Making ACs a Reality

[Tsuranga]

Yeah it's kinda sad being in engineering school and really understanding the unfeasible technology of many sci-fi techs like the ships in starwars, mechas and whatnot. But it at least lets me appreciate that what I am driving is already the most advanced technology we can make with this universe's materials.

 

And btw all this talk about faster, stronger robots and shit than humans is bullocks. We are the most efficient bipedal machines. Like humans can invent something in a couple hundred years that is greater than what evolution invented in millions.

Edited March 2, 2012 by Tsuranga

[BerserkFury]

Stop living in Final Fantasy Land thinking that everything that is technically possible is economically and combat efficient just because it sounds cool because it came from a video game.

clearly youre not reading, man! Im trying to detach my self and this discussion from the game as much as possible. The game's robots only serve as inspiration to that which could be.

[Falco]

I talked about things being "technically possible and economically and combat efficient" which AC's are clearly not, so that won't happen.

 

 

But if it did happen, I would like to drive one into my garage and take its head out and replace it with a convertible red american muscle car. That would be a good AC.

[Exorcet]

How can it not be realistically obtained? The howitzer capabilities I mean. And as for the weight, its relatively light so thats where Im getting the number but its an approximation like I said.

But how is it that youre studying to become an engineer but make all of this impossible talk. Its like defeating the purpose of becoming an engineer because thats what they do: make the impossible, possible. There is always a way you just gotta find it.

 

The Howitzer part can be done, but nothing else. It's not going to be 4000 lbs, it's not going to go 500 mph, or even 100 for that matter. And if it could, what does it have over an Apache anyway?

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0yFc-ozoqnA

 

I became an engineer because I wanted to design planes. Along the way, I learned how to do aerodynamics for race cars as well. It's pretty good fun. One big part of engineering though it know what is and isn't possible. If you don't know about them already, you'll soon find out about the laws of thermodynamics. They're just one of the many sets of things that limit what we can physically do. As an engineer, one of your jobs will be to decide what is possible and what isn't. Right now, mechs seems like its part of the "isn't" category.

 

Another thing an engineer does is justify the numbers he comes up with. I'm now working on a design project where the goal is coming up with something that can do missions that the U-2 and Global Hawk spy planes cannot. To get a weight estimate took me and a team of a dozen other people 2 weeks and a few hours in MATLAB writing up code. If you want to throw that 4000 weight number around, even as an estimate, you should have some math to back it up.

 

 

By the way, if you think mechs are a good idea, go for it. As long as you can justify your decisions, you could very well be correct. I'll gladly help out, but only if I think it's reasonable.

 

If you really want to pursue this, think long and hard about what a mech can do that nothing else can. Until you have that, this whole thread makes no sense.

Edited March 2, 2012 by Exorcet

[KORTOKtheSTRONG]

ACs would just fall over.

[BerserkFury]

ACs would just fall over.

you're right haha! But we'd just implement an algorithm to make it get back up.

 

 

The Howitzer part can be done, but nothing else. It's not going to be 4000 lbs, it's not going to go 500 mph, or even 100 for that matter. And if it could, what does it have over an Apache anyway?

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0yFc-ozoqnA

 

I became an engineer because I wanted to design planes. Along the way, I learned how to do aerodynamics for race cars as well. It's pretty good fun. One big part of engineering though it know what is and isn't possible. If you don't know about them already, you'll soon find out about the laws of thermodynamics. They're just one of the many sets of things that limit what we can physically do. As an engineer, one of your jobs will be to decide what is possible and what isn't. Right now, mechs seems like its part of the "isn't" category.

 

Another thing an engineer does is justify the numbers he comes up with. I'm now working on a design project where the goal is coming up with something that can do missions that the U-2 and Global Hawk spy planes cannot. To get a weight estimate took me and a team of a dozen other people 2 weeks and a few hours in MATLAB writing up code. If you want to throw that 4000 weight number around, even as an estimate, you should have some math to back it up.

 

 

By the way, if you think mechs are a good idea, good for it. As long as you can justify your decisions, you could very well be correct. I'll gladly help out, but only if I think it's reasonable.

 

If you really want to pursue this, think long and hard about what a mech can do that nothing else can. Until you have that, this whole thread makes no sense.

 

What it would have over an Apache? the ability to operate on the ground as well as the air. See, to make things clear, a mech would try to fit in between the roles of tanks and helicopters because competing with fighters is just a whole other level seeing that fighters are best suited for very specific tasks while tanks and helicopters are more versatile.

 

But yeah, the weight is really just something I threw in based on strategic logic, no numbers involved. Im gonna make a document and compile all the information that I can on this subject to further justify my model. Gonna throw in calculations too because I previously mentioned powering it vie tank engines and those weigh approx. 2,500lbs so 4,000 is really unjustifiable at this point.

[Exorcet]

What it would have over an Apache? the ability to operate on the ground as well as the air. See, to make things clear, a mech would try to fit in between the roles of tanks and helicopters because competing with fighters is just a whole other level seeing that fighters are best suited for very specific tasks while tanks and helicopters are more versatile.

 

"Being on the ground" isn't really an advantage though. How does that make it a more effective weapon? Attack Helicopters can already fly at basically zero altitude. It's a common tactic to fly low and hide behind trees, then lob some missiles onto tanks sitting on the other side of the trees.

