AnimeSuki Forums

Register Forum Rules FAQ Members List Social Groups Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   AnimeSuki Forum > General > General Chat

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2008-02-27, 08:23   Link #61
grey_moon
Yummy, sweet and unyuu!!!
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by TinyRedLeaf View Post
Furthermore, the limited effectiveness of tanks in many conventional operations today have led military strategists to wonder why they should bother with heavy armour. If you think about the wars that countries are likely to fight today, lightly armoured, highly mobile units packed with heavy firepower would be far more desirable than a squadron of tanks.

The days of massive tank battles, such as those we've seen in WWII and in the Arab-Israeli Six Day War are long gone. Armies will still keep tanks around, to be sure, but in smaller numbers. It's all done in the name of cost-effectiveness as well.
This reminds me of the doccie on Tank Killers I watched. When applied to the Iraq war, all Saddam's tanks were pretty much useless under all that aerial bombardment. Since the US had air supremacy the tanks were useless.

Now the question is would a humanoid shape mech be an anti-tank killer? I don't think it would be; in the air the shape is not aerodynamic. In space the limbs might help with mobility if thrusters were fitted on all the limbs, but loss of a limb would cut into that and more importantly in both cases the shape isn't stealth friendly.

On about the British why are Gundam mechs such bright colours for?
__________________
grey_moon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-02-27, 09:12   Link #62
Kyuusai
9wiki
*Scanlator
 
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: State of Denial
Send a message via AIM to Kyuusai Send a message via MSN to Kyuusai Send a message via Yahoo to Kyuusai
Quote:
Originally Posted by grey_moon View Post
On about the British why are Gundam mechs such bright colours for?
Because appropriately-colored machines (like the grey the Gundam RX-78-2 was originally supposed to be) don't make interesting-looking toys.
__________________

I await patiently
the gift promised to me.
Kyuusai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-02-27, 10:16   Link #63
4Tran
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by TinyRedLeaf
Actually, a tank is equally vulnerable in the same respect. Take out the tank tracks, and you have a sitting duck waiting for a coup de grace. Tanks are espeically vulnerable especially in built-up areas. Plenty of places for "piddly" infantry to hide. And they would be armed with anti-tank weapons to take out the supposedly well-armoured tanks.
For the most part, a tank's treads can only be attacked from the side; and if you're attacking from that direction, it'd be a better idea to attack the weaker side armor. This is fundamentally different from mecha, whose drivetrains can be attacked from all aspects.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TinyRedLeaf
Whatever the system, whatever the technology, whatever the tactics deployed, in the end however, it's still down to the poor bloody infantry soldier to hold and defend ground. So, enhancing infantry combat power with human-sized "mecha" might not be so far-fetched an idea.
Are you talking about man-sized powered armor or giant mecha? If it's the latter, there'd be all sorts of technologies which would be superior.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TinyRedLeaf
I'm not sure why people think mechas (if they ever become feasible) would never replace tanks as the "ultimate" weapons of land warfare.
That's because mecha would have inferior armor, inferior firepower, inferior mobility, and greater complexity.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TinyRedLeaf
When tanks were first introduced, they looked like this. They suffered from horrible mobility, piddly firepower, and were highly prone to get stuck in the muddy trenches of the Western Front. No one at the time would have imagined that an ungainly machine such as that could become a decisive weapon of war.
It's the other way around - tanks were conceived as a solution to the impasse of trench warfare. By 1918, they were instrumental in the Entente final offensives.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TinyRedLeaf
Furthermore, the limited effectiveness of tanks in many conventional operations today have led military strategists to wonder why they should bother with heavy armour. If you think about the wars that countries are likely to fight today, lightly armoured, highly mobile units packed with heavy firepower would be far more desirable than a squadron of tanks.
Stryker brigades tend to go splat when they face real tanks.
__________________
The victorious strategist only seeks battle after the victory has been won...
4Tran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-02-27, 11:11   Link #64
TinyRedLeaf
. . .
 
