I know mechas are not practical in battle due to cost, and being

>>33731118
What can this do, that a dirt bike or ATV can't?

>>33731118

Don't think it's really any better than a tank, or a plane. And it's surely more expensive

>>33731127
It's
BIPEDAL
I
P
E
D
A
L

>>33731127
Be foiled by teddy bears.

File: download.png (4KB, 225x225px)

4KB, 225x225px

>>33731145
What did he mean by this?

>>33731127
Strafe
Traverse uneven terrain
Jump(?)
And all while provided less rider protection, somehow

>>33731145
Seriously, thats my question. Is a bipedal personal vehicle worth using in tight spaces, uneven terrain if the technology for making it stable and reliable gets developed?

AT-RT
LE E R
LR C A
R O N
A N S
I P
N O
R
T

>>33731153
AT-RTs can't strafe or jump and on terrain that you need a walker you should probably dismount anyways.
>>33731180
They can be used as unmanned weapons/ruck carriers.

>>33731183
What the fuck happened my post is now an aborted fetus whose mother changed her mind at the last minute but it was too late

File: mgsv-pp-D-Walker.jpg (354KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

354KB, 1920x1080px

Maybe this?

>>33731198
Better off unmanned

You mean the ones that you can take out super easily in TPP or the equally shitty star wars version?

>>33731189
>AT-RTs can't strafe or jump
They're excellent jumpers and good at strafeing, dude? You see packs of them destroying heavy tanks in TCW

>>33731270
I honestly don't remember that much from TCW. I remember them jumping and shit on Ryloth but I don't remember side to side strafing.

File: 8f98ed4fc36e1b57fd082c99e93a1189.jpg (57KB, 451x599px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 451x599px

>>33731118
*carries your rucksack

>>33731303
In the Umbara arc they almost act animal

>>33731316
Why not just a wheeled buggy?

>>33731198
Nah, you can eavesdrop on two soldiers having a conversation about these things in game. One of them says they're pretty cool, but they absolutely destroy your knees. Maybe once we figure out cyborg knees, but we'll probably have figured out cyborg everything else by that point too, so we can just have individual soldiers carry the heavy weapons that you would mount on that thing.

>>33731415
Better over rough terrain?

File: blade wolf ver 0.5.gif (1MB, 320x180px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 320x180px

>>33731415
Because memes, Jack.

>>33731430
What type of rough terrain you going over?
Pretty much only scree or particularly rough moraine would stop a wheeled vehicle

Not to mention that swamp or soggy terrain would fuck you limbed vehicle.

File: tumblr_oom1xea0411ryv6tlo1_500.gif (537KB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

537KB, 500x281px

>>33731464
legs might help if you're moving over mountains maybe. lots of 45+ degree slopes and loose rocks/ gravel

>>33731127
Stomp ur cunt

>implying it's just a matter of cost and target profile
There should be a copy pasta for responding to these threads, I'm getting tired of telling people why tracks shall always be better than legs.

>>33732296
fuq ya got me!

>>33732305
I thought it wasnt done yet because something like it hasnt been developed yet, but I think it could work better in mountains, urban tight streets or in forests/jungles where passing with a vehicle is harder due to the limited space, which having a d-walker or AT-RT could pass through easily.
But any reasons why my ideais retarded is cool.

>>33731118
why ask people here on /k/ what#s viable on the battle field most are ether fat nerds that haven't been outside and smell and don't own guns or own guns and smell bad and are over weight or are ex mili but dumb as fuck

hell if you it was the grunts idea to develop shit for the militery would would just have fater loading muskets and faster horses

>>33731127
Carry heavy weapon systems and be an armored shock vehicle in hilly forest terrain. Other than that I have no idea where it would be an advantage

File: LIKE THE GOOD OL DAYS AFTER 9:11.webm (3MB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 640x480px

So when are we gonna start throwing the brains of mortally injured soldiers into bipedal combat chassis for some serious cyborg operating?

>>33731415
verticality

>>33732755
>another mecha thread on /k/
>no u /k/ knows nothing about weaponry and warfare unlike mature intelligent euphoric gentlemen such as myself
what, you trying to impress your robots before you fuck it?

File: DTR.png (140KB, 540x304px) Image search: [Google]

140KB, 540x304px

>>33731198
DTR

>>33731422
>One of them says they're pretty cool, but they absolutely destroy your knees
Maybe add a small saddle?

File: 1480371479466.jpg (12KB, 300x181px)

12KB, 300x181px

EVEN IN DEATH, I STILL SERVE

File: even_in_death__i_still_serve_by_rub_a_duckie.jpg (683KB, 688x1044px) Image search: [Google]

683KB, 688x1044px

>>33737680
>>33734806
LET NONE FIND US WANTING

>>33732624
Let me see if I remember all the points that come into play here.

Vastly more expensive
Vastly more fragile
Much more complicated to maintain and repair
Dust
Worthless in soft terrain
Balance changes from non-issue to "issue"
Profile

We're bending over backwards to come up with scenarios and justifications for bipeds really for their own sake, starting at "we want war mechs" and working backwards from there. The arguments for them are similar to arguments for giving infantry jetpacks. The advantages sound great until they hit the real world.

Anyone seen this yet?

https://youtu.be/5YDIzeW42hg

Still think BDs "handle" is GOAT. Been saying for a while legs rock, feet suck. Make robots skate. The linked bot is meant to be cheap and mass produced. They will be office supply surplus inside ten years like fax machines 10 years ago.

>>33737953
Oh, I almost forgot weaponry. Squat, heavy METAL BAWKSES can handle tremendous recoil. A high, fulcrum-shaped walking mech will be relegated to much lighter armaments, unless you want lessons in pratfalls and backflips.

>>33731127
walk in the everglades

>>33731118
>small biped walkers
Cute!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Is4JZqhAy-M

File: 17030-cassie-agile-robots-mn-1125_df68eedbbe694d761c1863d72f22719c.nbcnews-fp-360-360.jpg (21KB, 360x360px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 360x360px

>>33738476

Right? Linked a vid of it earlier and forgot pic.

