2007-02-11, 04:42 | Link #21 |
ermmm...
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: definitely not here
|
Think this -
which country have enough money to build A mobilesuit? which country have THE technology to defy gravity? As far as I'm concerned, NO country in the world have enough money to even buy scrap metals to build a GUNDAM's frame... Though I'll be happy to pilot one if such one exists... |
2007-02-11, 05:03 | Link #22 | |
Some say I'm the Reverse
Join Date: Jul 2006
|
Quote:
In both U.C. and Seed Gundam, there are reasons why Mobile Suits work. In both cases, it's because something exists that makes sure most 20th-Century weapons systems like ICBMs, Radar, Guided "smart" Missiles and the like do not work. In U.C. it's the Minovsky particle (which also helps power MS, BTW). In Seed, it's the N-Jammers. In Wing and X, there's little mention as to why MS work, but I think we've both seen that Wing and X don't seem to have much in the way of 20th-century weaponry. In Wing, I think it has to do with the 18th-Century warfare mentality of the whole world (All of this honorable direct combat crap--you don't do that in a real war!), while in X it's simply because the earth had the crap bombed out of it. The reason MS exist in those worlds is mainly because something (Minovsky Particles, N-Jammer Cancellers, some stupid 18th-Century throwback) makes sure that BVR (Beyond Visual Range) combat is impossible. Radar is not completely reliable. You're forced to fight within visual contact, and MS are designed to reflect that--close-in-combat weapons smaller than ships but tougher than tanks and fighter aircraft, and big enough to carry some really heavy firepower. Now think about this: If BVR radar and weapons systems existed in Gundam--for example, let's take the (now obsolete) F-14D Tomcat's AWG-9 Radar and AIM-54 Phoenix missile. The F-14 can track and hit 6 different targets with the AWG-9 radar, and that's beyond the pilot's visual range. The AIM-54 is a Mach 4+ missile originally designed to take out Bombers, again, beyond visual range. And at the speed they go, I doubt that an MS pilot will be able to see it, let alone react in time to avoid or shoot it down, whether it be on land or in space. Now, regardless of whether or not you think an AIM-54 Phoenix can take out a mobile suit or not is not the issue. The issue is, 20th-Century technology (Yes, 20th. The F-14 was built in the 1970's. I believe we're far more advanced now) already has a system that makes MS useless. We're living in the 21st Century now, and unless something like a Minovsky Particle or N-Jammer or some Pierson's Puppeteer seeds the planet with a virus that makes all beyond visual-range weapons systems in the world useless, I'd have to say that MS are going to be more and more impractical in real-life combat, even if the technology to actually build one becomes more and more plausible. It's not the technology. It's the need. And frankly, we don't need a huge 15-18meter tall mecha. If anything, we want a mecha that's about human size. And that's never going to be as flashy as what you see in Sci-Fi books or anime (look up Us Army Natick, stuff on BLEEX, etc.). Now, I love Gundams and Gunpla, but there's no way in hell I can bring myself to believe they can ever actually work in real life. Simply put: a Mobile Suit in the real world would be seriously finagled up the behind by some geek fifty miles away with a thumb on a little red button.
__________________
Last edited by wavehawk; 2007-02-11 at 05:17. Reason: Clarification |
|
2007-02-11, 09:39 | Link #23 |
勇者
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Tesla Leicht Institute
Age: 34
|
So far the major problem for mobile suit from reading all of you are sizes, technology are not good enough yet, and there are many better option as for a weapon. I am thinking for size ten meter should be the size for mobile suits, technology in future might make mobile suit work, and as for choice for an weapon, even I know that air combat for mobile suit will never work (maybe if they turned it into something like valkryie from Macroos that might work) so only thing that mobile suit could replace are tank. I seriously think mobile suit could replace tank if mobile suit wasn't one man machine and used by multiple crew and with right technology, someday it might work someday... maybe.
