Making ACs a Reality

[BerserkFury]

I'm not sure what you mean when you say equal superiority. I think the biggest benefit is the ability to quickly adapt to unanticipated situations. You could have the actual vehicle chassis standarized and deployed everywhere, but logistics would only need to move around interchangeable weapons and armor rather than ship in a whole bunch of new vehicles to your location just because you need more anti armor capability.

 

Also, I'd point out that the trend today is to move away from tanks to lighter armored vehicles like Bradley and Striker, especially in urban combat. You should take that into account.

 

Are you going to design an entire vehicle based on new methods of combat, an entire vehicle that fits in with current combat tactics, or just the turret?

 

Keep at it, maybe this could become your thesis.

 

What I mean by equal superiority is parallel performance of multi purpose systems in comparison to specialized systems. As youre aware, specialized systems do their job extremely well, such as tanks, because they are built primarily for that one purpose. The goal here is to build a machine that can fill multiple roles and perform just as well as specialized machines can, in those roles.

 

And as for treads, that idea for a displacement system might change along the way given how much maintenance they require and how tedious it is to repair them, but for now I think theyre a good choice due to their survivability and quite literally all terrain adaptability. The IAV Stryker is a really good example of the versatility that machines can display on the field given all of the uses it has for light armored vehicle. It has great mobility and lots of variants but my concept revolves around eliminating the variant aspect of these machines and creating multi purpose machines that can fulfill the needs that variant based machines fill.

 

I know it sounds crazy to outperform specialized systems but thats what makes this idea intriguing because its not impossible its just a matter of engineering. My machines will specialize in outperforming specialized machines, haha!

[Aokiryu89]

Just go straight for the sun gun.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun_Gun

 

My main problem with the Sun Gun is how is it supposed to defend itself from ground fire. I'd like to know how much the atmosphere would effect projectiles fired by Railguns.

 

 

SUN GUN!

 

[Exorcet]

I know it sounds crazy to outperform specialized systems but thats what makes this idea intriguing because its not impossible its just a matter of engineering. My machines will specialize in outperforming specialized machines, haha!

 

I hate to say it, but this is the wrong way to look at it. You first need to determine if it is actually possible, then you can do the engineering. Specilization exists because it's better than Jack of all trades, generally. Technology can change this though, avionics have and weapons technolgy allow fighters today to perform roles that would have had to have been split between two or more different planes in the past, but even today you can't have an air force with only one type of plane.

 

You certainly can build something just because it's cool, there is nothing wrong with that, but it probably won't be practical. If you want to make something practical, which is typically the point of engineering, you need to start with a purpose and not an idea.

 

I'm not saying this to discourage you, it's certainly possible that a multirole tank could be nearly as good or possibly better than current tanks, research will give you that answer. However what you need to put before anything else is the goal that you're trying to achieve. Even if this adaptive tank outperforms current specilized ground vehicles, will it outperform next generation specilized tanks? If it does not, then what is the point? I think the strength of your idea comes from its ability to ease logicistics in a combat situation, and not necessarily raw performance. But it's your concept, take it where you want.

 

 

 

(And not to half show off, half make a point)

 