>>33738542
Now it needs Five-seven pistol strapped to the "head".

>>33738577
And a 40 mm launcher underslung between legs (logical balance point).

>>33731118
It's the same fucking thing. Mechs are walker vehicles. All walker vehicles are mechs.

The only exception are oddball frankenstein combinations where the upper half of a humanoid design is intentionally or makeshift-ly mated to a tracked or wheeled or some other lower movement platform, in which case it is still a mech.

File: 8ab651890-1.jpg (21KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 480x360px

>>33738476
You know they move on their own right.

>>33738656
I fear it would be BTFO by 40 mm recoil.

>>33731183
What mean this? Is English?

>>33731145
I could go even further and call it a Bipedophile

>>33738694
bullshit

File: gondola[1].png (5KB, 640x480px)

5KB, 640x480px

>>33738542
>>33738682

>>33738694
Voice command "red rocket" accepted, weapon armed.

>>33731316
Didn't that thing got shitcanned due to it still needing a running gasoline engige and thus being way too loud?

File: dtoi7KhzQAWV.jpg (28KB, 609x360px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 609x360px

>>33738785
Its still around with fuel cells. The real attention is on this guy here.
Wheels>feet

>>33738813
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G7uZfrdtpY0

>>33738813
Wheels alone are poor at handling anything other than flat ground. Experiments still work in baby steps.

The ideal are proper clawed or "toed" feet with wheels. Highest possible mobility in all kinds of situations.

File: 1457382448396.jpg (79KB, 1366x768px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 1366x768px

>>33737680
>>33737745
FAITH AND FURY GIVEN FORM

>>33731118
Those things would be useless. Practically no protection for the driver, looks super fragile, that high profile wouldn't be doing it any favor for recon and wheeled vehicles are faster. Also honestly a flat foot bipedal mech isn't going to do well in traversing various types of terrain, it'll be better to just get out an walk and if say it somehow flips to its side you're not gonna be able to flip it back up on its feet and get it going again as oppose to an atv or 4 wheel vehicle flipping

>>33738542
That thing is small enough for jump jets. Or better yet a detachable quad copter backpack. Imagine the scouting capabilities.
Airborn deployable boots on the ground with personal eye in the sky.

>>33731118
Maintenance nightmare.

Also unsuited for any kind of soft or unstable ground. Only has 2 points of ground contact, which becomes 1 when it's moving. Weight distribution is a thing.

Then there's the tripping factor. A wheeled or tracked vehicle is stable if it loses a wheel or track. A bipedal design will fall if it loses a leg. So now you have the possibility of a dead/injured rider on top of the mechanical breakdown.

Height is a serious disadvantage. Your 9 foot tall mechanical ostrich is going to become everybody's favorite target. The rider will not like that, nor will any friendly ground forces in the vicinity.

It offers no advantages, while bringing some very real tactical and economic disadvantages.

>>33732755
>fater loading muskets and faster horses

So, in other words, M-4s and humvees.

Star Wars vehicles were made using the rule of cool, they were never meant to be practical or look practical. The best example of this would be the AT AT. It looks cool but it's a terrible, awful design. (Pls don't kill me emperor saltine)

File: 6C9F5FD3-1FF6-42BA-82D2-3352B502FCAD-7279-0000073A07FD3C58.jpg (236KB, 1785x1745px) Image search: [Google]

236KB, 1785x1745px

Ops forgot the image

Bipedal robots will honestly never be viable. If you want it to be a ground vehicle, tires or tracks will be better. If you want it in the air, something like a drone will be better. It's just a fucking stupid idea.

>inb4 future undiscovered super tough super light handwavium material
>inb4 us has too much military funding sitting around might as well make robot
>inb4 just leave it to scientists to figure it out none of us know anything about robotics
>inb4 bipedal can jump and run and dash at incredible hihg speed and teleport behind tanks
Oh wait, I am not on /m/, never mind.

>>33739144
>Also unsuited for any kind of soft or unstable ground. Only has 2 points of ground contact, which becomes 1 when it's moving. Weight distribution is a thing.
lmao clearly all soldiers should have their legs amputated and they go to war in powered wheelchairs

>>33738696
All Terrain Recon Transport

>>33731127
Block your path

>>33738542
That thing is adorable.
Strap on an smg and it'll be the ultimate battle buddy.

>>33739563
We have the technology to make him faster, stronger, more tanky.

https://youtu.be/Qnrcr-rOcuw

>>33731183
>>33731183
Allrainrt?
LEER?
Teronpo?
Ron-Ans?

...

/W H A T D I D H E M E A N B Y T H I S /?

>>33738361
> A high, fulcrum-shaped walking mech will be relegated to much lighter armaments
meh. with good enough sensors it could literally, and I do mean literally, jump before firing, adjust and fire at the tip top of its ballistic arc (zero gravity, ~zero velocity) then be pushed back by recoil and land on its feetses

but seriously, I want to play devil's advocate here: the legs need not present an attack surface bigger than tank treads, the legs can fold up spider-like if you want to sit still, the legs carry you where nothing else will

>>33739799
With the right software it could choose multiple targets and angle itself to be thrown into the next firing position with recoil assist.
We understand the fictional physics of rocket jumping. Now its time for recoil based manuvers.

Thinkaboutit...

>>33739088
>Those things would be useless
You can say the same about the horse cavalry, and yet it lasted for centuries, millennia even.

>>33739844
yeah why not
you know, the one thing that gets me worst about these nay-sayers and tank supporters is that they think so deep inside the box
I mean, you want to drag your belly across the ground? sure why not, a robot would never tire of crouch-walking. wanna jump like a kangaroo? why the fuck not, just needs some hydraulic actuators. wanna hang from ceilings? again, why the fuck not.
but where the mecha would truly shine is urban combat
the simple ability to peek a gun and a camera around a corner while keeping the bulk of the vehicle in hard cover is something a tank will never ever do
oh and if a motherfucker thinks it's cute to throw anti-tank grenades at you from the roof of his shitty ten-floor tenement? why, you can just climb on up and say hi...

