Making ACs a Reality

[Shirtless Crackhead]

Ganymede is pretty gay, not gonna lie.

[YUNG MASTERLESS GLENCOUR]

im sayin tho

[Py687]

Further Info

 

edit jfkdlshgielsw

Edited January 26, 2015 by Siri

[YUNG MASTERLESS GLENCOUR]

ugh

[Nomrah]

Get in the cockpit!

[Py687]

http://i.imgur.com/4MwNmfm.jpg

[YUNG MASTERLESS GLENCOUR]

the chick in the video was fine tho

[Rixlen]

http://www.popularairsoft.com/files/imagesnew/megabots.jpg

[Nomrah]

http://i.imgur.com/Rk580Wr.jpg

[YUNG MASTERLESS GLENCOUR]

now we're talking

 

finally a good robot pic

[Shirtless Crackhead]

RIP in peppers battlebots.

[Not-Hunter]

That was the coolest thing ever as like, a fourteen year-old. Now, the lego version seems much cooler for some reason.

[Plus Escapee]

I don't think that the questions asked in the OP are destined to do anything but gather stark opposition.

 

I think a better question to ask would be CAN it be done and not SHOULD it be done.

 

So, I will posit that question; CAN it be done?

 

In the game environment, even in AC4/AC4a, the game does not showcase the awesome power that our modern military has, but it does make one ask questions about what technology is capable of doing, and what would an AC using real-world technology end up being like? The answer; a real world AC would be much faster, would have weaponry with much greater range, would rely on agility and countermeasures to avoid taking damage rather than armor, and would not be practical by any means unless it featured an edge over current technology. In other words, today is not a good day to make an AC, but it's a good day for prototypes and wishful thinking.

 

So, the most interesting feature of the Armored Core for me is it's power system. It's the one component of the machine that modern technology has trouble explaining. How do these robots produce the energy, thrust, and continuous activation of their propulsion systems? What is used as fuel? How many continuous hours can an AC unit operate before it needs a refuel? This system must be able to both emit thrust and power the electronics of the AC, which limits the candidates for power supply/generation.

 

I can make some guesses as to what an AC does NOT use as a power source, but I'm not a trained scientist in any field so I can only guess. We need to narrow down what sort of power plant produces electricity and thrust for the AC platform.

 

Nuclear power doesn't seem viable from what I know. Even though a sub-marine uses a nuclear core roughly the size of a golf ball, the power plant in total is massive, and a power source like that would not offer itself well to a propulsion/booster system like the one seen on an AC since the nuclear plant is based on steam. Although any organization who deploys an AC would likely not give two shits if their hired assassin failed to complete their mission, thereby leaving a smoking nuclear disaster at the doorstep of their enemy, having a nuclear dog-fighting platform is a huge liability when the enemy brings the fight to you. So, although there might be an alternative type of nuclear engine that is more compact and doesn't create as much fallout if destroyed, the nuclear power as we understand it now that uses plutonium and uranium 235 is not viable for AC technology.

 

Alternate forms of nuclear engine might be viable in the near future, but as of now our nuclear technology is in a very early stage of development, similar to when fire arms consisted of jamming black powder into a crude tube of steel hundreds of years ago. Nuclear power as of now is too unrefined.

 

Gasoline turbines might be able to do the job as far as thrust and basic electrical supply, but there are a couple issues. First, gasoline turbines devour fuel very quickly. Second, the AC requires a massive amount of power, even the early generation games featured defense ratings against both conventional projectiles (shell) and super-heated particles (energy) that suggest a sort of force-field factor, and laser weaponry that would demand massive amounts of voltage to operate. While gas turbines are proven to provide enough energy for perhaps a small array of laser weapons or a prototype force-field generator as already seen in some modern experimental aircraft, can the gas turbine offer the power needed for a beast like an AC? While the modern F-22 has cruise speeds that are beyond sound, the AC is not an aerodynamic design yet still seems to compare in cruise speed as of it's 4th generation game incarnation. I have doubts that the gas turbine meets the demands for a real AC. Perhaps a specialized fuel, or special undeveloped "unobtanium" metals could produce a turbine that could meet or exceed the demands of an AC, but just as today's nuclear plants fall short, the viability of the gas turbine, although more viable than current nuclear, may require more advancement in technology.