__________________
|
2007-02-11, 12:25 | Link #24 | |||||||
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
|
Quote:
If we were to take the Gundam battleships as they are, then that'd be a different story. The UC battleships can fly at high altitudes, therefore they'd make for awesome bombers. Archangel has a ridiculously powerful main gun, and very good armor to go with it, so it'd make for an excellent spearhead for an armored column. It'd be even better as an amphibious assault landing craft. Against forces with equivalent technology though, they wouldn't be anywhere nearly as effective. Quote:
I think that the best firing position for mecha would be the prone position, just like modern infantry, with most of the armor going to the head and shoulders. The problem remains that, even prone, a mobile suit is still far bigger than a tank, and that it'd be immobile as you pointed out. The issues of weapons size and armor protection remain mostly unchanged. Quote:
Quote:
My Abrams is about the right size. Most modern MBT are anywhere from 2-3m tall, and the M-1 is at the high end of this at 2.89m. This is about 1/6th the height of a Zaku II, which is what the picture shows. It also shows the reason why a mobile suit is worse off in the size comparison: its largest dimensions (height and width) represents it's most common target profile as well. This isn't true for tanks which generally present their smallest target profile. Quote:
Quote:
A 10m mecha would be a big improvement over the 18m ones we commonly see, but it'd still be a big a target as a double-decker bus. Quote:
__________________
|
|||||||
2007-02-11, 13:50 | Link #25 | ||||
Zeonic
|
Quote:
Quote:
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/f-22-991769b.jpg http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/a...90518f2238.jpg http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/f22-002.jpg Quote:
Quote:
Something I find interesting is that given similar technology, wouldn't a Zaku be capable of having even greater sensors than conventional vehicles? It's definitely not lacking in space nor power supply for them. Is that a shoulder launched Tomahawk I smell...? |
||||
2007-02-11, 14:26 | Link #27 | ||
Lost in my dreams...
Join Date: Jun 2006
Age: 37
|
Quote:
Sure - it might be capable of hiding behind apartment buildings... one problem tho - who the heck would build a weapon that utilizes the cover of residential area as it's main(only) means of staying intact ? Quote:
Why mount a Tomahawk missile on something like that, where one could, probably, produce 50 normal launchers/tanks/aircrafts for the same cost, and achieve a much greater effect, both in firepower and tactical possibilities, as well as survivability ? Not to mention the maintenance alone of that thing would kill you. As it stands, building a mecha in real life for general combat purpose is as impractical as it can possibly get. I can't imagine a situation where a squadron of tanks/planes wouldn't be able to out-perform such a thing. Heck, a single plane is capable of out-performing it most likely. Heck, In a 1v1 between an 18m mecha and F-22 i would place my money on the plane in a heartbeat.
__________________
|
||
2007-02-11, 15:30 | Link #28 | ||||||
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
|
Quote:
Quote:
http://www.airforceworld.com/fighter/gfx/f22/f22_4.jpg. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Off-topic: Quote:
http://www.crazyaviation.com/movies/CA_SU-30.wmv The current maneuverability king is the Su-47, with its inverted wing design. Incidentally, this plane looks just like the YF-19 in Macross Plus . For all sorts of reasons, the Macross designs give a better impression of being military vehicles than Gundam ones.
__________________
|
||||||
2007-02-11, 15:47 | Link #29 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2006
|
Su-47 may win in the subsonic maneuverability area but in the modern theater of air warfare low-speed dog fights aren't that important. In fact it's not expected that the F/A-22 will engage in any dog fights. Stealth, accurate targeting/avionics and speed are much more crucial. Basically you want to get to your target before your enemy does and high-tail out of there after you launched a bunch of missiles.
In a straight up fight between a F/A 22 and the Strike Freedom I don't think the Raptor have enough firepower to put a scratch on the S. Freedom. Last edited by kiramuro; 2007-02-11 at 16:00. |
2007-02-11, 16:30 | Link #31 |
I disagree with you all.
Join Date: Dec 2005
|
I think it all boils down to one thing: whatever technology you can use to make working mechas, you can use to make tanks and planes that'll be cheaper and able to beat up your mecha and steal its lunch money with one hand tied behind their backs.
|
2007-02-11, 20:53 | Link #32 |
INTJ
IT Support
|
It appears some issues regarding the possibilities of mobile suits have been addressed. I'll admit not all of them. I'm kind of sensing some Gundam Wing hate from some people, though.
