Board index » MDC Worlds » Robotech® - The Shadow Chronicles® - Macross II®

 


Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
Unread postPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 10:46 am
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2006 10:50 am
Posts: 6176
Location: WI
Is 15 ready Alpha Fighters actually the maximum the Garfish can carry in its Hangar module, or are there ways to pack in a larger force, but the UEEF uses 15 as the standard for what ever reason? Well using the Veritechs shape-shifting ability (and the occasional additional hardware) it seems reasonable to be able to easily offer up deck layout placement scenarios that double that number (and in rare cases triple or quadruple).

Ground Rules:
1. The show displays (launching) and RT.com's Infopedia and AotSC state 15 Alpha Fighters. I am aware the OSM had it at 12, but lets go with RT's official stance by HG
2. Measurements will use RT.com's Infopedia (when necessary) and AoTSC before the 2E RPG for all craft being considered. I am aware the OSM has the Garfish at a different size than RT's official stance.
3. For expediency I am going to treat the entire assembly as a single module, even though it could be 3 (I want to say 6 also, but since each "sectional" has a single hatch with a double deck I feel pretty confident it is either a single module or 3 module docked together, though in the case of 3 modules it would have to be 3 separate types IMHO)

Default Layout:
The show actually gives us a pretty good idea on the probable layout. It has 3 sections organized each as 1x3 on top and 1x2 on the bottom. The Alphas are in Fighter Mode. The one thing we do not know is how close they are on the deck (for safety it likely isn't going to be nose to tail, there probably is a blast shield, etc).

Scenario 1: Shoulder-Shoulder Guardian Mode Alpha Fighters. Alphas in G-mode are 4.84m wide, in F-mode they have a wing-span of 8.2m. Two Alphas standing shoulder to shoulder would exceed the wingspan by 1.48m (w/no gap between them). We know from Invasion comic though that a Garfish bay can accommodate the Conbat Fighter (wingspan of 9.5m), but that is still too short without some margin in the tube. IF we assume there is margin to play with (and there should be given the Module is ~59m wide per RT sources, meaning each sectional is ~19m wide, less due to hull thickness obviously buy ~10m of thickness seems unlikely) you could replace each Alpha in Fighter Mode with 2 Alphas in Guardian Mode and double capacity.

Scenario 1A: Depending on how much room is between the parked mecha, a 3rd Alpha in G mode could be placed in open areas, though maybe not the forward unit (for an extra potential 9-15 units).

Scenario 2: Shoulder-Shoulder VTOL/Guardian-hybrid Mode Alpha Fighters. Similar to Scenario 1, but the Alphas are in VTOL mode for the arms and legs, but the wings are in Guardian mode position. This reduces the Alpha's width IF it is possible below that of the Guardian mode since the arms have not deployed and the wings are stowed to be nearly a non-factor. Result each Fighter Mode Alpha could be replaced by 2 Alphas in this state, doubling capacity assuming the Alpha pilot has that fine of control over transformation.

Scenario 3: Rotated Guardian Mode Alpha Fighters. In full Guardian mode you could Fit 2 Alphas in place of a single Fighter mode if they are rotated 90deg and have some margin between them and would not take up more deck space. They would have to take off vertically and turn/bank as they leave. End result is a doubling of capacity.

Scenario 4: Guardian Mode Alphas in two staggard columns. As scenario 1, but they don't stand shoulder to shoulder in place of a single Fighter Mode Alpha, but instead are offset so that the open areas around the nose can be used by the forward unit to reduce the deck area. Result doesn't require any assumptions, and would double capacity.

Scenario 5: Battloid Mode. In Battloid mode the Garfish hangars could accept Alphas in this mode as Scenario 1 if they are in a prone position (on their back/belly). Same assumptions as in Scenario 1 yielding the same result (doubling capacity). One benefit is that the units are not as "tall" (relative) as a Guardian mode.

Scenario 6: Fighter Mode Pedestal. This requires specialized equipment to be installed, but if the Alpha in F-mode can be suspend above the deck and it can manipulate its wing position to be in Full G mode (while arm and legs in F-mode position), you essentially arrive at Scenario 2 with a shorter height than the full G-mode. Result is doubling capacity, but it rests on the assumption that the wings can be positioned as such (which seems possible given the animation at times shows "drooping" wings in flight and on ground, but it might be a recurring "AE"). A staggard layout might also be required depending on how much "wing positioning" one is comfortable allowing.