File: 4337436-3x2-940x627.jpg (188KB, 940x627px) Image search: [Google]

188KB, 940x627px

>>33739248
Wheels & tracks BTFO

>>33739360
You forgot
>someone said planes/tanks/guns/computers would never work*citation needed" yet look where we are today fuck you mechs are gonna become reality
>I'll leave it to someone else to figure out how and why but MECHA IS TOTALLY GONNA BECOME THE FUTURE OF WARFARE

>>33731118
>Boy, I sure wish my ATV made me easier to shoot while potentially being destroyed by small, low obstacles.
>Oh, and if it could prevent me from seeing those obstacles when they're right in front of me too
>That's be fucking sweet.

>>33731183

All Terrain Recon Transport.

It is deciphered.

>>33734806
So that's a servitor prototype?

Neat.

>>33739909
Give it a couple of ducted fans. Not for long range flight. Think jumpjet fast moves over obstacles/burst speed/strafe.
Get all starship troopers on the bounce style.
Just pop up to window height at a moments notice. Peekaboom!

File: ostrich cavalry.jpg (50KB, 536x640px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 536x640px

>>33740030
You are playing with fire m8

>>33739187
LA-AT/i are both practical and super cool.
Probably one of the best gunship in sci fi

>>33739563
Soldiers have the capability to go to 4 points of contact when the situation warrants. They can also go flat for lower ground pressure and lower profile. They also don't weigh as much as your fap fic walker. They also climb better because of hands for stability, secondary traction, and grip.

A fucking horse is a better option than a walker.

File: Rules of nature.png (981KB, 1200x675px) Image search: [Google]

981KB, 1200x675px

>>33738542

>mechs are shit
>Muh tracks
>Muh wheels

What the fuvkk is DARPA?

>>33738924
What about tracked feet, a la Heavy Gear?

>>33731127
Height advantage

>>33731127
Teabag your enemy corpse

>>33740880
>What the fuvkk is DARPA?
Not gundam

>>33739909
And why not disregard logistics while we're at it?

>>33740880
a cheap experimental FOUR legged robot whose only purpose is to carry supplies

>>33740979
On how many levels of uninformed are you?

this is what mechafags actually believe https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4b-haPATmI

>>33738160
This. Combine the advantages of tracks with the functionality of jointed legs
Probably not combat-effective, but a good start

File: tmp_12704-maxresdefault-1793353396.jpg (78KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 1280x720px

If this is what they've made public....

>>33741004
about 3 or 4 rn my doo

So what about using these existing walker designs as a man-controlled platform? Instead of a big rideable AT-RT, just a set of automated powered legs with a hip joint that allows for mounted weaponry?

File: battlefield_2142_render_mech_2_by_jtaa.png (462KB, 592x631px) Image search: [Google]

462KB, 592x631px

>>33741118
what you mean like this? (battlefield 2142)

>>33731118

Same problems apply as with larger mechs. Too complex, not fast enough with today's tech, too costly, no proper power source for it, and all for relatively minuscule returns.

>>33734806

That sounds kind of hellish.

>where the fuck are my limbs

>>33740491
>Soldiers have the capability to go to 4 points of contact when the situation warrants. They can also go flat for lower ground pressure and lower profile.
So what exactly is this magical reason that prevents a humanoid vehicle from doing the same?

>They also climb better because of hands for stability, secondary traction, and grip.
Yes, precisely, you should generally strive to put those on mechs too unless you really want to save costs like then open-air AT-RT.

>They also don't weigh as much as your fap fic walker.
Don't give me that fucking shit every time. Dinosaurs had no problems prancing around with their oversized bodies and inefficient weight distribution like having giant tails instead of a more upright posture. A machine of metal and petroleum would function better and faster provided you don't go overboard with the size.

>>33740901
Exactly the same thing except its a heavier and slower option that is meant to deal with the same problems that the leg joints are already addressing. Kind of redundant though I guess they would be more durable than air or foam tires. This option is probably going to have less synergy in very tight maneuvers that can only be done with a giant set of flexible suspension systems that are legs.

>>33741145
No, something like D-Walker but with the big machinery core removed

>>33731118
Too tall, too fragile, and if it trips you're fucked.
What's not to hate.

File: IMG_2126.jpg (81KB, 1026x544px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 1026x544px

What about the heavy weapons walker from battle LA.

Take that pack mule and mount a rocket launcher and a M2 on it. Make them either manual or remote controlled.

>>33741573
cant find that specific scene to really make an opinion

>>33741347
This post is so ridiculously retarded it hurts

File: Handle,We Fucked.webm (3MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1280x720px

>>33731118

>>33741347
>So what exactly is this magical reason that prevents a humanoid vehicle from doing the same?
Cost, Foreign object damage in joints, undue stress on joints that DO NOT SELF REPAIR, a biological body is a magical thing motherfucker, cuts strains, graizes bruises each of these your body unfucks while you sleep, a mech does not

>Yes, precisely, you should generally strive to put those on mechs too unless you really want to save costs like then open-air AT-RT.
No you shouldn't, the number of actuation points, and therefore failure points increases exponentially. that and maintainance time skyrockets.

>Don't give me that fucking shit every time. Dinosaurs had no problems prancing around with their oversized bodies and inefficient weight distribution like having giant tails instead of a more upright posture. A machine of metal and petroleum would function better and faster provided you don't go overboard with the size.
Large dinosaurs where limited in where they have been found, implying yes they struggled with moving in constrained areas or in bad ground resistance areas,
Giant Dinos did not "prance" anywhere
As for upright posture For what PURPOSE, they had long low necks to efficiently graze large areas

>TL;DR A machine would work well for a few days, then need a week of maintainance checks if human scale.

