Any good mecha designs that are realistic?

"no"

pretty sure the only thing /m/ generally agrees on are the Gasaraki mecha, Shirow's Landmates, Scopedogs, and powered armor.

basically, anything that stands up can be tripped. anything with joints can be crippled by small arms. anything with a head can be killed in one shot, and anything with hands is a waste of fucking money.

The only reason soldiers are shaped like human beings because they ARE human beings. battlefield robots are no humans, so have no obligation to look like them.

>>15770409
having said that, your pic is a pretty good attempt. when designing a mech, you really have to ask why your machine needs legs, rather than treads or wheels.

apart from balance issues and weak knee and ankle joints, standing actually takes power. even four-legged animals have to sit, or lay down, after awhile. what does your mech gain by making itself taller and more vulnerable? honestly, why not just strap some dynamite to an RC car?

The only practical walking AFV would have at least three legs, but probably more, with drive-wheels on the end of each limb. It's sole function would be to for use on very uneven terrain. Might be easier just to engineer a hovering vehicle for a similar energy cost.

>>15770345
yes, but you have to trying really hard. try to look at poo every morning for 1 year, and..nvm I go fuck myself.

>>15770482
>Might be easier just to engineer a hovering vehicle for a similar energy cost.
isn't that basically a helicopter

1. Humanoid UGVs
2. Powered armor
3. Helicopters
4. Planes
5. Tanks
7. Ships

It just occurred to me, tanks were invented after planes. How does that make any sense?

>>15770345

This thing is 2 evolutions away from anti-armor.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_luhn7TLfWU

>>15770901
They were invented because ground warfare was in the process of changing. They needed something that could traverse the rough terrain of the trenches in World War I and support infantry. They're called "tanks" because, when they were shipping from England to the battlefield, they did so under the cover of being "water tanks". It just stuck, as these things tend to.

The tactics evolved as the vehicles themselves did. Doctrine doesn't generally precede the invention, which is why this talk about mecha being unrealistic and useless on the battlefield doesn't really make sense. Might as well have said aeroplanes and tanks were unrealistic - because until they were built, they absolutely were.

>>15770919
Yes, but the difference here is that there really is no niche for mecha that isn't filled by other vehicles.
Maybe in space, if we ever get there.

>>15770345
tanks and guns are pretty realistic

>>15770919

> Might as well have said aeroplanes and tanks were unrealistic - because until they were built, they absolutely were.

Don't know about tanks, but that's definitely not true of planes. They were almost immediately used by the military for reconnaissance and even before the Wright Brothers hot air balloons were sometimes used for the same purpose, because imagining a use for a machine that can go above enemies is not hard.

File: dm003.gif (18KB, 485x726px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 485x726px

If anything you'd see scopedog looking suits about 7 feet tall
It just doesn't make sense to have anything larger and remain bipedal, and no shoulder mounted monsters either, they would need to be perfectly balanced and not exceedingly heavy. Think the "steel gorillas" in starship troopers

File: 10376099.jpg (46KB, 317x475px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 317x475px

>>15770919
>>15771059
>Might as well have said aeroplanes and tanks were unrealistic - because until they were built, they absolutely were.
Not necessarily. A well armoured land vehicle that can resist small arms is a simple enough concept with obvious enough use; pic related predates WW1 by over a decade.

File: white_ops_by_zhegesha-d4n3584.jpg (153KB, 1073x745px) Image search: [Google]

153KB, 1073x745px

CHIIICKENNNN WALLLKEREEREERSS GEEETT OUUUUUUTTTT!!!!

Your garbage form of locomotion is NOT realistic! It's not good for sprinting, it's not good for jumping, it's not good for TURNING, it's not good for swimming and it's definitely not good at conserving momentum! Why does this stupid meme persist? The only, ONLY thing chicken legs are better at is CROUCHING.

