Humans are more reliable than AI. They can pilot a mecha that is more human like than an AI can, because they know how the human body moves and reacts.
Sure an AI would have better reactions, but assuming it was controlled similar to how a drone was, there would be a slight latency delay, their programming could easily fail, you could attack the wrong target, technology can be hacked, etc.
The original Gundams Mechas were nothing more than fancy walking tanks (like they are in MGS). They even mention that carpet bombing them was highly effective way of dealing with them, but now it's become about Mechas being the ultimate war machine.
I didn't say AI. I said operated remotely. When they send drones into Afghanistan they're not piloted by AI, but by some Air Force pilot strapped into an arcade machine somewhere in New Mexico or Nevada.
>>115205178 Fairly certain this was also addressed in Gundam Wing. Can't recall the reasoning but I think it was something like having a human-like vehicle and a human-like target makes soldiers more "battle hungry".
Again, rockets will make it way more mobile and energy efficient than legs.
This is the only mecha like thing I've ever scene that makes sense. I think they also have fire rescue and hazard zone rescue robots that are controlled remotely, but I don't think those are really mecha.
The only time mecha make sense is when there's magic involved, like EVA (and yes, its basically magic).
>>115205668 Planes are an actual thing in the original Gundams, as were tanks. >>115205953 Mecha exist in Gundam because they have the energy provided due to Minovsky particles to sustain a walking tank. A reason for a tank with legs is solely so it can traverse more variety of terrain as opposed to just strapping on more weaponry. A tank with legs could go into far different places than a normal tank could get into. Even then they still had tanks in the original Gundams that were able to damage Gundams to an extent, and planes that could absolutely destroy Gundams.
As for mechs in real life, Japan has that big ass mech that looks like a silver loading docker from Alien. The reason we don't have mechs is solely because we haven't figured out how to make them actually move like humans or to sustain so much weight when traveling. If we had the energy and the intelligence for it, you'd have metal gears and zetas running around all over the place.
>>115205075 Latency. Do you think our drones are controlled like some guy sitting somewhere like a videogame? It takes forever until the command arrives if the thing it's on the other side of the world. They give it a command and then the AI does it's thing and has the chance to press a no button shortly before the thing shoots its missile. It works against buildings but as soon as you have to fight a thing as fast as you it's impossible.
>the reason we don't have mechs is solely because we haven't figured out how to make them actually move like humans or to sustain so much weight when traveling
There's literally NO REASON to even bother with this. You can get better and more mobility with rockets using less energy than you ever could with human appendages. Most of the "mecha" the Japs have built are for use in emergency rescue or firefighting, not fighting in wars. Making them for that would be like trying to develop a spaceship with a sail that picked up solar waves or some other bullshit to move instead of rockets but cost 10x as much to build as conventional spaceships and only lasted a 1/10 of the time before becoming useless - simply because it looked cool to have a spaceship with a sail.
The delay is two seconds. And that's with our current level of technology. I have a much easier time suspending my disbelief that they improve latency than that they could ever make a mecha practical in the first place.
>>115206688 But solar sails>rocket simply because the fuel won't run out as long as tge sun exists. And you can't fly through narrow spaces with them. Also rockets aren't efficient at all. A lot of energy goes to waste for the heat. Animals have limbs for movement because it's the most efficient way to move through all kinds of terrain.
The reason is much much simpler. Storytelling. It's more personal with the character inside the battle. And the mechas are humanshape because they're supposed to be seen as characters too, not simple war marchines.
>>115206161 >The reason we don't have mechs is That they don't make sense, from a tactical perspective. They are larger targets, barely maneuverable because they need to balance their huge weight on little leg-sticks, have inferior armor in general and seriously exposed weaknesses in particular and are generally a waste of resources.
Some major reasons that soldiers will always be on the battlefield (and subsequently pilots of anything will always be needed) jamming technologies can make remote operation impossible, as well as allow the enemy to hack them. Also, remote operations have a greater time lag (although often not noticed) that can make the difference between victory and defeat than direct operations. For a situation like rescuing people from a burning building in a situation, where there is no conflict mind you, it is perfect to have remote operated machines since no one is likely to jam them. Also, jamming and anti jamming technology is constantly evolving, so even if there is a period where jam technology is all blocked something new comes out shortly after. Basically, having someone there makes sure that the machine keeps working and by preventing a remote operation it prevents hacking and turning it against you, which is why they would likely also keep the communications system separated from the operations system, and not even on the same hard network, with no wireless network for the operations system. I could go on and on, but there are many many reasons.
>>115208667 Wait, wait. Not the same guy, but >evolution isn't perfect >legs are not perfect Is meant to imply that evolution could have done better in that regard? Do you think that various bipedal and quadrupedal animals might be better off with treads as opposed to legs?
If so, that's taking your argument about military hardware to a rather bizarre extreme.
>>115209020 Animals have a completely different set of requirements.