>>33741347
>So what exactly is this magical reason that prevents a humanoid vehicle from doing the same?

Humanoid? Nothing. Cost and maintenance will be ruinously expensive. You're not thinking this through. One humanoid mechanized combat device will probably cost the same to field as a company of infantry. The device will not have the same combat effectiveness as the infantry, simply from the aspect of not being able to perform multiple tasks and be in multiple locations simultaneously. Btw, the op question was about bipedal, not humanoid.

>Yes, precisely, you should generally strive to put those on mechs too unless you really want to save costs like then open-air AT-RT.

Or just enlist humans, who can perform a wide range of military tasks. Your mechanized monstrosities bring no advantage to the battlefield. If you want transport, tracked or wheeled vehicles do that for considerably cheaper and faster. If you want rough country transport, helicopters handle it. If you really want a device that can perform all of the movement functions of a human soldier, you'll wind up with something bigger than a pickup truck. It'll have a multimillion dollar price tag, and require continuous maintenance.

Human troops can function in combat for a day after their rations run out, plus several days after that at decreasing levels of effectiveness. When your tinkertoy runs out of fuel, it immediately becomes a war trophy for the other side.

>Dinosaurs

Are extinct.

>A machine of metal and petroleum would function better and faster provided you don't go overboard with the size.

Function better than what? Human troops? Do you really believe that? Are you 14? Machinery cannot adapt to changing environmental conditions. Nor does it have autonomous self maintenance and refueling capapilities, which humans do. A machine the size of a human will have significantly less functionality than a human.

You're just going to have to accept that Star Wars wasn't a documentary.

File: Avatar_mech.jpg (491KB, 2000x982px) Image search: [Google]

491KB, 2000x982px

>>33731118

Giant Battletech type mech aren’t practical but I could see small one-man Avatar type mechs being developed.

>>33740914
Height is a disadvantage 90% of the time in combat

>>33740914
Aka signposting your position.

>>33739563
>go to war in powered wheelchairs
They're called tanks

File: afghanistan patrol.jpg (309KB, 1200x780px) Image search: [Google]

309KB, 1200x780px

>>33731415

>>33742216
u wot

File: rollout.png (488KB, 827x455px) Image search: [Google]

488KB, 827x455px

>>33739563
I can provide what you seek

>>33742186
I can see them being used for combat engineering. If you need to dig, grab a giant shovel. If you need to cut, grab a giant chainsaw. All of this with one vehicle.

SIEG ZEON!

File: we can rebuild him.jpg (19KB, 125x355px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 125x355px

>>33738542
>tfw can't get your dick back

>>33731127
Your mom.

File: b288611d46da7255e1a70c1d5330853e.jpg (174KB, 727x1000px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 727x1000px

>>33742983
or you could just use a fucking skid like a normal person

>>33743050
>implying you won't have an enhanced cyborg dick

Be ready to become the Robocock!

>>33742186
something like this would make alot more sense but not for combat purposes. This could be helpful for loading heavy crates on trucks assuming that they can do it faster than a forklift

File: Metal_Gear_Gekkou.jpg (146KB, 1024x576px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 1024x576px

>>33731198
Posting superior MGS mech.

>>33731118
Their use would be limited but they'd look fucking badass

>>33731118
literally no advantage over tracked or wheeled vehicles

>>33743249
Betsy get back in the pasture.

>>33741199
We don't even know if it knows it's lacking limbs. Hell, we can't even imagine how the signals sent from that device are being registered by the rat brain.

>>33743249

Probably the most practical mech I've seen

>>33739799
Are you honestly suggesting that being forced to jump to fire its main armament is not a disadvantage big enough to scuttle the entire concept? The raw energy expenditure, being forced to conspicuously leave cover, being a predictable target during this arc, the requirement for suitably firm launch terrain, the requirements to handle that landing, the practical inability to do all this in urban environments (the very advantage mechs supposedly give us)

Any one of these would be a fatal problem. Military vehicle concepts have been called abject failures for far, far less. Think of it this way, we're trying to slightly increase the functional role of age-old and proven technology: by making the F-35 multi-role. Just that "little nudge" has cost trillions and taken years and years of brilliant development work.

Acquiescing to reality is not the same as being a luddite. If some wunder material comes out that makes all this feasible, then sign me up. But for now that pie is so far in the sky it must have needed to jump to fire its main cannon.

>>33739860
The usefulness-to-suicide ratio of horse cavalry was inversely proportional to the quality and prevalence of guns on the battlefield. More and better guns = fewer serious uses for horse cavalry.

Overwhelming ranged offense is THE great consideration when developing modern military technology. A walking tankette is not going to be less vulnerable than a tankette, which sees extremely little use because, in engineering terms, they get shot the fuck up.

>>33739248
I've never heard of mountainous terrain: the post.

>>33742176
>Cost and maintenance will be ruinously expensive.
On what basis? I am thinking this through instead of using handwave assumptions. Once production ramps up they are just a different application of well understood technology and should be only marginally more than the average vehicle.

>Or just enlist humans, who can perform a wide range of military tasks.
The problem with humans is the size. None of the humans you enlist can comfortably carry around a 25mm autocannon no matter how many of them you enlist. This is why we build vehicles.

And no, conventional vehicles are hilariously terrible at terrain navigation. No advantage? Mechs can better pick their battles, their direction of approach, their ability to properly use cover, their ability MAKE cover, their ability to simplify logistics and replace dedicated utility vehicles from service, the vastly superior management of obstacles... There are so many things you don't even bother to think about as useful for managing a war, which is why you still can't tell why your metal boxes on wheels are dead end technology.

>>33743388

Do you think a rat would be happy if you gave it a super huge body with buzzsaw limbs and rocket launchers? Or would it feel a sense of sorrow and loss?

File: IMG_2136.jpg (52KB, 952x399px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 952x399px

>>33741624
During the scene where the bus is stuck on the over pass. The aliens use it to take out a tank. Then a .50 gunner take out the walkers leg.