Scenario 7: Mixed Modes. If we accept Invasion's depiction of a Garfish hangar as being at least 9.5m wide, and allow a ~2m of clearance between F mode Alphas nose to engine nozzle... In theory you could put two Guardian mode Alphas in the gap on either side for the #1-2 and #2-3 Fighter Mode Alphas (for an extra 14 Alphas in Total IINM), though there will be some overlap (nose going over the wing).

Scenario 8: Fighter Mode Folding Ramps. Fighter Mode Alphas are parked on angled ramps (though it is possible other methods can be used) that lower down to level position to allow the fighter to launch. At an angle of 30deg (and retracting the tail fins and assuming there is some margin), you could theoretically pack in twice (or close to it) as many Fighter Mode Alphas. The caveat though is there is no indication the hardware for this is installed and I'm not 100% sure on the height of the tube (which could be an issue that would put a limit on the maximum angle), on the plus side if a physical ramp, it could serve as a blast deflector to protect fighters behind the launching fighter.

Scenario 8A: This method could be combined with the two column option scenarios for a further increase in number.

Scenario 9: Battloid #2. If Ep85's depiction (see notes #2) of the Shadow Drones is taken as accurate (not an AE), then the hangar decks are each ~9.2m tall, which would allow an Alpha Battloid to stand (and walk out the front). This would allow one to pack the Alpha-Bs in pretty tight at 4 Battloids (2x2) per Fighter, though you are cutting into margins on the units perimeter. That means that a Garfish Hangar Module could theoretically carry (15x4=) 60 Alphas in Battloid Mode, for some margin lets cut the back ranked fighters' trade off in half (a loss of 12 units) resulting in a total of 48 Alphas. Basically a x3-x4 increase in mecha, though there are two main problems (validity of the deck height and pilot access) that could make this a no go beyond a theoretical possibility from a single episode scene(s).

Scenario Notes:
#1 As the G and B modes placement lengths are shorter than the F-mode Alpha (1.5-2m), you might be able to get another pair of (side-by-side) mecha in IF the separation distance between mecha (tail-nose) is reduced and/or IF the Hangar Module Hatches have interior indentations to allow forward projections from the hangar deck into that space (sort of implied IINM). I make this note as you could put more units potentially, but it requires a additional assumptions and I sought to keep individual scenario assumptions to a minimum.

#2 The Garfish Hangar module in the above scenarios are only considering the 2-D environment and does not consider the deck height, though in all cases I seek to minimize the height required. I estimate the height to be ~5.75m (using AotSC lineart), but I am not be confident with that estimate. There is going to be some clearance between the F-mode Tail tip and ceiling of the hangar, how much and such I don't know. The show in Ep85 displays a trio of Shadow Drones launching from a Shadow Garfish (@~2:54) lower bay in a straight-on shot and the Drones are in F mode and appear to have a good deal of clearance (approx equal to the F mode height I would estimate), and later a tube shot (@~4:10) suggests similar (but this shot might not be a Garfish).

#3 Given that the default Garfish layout doesn't have any known margin for dealing with a clogged path (unit break down toward the front of a line), I have chosen to replicate that with the other approaches. Though most of the scenarios here can compensate unless the clogged path is the result of more than one unit and they are located close together that you can not navigate around

#4 I worked with a images using a saved copy of RT.com's infopedia Size Chart (incomplete, I have all the mecha, but no ships), and chopped up the Alpha in F mode to approximate a G mode (might actually be a bit beefier this way) in cases involving G-mode. B-mode worked from those results and listed dimensions. The F-mode ramp I used a screenshot for a side view and rotated them 30deg (I could rotate them more or less, but less would seem to reduce space and more runs into the risk of hitting the unknown height of the ceiling IMHO)

#5 I am going to assume that the Hangars can be configured to secure different mecha/fighters (along with modes)


          Top  
 
Unread postPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 11:25 pm
  

Wanderer

Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2003 10:27 am
Posts: 94
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
I think you will find that they listed is as 15 because for the Shadow Chronicles they changed the squadron size to 15 fighters, in three flights of 5 fighters each.


          Top  
 
Unread postPosted: Thu Mar 09, 2017 2:52 pm
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 6:36 am
Posts: 5031
Location: New Frontier Shipyard, Earth-Moon L5
Comment: "My theories appall you, my heresies outrage you, I never answer letters, and you don't like my tie."
ShadowLogan wrote:
Is 15 ready Alpha Fighters actually the maximum the Garfish can carry in its Hangar module, or are there ways to pack in a larger force, but the UEEF uses 15 as the standard for what ever reason? Well using the Veritechs shape-shifting ability (and the occasional additional hardware) it seems reasonable to be able to easily offer up deck layout placement scenarios that double that number (and in rare cases triple or quadruple).

