Skarclaw Posted December 8, 2009 Report Share Posted December 8, 2009 I figured if we had mechs or whatever they'd probably be alot smaller then the ones in computer games etc and probably do a similar role to those little tanks then like a challenger or whatever. Link to post Share on other sites
Desolation mkII Posted December 8, 2009 Report Share Posted December 8, 2009 The Germans tried building a mega sized tank in WW2, it was called the Ratte and was to weigh a thousand tonnes. Even Speer, a certified nutjob, thought the plan was silly and cancelled it before one was built. I think they built a chasis but that was it. Link to post Share on other sites
Azulsky Posted December 8, 2009 Report Share Posted December 8, 2009 There is no true purpose to massive tanks/walkers as they are such mobility inhibited energy hogs that they arent enough of a force multiplier to be worth a damn. As a delivery system they accomplish nothing a missle cant do better. Smaller versions on the other hand... Their application would be limited to LOS weapons, or NLOS that are not very far ranged(MLRS type missles) Availability of smaller mech type walkers is pending on certain things Weapons System(Your usual gatling guns, missles, rockets, eventually lasers(FEL) and rail guns(if they can make them last more than a shot or two)) Control System(Being worked on, look for Boston Dynamics videos on their human sized robots) There is alot to be said for a walker though, think of all the things you subconsciously do when stepping on ground, ie you feel for the softness of the ground as slowly bring your foot down, your equlibrium recalibrates when its angled ground, etc Power Plant that is long lasting and stable enough for the fine motor control needed(Carbon Nanotube batteries promise massive energy density and provide more stable supply which is needed for electronic control, especially considering the complexity of the proposed movement system) More efficient electronics(Moores law leading to less entropy on a chip leading to less power consumption) Defense systems(like the anti RPG system being deployed/developed(laser version), which as i understand is quite fantastic after a discussion i had with an engineer this semester) You can argue they want something with the precision and power of modern smart bombs without having to actually have to wait on a jet to be on station to drop them. Size and weight has to come down, i would imagine this would be something comparable in humvee size fully crouched to the ground, so basically a Chicken Walker size for the chassis with all the comms antennas and weapons hanging off of it. FIBUA is the way of the warfare and you need something that can enter and dominate that environment as well as other environments. Also hate to say it but they would probably be UGV's(Unmanned Ground Vehicles) as well, preserving as much room for the actual hardware as possible. War is being virtualized Link to post Share on other sites
The End Posted December 8, 2009 Report Share Posted December 8, 2009 i think we really just need GUNDAM! Link to post Share on other sites
shmook Posted December 8, 2009 Report Share Posted December 8, 2009 a bit late to the game here, but the first link is powered by... electricity! you need a *fruitcage* off large cable snaked to the thing to get it to work, so not really battlefield compatible anywho, big scary machines are cool, so carry on! Link to post Share on other sites
Azulsky Posted December 8, 2009 Report Share Posted December 8, 2009 Either that or batteries with immense density, carbon nanotubes are proposed to be viable for super capacitors, which is why having it as a UAV removes all need for life support or human interface systems and frees up more space for juice Link to post Share on other sites
shmook Posted December 8, 2009 Report Share Posted December 8, 2009 a UAV? i think its a bit heavy and un-aerodynamic to fly... Link to post Share on other sites
RacingManiac Posted December 8, 2009 Report Share Posted December 8, 2009 I'd imagine Super Cap or batteries like that is still a long way out.....look at Li-po or Li-ion, they've been out for ages and they are still not quite ready for use in cars yet.... Link to post Share on other sites
spetsnazdave87 Posted December 8, 2009 Report Share Posted December 8, 2009 I read somewhere (I think it was the new scientist) that theres a lot of interest in the US about a military exoskeleton allowing soldiers to carry weaponry several times heavier than their natural strength allows... I know the Japanese created something similar in a civilian prototype form, so I imagine its only a matter of time... mwahahaha! Link to post Share on other sites
Azulsky Posted December 8, 2009 Report Share Posted December 8, 2009 a UAV? i think its a bit heavy and un-aerodynamic to fly... Sorry meant to say UGV like in my earlier post lol I read somewhere (I think it was the new scientist) that theres a lot of interest in the US about a military exoskeleton allowing soldiers to carry weaponry several times heavier than their natural strength allows... I know the Japanese created something similar in a civilian prototype form, so I imagine its only a matter of time... mwahahaha! Its becoming apparent that Robert Heinlein could see into the future lol SuperCaps probably coming, they are current packing 350F into the D cell size specification Link to post Share on other sites