A machine designed for war must take into account durability (because they'll be under fire), maintenance (because there will be lots of damage) and other things. Legs suck at durability and maintenance. They also suck at carrying dozens to hundreds of tons of a vehicle at fast speeds. They might be able to slowly accelerate to such speeds on flat and very hard terrain, but you can't expect any of the quick maneuvers you see in anime. They'd very simply be crushed by the weight.
I'm guessing if both sides just piloted drone suits then someone would eventually target drone control centers to wipe out large swathes of enemies, create jamming devices that lead to instant victories, or engage heavily in cyber warfare.
>>115210853 Good luck driving through this with an offroad jeep. We're just shit at making legged vehicles because the balancing and running and shit is too hard to program. That's why big dog is such a huge deal.
>>115210949 If you are looking for real maneuverability, get yourself some helicopters. Those are actually agile, and can move across pretty much any terrain. They also serve a real purpose on the battlefield, beyond serving as big and expensive targets.
>>115211073 >How is it not much easier? Unless you build your mecha on the complexity level of a human leg, it will get suck and never get through. If you build your mecha on that level of complexity, it will be fucking useless in combat. It will also break down constantly and need lots of maintenance. The beauty of the tank tracks is that they are so simple and yet so useful.
>>115211229 >turn direction That's easier with wheels than with legs. Driving backwards in particular is trivial compared to walking backwards. A lot of things also depend on the suspension. Your car can jump if the suspension is just good enough.
>>115211318 >That's easier with wheels than with legs. You need to stop and turn if you're in a car or tank or do a big curve. With legs you can simply put the next foot in the other direction. And walking backwards is just as trivial. We're just afraid to trip because we can't see behind us. And there is no need to walk backwards in the first place when you can just turn around immediately. >Your car can jump if the suspension is just good enough. Now that's just silly I don't even know what we're arguing about anymore.
>>115211378 Balls, Saberfish and the like did a good job at that. A MS can't aim any better or cover a wider arc. Legs in space were pretty much just for show. You can use melee weapons and attacks without a humanoid shape.
>>115211503 >You don't wear the metal plates yourself either when you drive a tank. Did you know that a different word for tank is armor? When driving a tank you are literally inside your armor. When piloting a mech, the mech would realistically also be cumbered by its armor. >You put all the weaponry and armor somewhere where it doesn't impede movement. You leave it behind?
>>115211460 >Your car can jump if the suspension is just good enough. >Now that's just silly
So is the idea of a mech being able to jump. We're considering this being heavily amoured to withstand the same damage a tank can and still operate, a ridiculous proposition in the first place as the amount of moving parts to make the legs work would make it heavily susceptible to damage, any attempt at jumping with crush it's legs under it's own weight. Any attempt to make it lighter would just make it more damageable.
>>115211540 You put the fat armor on places that don't need to move as much, like chest and back that are also the most likely place to get shot. And on places that do have joints you mold the armor to fit the range of the joint.
Knights in plate armor from the middle ages were pretty agile as well, despite the armor, because it was made to fit their movement.
>>115211639 >Knights in plate armor from the middle ages were pretty agile as well, despite the armor, because it was made to fit their movement. So you feel confident about running and leaping around in that picture in full plate mail?
>>115211674 Yeah. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WMuNXWFPewg All it really does is make you heavier so you have to get used and train for that and harder to see around you if you have a full visor helmet. It doesn't really hurt movement range that much.
>>115211778 Now think about why you can do that and why it's difficult to apply to a scaled up mechanism. And then think about what sort of stuff you could do with wheels or tracks if you just added enough complexity.
>>115212072 >>plate armor >>30-50kg Plate armor was introduced only to give one example of what humans might strap to themselves. We have already established that large bipedal robots would have a lot of trouble with their weight.
>That's merely a problem of physical training. You are likely to slip, and when you are headed downwards, the unusual weight is effectively multiplied and puts a lot of stress on your joints and muscles when you try to break your fall.
>>115212165 That doesn't have anything to do with legs vs wheels though, just giant human robots not working in our world because square cube is a bitch. Legged vehicles don't have to be giant human robots.
>>115211639 >You put the fat armor on places that don't need to move as much, like chest and back that are also the most likely place to get shot. And on places that do have joints you mold the armor to fit the range of the joint. A mecha wouldn't need to be concerned with blocking its links too much, since it wouldn't even have most of them.
>>115212259 >That doesn't have anything to do with legs vs wheels though, just giant human robots not working in our world because square cube is a bitch. I wasn't arguing in the favor of wheels in general.
>Legged vehicles don't have to be giant human robots. If you want to compare wheels vs legs, I guess you'd need biological wheels or advanced robotic legs. The current advantage of legs is that they are part of a highly complex system of joints and other stuff. >>115212138 You wouldn't necessarily go that far, but it'd certainly be wheels that are not as fixated in their positions as you are used to, and they'd probably be able to shift their form too, going from circular to elliptic, and maybe even changing their size.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at email@example.com with the post's information.