Typically, at least in the case of oceangoing aircraft carriers, the actual operating aircraft complement of any given carrier is well below its theoretical maximum carrying capacity even under wartime conditions. I've often heard 25% bandied about as a nice back-of-the-envelope approximate figure for that disparity. The reasons for doing so are fairly pragmatic. The first is that it reduces the logistical burden on the carrier and leaves more room in the hangar spaces for maintenance crews and other tech specialists to do their jobs (nobody wants to be a bomb trolley driver on a packed deck). The second is that there usually aren't enough fighters kicking around to actually fill every carrier's hangar to the max. The third is that it leaves space in the hangar as a safety margin should the carrier find itself required to recover some aircraft from another carrier that was either too badly damaged to recover aircraft or was lost in combat.

Though, as we've both noted, the UEEF is not renowned for its sound judgment... I'd assume this margin has been retained in some form (it may not be as large as 25%) since the Robotech rewrite has retconned the Garfish-class high-speed transport ship from being a glorified spacegoing LST and freight hauler to being somewhere between a frigate and an escort carrier.

Based on the physical dimensions of the module under the RT spec., I would assume there's probably a modest amount of room around each fighter pre-launch, to enable at least light repair work, as well as rearming and refueling, to be carried out in the hangar module. The most sensible approach to storing more might be to simply turn off gravity in the hangar and cleat any extra fighters to the "ceiling" to keep them out from underfoot. If they fold the stabilizers, they should have sufficient clearance to have another 3-6 aircraft in there if they really pack 'em in. Launching them would be tricky, since there's probably no jet blast deflectors or anything like that up there. It would help if it had a more versatile gravity control system than Robotech apparently has on offer... they'd have a much easier time of it if they could have mutually-opposing gravitational fields so the ceiling could function as another floor even in normal gravity.

The Alpha battloid isn't particularly agile or flexible, so I'd suspect that while it may be possible to have them stand side-by-side to fit a few more into the hangar, it's probably not advisable while under sail since that puts the center of gravity rather high and nobody wants to tip a battloid over and break something or cause a hull breach if the ship has to suddenly change course or accelerate.

(In a pinch, there's always the MS IGLOO school of improv capacity improvement... like the Earth Federation Space Forces did with the Salamis-class cruisers during the Battle of A Baoa Qu, securing a bunch of mecha to any free space on the hull with maglocks and with good ol' fashioned high-tensile strength wire. It's undeniably ugly, but like the saying goes... if it's stupid and it works, it isn't stupid.)



ShadowLogan wrote:
Ground Rules:
1. The show displays (launching) and RT.com's Infopedia and AotSC state 15 Alpha Fighters. I am aware the OSM had it at 12, but lets go with RT's official stance by HG

It was just nine Legioss armo-fighters in the original MOSPEADA, actually... that scene showing one launch six twice in a row is one of the show's acknowledged animation errors, caused by looping an action shot in a place it shouldn't have been looped in order to fill runtime. (A common budget-saving trick, but one that had unintended consequences here.)



ShadowLogan wrote:
3. For expediency I am going to treat the entire assembly as a single module, even though it could be 3 (I want to say 6 also, but since each "sectional" has a single hatch with a double deck I feel pretty confident it is either a single module or 3 module docked together, though in the case of 3 modules it would have to be 3 separate types IMHO)

The "single module" view would be consistent with Harmony Gold's official descriptions thereof.





smkeyes wrote:
I think you will find that they listed is as 15 because for the Shadow Chronicles they changed the squadron size to 15 fighters, in three flights of 5 fighters each.

In point of fact, Robotech's stats listed it as carrying 15 fighters before development of Shadow Chronicles ever began.

The volunteers who helped write the Infopedia apparently weren't aware the aforementioned animation error was an error, and since the top deck is longer than the bottom one they went with the official layout but just massaged the numbers. On the OSM version it was six Legioss armo-fighters on top (3x2) and three on the bottom (3x1). They simply added another row in both, making it 3x3 and 3x2.

Also, if memory serves, didn't Robotech identify its squadron size as twelve fighters rather than fifteen? Macross, I know, gives fifteen aircraft (five platoons) as the minimum size for a standard UN Spacy variable fighter squadron, though we've seen squadrons there which had as many as twenty-four aircraft (eight platoons).

