Neil Baumgardner (
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

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