>>15770409
>basically, anything that stands up can be tripped
even today we have auto balancing technology that can withstand being kicked and counterbalance themselves in real time. It's only a matter of time until we have bipedal robots that are far better at walking and balancing than people are, able to look at their sensor map of the ground and optimize their steps for stability and energy efficiency with mathematical precision, and counter any force applied to them with the same level of accuracy.
>anything with joints can be crippled by small arms
that's why you have hardened joints, and armor plates
>anything with a head can be killed in one shot
what? this isn't fantasy. The robots don't "die" especially not because their main sensor array or whatever is knocked out. Surely anything that's ready for war would have redundant backup systems
>and anything with hands is a waste of fucking money.
Mostly right on that count
>>15770436
>apart from balance issues and weak knee and ankle joints, standing actually takes power
Balance issues are nothing with currently existing computer technology. The idea that they'll have weak joints is a weak supposition. And standing takes power for living things because we can't mechanically lock most of our joints in place when they aren't rotating to keep balance.
>what does your mech gain by making itself taller and more vulnerable?
Better sight, and a method of locomotion that is more energy efficient than rolling and with sufficiently mature computer control and equipment, allows traversal of virtually any terrain and any environment that can physically fit the thing.

I mostly imagine mechs would be for scouting, material transport, and fire support in urban environments where the city is blown to shit and the streets are so full of rubble that wheeled vehicles would just be hopeless.
And even then only the transport ones would need anything like hands, for packing and unpacking things without needing a crane.

File: Avestruz_alta.jpg (53KB, 800x1195px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 800x1195px

>>15771550
I was going to mention Ostriches, but on a closer look their legs are really different to how most chicken walkers look.

>>15770345
>realistic mecha
>legs
those two things are incompatible.

>>15771740
Exactly. I'm not against bird-legs in principle, but it's ridiculous for them to be the icon of "realistic" walking machine". And don't forget, but for all of the ostrich's speed, their turning radius is absolute garbage, even at lower speeds.

File: tempest_hover_tank_by_vattalus-dbad2a6.png (3MB, 2048x1152px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2048x1152px

>>15770609
More-or-less. Though, something more compact, armored, and capable of staying at ground level would have useful application.

File: 1242435408325.gif (2MB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 320x240px

>>15770345
The only mecha that will ever be feasible is space mecha used for maintenance on ships or something. The zero-gravity would make giving it limbs feasible.

File: mgsrevengeancescr_002-large.jpg (149KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

149KB, 1280x720px

>>15770917
>we're closer to Bladewolf than Metal Gear
I can't wait to have my own robo pupper

>>15772716
What if he leaves you all behiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiind?

>>15771939
>that recoil drift when it fires

>>15772655
>Ball finally gets a kill

>>15771059
>Doctrine doesn't generally precede the invention

It did with aircrafts. They figured that the terrorists/armies would lose if they'd kill enough non-terrorists/non-soldiers well before non-dive-bombing was able to hit anything, but all it did in practice is sharpen and enhance the bombed state's means and strategies of unifiying its population.

File: dorvack_power_unit.jpg (181KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

181KB, 500x375px

>>15770345
It's an underrated show, but Dorvack's (Dollarback's?) mecha are pretty realistic, aside from the super robot MC units, most of the mecha are small power armors, battlemech looking things, and one-man hovertanks with a manipulator arm or two.

>>15775210

To be fair though, strategic bombing was VERY effective at destroying the enemy's manufacturing capability. Many of Germany's worst weapons would have become commonplace if the factories building them were actually intact.

It may not have been direct, but there is no denying it made some serious effects on the war.

>>15778185
>To be fair though, strategic bombing was VERY effective at destroying the enemy's manufacturing capability.

The issue being that the Germans increased the output of their old ass shit aircrafts, among other things, until the war ended. The Nazi's main problems were gross missmanagement (the whole Holocaust, the genocide, the V-projects, their midwar aircraft projects going nowhere, piecemeal upgrade- and modification-procedures that increased the number of incompatible systems, not actually targeting british radar installations), shortage in critical raw materials and the successful bombing runs on their fuel reserves and refineries.
The lack of good midwar fighters probably was the main issue as far as bombing damage was concerned, because the British and Americans were about to give up on strategic bombing due to unsustainable losses combined with low actual damage before they finally managed to roll out their own midwar long-rage escort fighters.

The Germans successfully reduced damage on manufacturing by dispersing and camourflage. What stopped the technique from being applied even more widely was, once again, gross missmanagement. Actually hiding infrastructure wasn't flashy enough for Hitler and his pals, they wanted MEGABUNKERS AN SHIT.