_________________
Macross2.net - Home of the Macross Mecha Manual

Zer0 Kay wrote:
Damn you for anticipating my question. I've really got to unfoe you, your information is far more valuable than my sanity when dealing with your blunt callousness. :)


          Top  
 
Unread postPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 11:07 am
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2006 10:50 am
Posts: 6176
Location: WI
Seto wrote:
Based on the physical dimensions of the module under the RT spec., I would assume there's probably a modest amount of room around each fighter pre-launch, to enable at least light repair work, as well as rearming and refueling, to be carried out in the hangar module. The most sensible approach to storing more might be to simply turn off gravity in the hangar and cleat any extra fighters to the "ceiling" to keep them out from underfoot. If they fold the stabilizers, they should have sufficient clearance to have another 3-6 aircraft in there if they really pack 'em in. Launching them would be tricky, since there's probably no jet blast deflectors or anything like that up there. It would help if it had a more versatile gravity control system than Robotech apparently has on offer... they'd have a much easier time of it if they could have mutually-opposing gravitational fields so the ceiling could function as another floor even in normal gravity.

Check Invasion comic #1 shows the Conbat in the bay as Lancer gets ready to board it. The Alpha is probably similar, but that is speculation.

I agree that the sensible approach is to have some space and margin given the need to service the units. Still if they are looking to recover additional mecha (for whatever reason) knowing what the maximum capacity is and how they could go about doing it is certainly useful (or looking at adapting the module to serve as a QLB or using it for bulk transfer, etc). I would think that there is some room to play with in actual practice (if just go with the implied ~19meter width of each hangar tube instead of the Alpha/Conbat wingspan you could double capacity again and still have room for hull/walls).

Given the disparity in estimated heights (I had arrived at) for the hangar I avoided looking at double stacking them in this fashion. Though they don't need to turn off the gravity for that (if we assume there is sufficient height), though I would think it would require some complicated recovery/launch procedure and hardware adapted/taken from the Horizon-T A/B docking port (or something to duplicate the effect like Lunk did with the Alpha in the barn in RT-Ep63/GCM-Ep3, and the Conbat appears to use for the "parked on deck" Conbat in Invasion #1) and likely would not be very service friendly up that high.

Seto wrote:
The Alpha battloid isn't particularly agile or flexible, so I'd suspect that while it may be possible to have them stand side-by-side to fit a few more into the hangar, it's probably not advisable while under sail since that puts the center of gravity rather high and nobody wants to tip a battloid over and break something or cause a hull breach if the ship has to suddenly change course or accelerate.

Fit a few more in? Maybe if we only look at each individual slip getting an extra one or three can be considered a few, but in terms of overall capacity it quickly adds up to being "just a few more."

I am assuming that these types of scenarios aren't ad-hock and necessary support infrastructure is in place (or can be put into place). We know the Garfish bays can carry more than just Alphas: Conbats (Invasion comic #1) and VHT-2s (L&W #1 comic, parked on a ramp leading into the lower hangar) so it seems reasonable that they could be configured to safely carry an assortment of mecha/vehicles of varying sizes and dimensions, or even recover their Alphas in any mode should one( or more) become mode locked out of F-mode.


          Top  
 
Unread postPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 2:40 pm
  

Wanderer

Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2003 10:27 am
Posts: 94
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Seto you are correct in that the VF-1 Fighter squadrons are listed as 12 fighters per squadron and are broken down into flights or teams of three fighters each in the Macross saga.


          Top  
 
Unread postPosted: Sat Mar 11, 2017 4:09 pm
  

D-Bee

Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2012 5:00 pm
Posts: 37
Location: Sweden
Comment: Once upon a time I started writing "Insurrection". No, it's not likely to be completed... still...
It seems to me that the engines on the upper level need at least som space for...well, engines. In some scenes there appear to be nozzles on the lower level as well. I know that doesn't add much to the discussion but still...
To add fuel to this carrying capacity: do you think it likely that it's possible to move mecha from the upper central "hold" of the Garfish down into the suspended Alpha hangars below? That could add further capacity (albeit not to the hangars themselves).


          Top  
 
Unread postPosted: Sat Mar 11, 2017 5:16 pm
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2006 10:50 am
Posts: 6176
Location: WI
Bamse wrote:
It seems to me that the engines on the upper level need at least som space for...well, engines. In some scenes there appear to be nozzles on the lower level as well. I know that doesn't add much to the discussion but still...