>>33744522
>On what basis?

Complexity. The more complex something becomes, the more subject to entropy it becomes. You're proposing to put a very complex mechanism, with lots of delicate parts, into a very hostile environment filled with people who are actively trying to break said mechanism.

>Mechs can better pick their battles, their direction of approach, their ability to properly use cover, their ability MAKE cover, their ability to simplify logistics and replace dedicated utility vehicles from service, the vastly superior management of obstacles...

Real world source, pls. With real world examples of each of the criteria you listed. Preferably in real combat situations.

>>33744270
and mecha would just be an even bigger target without cover and terrible mobility in trees.

>>33745845
Oh, and speaking of hand waving, you neglected to address the whole running out of fuel bit. Why is that?

>>33744270
Horses, mules, goats, and llamas are all functional in mountainous terrain. Added bonus, they self replicate.

>>33742216
Fan fact: soldier has better obstacles negotiating capabilities than tank.

>>33743050
We have implants with a basic sense of touch in testing right now. Scientists have already used artificially created sperm to fertilize mouse eggs in a lab.
Artificial dicks ain't too far off.

File: 487B9370-9CAC-4367-8503-7F63C099B844-7828-000007AFD7C1477B.jpg (464KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

464KB, 1920x1080px

How can wheelies even compete

File: grievous_rocks_by_mcat711.jpg (110KB, 762x1130px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 762x1130px

>>33731118

It would be practical if it was an autonomous droid and didn't have a trooper riding on top of it with no armor to cover his ass.

>>33745968
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f0jMzdbEui0

>>33741199

It would be hella hellish.

https://youtu.be/NJIjNs_s2NI

File: SentinelCadia.jpg (66KB, 873x627px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 873x627px

40k sentinels are cool. Unfortunately they're only marginally more effective on the tabletop than they would be in real combat.

File: 7bc2b868992a026215c8522035804340.jpg (76KB, 640x786px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 640x786px

>>33746190

I guess that picture doesn't really show the scale well

>>33731316
Isn't that inferior to a donkey in every way?

>>33742026
we all had a kid in class that run with the hands behind the back like a cartoon
>tfw boston dynamics made the first autistic robot
/r9k/ must be proud

>>33738542
I have the strangest desire to see this thing in fishnet stockings.

>>33745845
>Real world source, pls.
Humans
Humans are the proof.
Hands don't change in function just because you make them bigger and out of metal.

>>33731118
>hey know how we have our 50 cal on top of our humvee?
>yeah
>what if we made it twice as tall with next to zero armor coverage for the gunner and attached it to two thin bipedal legs that are dramatically less stable and easily destroyed because of the 17 point of pivot
>BRILLIANT!

>>33731127
all the battle dirt bikes and atv floating around you'd think people would just give up on these memes
my god when i joined the military back in my day we didn't even run, we rode dirt bikes everywhere

File: Cavalry.jpg (652KB, 1024x683px) Image search: [Google]

652KB, 1024x683px

>>33745879

Shhh, lest we upset the spergs who think that this is civilization and that cavalry is obsolete.

File: 1492385565327.jpg (121KB, 960x958px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 960x958px

>>33743249
why those things bleed?

>>33742026
I never noticed but it looks like someone rollerblading in reverse

>>33746532
>Hands don't change in function just because you make them bigger and out of metal.

Examples of this, pls. I'm not asking for excuses and justifications. I'm asking for real world examples of your mechanical devices outperforming both human infantry and purpose built vehicles as you claimed in >>33744522.

While you're at it, list the unit price of your real world example.

>>33746580
To be fair, I suspect your pic is of dragoons.

Doesn't matter. I'm going to keep poking the autists until they pitch a wobbler.

>>33731118

Best kind of "mech" would be a rolling mini-tank. Something like the Tachikoma or a variant that runs on wheels but can traverse obstacles with relative ease when needed.

Still, it'd be useless in urban combat due to weight and size; for instance, you have a fireteam backed up with one mech and decide to clear a building, only for the mech to fall through the second floor and end up in the basement due to it being 2+ tons and physics.

In open warfare, the distance between the mech and its target would be huge, so why not just use a tank or weapons platform and call it a day?

Mechs are awesome in fiction but retarded in warfare, and any technological development that would make them viable in combat would make everything else we have better still.

File: yub yub commander.jpg (163KB, 720x640px) Image search: [Google]

163KB, 720x640px

>>33731149
Yub yub, Commander.

If we are going to be as firmly entrenched in fantasy land as this thread is, then here is my idea.
A doggo sized quadrupedal drone with chainsaws for an upper and lower jaw. Sending two or three into some dune coon's cave would be pretty awesome.

>>33731118

All the problems of mechanical actuation with twice the flimsiness.

I understand that it would have severe disadvantages on open terrain.
That said, in urban environments something bipedal would be very handy, since the problem with wheels./tracks is the fixed spand width of the wheeled vehicle. With legs you are much more flexible in small areas.

The height argument is definitly valid, so the mech would be as low as possible, with its weapons probably deployble under the belly of the mech.

Also, saying that the maintenance is hard, its expensive etc. is kind of a half-argument.
Im sure that in the past, it was the same for all revolutionary new equipment.

File: 1434402600988.jpg (82KB, 400x263px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 400x263px

If wheel > legs.

Why did we evolved with legs and not wheels?

Legs are better wayfaring devices.

Humans evolved to run long distances without geting tired.

Checkmate wheelfags.

>>33739987
trivial to traverse for a rotorcraft. bipedal robotics is a solution in search of a problem.

File: 26835498-Full-length-portrait-of-young-handicapped-man-sitting-on-wheelchair-at-home-Stock-Photo.jpg (124KB, 866x1300px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 866x1300px

>>33749365
>humans with wheels instead of legs
some of us have ascended

>>33743141
Killdozer minis!