 

Filling the role between tanks and helicopters might be something, but is there even a gap there to begin with? Tanks and helicopters already kind of overlap. You can use both to destroy enemy tanks, facilities, or personel. Both of them are fairly rugged. The helicopter is faster, but also more expensive (I think, don't quote me on that). Based on that, the only thing you might be able to do with a mech is make it cost less than a helicopter, but have nearly the same mobility. Given that an AC wouldn't have rotor blades, which are much more efficient than jet propulsion at low speed, this seems extremely difficult. Also, you could just make a cheaper helicopter.

 

Im gonna make a document and compile all the information that I can on this subject to further justify my model. Gonna throw in calculations too

 

Well that's a start. But don't forget, the most important thing is going to be finding a purpose for building the thing at all.

[BerserkFury]

The purpose is literally too grand to explain in a thread that can be viewed by such weak minded individuals. Lets leave it at that. But yeah, I already started on the doc and will be working on it all day Friday. (no class)

[Bakuhatsu Pengin]

your high horse certainly is very high boobfury guy

 

so why not enlighten us with your grand purpose that you supposedly proposed

[Shirtless Crackhead]

What it would have over an Apache? the ability to operate on the ground as well as the air. See, to make things clear, a mech would try to fit in between the roles of tanks and helicopters because competing with fighters is just a whole other level seeing that fighters are best suited for very specific tasks while tanks and helicopters are more versatile.

 

But yeah, the weight is really just something I threw in based on strategic logic, no numbers involved. Im gonna make a document and compile all the information that I can on this subject to further justify my model. Gonna throw in calculations too because I previously mentioned powering it vie tank engines and those weigh approx. 2,500lbs so 4,000 is really unjustifiable at this point.

 

The Apache's strength is that it's in the air, giving it a greater vantage point, making it hard to hit, which is why it doesn't have to be armored like a tank, because it's a fast and maneuverable helicopter, and it's not a mobile piece of artillery; it has 70mm rockets, hellfire missiles, and a 30mm chaingun. Tanks strength is that on the ground they can run through just about anything that isn't a dedicated system designed to beat tanks, which is easily nullified by the supplementary infantry forces. Tanks usability on the ground, however, is entirely dictated by terrain, the M1 Abrams is not a viable option for moving in the mountains of Afghanistan.

 

An M1 Abrams weights ~90 tons when loaded up, and top out at 65mph. Now that's with a locomotion system based on treads. Mechanical legs are VASTLY less efficient, so you are going to get a fraction of that maneuverability. AC's can very well fall over, and algorithms aren't going to do shit, you need gyroscopics and ground mapping sensors, and that still doesn't mean shit if it gets hit by a tank shell.

 

Howitzers are not close-range weapons, they are kept far from the front-line of combat, because they are not intended to drudge though the trenches, as it where. They are usually miles away, providing fire support. So if you think you are going to have similar firepower to a 155mm artillery piece, I have more bad news for you.

 

You also think something can do ground and air roles? Holy shit kid do you have any idea how idiotic that is?

 

You want to build a robot that's tough enough and has enough firepower to handle ground combat, while still being able to stuff in enough shit to get it to fly; which requires a massive system of engines, and even more fuel. Not to mention you'd be basically flying a floppy brick through the air, so you'd immediately get shot down by jets or helicopters.

 

Take your ass out of fantasy land, and come back to reality.

[Pendragon]

They'd be cool, but they sadly won't be as efficient as simply nuking everyone.

 

It's a pity.

[Mom]

They can fly easily, just use unobtanium for their arms.

[Red Shirt (Grayscale)]

Berserk, this should stop you from whining. http://gigazine.net/...110907_kuratas/

 

And, look, it's still on wheels. It'd be nice if Japan would actually use that as some sort of police car though. Also, keep in mind that today's weapons were made to destroy all opposition with the least casualties. Mechs on the other hand, were made to be destroyed and entertain people while having maximized casualties.

[Shirtless Crackhead]

If there's one thing the Japanese suck at making, it's weapons.

[YUNG MASTERLESS GLENCOUR]

I dunno man katanas are pretty marvelous weapons. They made pretty good spears and bows, too.

 

I really wish I had my final project from college still. The unmanned stealth UCAV we designed. It'd have been super useful for explaining stuff here.

 

I'm asking around to see if anyone has it still, I'll post it if I find it. Well, post a link to it anyhow.

[█␢█]

that can be viewed by such weak minded individuals.

Really, bro? You ran out of things to say instead of "I just know it's going to be great and revolutionize warfare (but I don't know what it is, or how it's going to do it)" so you resorted to this?

[Shirtless Crackhead]

I meant modern weapons.

[YUNG MASTERLESS GLENCOUR]

Oh then yeah fk them.

[Wong]

This is probably the closest thing to an AC we will get, a Robotic Exoskeleton. I don't care for it, personally.

 

Objectively, small robots that can infiltrate buildings or do surveillance are great.

[Harakiri Tiger]

Soon Bubblegum Crisis will be real, then Gundam.

[Shirtless Crackhead]

Nah, it's easier and cheaper to use forklifts and more man power.

 

This stuff is just making stabs in the dark for research grants.

[YUNG MASTERLESS GLENCOUR]

Objectively, small robots that can infiltrate buildings or do surveillance are great.

 

Yup and that's why we have stuff like that. Unfortunately (for some people anyhow) they are not ACs.

[Mom]

ACs keep getting smaller and smaller with every new game. I'm telling you by AC8 we'll have 3foot tall robots, and it will be the best game yet. Imagine playing a cover game hiding under an office desk!

[Shirtless Crackhead]

Or better yet, a wheelbarrow.

[YUNG MASTERLESS GLENCOUR]

AC9 is going to be Toy Story 4 huh?

 

http://files-cdn.formspring.me/photos/20111222/n4ef3027407dab.jpg