Another real issue was non-holocaust-related transport infrastructure getting a lot of lovin' from the Allies.

>Many of Germany's worst weapons would have become commonplace if the factories building them were actually intact.

Even with manufacturing intact, their jet fighters' turbines would still burst into flames due to a lack of raw materials required for the production of non-combustible fan blades and missile precision only really increased significantly after the 90s, so they'd just have a couple more V-weapons not hitting anything smaller than the city of London.

File: mohammed-z-mukhtar-tank-mech-3.jpg (166KB, 1457x820px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 1457x820px

Leaping tanks when

>>15771939
If it's gonna be near the ground, why not just put it ON the ground?

Treads. Just give it treads.

In fact, the tank.

Tanks are the only "realistic" mecha there is. The only reason they're not considered "Mecha" is because they actually exist. That's it. It's kind of ironic.

File: jarold-sng-key-art-01-12.jpg (736KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

736KB, 1920x1080px

>>15771575
>>what? this isn't fantasy. The robots don't "die" especially not because their main sensor array or whatever is knocked out.

I think he meant exactly that. without sensors, you are as good as dead. And if you go for redundancy - the head itself is a bad idea. Same goes for arms, legs, etc.

>>that's why you have hardened joints, and armor plates

Hardened joints and armor plates means more weight, less range of motion and problems with stability. Weight is an issue for bipedal locomotion allready, and adding more weight isn`t good. You CAN do that. Problem is, going for treads, wheels or hover propulsion is much more efficient, safe and cheap. So, the problem remains - "why do we need bipedal locomotion in the first place?"
And, contrary to what you say, balance is and will be an issue for walkers, no matter the tech advances are. Simply because it is dynamically stable system, capable to keep upright, only with constant correction. And wheeled or tracked vehicles can stand without that (cheaper and simpler once again).
Legs are less energy efficient than wheels or even treads right now. It can be mitgated to some extent, but at best, legs can be as efficient as wheels, while being MUCH more complex.
So, I DO like the idea of realistic mecha, but still, it require specific niche to exist. which we don`t have now. No, big dog is a proof of concept at best, and it`s functions could be performed by unmanned wheeled platform at a fraction of cost. Mars rover and Lunokhod are good example of what wheeled platforms are capable of.

File: 1459735462911.png (506KB, 808x480px) Image search: [Google]

506KB, 808x480px

>>15772311
Bumping with bigger brother.

File: f44a.jpg (43KB, 301x400px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 301x400px

>>15778397
A few decades ago, give or take.

>>15777183
I really like tha kind of robot/power armor, I will have to check Dorvack too, first time hearing about it.

>>15778475
>>15772311
Cute!

>>15770345

>>Boston Dynamics and Darpa are literally making robots that can run, jump, prance around on four legs, and do sick Votoms/Rideback skating moves

>>realistic mecha should just be boxes on tank treads

why does /m/ say this

>>15779193

> Boston Dynamics are making robots in the 3 to 7 foot range
> anons talk about how this proves 30 foot or taller mechs can be practical
> wonders why not everyone is taking the idea seriously

>>15779033
It's not in english but there are plenty of clips and OVAs in japanese available
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83zAgmf48Ds
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dCsUgaGIs2s

File: bigdog_by_0800-d3aiesx.jpg (117KB, 1280x1144px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 1280x1144px

>Any good mecha that can seen on the battlefield?
Right now? None unless you count riding a Bigdog.

Fictionally?
You've been given a lot of good anime example already (Patlabor's have good mech but its focused on Police mech, not the military one)
Unfortunately anime shy away from design that aren't mechanical samurai.
At this point it is extraordinary when a mech ISN'T HUMANOID (no head at least) and DON'T REPRESENT THE HEROES.

Realistically?
Using walking locomotion for a military vehicle is bound to happen, if only because of semantic.
Someday we will build a power-armor and discover it fit the definition of walking vehicle that isn't worn).
The question that divide us all is how and why it would happen.

A lot of possibility are possible, it's stupid to think warfare would never fit a walkers anywhere.

- Overgrown power-armor for combat engineering and flexibility is where my money is at.
- Gunship could use sophisticated landing legs to land truly anywhere and save fuel.
- Spider-tank with a leg design that make it faster and more resistant than tracked tank without magical tech (before you ask how: I never said it wasn't more complicated or costly, this is beyond the scope).