>>33742026

Imagine 20+ of those fuckers, armed and with swarm logic chasing you down.

File: Ra3uprising_gigafortress.jpg (65KB, 425x410px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 425x410px

>>33734806
>>33741199
>Where is... my body?

>>33739987
>>33744270
Use a drone or heli in that case

>>33749955
with bombs strapped to them

>>33749439
more like descended

>>33743141
>why use a helicopter or a plane, when you can just get a blimp
BACKWARD FOOL!

>>33739201
>>33739187
desu AT-ATs actually kind of make the most sense to me, contrary to what you're proposing. Make it large enough and heavy enough to be armored to all get-out against most ground-based weaponry (which is likely not even the same armor we're dealing with since they're defending against pure light/heat energy-based damage vs. kinetic). It would be heavy enough that it would be unlikely to be knocked over except through kinetic means, which seem to be rare in the universe save for ramming it with a ship. Throw on to that the psychological value of its size, and I don't think it's honestly all that far-fetched considering the tech and combat of the universe.

AT-TEs would definitely be just a bit more practical though.

>>33739987
Why can wheels or tracks not be used in that rubble? What would make them any less efficient than legs with less surface area trying to scramble up those uneven and shifting rocks?

>>33748463
Judging by things like Petman, while I'm sure it's relatively heavy compared to a human, I believe it's a safe assumption that a support mech could be easily viable in the near future that could easily be kept under 500 pounds. Still heavy, but not enough to just fall through the floor unless the building is seriously structurally compromised anyway, in which case it could still be a good rear guard on the ground while lighter troops do the clearing.

>>33750832
Force per area and angle at which the contact area meets the loose ground. With feet you can more easily angle it in to more stable spots or angle the bottom of a foot to dig into loose ground instead of slide down. In order for a wheeled foot to provide enough speed for a mech to keep up, it wouldn't be small enough to effectively plant itself and would more likely be unable to angle well, thus either skidding and dislodging debris instead of gaining purchase or just plain not be able to find an area flat enough to gain traction.

File: 1489769281972.png (26KB, 602x500px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 602x500px

>>33742186
>have the technology to remote control things
>make soldiers sit in vulnerable glass cockpit anyway

>>33731118

Having worked with the most Gucci parts in automation for less than a year I've realized that there is no way I'd trust the mechanical parts alone of a bipedal enough to to sit in one greater than 5 feet off the ground for more than walking across pavement let alone the electronics. These things would be expected to last through the wear of climbing mountains and may not see service for longer than 8 hours plus they'll be falling on lose rocks occasionally and taking incoming fire. The idea is dumb.

>>33746603

Synthetic muscles with artificial blood on legs if i recall correctly. That or something about nanomachines.

File: 1235518251101.jpg (275KB, 1680x1050px) Image search: [Google]

275KB, 1680x1050px

Want a gun ?
>Tank
Want a mobile platform ?
>Helicopter
Urban warfare ?
>Infantry

>>33752326
Hey, I never noticed the Zergface !

>>33751363
Everything the RDA or whatever they were called in Avatar had was repurposed industrial equipment. The AMP suits were construction vehicles with some armor plating bolted on, and upscaled infantry weapons.

File: 1477593809112.jpg (45KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 640x360px

>>33750397

>>33731316
BBZZZZzzzZZZzzzZZZzzzZZZzzzZZZZzzZZZzzZZZzzzZZZzzZZzz

>>33746118
Cleary goats are the superior species

>>33731118
Did you even watch clone wars? Those things were worthless even in universe, among the first of the cannon fodder to get killed every time, why do you think it would be any different in real life?

File: 1492001050870.png (848KB, 1077x570px) Image search: [Google]

848KB, 1077x570px

What about powered armor?

Seems to me the only thing holding back it's (and a bunch of other cool stuff's) development is battery technology.

File: On9czRX.png (4MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 1920x1080px

>>33738813
Legs+wheels is best combo.

>>33754363

legs + wheels = lels

>>33754384
you mean leels

>>33738880

What they need is to install a mechanism that allows the robot to right itself!

File: BT Vanguard Titan.png (565KB, 486x887px) Image search: [Google]

565KB, 486x887px

>>33742186
>exposed as fuck glass cockpit

If they used Titans they would've stomped the cat people hard.

>>33740914
Guess for Recon this could be useful. But then again, that's probably what terrain and Observation Posts are for.

File: spot.jpg (66KB, 680x382px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 680x382px

>>33738785
>>33738813
Wrong. The marines are bringing back bigdog in the form of 'spot'. It has a much less noisy electric drive.

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/us-marines-reboot-boston-dynamics-robot-dog-spot-military-action-1615765

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2017/04/05/spots-back-marines-resume-testing-with-four-legged-robot.html

>>33731127
I used to think that legged robots are a joke, but the marines figured out that tank treads and wheels don't give their sub-tank sized UGVs sufficient mobility.

Check out the results of the recent exercise, PACMAN-I

File: bots (56).jpg (480KB, 1280x1137px) Image search: [Google]

480KB, 1280x1137px

beep boop

File: us-marines-return-fire-against-simulated-enemies-with-the-weaponized-multi-utility-tactical-transport-vehicle (1).jpg (149KB, 1200x800px) Image search: [Google]

149KB, 1200x800px

>>33756353
Specifically, read up on the deficiencies marine testers found with MUTT

>>33756403

What do you think that guy is thinking in that moment?

>>33754318
Not really worth it and here's 3 reasons as to why.

1. The cost of equipping each soldier with one of those would be tremendously big. Based on a press report that cited Pentagon officials back in 07 the average cost for equipping 1 US soldier is $17,500. Now imagine how much it'll cost when you give them power armour (like the ones in fallout), you're looking at spending possibly nearly $100k ust to fully equip 1 soldier.

2. Imagine how much of a struggle it'll be for a soldier to maintain one of those suites and make sure its fully operational. Them messing up or neglecting their equipment could prove to be fatal in combat.