 

Oh but there's one other thing that, like gas turbines, looks like it comes close to a solution if not meeting it entirely. Perhaps a miniature version of the VASIMR technology would offer both power supply and sustained thrust for an AC unit, but like the previous two candidates for a power source, VASIMR engines are a new thing. Dr. Franklin Chang Diaz and his company are working with NASA on the VASIMR engine, and the engines built so far are named in ways that remind me of the conventions used for parts in Armored Core. Doesn't VX-200SS sounds like a badass booster from Armored Core? Well, it's real. Look it up.

[YUNG MASTERLESS GLENCOUR]

if you get a chance read thru the topic, we actually covered that too

 

that could be a big problem tho given its 25 fucking pages

 

man how did this go 25 pages

 

thats depressing

 

I met chang diaz, good guy

[Plus Escapee]

Well, the big problem with this thread is that the first two pages are extremely discouraging, and don't lend well to entertainment, so given the tone set on the first two pages, I assumed you guys were just a bunch of smoopy naysayers without imagination. Sorry for the quick assumption, if what you say is true I might dig through this thread to see what was said, especially if you guys eventually came around to talking about potential future nuclear technology and VASIMR thrusters.

[YUNG MASTERLESS GLENCOUR]

I dont know what smoopy means

 

i don't think its fair to say i lack imagination, especially considering my field is stuff like this (as well as the case with two other ppl who were posting in this thread)

 

well, was, i just fix commercial aircraft now

[Plus Escapee]

i don't think its fair to say i lack imagination, especially considering my field is stuff like this (as well as the case with two other ppl who were posting in this thread)

 

My comment wasn't aimed at anyone specifically. As the saying goes, "only the offenders should be offended." So if it doesn't apply to you, don't take it personally.

 

A smoopy is a small poopy. You may now palm your face.

[Bakuhatsu Pengin]

no

[Plus Escapee]

no

Awesome response. I'll do it for you.

 

http://static.fjcdn.com/pictures/Peekaboo_3ef209_640992.jpg

[Shirtless Crackhead]

Read the thread.

 

tl;dr, No

[Rixlen]

I'll make this easy for you.

 

I can make some guesses as to what an AC does NOT use as a power source, but I'm not a trained scientist in any field so I can only guess.

 

The engineers on the site are saying no. There's really no point in speculation.

The world can't even produce a decent current gen mech video game. I say tackle that hurdle first.

[Shirtless Crackhead]

The whole concept is fucking bunk.

 

Since people don't want to read the thread, I'll summarize it.

 

#1. ACs provides nothing that aircraft and ground vehicles don't already.

#2. ACs require technology that doesn't exist yet, said technology will increase the potential of aforementioned platforms in the same ways it would make ACs technologically 'possible'.

#3. They would be prohibitively costly, both in the physical construction, but then also the maintenance and logistics of keeping it supplied with fuel, ammo, and spare parts.

#4. They are incapable of either the armor of tanks or the maneuverability of aircraft.

#5. Wonder Armor = Wonder Weapons, so they don't get magical impregnable armor anymore than anything else does; and there's always going to be a way to penetrate said armor.

#6. On the ground, biped or quadruped styled mechanical locomotion simply isn't effective for moving anything seriously heavy; which weapons, armor, ammo, fuel, etc.. all are.

#7. Why the fuck would you build a humanoid upper body on a tank, so don't even try that one.

#8. Thinks that articulate are weak points, so consider that before you start yapping off about the "advantages" of arms/heads/etc..

 

It's not that they cannot be built, frankly they could be built with developments in technology.

 

The problem is you'd have to be goddamn retarded to put money into them as serious WEAPONS OR WEAPONS PLATFORMS.

 

Before anyone of you mechasexual autists respond, consider the following questions.

 

-What would an "AC" provide on the ground that a tank would not?

-What would an "AC" provide in the air that an aircraft would not?

 

Remember, you don't get to magically say ACs get X/Y/Z technologies and nothing else does, that's not how REALITY works.

Edited May 1, 2015 by Turd Ferguson

[Ataraxis]

The first two pages are good idk why you'd wanna stop there. Worth the read all the way through.

 

ACs would just fall over.

 

Legendary quote.

[The Talentless]

Ten years from now someone new will join, find this topic, and put in their two cents. And then Raor will tell them how they are incorrect.

 

It keeps happening.

[YUNG MASTERLESS GLENCOUR]

thats like 22-23 of the pages, yeah