Correct there are engines on the upper level (external nozzle) and on the lower level (internal nozzle).

Officially we know that 15 Alphas are divided between 2 levels and 3 tubes with the upper level containing more an extra Alpha per tube. So we know there is 21-31m at least of the length of the Garfish available for parking Alphas on either level (maximum length of the module is ~50m as it appears to be ~30% of the 179m length, the lower area is about 1/2 that though). So if one knows (or assumes) how long the engine blocks are behind the hangar tubes, we could use that extra space to further increase the number carried, but we also have to consider safety and operation procedures.

Bamse wrote:
To add fuel to this carrying capacity: do you think it likely that it's possible to move mecha from the upper central "hold" of the Garfish down into the suspended Alpha hangars below? That could add further capacity (albeit not to the hangars themselves).

Possibly, but is a bit outside of the scope of what I was looking at (specifically the hangar module itself, external to the module or transferring into from the Garfish proper seems like cheating).

AotSC has the docking interface exposed in line art (pg112 bottom), with three sets of identical sized hatches running the width (with frame). The UEEF ship recognition page (pg102) suggests that ~10% of the length of the ship goes to the docking ports (179m length means ~17.9m, and an Alpha is 10.25m) which would allow a parked Alpha no matter how you orientate it. So assuming the docking port would allows for the transfer of oversized units it should be possible, but that is a GM call at this point (without some input from HG or PB).

Now how many Alphas the Garfish can carry in its main hull proper is any ones guess at this point. Though the opening "maw" feature the Syncro-cannons use might be used to deploy (and recover) other mecha (this is speculation though as we only see the module used for the cannon, and AFAIK its a "new feature" of the Shadow Refit).


          Top  
 
Unread postPosted: Sun Mar 12, 2017 4:52 am
  

D-Bee

Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2012 5:00 pm
Posts: 37
Location: Sweden
Comment: Once upon a time I started writing "Insurrection". No, it's not likely to be completed... still...
As you say, assuming the height in ep85 is accurate then shoulder to shoulder battloid Alphas are fine and I remember someone insisting on doing this in a game back in the '90s. We ended up in a brawl over whether an Alpha pilot can get in and out of a battloid. If they can't then, well, thems are going to be smelly Alphas. But drones could work. Except the only ones we see launch in fighter mode.


          Top  
 
Unread postPosted: Sun Mar 12, 2017 9:03 am
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2006 10:50 am
Posts: 6176
Location: WI
Quote:
We ended up in a brawl over whether an Alpha pilot can get in and out of a battloid.

I don't think we actually are shown how the pilot can enter/leave a battloid mode Alpha (unlike the VF-1) in the show, but there is plenty of circumstantial evidence that they can do it*, we just don't know how AFAIK.

*if nothing else the existence of the Ikazuchi QLB would necessitate it.


          Top  
 
Unread postPosted: Sun Mar 12, 2017 1:23 pm
  

User avatar
Adventurer

Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2008 11:58 am
Posts: 450
Location: It's all about the gestalt.
ShadowLogan wrote:
Quote:
We ended up in a brawl over whether an Alpha pilot can get in and out of a battloid.

I don't think we actually are shown how the pilot can enter/leave a battloid mode Alpha (unlike the VF-1) in the show, but there is plenty of circumstantial evidence that they can do it*, we just don't know how AFAIK.

*if nothing else the existence of the Ikazuchi QLB would necessitate it.


The only art I've seen that gives any clue of pilot access in Battloid mode is art of the ejection seat sequence. Unfortunately, that looks to require the nosecone section to raise up/out from the body. http://www.gearsonline.net/series/mospeada/mecha/human-mecha/legioss/eta-25.gif

Again those Battloid quick launch bays come into question. There could be enough room to partially extend the cone I suppose, but it'll be tight. http://www.gearsonline.net/series/mospeada/mecha/human-mecha/ikazuchi/ikazuchi-04.gif

_________________
Image


          Top  
 
Unread postPosted: Sun Mar 12, 2017 4:05 pm
  

D-Bee

Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2012 5:00 pm
Posts: 37
Location: Sweden
Comment: Once upon a time I started writing "Insurrection". No, it's not likely to be completed... still...
I always assumed the Ikazuchi Alphas are stored in Guardian mode behind the bunkers and change before entering them. Kinda like suiting up before you enter an airlock. Requires an awful lot of space for the Alphas though. I think, Shadow Logan, that you also ought to weigh in the matter of the hangars opening to space. You don't want clutter in your launch bay when you vent the joint to space. Not saying rows of nicely tied down battloids necessarily mean clutter but it does mean a lot of logistics and the more pilots involved and the more fighters being prepped the larger the risks.

