gerwalk mode, the engines produce much less thrust. This is an optimization for safety reasons.
>Basically, VF's at top speed move so fast that the pilot would flat out die if not for the protective buffer of the gravity counterweight/intertial battery technologies. Basically techs that reduce the g-forces on the pilot so they don't turn to a red milkshake. This speed is is only achievable using the engines, so its on during plane mode.
>
>Because Battroid mode is assumed to be running around on foot instead of rocketing around, the inertial battery is not needed for the pilots protection in this mode. So, instead, while in battroid mode they turn the force-softening effect inside out and apply it to the armor of the VF instead of the cockpit, meaning that the pilot feels more G forces (while the G forces are much lower) but you can hit the VF with a truck and it will barely feel it. This takes a LOT of power, and where do you think they get it? You guessed it, they redirect energy from the engines that they are assumed to not be using in this form.
I'd like to know what you're basing this on, because I am a huge VF nerd and I have never heard of anything to this effect before.
>>14001567
This sounds like it's from some Robotech shit because I have never heard of VFs having to purge Super Packs to transform.
>>14001598
The armor packs yes though until the 25.
>>14001540
t. reddit
>>14001598
He probably meant the Armor Packs.
The part about rerouting power away from the inertia dampeners(or ISCs), I never read about it before, but the rerouting of power to the energy-conversion armor in battroid is correct, at least.
![Awesome-Fighter-Aircraft-art-image-680x425[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/Ssct6Ex.jpg "Awesome-Fighter-Aircraft-art-image-680x425[1].jpg")
>>13996728
The real reason is because jets are cool as shit and seeing a jet flying looks better than a robot man awkwardly gliding through space
>>14001540
go to bed you shit
>>13998526
>Fuel is not an issue with Valkiries, reaction mass might be.
Reaction mass is just a fancy term for fuel. Gasoline is reaction mass for cars, for example.
>>13996728
Because in GERWALK the engines are mounted off-axis for the sake of instability/mobility, and in Battroid a significant portion of the engines' power is redirected for the armor.
(I don't remember if the power-conversion armor is on in GERWALK or not.)
>>14002839
That isn't exactly true, but it's pretty close.
Fuel is burned for propulsion, reaction mass is just what is thrown out the back, regardless of its origin. Valkyries have a lot because they're just tossing the products of their reactors out the back. However, the term reaction mass doesn't have dick to do with reactors, but instead Newton's third law. Equal and opposite, etc.
>>14002373
I'm pretty sure ICS was introduced during Eden trails on Yf-21 and, maybe, -19. It wasn't until YF-25 that system was useful in any military sense. That was also reason why X-9 was such pain in the ass to shot down in Plus and why V-9 in Frontier aren't, at least for SMS fighters.
Also pretty sure, issue of not enough reactor power for engines + conversion armor was solved somewhere between VF-4 and VF-11 but here I am talking out of my ass and base this on /m/ posts plus official power/thrust ratios of VFs.
>>14002853
This. Except of VF-0, which indeed was using air breathing turbines, which weren't exactly fuel efficient.
By the way, do we know what is used for reaction mass on valks? Water?
>>14002839
>Reaction mass is just a fancy term for fuel. Gasoline is reaction mass for cars, for example.
but that's fucking wrong.
Reaction mass is literally mass you throw out in one direction to push yourself in the other direction, per newton's laws.
Fuel is a consumable source of energy.
In a propeller plane, fuel is fuel and air is reaction mass. In a jet plane, fuel is fuel, and fuel and air are reaction mass. In a chemical rocket, solid or liquid, fuel and oxidizer are both fuel and reaction mass. In a nuclear thermal engine, nuclear fuel is fuel, and liquid hydrogen (usually) is reaction mass. In an ion or plasma engine, there may not be any fuel, but xenon gas is the reaction mass.
If a car could be said to have reaction mass, then the reaction mass would be the earth itself, which the car pushes against with it's wheels.
>>13996759
>Basically in space it gets a higher top speed in a straight line due to all the thrusters pointing in one direction. Or at least that is how Zeta Gundam justified all its transforming mobile suits.
Newtonian dynamics was never Macross nor Gundam's forte. You want realistic space combat, look no further than Babylon 5 with its starfurys, white stars and earth destroyers.
>>14002459
>jet flying looks better than a robot man awkwardly gliding through space
Gundam always handled it gloriously. In fact, the way MS operate in space is way cooler than the usuak Sci-fi space fighter, and and somehow manages to be more realistic.
>>13996728
Battroid has less output or something because of its armor or some shit. idk. because it looks cool
>>14005779
Webm not related? Because he's just jerking around awkwardly while moving forward.
>>14005779
>this whole post.
>>14005809
You get my point. Gundam has always handled space combat via mobile suits by depicting their thrust vectoring capabilities enabled by AMBAC, as well as AMBAC itself.
Like this. Macross could show VFs operating in space like this without transforming at all and it would lose nothing.
>>14004025
>I'm pretty sure ICS was introduced during Eden trails on Yf-21 and, maybe, -19
Looking at the Macross Mecha Manual here.
The ISC tech was tested and used on post-YF-24 VFs. Its based off the inertia dampening system the Queadluun-Rau has, and the YF-21 has the same system the Queadluun-Raus had, though it wasn't as effective as the later ISCs.
The problem with the YF-19 and YF-21 was that they reached that point where pushing the VF's specs any higher would very easily kill the pilot.
Guld was killed via the G forces alone from releasing the limiters on the YF-21.
>The ISC would become incorporated into the new YF-24 Evolution after field testing proved an ISC-equipped craft could catch and shoot down the unmanned QF-4000 air-intercepting variant.
>>14005840
you don't get it
plane mode looks cooler.
>>13996764
If you think about it, there must be a lot of tiny debris floating around in a space battlefield, so getting your suit in a compact form, while losing a bit of manuverability, would reduce the damage it takes when it flies through them at high velocity.
>>14005915
That's not hard, since most Battroid modes look like ass.
>>14005915
>plane mode looks cooler
Your opinion does not equal fact.
>>14005779
> more realistic
In anything approaching even a video-games physics engine, that mobile suit would be tumbling end-over-end instead of flying. It has WAY too much thrust on its top half, above its center of mass, without a counterbalance on the bottom.
And before you say it, yes I can see that it does have thrusters on its legs too for maneuvering and shit. But those thrusters are fucking tiny. Not only do they not burn continuously like the thrusters on the backpack, but they are very clearly smaller and weaker. By attempting to go forward, the MS is just going to end up somersaulting, and no amount of AMBAC can negate that.
This isn't a space weapons platform. Its a centrifuge with a pilot.
Because it points all the burners straight back. Duh.