% Breguet Range based aircraft sizing code
% Imperial units
% range = nm, speed = knts, TSFC = lb/lbf*h, mass/weight = lb
% R = V*(L/D)/SFC*ln(m1/m2)
% m1/m2 = e^(R/(V*(L/D)/SFC))
clear all
CRange = [b]1200; % total range[/b]
% Range = CRange*(1+(1/3)); % Accounting for off cruise condition
Range = CRange*1.5; % Accounting for off cruise condition
			    % (start up, taxi, takeoff, climb, mission,
			    % descend, approach, land)
M_cruise = .8; % cruise Mach
LD = 8.84; % L/D (function of cruise mach, external payload)
SFC = .72; % SFC
r = Range/.000539956803;
% altitude table for reference
% 30,000 ft a=589.4 kt
% 35,000 ft a=576.5
% 40,000 ft a=573.6 (const to 70,000 ft)
a = 589.4;
v = (M_cruise*a)*.514444444444444; % units
SFCu = SFC*(1/3600); % units
s = SFCu^-1;
% Weight calculation
mr = exp(r/(v*LD*s)); % total weight / empty+payload weight
mf_over_m2 = mr-1; % fuel fraction / payload+empty weight
disp('====FUEL FRACTION====') % Begin output
% fractions
ffrac = mf_over_m2*(1/mr) % F-35 = .264 (MTOW)
m2frac = 1-ffrac % empty weight + payload fraction
fs = .42; % structure fraction (for F-35 = .418; F-22 = .520 {both MTOW])
fpay = m2frac - fs % payload fraction
% Weights
payload = [b]20000; % Max payload[/b]
loadedpay = 10000; % Payload that must meet range req
AApay = 2000; % Air to Air payload
   p = payload;
   l = loadedpay;
   a = AApay;
GTOW = p/fpay % Gross take off weight with full payload
mf = ffrac*GTOW % fuel mass
ms = fs*GTOW % empty weight
% Off payload range
mi = ms+mf+a;
me = mi-mf;
AARange = v*(LD)*s*log(mi/me)*.000539956803/1.1
AA_Combat_radius = AARange/2

% Actual number, non fraction
ms = 0; % empty weight
mf = 0; % fuel weight
a = 0; % payload
mi = ms+mf+a;
me = mi-mf;
AARange = v*(LD)*s*log(mi/me)*.000539956803/1.1
AA_Combat_radius = AARange/2

 

This code is for a project I'm doing for fun. I'm designing a fighter. This is the very first thing I did, I decided to check and see if my goals were reasonable. My goals were carrying 20,000 lbs of payload over a range of 1200 nm. I have no idea what my plane will look like, or how I'm going to carry that 20,000 lbs, but I first made sure that it was possible. Once I did, I could start the real engineering.

[BerserkFury]

I hate to say it, but this is the wrong way to look at it. You first need to determine if it is actually possible, then you can do the engineering. Specilization exists because it's better than Jack of all trades, generally. Technology can change this though, avionics have and weapons technolgy allow fighters today to perform roles that would have had to have been split between two or more different planes in the past, but even today you can't have an air force with only one type of plane.

 

You certainly can build something just because it's cool, there is nothing wrong with that, but it probably won't be practical. If you want to make something practical, which is typically the point of engineering, you need to start with a purpose and not an idea.

 

I'm not saying this to discourage you, it's certainly possible that a multirole tank could be nearly as good or possibly better than current tanks, research will give you that answer. However what you need to put before anything else is the goal that you're trying to achieve. Even if this adaptive tank outperforms current specilized ground vehicles, will it outperform next generation specilized tanks? If it does not, then what is the point? I think the strength of your idea comes from its ability to ease logicistics in a combat situation, and not necessarily raw performance. But it's your concept, take it where you want.

 

 

Yeah I see what youre saying.

 

And as for the code, I dont know how to read it but its really interesting that youre designing it. Are you working on it alone or with a group? What program are you using?

[Aokiryu89]

It looks readable, I just either forgot or never seen most of those symbols.

 

MATH MAGIC

Edited May 21, 2012 by Ogawa Lou

[Wong]

Edited May 22, 2012 by Honest Frank

[KORTOKtheSTRONG]

[Exorcet]

And as for the code, I dont know how to read it but its really interesting that youre designing it. Are you working on it alone or with a group? What program are you using?

 

It's MATLAB, and this is on my own for fun/practice.

[BerserkFury]

 

This is exactly why I initially proposed a bipedal unit but later realized it would be counterproductive on a battlefield. Walking machines have their up sides and drawbacks but when it comes to arms technology, treads seems like the better option because of the weight displacement Enganacious initially pointed out.

 

@Exorcet, Im supposed to learn to use MATLAB but dont know where to start? Any advice?