Maybe we ought to ask the question why you WOULDN'T load more fighters into those bays. Because, let's face it, there appears to be no proof that anyone did.


          Top  
 
Unread postPosted: Sun Mar 12, 2017 5:39 pm
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 6:36 am
Posts: 5031
Location: New Frontier Shipyard, Earth-Moon L5
Comment: "My theories appall you, my heresies outrage you, I never answer letters, and you don't like my tie."
ShadowLogan wrote:
Check Invasion comic #1 shows the Conbat in the bay as Lancer gets ready to board it. The Alpha is probably similar, but that is speculation.

I'll have to dig my copy out of storage later.



ShadowLogan wrote:
I agree that the sensible approach is to have some space and margin given the need to service the units. Still if they are looking to recover additional mecha (for whatever reason) knowing what the maximum capacity is and how they could go about doing it is certainly useful (or looking at adapting the module to serve as a QLB or using it for bulk transfer, etc). I would think that there is some room to play with in actual practice (if just go with the implied ~19meter width of each hangar tube instead of the Alpha/Conbat wingspan you could double capacity again and still have room for hull/walls).

Actual maximum capacity isn't normally published until a model of carrier is well on its way to being retired from service, and sometimes not even then since it too is usually an arbitrary number which some naval architect came up with based on square footage of the floor plan and a healthy guess as to how many planes can stay on deck in rough seas. There'll always be some enterprising member of the deck crew doing strange things with tie-down points and parking aircraft unfeasibly close together for some reason or other who could theoretically take the maximum up a notch... and a senior officer who'd very much prefer not to have to explain how he ended up with a five aircraft pileup because someone sneezed while towing one into the hangar or bumped a tire while driving the missile trolley.

That said, the 15 plane complement in Robotech is probably the "safe maximum" designated by the UEEF's clerical functionaries based on available tie-down points, the ordinance capacity of the ship under normal operating conditions, and a thousand other parameters. (On the original MOSPEADA design, the nine aircraft capacity was simply the physical limit of the hangar space, since they weren't meant for extended carrier operations... a recurring problem when it comes to the Robotech adaptation.)



ShadowLogan wrote:
Given the disparity in estimated heights (I had arrived at) for the hangar I avoided looking at double stacking them in this fashion. Though they don't need to turn off the gravity for that (if we assume there is sufficient height), though I would think it would require some complicated recovery/launch procedure and hardware adapted/taken from the Horizon-T A/B docking port (or something to duplicate the effect like Lunk did with the Alpha in the barn in RT-Ep63/GCM-Ep3, and the Conbat appears to use for the "parked on deck" Conbat in Invasion #1) and likely would not be very service friendly up that high.

Possible, though I'd imagine the deck crew and safety department would have an unholy fit over it... the wider your safety margin for recovery (AKA the amount of "wiggle room" in the safe landing zone) the happier they are. Nobody wants a smashup on a carrier deck period, and I'd imagine having a smashup on a deck full of explosive ordinance in close proximity to a plasma engine is not a prospect that would make anyone especially happy.



ShadowLogan wrote:
I am assuming that these types of scenarios aren't ad-hock and necessary support infrastructure is in place (or can be put into place). We know the Garfish bays can carry more than just Alphas: Conbats (Invasion comic #1) and VHT-2s (L&W #1 comic, parked on a ramp leading into the lower hangar) so it seems reasonable that they could be configured to safely carry an assortment of mecha/vehicles of varying sizes and dimensions, or even recover their Alphas in any mode should one( or more) become mode locked out of F-mode.

The Convert fighters in MOSPEADA weren't especially large, not much larger than the Legioss... so that's something. The hovertanks are even smaller, so that's something on its own.





Bamse wrote:
I always assumed the Ikazuchi Alphas are stored in Guardian mode behind the bunkers and change before entering them. Kinda like suiting up before you enter an airlock. Requires an awful lot of space for the Alphas though.

From the original, they were stored in the bunkers all the time (meaning, the few hours flight from the staging area on Luna to the area of operations).