>>15779274
Lel at the last ones.
Those suits are more or less how I imagined Starship trooper ones (a bit more ape like perhaps, but size is on point), I will have to dig more about it.

File: 011.jpg (1MB, 1280x1830px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1280x1830px

The intro to MGS4 emphasized Metal Gear Gecko's flexibility being able to navigate urban environments obscenely well with it's robo muscle legs, couldn't do that with tank treads.

File: army.mil-2007-01-08-093146.jpg (3MB, 2408x3800px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2408x3800px

>>15771833

Actual digitigrade legs (As in, not simply a reversed knee bipedal and actually being laid out like a bird's leg) are on my wishlist for mech legs, but they are quite a ways off due to actually being more complex than regular legs. Even then I don't intend it for a giant robot, just a human-sized one that wants to run fast. Alternatively, make the "heel" lock in place like that Metal Gear I hate and can't pronounce the name of so that it can turn into a standard bipedal when needed.

>>15771939

Already mentioned this in another thread, but the Bell M-X Hovercraft was a giant armored hovertank capable of launching nukes.

That sounds kind of familiar...

>>15778396

Okay...I'm backing down here. All of your points are good.

>>15779649

I've occasionally thought to myself that legs would be good for literally "stepping over" obstacles such as cars, but even then that's a subject of precision.

A subject we clearly can't fulfill at the moment.

Also, I'm surprised there isn't more discussion regarding powered armor. Granted, building Iron Man suits is ridiculous, but there's no denying the appeal of a walking tank that fits through doorways and mows down shit with a .50cal "light machine gun".

Chances are they'll actually end up looking dorky as shit though. We might hope for using dual-hardness armor to make it actually look mecha angular, but even then that would establish too many shot traps.

>>15779318

> Using walking locomotion for a military vehicle is bound to happen, if only because of semantic.

What does this even mean? Do you imagine the military brass or research personnel often hear or use the phrase "walking mechs" and romanticize them or something?

File: 1315290916980.jpg (146KB, 1280x712px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 1280x712px

>>15779688
We've had talk of power armor here, and even discussion on where the transition between Power armor and Mecha is (with lot of bullshits coming from movies inability to use the right definition, for example most of the Iron-man suit are actually very small mecha)

Another problem is that around here THIS PICT also count as "power armor" and we really wish it didn't. Same for Sentai series

>>15779688
>Also, I'm surprised there isn't more discussion regarding powered armor.

Mostly because they haven't written a story about how it's going to win ALL THE WARS by ITSELF yet. Those stories were the main selling points for both tanks and aircrafts.

Right now it seems like an incremental increase in survivabilty while exploding the costs of your most basic expendable unit. Plus K/D-rates in neocolonial conflicts are already ridiculously lopsided for the US and other nations that could afford it to begin with.

File: rtn08_exo_03.jpg (1MB, 2040x3072px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2040x3072px

>>15779694
I made sure to be clear because a lot of people don't know there are actual definition for "SF-ish name" and keep interchanging mechs/robots, calling a power armor a mech or the reverse. And we can go on forever on those definition.

About military brass, one word : "tank"

They don't care if they don't use the right name for something, they'll invent their own dictionary just to make it easy to pronounce and non-ambiguous.
You'll have an hard time believing me but my work is to write tech manual for military vehicle, not in english though, you get me on that.

File: IMG_4672.jpg (1MB, 1936x2592px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1936x2592px

>>15779699

How is that even power armor? Where's the power - or even protection - in the elbows?

Eh, I guess most proposed powers don't have elbow power, but they still have protection for the most part. Pic related.

As for my definition of power armor though, it needs to provide full-body protection, provide the ability to augment strength and carry that full-body protection, and fit through a doorway (Since that's the whole point of a power armor, anyway).

>>15779649
Honestly I'd say it's debatable whether you could do that with robo legs. Getting the legs to actually do what you want aside, I don't think most walls could support these, quite possibly several ton, bodies climbing and pulling on them.