[Wong]

Hey Mike, what's your focus in Aerospace Engineering anyways? I specialized in controls engineering, which is why I decided to go for robotics for my Masters. MATLAB is pretty good for its RL Tool Kit. Otherwise, I find Python to be a much better programming language.

 

BererkFury, if you ever decide to go for graduate school, consider this to be your thesis. Humanoid robotics is actually a hot topic for graduate work. This is because you will learn a lot of fundamentals by doing challenging work, even if the product is not marketable. Employers will take notice too. I think the major barrier to the success of this project will largely be the control aspect. Take example your arm. The fact that your arm can rotate and flex means that there are not three degrees of freedom, but six. Now include that with your hands and fingers. That is 72 degrees of freedom. Now imagine including another arm, both legs, the body, and the head. The degrees of freedom is high up in the hundreds. And try to make a controller to make the robot not tip over. That is a monumental task. It can be done, it just takes a systematic approach. You have to make sure that your professor is advisable towards this topic. And work with a team. This is no solo task.

 

Not sure if you had seen this video before:

 

@ Exorcet, Im supposed to learn to use MATLAB but dont know where to start? Any advice?

MATLAB is great in the aerospace field and to use its RL Tool Kit if you like control theory. I'd actually advise you learning Python.

http://noexcuselist.com/

See: Programming

 

If you know C++ or Python, MATLAB is really easy to pick up. It is very lenient with syntax, with is great for non-cs majors. But it has a bunch of limitations and makes a lot of assumptions because of it.

[Aokiryu89]

[KORTOKtheSTRONG]

BererkFury, look at your man, now back to me, now back at your man, now back to me. Sadly, he isn’t me, but if he stopped using ladies scented body wash and switched to Old Spice, he could smell like he’s me. Look down, back up, where are you? You’re on a boat with the man your man could smell like. What’s in your hand, back at me. I have it, it’s an oyster with two tickets to that thing you love. Look again, the tickets are now diamonds. Anything is possible when your man smells like Old Spice and not a lady.

 

I'M ON A HORSE

[Wong]

I need to subscribe your account.

[YUNG MASTERLESS GLENCOUR]

Hey Mike, what's your focus in Aerospace Engineering anyways? I specialized in controls engineering, which is why I decided to go for robotics for my Masters. MATLAB is pretty good for its RL Tool Kit. Otherwise, I find Python to be a much better programming language.

 

MATLAB is great

 

There are two Aero Mikes.

 

MATLAB is king.

[Wong]

Haha, I was referring to Exo. But there are also two Exos.

 

MATLAB is good depending what you want to accomplish. It has a nice library set. I especially like the RL Tool Kit.

 

Edited May 22, 2012 by Honest Frank

[Aokiryu89]

I don't know if anyone's heard the news but.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silicene

 

GRAPHENE IS OBSOLETE

Edited May 23, 2012 by Ogawa Lou

[Exorcet]

Hey Mike, what's your focus in Aerospace Engineering anyways? I specialized in controls engineering, which is why I decided to go for robotics for my Masters. MATLAB is pretty good for its RL Tool Kit. Otherwise, I find Python to be a much better programming language.

 

The choices were Course 16-1 Aerospace Engineering or 16-2 Aerospace Engineering with Information Technology. I'm 16-1, and I took aerodyanmics classes ahead of everything else, so it's pretty much the aerodynamics side of things. Systems and controls is pretty popular here, but it's not what I find the most interesting.

 

I think I tried Python when I did a small project as a freshman, I didn't really learn that much as programming was completely foreign to me, and the project only lasted a week, but I'd be willing to try it again. I certainly can't do any worse than the first time around. Oddly MATLAB is the stanard language for most classes here, but they actually teach you with Java.

 

Berserk, http://www.mathworks.com/help/techdoc/ that should be your best friend. I was never formally taught how to use MATLAB, I just had it thrown at me and went from there. It was pretty frustrating early on, but just keep writing code even if it doesn't do anything useful and you'll learn it. If I have one piece of advice, it's to make your code less ugly than mine. I can kind of get away with it since I don't intend for people to be using the code I posted here (though if anyone wants it, go ahead), but if you're going to be working in a group and sharing code, comment everything and make it as clear as possible.