_________________
Macross2.net - Home of the Macross Mecha Manual

Zer0 Kay wrote:
Damn you for anticipating my question. I've really got to unfoe you, your information is far more valuable than my sanity when dealing with your blunt callousness. :)


          Top  
 
Unread postPosted: Sun Mar 12, 2017 6:03 pm
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2006 10:50 am
Posts: 6176
Location: WI
Seto wrote:
The Convert fighters in MOSPEADA weren't especially large, not much larger than the Legioss... so that's something. The hovertanks are even smaller, so that's something on its own.

In some respects they are smaller than an F-mode Alpha (length and height), but in other aspects larger (wingspan). So if the Hangar module is the same, or similar then the smaller wingspan of the Alpha should allow even greater margin on the sides than the Conbat enjoys.

The fact Hovertanks are put in there though means its possible they could be put in double column style, which likely means they need to be secured and such for that (which would bode well for some scenerios). Granted the double column style isn't implied with the L&W comic.

Bamse wrote:
I always assumed the Ikazuchi Alphas are stored in Guardian mode behind the bunkers and change before entering them

Why would they do this? That seems to defeat the purpose of the Quick Launch aspect of the bunker. It also ignores the features we see in the bay that show the Battloids held in place. At ~5m between units, that is enough for the nose section (which runs the height of the "torso", which is basically 1/2 the height of the unit assuming human proportions so 1/2 of 8.75m = 4.37m) to unfold (assuming the OSM approach is used in RT).

Bamse wrote:
I think, Shadow Logan, that you also ought to weigh in the matter of the hangars opening to space. You don't want clutter in your launch bay when you vent the joint to space. Not saying rows of nicely tied down battloids necessarily mean clutter but it does mean a lot of logistics and the more pilots involved and the more fighters being prepped the larger the risks.

Right now given that we don't know what margins exist in either tube between the parked (and secured) mecha, I think it is safer to focus on the area the F-mode Alpha occupies and minimal area immediately around it (if we need a tad bit more room).

Yes there will be issues that such a configuration brings with it that would have to be addressed. However given that B and G mode Alphas would take off differently than F mode Alphas some issues of cramped space don't apply in all cases. Logistics of course will be an increased burden, but not impossible depending on how much margin the UEEF puts into such matters.

Bamse wrote:
Maybe we ought to ask the question why you WOULDN'T load more fighters into those bays. Because, let's face it, there appears to be no proof that anyone did.

I agree that we have no proof anyone did. I can see several reasons you wouldn't want to load the bays to capacity:
-various safety requirements and operations
-by limiting the number of Alphas on the Garfish, you could "inflate" your force numbers (5 Garfish carrying 5 Squadrons of Alphas sounds like more teeth than 5 Garfish carrying 2-3 Squadrons, since "squadron" is not a fixed size) on paper
-actual availability of pilots/units to fully support all ship types
-logistics (balancing various factors in this area, though that could be tossed out the window for a short-term/immediate requirement)
-the decks can only support so much mass before they buckle

but I can also see reasons you would want to:
-recover mecha from a lost ship (Garfish or Ikazuchi)
-used as bulk transfer of mecha from location A to location B (why tie up 2-4 Garfish when you could do it with just 1?) when a Horizon-T is not available or not practical (no Fold drive)
-battle tactic/strategy to cause an enemy to misjudge an attacking force and their response
-make room for other combat mecha (ground mecha given L&W can be loaded into the bottom bay and deployed from there) by moving the air wing completely up to the upper level


          Top  
 
Unread postPosted: Sun Mar 12, 2017 6:25 pm
  

User avatar
Rifts® Trivia Master

Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2003 3:37 pm
Posts: 13086
Location: Missouri
i would assume that there is a small tunnel/hatch in the base of the nose section (would be just behind the head in battloid mode) that a pilot could use to get in and out in battloid mode.. too narrow and cramped for ejection but enough to let a pilot get in and out of the cockpit.

_________________
Author of Rifts: Deep Frontier (Rifter 70)
Author of Rifts:Scandinavia (current project)
Image
* All fantasy should have a solid base in reality.
* Good sense about trivialities is better than nonsense about things that matter.

-Max Beerbohm
Visit my Website


          Top  
 
Unread postPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2017 4:51 pm
  

D-Bee

Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2012 5:00 pm
Posts: 37
Location: Sweden
Comment: Once upon a time I started writing "Insurrection". No, it's not likely to be completed... still...
There is an Artmic sketch of a Beta in a hexagonal hold. Said hold ought to be bigger than an Horizon cargo pod which in turn could mean that you just got yourself a good interior view of a Garfish hold.


