VF Development notes

In developing stats, we have to consider background. Case-in-point, the VF-1 was developed. Then the Earth was destroyed and a massive effort was undertaken to repopulate Earth, rebuild Earth, build massive colony fleets, populate the colony fleets, colonize planets AND build up a viable defense force. During this period, it’s easy to justify that there was little to no R&D energies invested in VF technologies. (The old – what we got ain’t broke, lets just put some transatmospheric thrusters on it – line of thinking. The one that resulted in the VF-4.)

Therefore, IMHO, technological progression in VFs didn’t resume until the VF-9 (where we see regular VF thermonuclear engines being able to make a VF transatmospheric) and perhaps the VF/A-14 and VF-17. But then again, those VFs are largely utilizing existing technologies (just tweaked) and the truly large gap occurs, as mentioned before, when the VF-19 and 22 are developed.

Therefore, I present a technological advancement (aka power up increments) chart:

First Generation

(comparable performances save for notes):

• VF-1 (and subsequent variations, save where they are designed with higher capabilities.)
• VA-3
• VF-4 (transatmospheric due to addition of rocket thrusters. Speed increases due to conformal mounted armaments.)
• VF-5000 (more maneuverable in an atmosphere and perhaps slightly faster then the VF-1 due to lack of wing mounted ordinance on with standard load-outs.)
• VF-11a

Halfway Generation

– all are comparable to the VF-1 but the big leap is the addition of thermonuclear engines allowing for transatmospheric flight.

• VF-9 (Increased speed due to higher thrust to weight ratio and increased atmospheric maneuverability due to forward swept wings.)
• VF-11b (and further generations)
• VF-14
• VA-14 (increased armor levels and overall structural strength.)
• VF-17 (increased armour levels and overall structural strength, first truly stealthy design from the onset of development.) (This could be considered a largely experimental VF – as the end result, though has high performance and capabilities, is cost restrictive in construction and maintenance.)
• VAB-2 (Due to lack of information, I’m not sure if this should be placed here or in the 2nd Generation.)
• VB-6 (placed here largely due to the impression that it’s built off of existing technologies built on a larger scale and not much technological innovation was put into it.)

Second Generation

– an overall increase in everything. See Project Super Nova requirements.

• VF-19 (due to budget constraints, perhaps consider this one to be more in the midpoint between the Halfway generation and the 2nd Generation, in terms of overall performance abilities. However, it has lots of extras only available on the 2nd Generation fighters – said as these things are wasted by roughly similar damages as the VF-1 and VF-11, in Macross 7.)
• VF-22 (the “true” 2nd Generation fighter in regards to its overall performance abilities.)

We do support the idea behind technology being retrofitted onto existing airframes (it happens all the time in real life.) However, that doesn’t preclude that ALL VFs are going to be getting the same retrofits, nor are the retrofits going to be the same. (Example: most of the surviving VF-1s in the UNS where upgraded to the VF-1X. However, very few of those would have been upgraded with the PPB (outside of the Special Forces.)

Therefore, we could end up with a progression chart akin to (numbers in bracket for a top end scaling choice):

• VF-1 150 (300) MDC
• VF-11 200 (400) MDC
• VF-19 250 (500)
• VA-14/17 300 (600)
• VF-22 350 (700)
• VB-6 500 (1000)

This chart isn’t meant to be perfect…

Sample calculation

MDC division based on the following formulae:

VF-1 empty mass = 13250 kg

3.75 MDC / 100 Kg of Mass (rounded up) (Gen 1.5 is 5.625 and 2.0 is 7.5)

Total MDC/mass of VF-1 = 496 rounded up to 500.

Further divided on the following chart:

50% main

30% legs

15% arms

5% hands

10% head

2% head mounted laser

15% wings

7% tails

• Gun pod is not included in the overall calculations. However, I felt that a MDC rating comparable to the arm is best.