Dark Duel wrote:My problem with the Akatsuki's beam saber hardpoint on the rifle is that it only has a single pair, so if it sticks them on the rifle, and then that's damaged/destroyed, Akatsuki's up s*** creek without a paddle - no melee weapon.
Er... doesn't the rifle only take one beam saber, not the pair?
Also, those shoulder thrusters are probably the only noticable difference between the Akatsuki's frame and that of the Strike. The Strike E/Noir has a similar design feature. Judging by their positioning, they're for increasing maneuverability in space and during flight. Basically zigzaging around, if you will (which in actual combat is much more important than acceleration)...
a rocking zig-zag as it looks like those super shoulders would be perfect for, would definitely help in avoid those massive missile, beam, and bullet barrages that are trademark CE. plus i dunno i personally prefer larger shoulders so long as they arent you know quebeley sized. when i saw those little shoulder pauldrons on the original rx-78 i always thought, geez whats the point, you might as well just reinforce the actual shoulder joint.
setsuna: I AM A GUNDAM!!!
graham: I AM A FLAG!!!
(setsuna giggling)
graham: NO!! i said FLLLAG!
And the lineart as well. The "Hyakurai" beam rifle's "bayonet" hardpoint takes the docked pair, not a single saber. You can see that quite clearly in the uncolored pic in the upper left corner of the rifle lineart.
So the monstrous things in the shoulders are thrusters...thought so. A bit overlarge, IMHO, but I can see the principle behind it. Thanks for answering my question.
"You can learn all the math in the 'verse, but take a boat in the air you don't love, she'll shake you off just as sure as the turn of the worlds. Love keeps her in the air when she ought to fall down. Tells you she's hurting before she keens. Makes her a home."
flamingtroll wrote:But the thrusters arn't pointing in a direction where you can take advantage of the leverage, no matter how how the shoulders bent. I assuming what you are saying is that the shoulder thrusters would help the MS turn around, but the thrustes on Freedom or Akatsuki doesnt look like it would help. They would help them zigzag around though while facing the same direction.
Some basic physics are required here. When you apply a force a distance away from the center of gravity, a torque is produced by the perpendicular component. Since I'm pretty sure even Freedom's CoG is at least a little lower (well, actually I'm not, but let's pretend its fission reactor and its heavy shielding weigh enough to at least bring it down a little), at least part of the shoulder thrust can be used to rotate the MS-and Freedom likes to rotate, often while firing off beam rifle shots. Moving them further out makes that somewhat pathetic amount of actual torque producing thrust actually have enough leverage to do something. You'd need to compensate with some other thrusters to do it without moving sideways as well though.
Of course, if used in concert with other thrusters, they can be used (rather more efficiently) to do a linear "sidethrust" as it were.
Requiring the pair of sabers to be used as a bayonet rather than just one seems pointless to me, unless it actually increases the output or range of the weapon. I wonder who thought up of such a ridiculous feature...
"You can learn all the math in the 'verse, but take a boat in the air you don't love, she'll shake you off just as sure as the turn of the worlds. Love keeps her in the air when she ought to fall down. Tells you she's hurting before she keens. Makes her a home."
flamingtroll wrote:But the thrusters arn't pointing in a direction where you can take advantage of the leverage, no matter how how the shoulders bent. I assuming what you are saying is that the shoulder thrusters would help the MS turn around, but the thrustes on Freedom or Akatsuki doesnt look like it would help. They would help them zigzag around though while facing the same direction.
Some basic physics are required here. When you apply a force a distance away from the center of gravity, a torque is produced by the perpendicular component. Since I'm pretty sure even Freedom's CoG is at least a little lower (well, actually I'm not, but let's pretend its fission reactor and its heavy shielding weigh enough to at least bring it down a little), at least part of the shoulder thrust can be used to rotate the MS-and Freedom likes to rotate, often while firing off beam rifle shots. Moving them further out makes that somewhat pathetic amount of actual torque producing thrust actually have enough leverage to do something. You'd need to compensate with some other thrusters to do it without moving sideways as well though.
Of course, if used in concert with other thrusters, they can be used (rather more efficiently) to do a linear "sidethrust" as it were.
Thats my point. The thrusters' direction just line up on the same axis (in the lineart at least, I know the MG Strike freedom's shoulder is slightly different), they dont' provide any perpendicular force( perpendicular to the direction that the MS is facing). I think we are talking about a different rotating direction here. I am referring to the "horizontal rotation" (i.e. chaning the direction the MS is facing). You are probably refering to the side way "vertical rotation" where the suit just spins while facing the same direction?
And even then, that doesn't merit a such a broad shoulder. All you have to do is to have a thruster placed at a "higher" place, on the Wings for example.
Well in general thrusters/apogee motor placement has always been something that bothers me with gundam in general.