3.The enemy will just make better bullets. Ballistic vests already have a hard time stopping rifle rounds and could only take a few shots before its armour integrity starts to degrade and becomes useless. Power armour will suffer a similar fate. Your enemy can just develop better, stronger more damaging armour piercing bullets for small arms to combat again'st power armour and what you essentially get when that happens is a full body, bullet resistant suite (that's more expensive than a regular vest) that can only take a few shots before the armour integrity starts diminishing

>>33746532
>Hands don't change in function just because you make them bigger and out of metal.
Sure they do.
What is inverse-square law?
What is density:weight ratio?

>>33752942
>goats are the superior species
That's true in many respects. Goats are a very capable lifeform. They can go just about anywhere and live off just about anything and are pretty tough in their own right, good at fending off carnivores.

As much as /k/ hates legs a swarm of AT-RT type things capable of what we see in the Clone Wars series would be scary as fuck.

>>33750832
Because vertical obstacles negotiation capabilities.
https://youtu.be/BjkWgek6UXU?t=767
Wheels can only cross obstacles with height up to the forward wheel height. This height is ok (not good just ok) when we are talking about tank. But even tank crosses wall with less height than human or little dog can cross. When you scale wheeled vehicles down 2-5 times they only pass 50-20 cm high obstacle. That means any piece of rubble can stop your wheels.

>>33756498
>Based on a press report that cited Pentagon officials back in 07 the average cost for equipping 1 US soldier is $17,500.
This obviously doesn't include cost of IFV Bradley.

>you're looking at spending possibly nearly $100k ust to fully equip 1 soldier.
Pro tip: Pentagon already spends much more on every soldier, see above.

>>33746118
I want to take a shotgun and pelt then from the top of the dam, just to see them roll down

>>33756769
Also, tanks can simply smash through obstacles with brute force. Small vehicles cannot do that.

>>33756428
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IhnUgAaea4M

File: 1276502639918.jpg (129KB, 849x849px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 849x849px

>>33754363
This.
Best of both worlds.

>>33746603
the legs are made of abortions
it's the only way a bipedal mech would work since if it's wholly mechanical then there's no reason to only have two legs, but ifi t's organic then it could work
it's also why they shit everywhere, it's the lactic acid buildup

>>33731316

Would be awesome in civvy use
Handy farming/camping/bushwalking etc if it had the right batteries

File: platform.jpg (15KB, 550x320px)

15KB, 550x320px

>Touching the earth at all

>>33757074
>it's the only way a bipedal mech would work since if it's wholly mechanical then there's no reason to only have two legs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kotWv4MCxNI

>>33757195
I
uh
yeah?
it's organic so the way the muscles work makes it easier to perform tasks on two legs
muscles are not the same as pistons and gears so you have to think differently about them

>>33757207
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NVFymqa8qY

>>33757122
>Yuri Prime, the early days

File: battle_gear_by_nickthenikout-d9pm0w8[1].png (660KB, 1024x576px) Image search: [Google]

660KB, 1024x576px

>>33731198

>>33750832
Rolling locomotion pulls the entire weight of a vehicle over an obstacle in order to cross it. If it is only one side that needs to rise, it still has to lift up most of its weight. In some cases the object in the way is at some point taller than the radius of the front wheel and thus it becomes impossible to immediately cross even if the rest of the path is clear. In all cases it takes a considerable amount of energy to shift the entire weight of the vehicle over the target or to go around it, and it will do so at reduced speed.

When a walker vehicle needs to circumvent a non-excessively-large obstruction, it need only lift a relatively small fraction of its weight up and over the object, something which it is designed to do for regular movement anyway. When legs are combined with wheels, it means that a mech can blaze across difficult terrain and crumbling, artillery-torn cities at full throttle. Being able to move fast can be a really big advantage to everything related to positioning. We do not require it to perform pirouettes in the course of these duties but sailing down a cluttered street on one leg is not out of the question.

In that particular scenario presented by the image, a pair of legs will also be able to change their height and adjust the exact point of contact they are making with the ground so that they can lean out from any corner or hunker down to peek out through any hole. As a result they can make use of the position for cover and for attacking from cover better than any other form of ground locomotion.

>>33758239
So we give the mechs heelies.

File: HexSnp2ns.webm (3MB, 853x480px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 853x480px

I just want MAV/Chromehounds mechs to be real.

File: image.jpg (414KB, 1000x750px) Image search: [Google]

414KB, 1000x750px

Watch Kill Command!

Four legged walking guns.

File: image.jpg (116KB, 1000x750px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 1000x750px

>>33758288
Or if you really like humanoid bots then a four leg two armed bot.

>>33731118
I like how this is like the worst of every field...
>not stable
>not fast
>high visibility
>driver is completely exposed

File: AT-RTs-Umbara.jpg (39KB, 1600x633px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 1600x633px

>>33758306
Except the AT-RT IS fast and stable. They're shown leaping around and hauling ass into battle. They're also actually kinda small, the height just makes it seem like they're big. The body isn't much bigger than a large motorbike and the legs are not exactly massive targets either.

It's problem is the lack of protection for the rider but that can be explained by the name, "All Terrain Recon Transport". They're intended for scouts not necessarily things like you see in the Umbara arc.

The AT-RT is by far the fastest and most agile walker that's come out of star wars so far.

>>33758531
riding these for long campaigns is sure to fuck up the rider's back

>>33758531
It's a Star Wars... real life physics wont apply to it.

File: GTB-22.jpg (40KB, 576x815px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 576x815px

This game had cool realistic mechs

>>33758560
I'd give it an absolute maximum of 200 years until we have things that work just like these if not better excluding the blasters. Really I'd put the advancements required somewhere in the next 50-60 years. It's not exactly impossible by any stretch, we just don't have the technology or programs required to do it at this time.

This isn't some 100 meter tall cluster fuck that would take several stars in a jar to run.