Anyways, I've been reading upon the concerns of armor. I agree with that, though the concept of such a thing isn't that highly impropable. In fact, that theory should be tested out. I'm guessing most of everyone is thinking that if someone was to build a mobile suit, the protective armor would be the strongest and/or lightest possible metal we have in this world. That would also imply titanium or the next strongest metal. Although that thought pattern is understandable and valid, I implore everyone to think outside of the box in terms of science. Afterall, science wouldn't progress if people keep thinking inside the box. So, why not a chemically created alloy like most Gundam series usually suggest? I'm a Gundam Wing fan, so I'll use Gundam Wing as an example. In Gundam Wing, their "Gundanium" alloy isn't a mere new metal they uncovered. In fact, it's chemicals combined in zero gravity to create an alloy, supposedly powerful enough to defend against beam weaponry, heat resistence and of course, bullets. The concept I read up on it was intriguing and convincing enough that maybe it's possible. It was indicated that plasma was one of the chemicals used. Now, having done some research, I found out that plasma has a magnetic quality that may even produce a magnetic field. Plasma also has some heat-resistant qualities. Now, given for the weight problem, considering the theory/concept is dealing with chemicals, the weight of the alloy can possibly lighter than any metal found in Earth. So, the concept is possible. We can't exactly disprove it until we try it. The only problem to this is we'll practically have to be in outer space to try something like this. This means that we'd have to rely on NASA or any other space program, and considering the limited amount of space travel done today, it would be quite difficult to test out. Another problem is power supply. There's nothing in this world that can power a mobile suit of any form. Sure, we can try the imbelical cord idea from Neon Genesis Evangelion, but that's not really a good idea in a combat situation. So, we'll have to resort to other ideas. Nuclear powered like Freedom/Strike Freedom and Justice/Infinite Justice? A bit risky if it leaks, but that's one idea. We're getting there. Slowly, but surely. Another concept idea is the fusion reactor. In practicality, harnessing a the power of the sun. It's possible, requiring several hydrogen attoms and a laser, but we'd need a container that can take such a punishment. So, I'd say the armor concept I spoke about would have to be invented first. The reason I say this is because of the magnetic field it would produce. With an armor emitting a magnetic field (which is pretty much like an i-field) all around the power source like a ball, the reaction would be forced to remain at the center. Once that's resolved, another problem would be somehow drawing the power from such a thing...and of course, the same problem as a nuke. A leak can be deadly and the theory for what could happen is endless. Maybe the sudden expansion would cause the reaction to disappate or we've just created another sun. Scary, isn't it? And of course, the argument about giant bi-pedal robots that a lot of people use. If a robot falls to the ground, it's screwed. Actually, I don't believe that. It shouldn't have any problems getting up just like any other human being. They just need to immitate the movement. Given the type of mechanical and technological advancements we have today, I'd say mobile suits wouldn't be moving slowly as people claim. At the beginning, during the creation of a mobile suit, I'd believe that they would be moving slowly, but if a creation of a mobile suit ever came to be, the builders would have no problem thinking up ways to improve their mobility and reaction time. And if you some people are thinking about all that work the pilot has to do to make a robot move, that's not true. It's the same idea as driving a car. You move the steering wheel, work the pedals and the shift knob. The rest tends to be mechanically automatic. You don't exactly wind up the engine of the car anymore, do you? With today's advancements, it's possible to make the controls pilot friendly where-in most of the actions of a robot is quite automatic with a single flip of a switch or a turn of a joystick. It's all a matter of how you want it to work. As for size, I believe 15-16 meters is a good enough size for the mechanics to fit. That's not too big. In fact, the foot of a mobile suit that size would be about the same size as a economy car, which isn't that huge. In conclusion, I agree that the need for a mobile suit isn't there for the world to be forced to create such things. I believe the possibility of mobile suits are there, though we're lacking a few things to make it work completely. I believe that with that in mind, the possibilities does not simply lie in the Gundam series, but in other animes as well. For example, the "fakes" in Gasaraki or the M9s in Full Metal Panic... minus the cloaking technology. Nearly all the requirements to make a mobile suit is there, we just now need the will to create such a thing. |
2007-02-11, 21:27 | Link #33 |
The Dark Knight
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: From the deepest abyss in the world, where you think?
Age: 38
|
Whatever the argument, Anh_Minh's got it pat down.