File: 4af387af48c172f3b957ea6cce2822bf.jpg (195KB, 635x800px) Image search: [Google]

195KB, 635x800px

>>15779759
>Mostly because they haven't written a story about how it's going to win ALL THE WARS by ITSELF yet. Those stories were the main selling points for both tanks and aircrafts.

Yes and no. Military Aircraft and Tanks were both evolutions of already existing tech. Military aircraft started as strap a gun to a biplane. Tanks came about because heavy weapons had to be hauled, set up, broken down, etc, from battle to battle, or even if there was a major shift in battle lines, with the crew completely exposed. The tank started as a heavy weapon welded to a truck for mobility, and then armor was added as engines improved for crew protection. There is no commercial or military precedent for anything like a full body powered armor, and it's only of feasible benefit to develop for commercial purposes during interplanetary colonization or terraforming.

File: 1241077569920.jpg (203KB, 531x730px) Image search: [Google]

203KB, 531x730px

pictured: Madox-01 from Metal Skin Panic
note: to me that's a mech, not a power armor or an exoskeleton.

>>15779791
That horror is "power armor" if you consider that magical force field from a cheesy future tech count as structural part. There's good stories about spaceship built of force field.

I can't say I agree with your definition,
because power-armor is more of a role description than a definition for a technology like exoskeleton.
Power-armor as a "role" don't need to fit through doors. If you built one for open field combat it wouldn't have this requirement but another saying it's legs must extend the user reach or ability to cross obstacle.
It also don't strictly need to be full-body to be armor supported by mechanical assistance.

Lastly you could make a MECH that fit all of your criteria, simply switching "augment" to "replace strength". As it define (IMO) the difference between an exoskeleton that is worn and a vehicle that don't need an operator to support/balance itself.

We've really had a lot of topic about the limit between mech/power-armor/exoskeleton.

>>15779834
>The tank started as a heavy weapon welded to a truck for mobility, and then armor was added as engines improved for crew protection. There is no commercial or military precedent for anything like a full body powered armor, and it's only of feasible benefit to develop for commercial purposes during interplanetary colonization or terraforming.

The flaw in that logic is that you don't assume "full body powered armor" will start small just like plane and tank did.
The HULC is already an exoskeleton, getting full body is only a matter of time and it could evolved into very creative design (just having more arms for example)

http://bleex.me.berkeley.edu/research/exoskeleton/hulc/

>>15781190
>The flaw in that logic is that you don't assume "full body powered armor" will start small just like plane and tank did.

I think you misread what I said there. A full body power armor would be more useful in the commercial sector as the tech develops, which would put mass production on the table, making it more viable for militarization in terms of cost-effect ratio.

File: 1266744600669.jpg (157KB, 1200x1209px) Image search: [Google]

157KB, 1200x1209px

>>15781190
In open field combat power armors would get butchered by tanks, aircraft and helos.

Urban warfare and small enough to enter, climb stairs and hide inside buildings and other forms of cover is the only place they make any sense.

File: sorenbendt_apesuit_by_sonobeno-d68hxwe.jpg (136KB, 1024x668px) Image search: [Google]

136KB, 1024x668px

>>15781245
I don't think so, you don't need a full body exoskeleton to start having commercial application and the military are already interested in a lower body just for all around hauling jobs or just to make soldier run over longer distance.
They will not go from no power armor to full-body soldiers. They'll be developing/improving their own as soon as they have 8 hours of autonomy.

>>15781321
If we followed your logic, soldier shouldn't be present anywhere that isn't a city.
We have soldiers on patrol and everywhere in mountainous area where vehicle isn't a solution. They have a lot of distance to cover and unlike city you don't have walkways, stairs and human-friendly access everywhere. Another model of non-humanoid power-armor would be cost effective for guerilla warfare.

Plus infantryman in with anti-tank anti-air manpad is the nightmare of tanks and helicopters, no matter where. Tank were built to destroy entrenched position, not hunt soldiers spread in the wild.

>>15781485
Nobody marches troops in formation off to battle any more.

Mechanized infantry is a thing, soldiers go inside their IFV or Humvee unless there's in a city or impassable terrain or need to interact with the locals.

Most impassable terrain could far more easily be handled by airborne drones.

>>15781485
>Another model of non-humanoid power-armor would be cost effective for guerilla warfare.