[Wong]

Oddly MATLAB is the stanard language for most classes here, but they actually teach you with Java.

 

I was never formally taught how to use MATLAB, I just had it thrown at me and went from there.

MATLAB is standard for most aerospace industries. Pretty much every aerospace engineer learns MATLAB at one point. Penn State pretty threw all the juniors under the bus to self teach MATLAB.

 

comment everything and make it as clear as possible.

This times +9000. Heck, do this even on your own personal codes. Even if your code is ugly, at least when you go back, you will be reminded of what you did. It is much better than starting from scratch.

[YUNG MASTERLESS GLENCOUR]

I don't know a single Aero major anywhere who got formal training in MATLAB. Everyone just learns it on the fly.

 

Kortok's fishturkey pic fucking rules

[Aokiryu89]

I just realized someone had to make that...

[BerserkFury]

Thanks for the links Exorcet and Honest Frank. My professor warned me about MATLAB too, that Im supposed to learn to use it but that they wont be teaching us how. We're supposed to... know.. how to use it down the road.

 

Im actually planning to go to grad school for mechatronics so this could very well be my thesis. This idea sort of started up when I was in middle school but I didnt think it was possible back then so it just sorta got thrown to the back of my mind. I always thought about the complexity of the controls on such a machine but with the current pace of Honda's ASIMO, I figured that research in bipedal robot controls would significantly have progressed by the time a project such as a bipedal weapon went under way.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R8UeT9r4cmg

 

I've always wondered if his movement could be adapted to absorbe or adequately withstand the recoil of firing a rifle or something. What does Honda do with the knowledge they gain from researching robotics, anyways? Aren't they primarily a motor vehicle company?

[Exorcet]

I don't know a single Aero major anywhere who got formal training in MATLAB. Everyone just learns it on the fly.

 

 

I guess I can't use it to brag about how awesome I am anymore then. Still, it's kind of annoying that you have to take classes that have nothing to do with your major, but at the same time you're on your own when it comes to learning about something that you're expected to know.

 

It's the same thing with CAD, at no point was there any formal introduction to it. I only really know how to CAD because I did FSAE.

 

I've always wondered if his movement could be adapted to absorbe or adequately withstand the recoil of firing a rifle or something. What does Honda do with the knowledge they gain from researching robotics, anyways? Aren't they primarily a motor vehicle company?

Computers are everywhere.

 

Also, Honda jet

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honda_HA-420_HondaJet

 

I don't know what they plan to get out of ASIMO, etc specifically, but I bet there are plenty of options.

[KORTOKtheSTRONG]

that jet is very honda

[YUNG MASTERLESS GLENCOUR]

I guess I can't use it to brag about how awesome I am anymore then. Still, it's kind of annoying that you have to take classes that have nothing to do with your major, but at the same time you're on your own when it comes to learning about something that you're expected to know.

 

It's the same thing with CAD, at no point was there any formal introduction to it. I only really know how to CAD because I did FSAE.

 

Yeah that'd be a stupid thing to brag about. I can stomp that anyways: I had to learn how to use a radar cross section program on the fly which included having to learn how radar works. It was for the stealth UCAV I designed. I basically sat in the library for a month reading every stealth book and radar book they had. It was hell but now I know more about stealth and radar than anyone I know who doesn't work for skunk works. Fuck it.

 

And yeah AutoCAD and SolidWorks, along with Matlab (and other shit) we all have to learn on the fly more or less. There was actually 1 autocad course on our curriculum that was aero specific, so that was kinda good at least.

 

It's kinda stupid I guess, but it's basically how you weed out the sissies. By the end of my time in undergrad I felt like everyone who was left was as capable as I was to a man.

[Shirtless Crackhead]

Something occurred to me, the State of Danger needs something...

 

STEALTH LUNAR SPEARS