>>33754318
>you will never have Fallout 2 Enclave armor

Mechs would bring an entire shift from shaped charge projectiles to just high explosive.

>>33748890
See, now this makes sense. Why risk massive bombings? They are incredibly expensive and have a bad track record with civilian causalities. Send in a pack of highly maneuverable robo doggos instead. This is years and years in the future, when we have sensor technology that can rival a dogs sense of smell, and the ability to upload that data to human operators at a ridiculously rapid speed. You wouldn't need human operators, but they should be monitored, and humans should be able to input controls in case of hostages or noncombatants.

Mite b kewl.

File: ch02.jpg (62KB, 740x416px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 740x416px

>>33758276
This
Chromehounds mechs are the best

File: CannonKillns.webm (3MB, 1596x898px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1596x898px

>>33759381

>>33759412
>>33759381

Not on PC

>>33758574
MY MOTHERFUCKING NIGGA

>>33758560
>It's a Star Wars

So it happened long time ago, in a galaxy far far away.

>>33758276
... World of tanks sure looks different.

>>33760447
*queue intro music*

>>33731127
It has the highground.

>>33744522
It's ruinously expensive for a simple reason.

The only machine of similar complexity is the human body, which is self repairing.
This is not.

>>33740840
we ED209 now. im down

>>33760720
More like ED109.

>>33756403
I can't find anything on negative assessment found on MUTT. Hit me up with a link.

File: steel_battalion_wallpaper_by_arkensark.jpg (209KB, 975x820px) Image search: [Google]

209KB, 975x820px

What about Vertical Tanks?

>>33758574
Hell yeah dude.

>>33762138
Piss in a bottle/10

File: 2684-ring-of-red-1-scghf.jpg (183KB, 1280x1024px) Image search: [Google]

183KB, 1280x1024px

>>33731118
best mech game https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iuizKom-bjo

>>33746248
Underrated post

>>33763043
>Never played it/10

File: Base Save NoSound.webm (3MB, 1279x720px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1279x720px

>>33759526

But it IS on PC...

File: 1sNjcgc.webm (2MB, 405x720px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 405x720px

>>33731118
>not posting this

>>33765043
>>33765043
why do i get the feeling this will be the next gen riot control?

>>33731118

Troll reply: No, it's a mecha so it'll never work.
Non-troll reply: You'd be better off with smaller-scale "mechas" with less armor than a tank, but with jetpacks, heavier armaments (such as: rpgs) and other ancillary features such as heat tracking and temperature regulation. In other words, a battle suit, similar-ish to what they've got in Infinite Stratos.

>>33756828

Gross. They're keeping the dam clean, dont fuck with them

File: 1490426270056.jpg (64KB, 295x366px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 295x366px

>>33746118
>they crave that mineral

File: 1486476804018.jpg (407KB, 1200x1011px) Image search: [Google]

407KB, 1200x1011px

>>33765043
Fuck yeah arm slaves.

>>33765088
>Riot control.
Imagine somebody throwing a molotov on you while wearing this.

>>33765905

Thicc

>>33756428
>shit, this is like fuckin' Mechwarrior

File: 1345334043900.jpg (334KB, 882x598px) Image search: [Google]

334KB, 882x598px

>>33731198
Why the fuck haven't some Japs made D-Walkers yet? I know they like Metal Gear.

please, Japan

>>33758288
>>33758294
I hope they make a sequel.
SAR's are fucking scary man, with the blades and stuff.
And those walking .50cal guns would be a tactical advantage even if they were remote operated and not autonomous.

File: AAi RDF scorpio - Elevated.Kinetic.Energy.Demonstrator ------ XM274 ARES 75mm (1).gif (121KB, 1000x559px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 1000x559px

>>33740914
>>33760678
no need

File: GE walking truck.jpg (132KB, 952x714px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 952x714px

>>33731316
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMGCFLEYakM

>>33734806
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Whisperer_in_Darkness
wew lad

>>33768380
How does it feed?

File: AAi RDF - Elevated.Kinetic.Energy.Demonstrator - XM274 ARES 75mm (2).jpg (284KB, 1014x543px) Image search: [Google]

284KB, 1014x543px

>>33768458
not sure I assume it has a magazine
http://www.williammaloney.com/Aviation/WatervlietArsenalMuseum/TankCannon/pages/22XM274_75mmAutomaticCannon.htm

>>33734806
So it's technically alive? Wtf

>>33738750
Fucking underrated kek

>>33734806
this is the fucking future bois

robobrain lives

we fallout now

>>33734806
I must squeak, but I have no mouth

>>33738361
Never underestimate the power of control systems engineers

>>33745746
...and that's why we don't use walkers

>>33734806
Is that fucking conscious?

I imagine there will come a time when legs will be used, but certainly not in the way most people imagine it. Large, anthropomorphized robots with hands that grip supervised assault rifles and pull car door sized triggers are straight fucking retarded. However, legs offer some advantages over wheels or tracks. When the technology develops I'd bet you would see very short, stubby legs in rows almost like a millipede. A significant number of them would have to be destroyed in order to effect mobility and there's no need for exposed joints or machinery.

File: thonking.png (6KB, 99x103px)

6KB, 99x103px

>>33731145
waht he men by thhs

File: Darpa_Funding_Cut.webm (1MB, 220x400px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 220x400px

>>33731118

>>33731118
just pack a roomba with high explosives in the trash can, and a remote detonator. why you need legs?

File: 1484102287162.jpg (28KB, 500x356px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 500x356px

>>33764897
I need some source now

>>33772069
ChromeHounds.

>>33772119
MAV actually.

...
It's basically Chromehounds+

>>33772317
It looked lot like it, thanks for the clarification.

>>33732296
AT-RT curbing flops would be a sight to see

>>33739799
dude, you're just making it more complicated and expensive

>>33756428
"this is literally the only reason i joined"

>>33757122
>tfw you take out the enemy like Mario

>>33741089
mfw Trump unveils million strong robot infantry force to complement Army and Marine forces