You mean for anti-guerillia search-and-kill missions? They already are pretty mad about the gimmicks on the supension of their new jeeps and an exo is a lot more complex than a car's blinged out suspension.

File: Imperial_Reaver_Titans_on_Betalis_III.png (1MB, 921x653px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 921x653px

does somewhat realistic count?

>>15772311
>4 m203s

At this point, why not mount an auto-loaded grenade launcher?

>>15778474
The head might be a good psychological concept. Human enemies would be inclined to shoot at it instead of center of mass.

File: ForDaEmprah.jpg (9KB, 194x259px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 194x259px

>>15779688
>walking tank that fits through doorways and mows down shit with a .50cal "light machine gun".

>>15781687
Yeah, YUGE mecha will probably go this way:

>we invent space travel
>we have YUGE capital ships in space
>we invent YUGE weapons to stick on those ships
>now someone wants to use on on ground
>we need to mount those weapons on mecha for terrestrial warfare

File: Leonardo_tank.jpg (141KB, 845x492px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 845x492px

>>15771535
>pic related predates WW1 by over a decade
You can go way, way older than that. The idea of a tank was born pretty much as soon as man invented both the wheel and the castle. It's execution that took centuries to get right.

>>15781321
Actually, dug in powered armor should be able to stand off tanks. In fact, as long as the powered armor has some sort of cover to work with they can hold a position. Likewise, any attempt at overrunning them with tanks would result in massive tank casualties.

The real advantage here is the increased firepower rather than increase defense.

File: zR5ieJO.jpg (106KB, 790x579px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 790x579px

>>15781896
the anatomy on terminator armor is fucking weird

>>15781943
Depends on your definition of a tank. Arguably chariots fill the same role.

>>15781891
>The head might be a good psychological concept. Human enemies would be inclined to shoot at it instead of center of mass.
You do know that soldiers are explicitly trained to shoot for center of mass, right?

File: 263651_v1.jpg (36KB, 420x644px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 420x644px

>>15781630
I was thinking about guerilla tactic but yes, whatever can use fast mobile infantry with equipment, considering the pict I posted, it double as an handy exo to carry box around.

>They already are pretty mad about the gimmicks on the supension of their new jeeps and an exo is a lot more complex than a car's blinged out suspension.
I guess in another life they were mad to abandon their trusty war horse and swords.

It doesn't matter anyway, this pict is the future of warfare, it's much less costly than power armor.

File: 1430966171644.png (393KB, 758x645px) Image search: [Google]

393KB, 758x645px

>>15781896
Bolt rounds are .75 calibre. Heavy bolt rounds are a full inch.

>>15782093
looks silly and hard to deploy

glad to see /m/ has come around. last time i was here i still had people arguing hardcore that militaries would waste money on giant easy to destroy targets, and getting shit on for speaking the truth

i love anime and giant robots as much as the next guy, but im also aware its not cost effective/results effective enough to ever be a viable means of combat. this is our version of superheros /m/ . awsome stuff that isnt realistic but fun regardless.

>>15779699
iron mans suit is a Power Suit.

you wear power armor, you ride mecha.

hulkbuster is/starts to be a mecha.
proper terminology is important

>>15782070
Yeah, the head is a better periscope than decoy. Stack it full of sensors and use it to peak over hills and such.

File: 6b5db6d06b79c65c3d7de54c9edc6f48.jpg (41KB, 640x619px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 640x619px

>ywn have your brain be hooked up to a walking castle with guns the size of cruise ships
>ywn have two other dudes hooked up to your brain so that the seizures the raging machine spirit gives you don't turn your brain to mush
>ywn get to raze a hive city the ground in your extremely angry castle of rape

y live?

>>15781888
Weight, size, no need
203s are like 3 pounds a piece, a mk 19 is over 70.
The only reason it has multiple 203s is because it cannot reload them on its own

>>15782112
The prevailing (i.e. loudest) opinion cycles through that every year or two.

File: 1475473120392.jpg (526KB, 1666x1166px) Image search: [Google]

526KB, 1666x1166px

>>15782131
>iron mans suit is a Power Suit.
Proper terminology say no.

