Neil Baumgardner (nbaumgardner@phillips.com)
Tue, 25 Jan 2000 14:02:56 -0500


Mark Simmons wrote:

> > But I take they are not taken as canon, right?
>
> Only if you believe that the Full Armor Type was actually constructed, in
> which case they would need some extra Gundams as testbeds.

Okay, you didnt help there as I have absolutely no clue.

> <snip>
>
> > But they are present in official animation no? Hence they have to be taken
> > seriously dont they?
>
> That depends. The 0083 novelization, edited by the series director,
> describes the Zakus of Kimberlite Base as being a mix of J, D, S, at cetera
> - even though on screen they're all animated as F2s. The F2, which was
> originally supposed to be a redrawn version of the J type (so it's labeled
> in early reproductions of the line art), is really just a placeholder for
> any & all models of Zaku II. Likewise, the FZ was intended as a substitute
> for the F type, which is why it's used in every illo in MS ERA in place of
> the regular Zaku II.

Okay granted, but there are seen none-the-less and even have stats that
differentiate them from the other types. Just for discussion at this point anyway,
as I can take from your comments that one should simply take the F2 production
numbers as part of the overall F and J numbers, while the FZ should be taken out of
the F type numbers.

> > Awwww! So what a dozen, less? What about the erstwhile MS-18F production type?
>
> Try one or two. It's an experimental mobile suit, not a limited- or trial
> production model.

And the MS-18F?

Also any comment on the second Delaz fleet Gwajin battleship?

Neil Baumgardner

-
Gundam Mailing List Archives are available at http://gundam.aeug.org/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Wed Jan 26 2000 - 04:05:23 JST