WeirdoTransvestite Posted December 8, 2009 Report Share Posted December 8, 2009 I'd imagine Super Cap or batteries like that is still a long way out.....look at Li-po or Li-ion, they've been out for ages and they are still not quite ready for use in cars yet.... That's partially because they have that tendancy to kerplode a bit. Link to post Share on other sites
apmaman Posted December 8, 2009 Report Share Posted December 8, 2009 I'd imagine Super Cap or batteries like that is still a long way out.....look at Li-po or Li-ion, they've been out for ages and they are still not quite ready for use in cars yet.... Thats because if we all had battery powered cars the government couldnt leech us dry with Tax on petrol! /remark_water-powered-car Link to post Share on other sites
mattmanic Posted December 8, 2009 Report Share Posted December 8, 2009 How about a massive diesel generator? Link to post Share on other sites
apmaman Posted December 8, 2009 Report Share Posted December 8, 2009 How about a massive diesel generator? Now were onto something! Link to post Share on other sites
Azulsky Posted December 8, 2009 Report Share Posted December 8, 2009 theoretically one of the reasons for making it a bigger machine could be the incorporation of a reactor But for a practical size one for MOUT/FIBUA it would have to be some sort of direct system(as opposed to converting the gas to fuel then inverting it) Link to post Share on other sites
mattmanic Posted December 8, 2009 Report Share Posted December 8, 2009 practical size If you make it big enough it doesn't need to be practical. Just needs large enough tracks to go over the buildings. Link to post Share on other sites
Azulsky Posted December 9, 2009 Report Share Posted December 9, 2009 The maintenance time on tracked vehicles per hours of operation is ridiculous. Link to post Share on other sites
Rob15 Posted December 9, 2009 Report Share Posted December 9, 2009 a bit late to the game here, but the first link is powered by... electricity! you need a *fruitcage* off large cable snaked to the thing to get it to work, so not really battlefield compatible Eh? You mean the extremely huge digger? Assuming you do if you read the blurb on said link it says... Liebherr is providing for the machine two engine options, two Cummins QSK 60 with a installed power of 1,492 kW / 2,000 hp each or two MTU 12V4000 with a installed power of 1,425 kW / 1,910 hp. Yes it is powered by electricity but that comes from onboard generators, its a bit like trains, all modern trains (steam trains being the exclusion) are electric but most have onboard generators which power the traction motors rather than running from overhead powerlines.... Link to post Share on other sites
bankz5152 Posted December 9, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 9, 2009 Cool to see people getting into this crazy idea. A giant nuclear powered vehical refuel/rearm, helipad and refuel rearm, a mine sweeper, tracks solid and hard enough to run down buildings, a mobile artillery canon and close protection .50cal machine guns and some 40mm grenade launchers for *suitcases*. There we go the Uber KillDozer Re-Fuel & Re-Arm Station. lol Link to post Share on other sites
The End Posted December 9, 2009 Report Share Posted December 9, 2009 has anyone considered the astronomical cost that would be associated with building such a beast? Not only that, but also think about transporting it overseas, that would truly be a disaster in times of war... Link to post Share on other sites
askeytheman Posted December 9, 2009 Report Share Posted December 9, 2009 "A giant nuclear powered vehical refuel/rearm, helipad and refuel rearm, a mine sweeper, a mobile artillery canon and close protection .50cal machine guns and some 40mm grenade launchers for *suitcases*." http://wallpaper-s.org/24__USS_Theodore_Ro...aft_Carrier.htm Link to post Share on other sites
Azulsky Posted December 9, 2009 Report Share Posted December 9, 2009 has anyone considered the astronomical cost that would be associated with building such a beast? Not only that, but also think about transporting it overseas, that would truly be a disaster in times of war... Mobile Oppression Fortresses are built on site lol Link to post Share on other sites
Seraphim989 Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 The Germans tried building a mega sized tank in WW2, it was called the Ratte and was to weigh a thousand tonnes. Even Speer, a certified nutjob, thought the plan was silly and cancelled it before one was built. I think they built a chasis but that was it. I dunno if youre thinking of the Maus or something else, but they did build the Maus. It had a main cannon and a secondary gun...and the secondary was 75mm Link to post Share on other sites
DrKalinka Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 The Maus (Die Maus in german though) also sank through the roads... I believe its maiden voyage took it 20 meters down the road before it got lodged in asphalt... Way to go Link to post Share on other sites
Stealthbomber Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 To add my opinion to the original topic... Basically, a Challenger or Abrams could make mincemeat of even the biggest construction machinery. Fact is that an MBT is already weighed down by tonnes of armour plating and ammunition and still has superior manoevrability to an earthmover as well as having a better weapon than a shovel. Earthmovers look rather impressive but the engineering in an MBT is on a whole other planet. It's like suggesting somebody builds a spaceship out of a Lexus because it looks cooler than a Space Shuttle. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.