Emery Calame (palaeomerus@excite.com)
Wed, 17 May 2000 00:45:03 -0700 (PDT)


On Wed, 17 May 2000 08:31:07 +0800, gundam@aeug.org wrote:

>
> Had some questions to ask.
>
> Chronologically, the NT-1 should be the first non-Core Fighter
> equipped Gundam, followed by the GP-02A and then the GP-03S, and then the
> Mk. II. Correct?
>
> Anyway, are these non-Core Fighter Gundams equipped with escape
pods
> similar to what we see in Zeta?

I suspect that the pilot bails out in his normal suit and either calls for
help or uses those maneuver units seen in MS Gundam. The only place I've
seen a real escape vehicle (that I can remember off hand) was the
Psycho-frame cockpit ball of Char's Sazabi in CCA.

> As a further question, does the GP-04 design have a Core Fighter?
I
> think the GT doesn't have one, but I'm asking about the GP-04.

AS far as I know GP04 was just a garage model-kit and an illustration. I
doubt it ever got far enough along to really know what it was to be built
like or what it was designed to do but I don't have one so I can't really
tell you.

  
> Here's an interesting thought. The NT-1 wasn't totally destroyed
by
> Bernard Wiseman. It had one arm hacked off, the head sheared off, and
took a
> blast from a Zaku II engine at point blank, but if IIRC it remained
> relatively intact.

Yeah well, they could'nt let it go nuke or it would have spoiled the tragic
scene where Christine tells Alfred that she is leaving. But if she was going
to Earth I guess it might have been a question of the suit going there too.

  
> Of course, the NT-1 couldn't be repaired in time for Amuro to use
it
> in the OYW, but it *could* have been repaired, and used as a testbed for
> future MS development. We do know the 0083 Guncannon decended from the

Uh D'you mean the GM Cannons in 0083? There are a form of Gun cannons in
0080 seen dropping out of a White-base like carrier...

> original Guncannon and the NT-1, and the MG kit of the GM Custom strongly
> suggest that the GM also descended from the NT-1. So what other MS could
> have descended from the NT-1?

I'm not sure how much you can really tell from a model kit. Cannibalization
of parts can be very common among mold makers.
Is this something you read in the little instructions pamphlet or what?

>
> Pure conjecture, of course, but I think GP-01 was a design taken
> from the original RX-79, a straight improvement of systems proven in the
OYW.

I guess it very well could be. I kind of wonder at Anaheim building suits
like that before Zeta though and I can't say that it makes a lot of sense
for a dueling moble duit industry to introduce and imediately forget
something as cool and handy as the "zit" (the beam bayonettes mounted under
the GP01's beam gun).

 
> GP-02A, however, had a few more interesting toys. It had no Core
> Fighter, for one, and it had a unique weapon, ala the NT-1. Could GP-02
be a
> mutated outgrowth of NT-1? Unlikely, but it seems that the non-Core
Fighter
> design of the NT-1 might have turned some heads.

Well the thing about core fighter vs. linear seat is....a core fighter can
be used for recon, assault, harrassment, and escape. All that is well and
good. A linear seat in 360 degree hologram cockpit can help you spot tricky
stuff like oh say an Elmeth's bit sneaking around you and possibly give you
that split second chance to dodge just before it's too late....

So I think you can see why most pilots preferred the linear seat until ZZ or
so. Most suits without a linear seat(s) were either multi-part V.M.S.A.W.R.S
or multiple part variable mobile suits who had a pal to watch their back.

Anyway GP02 looked to me like a sneaky moblie suit version of an early
nuclear bomber, tough, fast, and with a big freakin' gun to make the trip
worthwhile. I'd say it was designed to get rid of asteroid fortress bases
like Pezun and Axis and Solomon and end sieges more quickly. It would also
be deadly against space colonies....

NT-1 was an attempt at a space superiority fighter with a suit of chobham to
upgrade it's ground combat abilities.