Whatever you can make for giant robots, you can do the same for fighters and tanks at a better price. Seriously people, the only thing giant robots would be good for is psychological (AT-ATs). And for those people who don't realize having such a massive machine operating with two legs, there's a reason why the heaviest creatures are found in the ocean and not on land. You would need powerful hydraulics to ease the stress on the machine itself and even then, that still leaves it vulnerable. Besides, weren't the idea of mechs taken from the powered armors from Starship troopers and then "super-sized?" I find the armor from starship troopers to be the most realistic in combat. |
2007-02-11, 21:35 | Link #34 | |
INTJ
IT Support
|
Quote:
|
|
2007-02-11, 22:55 | Link #35 | |||||||||
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Offtopic Quote:
Sure, the F-22 isn't expected to ever engage in dogfighting (even though it's equipped for it), but it's going to be combat that'll tell us if it plays out the way USAF theorists think it will. The last times that they designed fighters with such sweeping theories in mind, they didn't put a gun on the F-4, and they thought that the F-14 would engage most of its targets with the AIM-54. The end result was that they ended up having to install gunpods on their F-4s, and AIM-54s ended up almost never getting used (except for the Iranians, but that's a different topic). As a side note, you don't have call it the F/A-22 any more. Even the USAF has given up on trying to claim that a pure fighter with no ground attack capabilities as a fighter-bomber.
__________________
|
|||||||||
2007-02-11, 23:02 | Link #36 |
INTJ
IT Support
|
My, my, 4tran. You're nit-picking through what I wrote. I was being quite neutral about what I wrote while throwing out possible solutions and ideas along with the problems of what creating mobile suits would intale.
For one, you rebuted me regarding practicality and usage of mobile suits, when I, myself, stated that unless we, as human beings, choose to create them for whatever reason other than practicality and usage, I don't see why would people choose to build them. There has to be a means to an end. So far, I've stated the concept and possibility is there. |
2007-02-11, 23:18 | Link #37 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
|
Quote:
If you have any problems with any of my comments on your arguments, then feel free to bring them up. Quote:
__________________
|
||
2007-02-11, 23:50 | Link #38 |
INTJ
IT Support
|
Do you like to be offensive or something? Or is it that you just like talking down to other people?
You nitpicked. There's no going around it as much as you try to use excuses. Instead of responding to the entire paragraphs I wrote as a whole, you decided to respond to certain portions of what I wrote. Clips and phrases as they say. Besides, what's not important to you doesn't mean it isn't important to others. So, I'll ask nicely; Please, please, get off your high horse. This is a discussion, not an argument over who has the bigger balls. (Or brain and/or validity.) And since this is a discussion, I would rather -discuss- about the subject matter without the intent of trying to piss each other off on both sides. |
2007-02-11, 23:57 | Link #39 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Finland
|
Ok,i saw this topic and decided to throw some of my own ideas to the discussion,english isnt my native language,so prepare for spelling errors.
In my honest opinion,Mobile Suit in its classic RX-78 Gundam-form wouldnt work in a battlefield.Why? Well,it lacks protection,firepower and maneuverability.That one sidearm + 2 headmounted vulcans just arent enough for a hulk of metal that large. BUT,it might be successful,IF; - it has extremely efficient Active Protection System (like the US "Iron Fist" or Russian "Arena" and "Konkurs",check wiki for those if interested) - same tactics as armored forces or armored cavalry - airborne operation capability - somesort AT-missile carrying capability and really advanced Firecontrol System for those.(or more firepower otherwise) Although it would be still too expensive,too big and a bit clumsy for modern battlefield. I think that smaller mechas (Like the RPI-11 Knightmare Frame from Code Pizza Hutt)would be succesful in armored recon-companies or similar tasks. Anyway,interesting thread |
2007-02-12, 05:10 | Link #40 | ||
Lost in my dreams...
Join Date: Jun 2006
Age: 37
|
Quote:
There is a reason why people quote lines instead of whole paragraphs - it keeps the thing organized and easy to follow. If i am responding to one sentence of a paragraph, why should i quote the whole thing? Especially paragraphs that consist of 15 lines and are a pain to read. *hint* *hint* When responding to long posts and/or paragraphs that contain many different arguments, breaking them up and responding to each argument with the respective answer is a common practice in this forum. Hang around for a while longer and you will notice it ...along with specific member specific writing style/quirks Quote:
__________________
|
||
|
|