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Singapore
Age: 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4Tran
Are you talking about man-sized powered armor or giant mecha? If it's the latter, there'd be all sorts of technologies which would be superior.
I'm thinking about these.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 4Tran
For the most part, a tank's treads can only be attacked from the side; and if you're attacking from that direction, it'd be a better idea to attack the weaker side armor.
Actually, if we're talking about MBTs like the M1A1, even their side armour can be quite tough to beat. HEAT weapons apparently can't penetrate their armour. Attacking the treads would still probably be the better idea. However, if the crew is still alive, and the turret still works, you would still have to deal with its main gun.

We're talking about infantry tactics against tanks of course. The first choice of weapon platforms against MBTs would still be attack helicopters like the AH-64s or attack aircraft like the A-10s. Or another MBT. In which case, we're talking about full-blown war.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 4Tran
That's because mecha would have inferior armor, inferior firepower, inferior mobility, and greater complexity.
A modern infantry platoon probably has enough firepower to mow down an entire company of 200+ medieval knights. (My imaginary figures, don't quote me.)

Lol. My point is that current technology may produce inferior armour, firepower and mobility, but who knows how mecha technology may evolve in the future? In any case, any military that is seriously investing money on mecha research probably isn't aiming for tank-equivalent firepower and armour. More likely, they'd be aiming for something mobile and versatile like infantry. Mech exoskeletons might become reality.

Meanwhile, I'll content myself with Mechwarrior simulations.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 4Tran
It's the other way around - tanks were conceived as a solution to the impasse of trench warfare. By 1918, they were instrumental in the Entente final offensives.
Point taken. But those tanks were never as decisive as their designers hoped. The Allied victory on the Western Front was won eventually by sheer attrition rather than decisive battle. The Germans knew they couldn't last much longer after the US joined the war, and thus threw in the towel.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 4Tran
Stryker brigades tend to go splat when they face real tanks.
"Stryker brigades" wouldn't even be in the same area of operations as MBTs, let alone face them in battle. Current conventional operations are typically civil wars or civilian insurgency in heavily built-up areas -- precisely the kinds of situations you wouldn't want to send a tank company into. It would be sheer suicide for the tankies.
TinyRedLeaf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-02-27, 11:44   Link #65
Nenkitsune
Ive been MikuCaramellized
 
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Age: 26
Send a message via AIM to Nenkitsune Send a message via Yahoo to Nenkitsune
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skyfall View Post
Now this is definitely a more workable idea than a humanoid mecha, though still not without drawbacks. The legs would still be vulnerable to attack, and disabling one you would disable the mecha. Plus it would likely have a slow movement speed. While it might have access to areas where a tank could not go, i am wondering what swamps of critical importance enough to bring in heavy advanced weaponry you want it to scale that couldn't be simply bombed to oblivion by artillery and air support
that wouldn't be too much of a problem. I was thinking they could be used for long range Howitzer attacks. it also depends on how many legs it has. If you engineered it in a way where it could loose legs and not hinder its performance, that would be ideal.
__________________

もいちど。。。
Nenkitsune is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-02-27, 12:11   Link #66
hobbes_fan
You could say.....
 
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Of the concepts I've seen in mecha and I've seen a lot - the only concept I can really think of being implemented is the degree of thrust vectoring in the Macross valkyries and that's an extension of tech in use and battle tested, however whether the airframes and human physiology can take the physical pounding of such high g forces is debatable. VTOL/STOL is always highly desirable. Even in aircraft design it's widely acknowledged that the pilot is the weakness. They can build stronger airframes but no pilot can withstand the g-forces to push those limits.