GP01 was also a space superiority weapon but in FB it oculd also act as a
very fast long range interceptor. Why it had a core fighter and especially
such a weird "non-core block" one I will never know. It just did okay? :)
 
> After the GP project got buried, the Titans could have either
> sneaked a copy of the GP project out and adapted the GP-02's non-CF
design,
> or more likely, dusted off the NT and took a good hard look at it. A Core
> Fighter is probably no good for a moveable frame MS, so a non-CF Gundam
> might be a good place to start looking for ideas. The result? RX-178.
>
> (The thought that the Titans looked at a Guncannon for
inspiration
> isn't particularly pleasant. =)

I dunno. In the movie when Sayla takes the gundam out in combat and gets it
trashed Amuro takes a Guncannon and wipes the floor with the Zeon squad he
goes up against. The whole time he has this look on his face like : " Wow.
I've been flying the WRONG mobile suit! Bang! Bang Pow!"

 
> Fast Forward to CCA. Someone mentioned not long ago about the
> similarities between the NT and the Nu. Could AE have taken the basic NT
> design, which was tuned generally for NT and specifically for Amuro, and
> upgraded it with new technologies, cumulating with the psycho-frame
> technology, all designed specifically for Amuro's use?

I dunno. The NT-1's main "New Type friendly" feature was the linear seat
cockpit and it's "advanced" reaction time that Christine babbles about while
using it for simulations... I guess the armor might have pissed Amuro off
since it wouldn't survive a bazooka hit and was really only good enough to
hrug off the chain mine the Kampher used.... On Earth it would be handy but
in space it would be a mess.
Remember...the ace version of the space GM had less armor and depended on
speed and mobility to survive.

>
> Sadly though, the most distinctive armament of the NT-1 is never
> replicated in any Federation MS that I remember. The Dreissen is the
> closest, AFAIK.

I think the Dreissen had beam gatlings though. Eh? Seriously the wrist guns
remind me of the one's sported by some Gelgoog's who would have been an
expected opponent of a Gundam pilot. They are heavier shells than the head
vulcan's have and are menat for close range fights. Come to think of it
Gelgoogs were heavier armored than Gundam's supposedly faster, similarly
armed and quite possibly as or more agile.

Luckily Amuro was devil of a pilot by the time he faced a Gelgoog(with Char
in it) and he almost killed Char but LaLa wouldn't have it...

Anyway think of NT-1 as a Gelgoog-killer upgrade program... :)

> Given the trememdous recoil of a Gatling, however, I guess the
wear
> and tear on the elbow joint might be a bit over the top to justify it. =)
> Just how many rounds can it carry? 90 per arm?

Ever hear the one about how giant robots with proportionately small feet
should sink into the ground unless they were light enough and then the wind
would blow them around because they are basicly big sails?

I mean it's a freakin' giant robot show! :)
  
> Wondering again. Amuro had a reputation of a sniper with his beam
> cannon, right? So why give him a pair of scattershot Gatlings? I'm
willing
> to bet that Christine Mackenize sprayed a good percentage of her long
burst
> at everything *except* the Kampfer, so why would Amuro want that sort of
weapon?

Amuro ran out of ammo a lot. Check out the MS Gundam movies....

>
> Now, Amuro with a proposed GP-04.. that will be interesting. =)

He did fine in a Guncannon, ok in a guntank,well in a Rick Dias, a Dijeh, a
Gustav (refined Zeta Gundam whatever that is), and a Nu Gundam, and he is
supposed to have test piloted the first mass production Zeta Gundam models
for Kalaba...

Emery
(palaeomerus@excite.com)
 
> Hope this generates some interesting responses.. =)
>
> -------------
> Lim Jyue

_______________________________________________________
Get 100% FREE Internet Access powered by Excite
Visit http://freelane.excite.com/freeisp

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



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Wed May 17 2000 - 16:39:04 JST