          Top  
 
Unread postPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2017 8:52 pm
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 6:36 am
Posts: 5031
Location: New Frontier Shipyard, Earth-Moon L5
Comment: "My theories appall you, my heresies outrage you, I never answer letters, and you don't like my tie."
Bamse wrote:
There is an Artmic sketch of a Beta in a hexagonal hold. Said hold ought to be bigger than an Horizon cargo pod which in turn could mean that you just got yourself a good interior view of a Garfish hold.

Ah, no... in point of fact, that picture of an AB-01 TLEAD armo-bomber (RT: "Beta fighter") tied down in a hexagonal room IS the interior of a Horizont-class descent shuttle's cargo pod. That much is stated quite clearly in many official MOSPEADA artbooks to feature that piece (and views of the same space from several other angles.)

The Horizont-class was the only ship the Mars Colony forces had that was capable of carrying a TLEAD back in the original Genesis Climber MOSPEADA. The descent shuttles could carry them in one of two ways: either the TLEAD was docked to the Legioss armo-fighter that was the descent shuttle's only defense from hostiles, or carried as cargo inside the shuttle's cargo pods. The Garfish-class high-speed transport's hangar wasn't big enough to carry a TLEAD, and the Ikazuchi-class carrier's only accommodation for aircraft was the six launch bunkers the ship used to carry its 144 Legioss armo-fighters in. The only other TLEADs that made it to Earth were the ones that flew independently from the lunar staging areas as the fighter escort for the fleet. (MOSPEADA's ships are not anywhere near as large as Robotech claims... the largest, barring the Izumo, being just 300m long.)

_________________
Macross2.net - Home of the Macross Mecha Manual

Zer0 Kay wrote:
Damn you for anticipating my question. I've really got to unfoe you, your information is far more valuable than my sanity when dealing with your blunt callousness. :)


          Top  
 
Unread postPosted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 3:26 am
  

D-Bee

Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2012 5:00 pm
Posts: 37
Location: Sweden
Comment: Once upon a time I started writing "Insurrection". No, it's not likely to be completed... still...
I stand corrected. But wouldn't that make the Horizon bunkers wider than the rpg stats? How wide is a Beta with its wings folded?


          Top  
 
Unread postPosted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 8:32 am
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2006 10:50 am
Posts: 6176
Location: WI
Bamse wrote:
I stand corrected. But wouldn't that make the Horizon bunkers wider than the rpg stats? How wide is a Beta with its wings folded?

If we assume the Battloid mode width is representative of the Beta's width in Fighter Mode with wings stowed, you end up with a width of 8.5m (AotSC, 2E RPG, 1E RPG). The (85ep) animation seems to show (pretty consistently using RR's pic archive) that the width of the Beta F-mode sans its wings is on par with the Alpha F-mode wingspan (which is 8.2m) if not shorter.

I'm not sure if 2E RPG (deluxe core or Marines) provides the bunker size (I know AotSC doesn't), but by 1E stats for the bunker and 2E size for the Beta... The Horizon bunkers are wider (~10m) than the Beta in F-mode with stowed wings (which as mentioned above is around 8.5m).


          Top  
 
Unread postPosted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 11:20 am
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 6:36 am
Posts: 5031
Location: New Frontier Shipyard, Earth-Moon L5
Comment: "My theories appall you, my heresies outrage you, I never answer letters, and you don't like my tie."
Bamse wrote:
I stand corrected. But wouldn't that make the Horizon bunkers wider than the rpg stats? How wide is a Beta with its wings folded?

That, I suppose, would depend upon which set of specs you'd like to consider:
  • Using the correct, official spec. from the original show's mechanical designers gives the AB-01 TLEAD wings-folded width of approximately 6.5m, so it fits (rather snugly) into the ~8m diameter cargo area of the Horizont's assault pods thanks to the hexagonal shape of the pod.
  • The fan-"edited" Robotech specs suffer from a lot of Sci-Fi Writers Have No Sense of Scale, and after the Macross Saga increasingly fail to match the physical proportions of the mecha they're allegedly for. At the RT-stated width of ~8.5m, it would not fit into the correctly-scaled Horizont pod based on the line art. I don't recall any mention of an interior diameter for them in the RPG though.

_________________
Macross2.net - Home of the Macross Mecha Manual

Zer0 Kay wrote:
Damn you for anticipating my question. I've really got to unfoe you, your information is far more valuable than my sanity when dealing with your blunt callousness. :)


          Top  
 
 
Post new topic Reply to topic



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users


Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Jump to:  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group