How would you operate this mech BTW? Would it be crewed by a team ala getter Robo? That poses problems as well. I'm prety sure you won;t be getting the levers and foot pedal action as depicted in "real" mecha shows. You'd have to rely a lot on pre-programmed articulation. My biggest problem really with mecha is is payload - what could you arm it with? Missiles, guns. How is it superior at delivering these payloads? I'm sorry a beam saber is a pretty pointless weapon on a battlefield. Rail guns are heavily in development and from testing they rounds look like they pass through a tank completely. How much more armor is a mech going to have? So before the mech got anywhere near you you would of pumped it full of holes from 200 miles away
http://dvice.com/archives/2008/02/the_navy_shows.php

I don't care how well armoured you are - get hit with one of these rounds (one round weighs about the size of a car) at 5600mph you will be seeing some serious damage.

You could chuck it on the mech but why? If you're shooting at something 200 miles away it's nothing more than glorified artillery and no longer meets the design specs of a frontline weapon.

BTW hardsuits are already in use. Meets all the criteria of mecha IMO
http://www.oceanworks.com/hsCommercial.php
__________________
Before you ask "How do I convert fansubs to...." see the following
MP4 - http://forums.animesuki.com/showthread.php?t=47693
Convert AVI/MKV/MP4 to DVD
http://forums.animesuki.com/showthread.php?t=26308

Last edited by hobbes_fan; 2008-02-27 at 12:29.
hobbes_fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-02-27, 12:14   Link #67
Skyfall
Lost in my dreams...
 
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Age: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nenkitsune View Post
that wouldn't be too much of a problem. I was thinking they could be used for long range Howitzer attacks. it also depends on how many legs it has. If you engineered it in a way where it could loose legs and not hinder its performance, that would be ideal.
If it can lose the legs without hindering the performance, then what was the point in having them in the first place
__________________
Skyfall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-02-27, 12:35   Link #68
TinyRedLeaf
. . .
 
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Singapore
Age: 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by hobbes_fan
How would you operate this mech BTW? Would it be crewed by a team ala getter Robo? That poses problems as well. I'm prety sure you won;t be getting the levers and foot pedal action as depicted in "real" mecha shows. You'd have to rely a lot on pre-programmed articulation.
Um, I have to admit I'm more of a Robotech fan than a Macross fan. (Don't shoot me!) If I recall correctly, Robotech pilots used brainwaves to control some of their mecha's motor functions. For simpler functions, like transformation, they used pedals and levers.

Now, with that in mind, it's interesting to know that "brain control" headsets are just around the corner. Let's see, all we need now are a few mad scientists to use such technology on military applications.
TinyRedLeaf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-02-27, 12:45   Link #69
Amray
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: England
Age: 24
I personally prefer Guns and Swords to Mecha's.
And whats better is that they already do exist and I possess a sword myself.
Amray is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-02-27, 13:02   Link #70
4Tran
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by TinyRedLeaf
I'm thinking about these.
Ah, I see. I regard Elementals and other powered armor as just a subset of infantry since they perform the same roles.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TinyRedLeaf
Actually, if we're talking about MBTs like the M1A1, even their side armour can be quite tough to beat. HEAT weapons apparently can't penetrate their armour. Attacking the treads would still probably be the better idea. However, if the crew is still alive, and the turret still works, you would still have to deal with its main gun.
M1A1s don't have composite armor for the sides or the rear, so they are far more vulnerable to attack there than from the front. While it may be proof against RPG-7 HEAT rounds, more advanced munitions like the RPG-29 or Metis-M or Kornet would penetrate without much difficulty.

Still, it'll be much harder to attack a tank's treads than a mecha's legs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TinyRedLeaf
My point is that current technology may produce inferior armour, firepower and mobility, but who knows how mecha technology may evolve in the future?
It wouldn't really matter since any technological advance that makes large mecha more practical will benefit tanks as well (and probably to a greater degree). And none of this technology will counter a mecha's inherent disadvantages.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TinyRedLeaf
Point taken. But those tanks were never as decisive as their designers hoped. The Allied victory on the Western Front was won eventually by sheer attrition rather than decisive battle. The Germans knew they couldn't last much longer after the US joined the war, and thus threw in the towel.
By a similar token, nuclear weapons aren't as decisive as their designers hoped either. I'm not sure how that's supposed to take away from their effectiveness.

And on the World War I point, the Hundred Days campaign in 1918 is arguably the most successful offensive of the entire western Front. The Germans didn't just give up; they were beaten rather badly and they lost all of their best defensive lines in the process.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TinyRedLeaf
"Stryker brigades" wouldn't even be in the same area of operations as MBTs, let alone face them in battle.
Why would it be impossible for such a unit to engage a few tanks here and there?

Quote:
Originally Posted by TinyRedLeaf
Current conventional operations are typically civil wars or civilian insurgency in heavily built-up areas -- precisely the kinds of situations you wouldn't want to send a tank company into. It would be sheer suicide for the tankies.
Untrue. The American forces used tanks to great effect in retaking Fallujah in 2004. Besides, it's not a good idea to assume that all conflicts will be of this nature.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skyfall View Post
If it can lose the legs without hindering the performance, then what was the point in having them in the first place
Hah! That'd make it a Zeong.

Off-topic:
Quote:
Originally Posted by TinyRedLeaf
A modern infantry platoon probably has enough firepower to mow down an entire company of 200+ medieval knights. (My imaginary figures, don't quote me.)
It'll do more than that. A first-world infantry platoon will have eight or more machine guns. They could leave the riflemen at home and still slaughter the knights.
__________________
The victorious strategist only seeks battle after the victory has been won...
4Tran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-02-27, 13:18   Link #71
grey_moon
Yummy, sweet and unyuu!!!
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Hee hee sorry a bit out of place I typed it out and forgot to press post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyuusai View Post
Because appropriately-colored machines (like the grey the Gundam RX-78-2 was originally supposed to be) don't make interesting-looking toys.
LOL can't argue with that

I also cringed at the super soldier's pink mech suit in 00. To preserve my sanity I put it down to pink makes her mech faster the same way that red makes cars faster for orkz in the WH40K universe because they believe it does

I know people have been saying that exo skeletons would be useful because they would be more flexible for things that require augmented human strength, but would that be the case if humans were no longer involved in the jobs?

For example carrying stuff around, two legs puts a lot of stress on the joints of the legs and also for weight distribution it puts a lot of pressure two small points of the floor. For balance pole like bodies need far more resources to handle it, whilst a squatter object would naturally have balance on its side.

So in my mind for more flexible body shape for a odd jobs like building and construction surely a squat spider with lots of leg/arms be far more appropriate; also with tank tracks in its main body to allow for it to carry stuff via that on flattish land and use the legs to climb up more difficult terrain?

The multiple leg/arms would allow for it to handle many tasks in one go instead of our 2.
__________________
grey_moon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-02-27, 15:09   Link #72
kitto-chan
很快是工程師
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: ゴミ箱の存在の他の平野
Actually this may not be so far fetch. It has some characteristics of a mecha. Basically an enhancement suit. Extend the soldier survivability on the battle field. Could be outfitted with heavier guns or anti-tanks rounds. Very maneuverable, factor in the newer camouflage technology, a 3-4 meter mecha is not unrealistic.
kitto-chan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-02-27, 15:52   Link #73
NightShade
Above and Beyond Fan
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Panama
Age: 31
Send a message via MSN to NightShade
Quote:
Originally Posted by kitto-chan View Post
Actually this may not be so far fetch. It has some characteristics of a mecha. Basically an enhancement suit. Extend the soldier survivability on the battle field. Could be outfitted with heavier guns or anti-tanks rounds. Very maneuverable, factor in the newer camouflage technology, a 3-4 meter mecha is not unrealistic.
Thats like Halo coming true :P hahahah

Anyways the mecha could be true but for now it sucks lol its soo slow, for a mecha to be effective it need good mobility and good armor....
__________________
Signature removed by a Moderator because it was too big
NightShade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-02-27, 16:02   Link #74
Deathkillz
~ You're dead ^__^* ~
*Graphic Designer
 
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: uk, England
Age: 24
Send a message via MSN to Deathkillz
Oh the land walker...I remember watching this on youtube some time ago...

Thing about humanoid machines like these is their speed...I can probably walk faster

Unless they can make mechas that can do ballet dancing, in reality, it won't work in a war zone
__________________

Siggy: hohohohoho~ | AnimeHistory welcome to our blog ~ | Summer2009 early review
Under the radar series Summer2009: Kanamemo, GA Geijutsuka Art, NEEDLESS
Deathkillz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-02-27, 16:06   Link #75
Vexx
Obey the Darkly Cute ...
*Author
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: On the whole, I'd rather be in Kyoto ...
Age: 57
I figure enhancement suits are much more likely and survivable than anything one might call a "mecha" (thinking a streamlined version of the power suits from Starship Troopers -- the BOOK not the vaguely related MOVIE).

Mechanical Engineers may find the idea of mecha cool... but the mech-eng part of their brain is rolling on the floor laughing hysterically because of the material and design obstacles as well as survivability in the field environment.

Enhanced infantry-wear though... that could have some very cool results.

Last edited by Vexx; 2008-02-27 at 17:28.
Vexx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-02-27, 16:09   Link #76
_DaViD_
~(=ω=.)~
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
i would like to see a real life gundam but the bad side is that they will use it to destroy other countries so i dont want at the same time, imagine if it turns like code geass, just to put an example xD!

PS. maybe a gurren lagann with a supah driller, omg i would die to ride it xD!
__________________
konata
_DaViD_ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-02-27, 16:22   Link #77
Dxon
Inactive user
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Holland,Zuid-holland,Capelle aan den IJssel
Age: 21
I want one!
__________________
I don't want a sig anymore.. It's going to get removed anyway.
Gimme Cookies!!
People's screens are to small for my signature.
Dxon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-02-27, 17:12   Link #78
hobbes_fan
You could say.....
 
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Note that they still haven't figured out the defining feature of the human body - the hand. It's not a major thing if you use fixed mounts, but the hand/opposable thumb design is an engineering marvel. It'd be an effort to turn a doorknob with the hook thing they were using. It'd be impratical to leave the suit in hostile conditions to simply open a doorknob. I wonder how its powered, it looks like they're recycling kinetic energy from the looks of the leg design. The big umbilical cable looks like a PITA though. Can it generate an AT field or do you need to eat an s2 engine?
__________________
Before you ask "How do I convert fansubs to...." see the following
MP4 - http://forums.animesuki.com/showthread.php?t=47693
Convert AVI/MKV/MP4 to DVD
http://forums.animesuki.com/showthread.php?t=26308
hobbes_fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-02-27, 18:27   Link #79
Sides
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Edinburgh
Age: 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vexx View Post
Mechanical Engineers may find the idea of mecha cool... but the mech-eng part of their brain is rolling on the floor laughing hysterically because of the material and design obstacles as well as survivability in the field environment.
Well i'm a mechanical engineer, or use to be. I just find it sad that some people want to create "cool loking" war machines to kill people. What is wrong with you people?

Quote:
Originally Posted by hobbes_fan View Post
My biggest problem really with mecha is is payload - what could you arm it with? Missiles, guns. How is it superior at delivering these payloads? I'm sorry a beam saber is a pretty pointless weapon on a battlefield.
How about a pressure based weapon, let the mecha clap in its hands, it should create enough pressure to affect its surroundings, or let it do somekind of step dance to create artificial earthquakes. Or a pressure-impluse generator to blow things away.
Sides is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-02-27, 18:49   Link #80
technomo12
Wise Otaku Seeker
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Philippines
Age: 24
Here is all i can say

IF nanobots are developed

many people are goin to have super humans strenght and also they can chage any parts of their body to their ideal

but if

Mobile suit are made

expect massive war
__________________
technomo12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:12.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
We use Silk.