Ironman is a human shaped walking vehicle capable of supporting its own weight without an human aboard.
It's normal use require it to replace entirely the user's strength. Realistically it would also override human involuntary movement to have any precision and to control its incredible force.
With the AI it's capable of moving autonomously.
At no point it is worn, or can it be worn. Just like you aren't wearing a robotic arm mimicking the move it receive by electric signal and its sensor.

Hulkbuster is a definite mecha interfacing with another mecha.

I'm afraid comic author rarely care about proper terminology, just like they rarely have any sense of scale or understanding of technology when making their heroes superpowered gizmo.

At best you can cheat and claim they use Tony's arc reactor to increase their power. But defining Tony as a cyborg would turn the Ironman suit an extension of his body.

Terminology is tricky, that's why Pluto isn't a planet anymore.

>>15781321

That's why you don't use powered armor in open areas. See below.

>>15781888

I had an MGL in mind.

>>15781960

This. Even garrisoned infantry can be extremely dangerous against tanks.

>>15779699
>>15782131
"Wear" is not specific enough. If the power armour relies on the wearer's physical structure for mechanical leverage, or even if it requires the user to input some of their own strength, than that's closer to normal armor.

But what is the functional difference between moving around inside a rigid, fully-powered, environmentally-controlled power suit, and moving around in the cockpit of a much taller mech? At that point, it's only size that's different, and you might as well consider both units to be "mecha" as counter-intuitive as that may be.

>>15782314
>I had an MGL in mind.
Oh, yeah you could I suppose. I don't know how they rigged the trigger mechanism but it should be able to be used on a mgl. Might be that it was easier to make a mount for 203s than one for a mgl. Or they just didn't have mgls since they aren't really that numerous.

File: pike_body_img_01.jpg (309KB, 761x473px) Image search: [Google]

309KB, 761x473px

>>15782425

Actually, for maximum shock value they should use M320s armed with these bastards.

>>15782304
you know , i hadnt even thought about the self reliance aspects of the Iron man suits. good catch!

these things are more complicated then i originally thought.

File: 1434990676060.jpg (303KB, 640x1060px) Image search: [Google]

303KB, 640x1060px

>>15782997
Thank you, I like seeing someone reconsider his opinion.
>implying your opinion isn't superior and you didn't insult me

Anyway, it can get worse. Even when author use the right terminology, sometime its technology that mock our puny words.

Take comic villain "Octopus" mechanical tentacles.
In the context they are "cyborg limb" but in a movie they have their own minds and can be autonomous, it make them either robots (loosely defined by feedback not under your control) or an hivemind with the pilot anytime he have to "fight their wills".

But assuming they only obeyed, the limit between easily-removable-limbs and tools/vehicle is arbitrary (research show that human consider their tools as extension of their own body), that's why I said that you could OR NOT redefine Tony Star as a cyborg with an external body shell.

Now assuming there's now body mods needed : they are light enough to be worn/carried but strong enough to carry you.
This almost make them switch between exoskeleton & mecha, but you can supersede it by saying it's a mecha light enough to be carried but that do not use your own body strength support itself.


Still I read myself back and I don't think I have found a way to break terminology, yet.

>>15784616
4chan is full of that behavior. just becuase we are anonymous and can be assholes, doesnt mean we need to be. 10 bucks says a lot of our lives suck as it is. no need to wallow in ego and self pitty anymore then we already do

last time i left /m/ was because of the asshattery and im trying not to contribute to red pill like negativity. im a realist, but i dont have to be a jerk about it.

desu the powersuit-mecha-armor style taxonomy is likely just a side effect of generalized terms vs specific terms. for the most part, we likely can use them without exacto knife precision due to the generality of the subjects to most laymen. they will know what you mean likely.

better more specfic terminology would be nice though

techincally i assume iron mans armor qualifes as a robot as well since its autonomous at times.

ps, i never realized mecha fandom was so small. this board moves slow, the games we have options for are terribly limited, and the shows are largely leftovers from the 80s 90s and early 2000s...

is mecha just not that popular? :c

File: 1322650848361.jpg (210KB, 1280x754px) Image search: [Google]

210KB, 1280x754px

Have a game : Take this from MGS-4 and try to find the right terminology for each.
My take: Crying wolf and Raging raven are mech if defined by the ability to stand and walk by themselves, Laughing octopus is mech if the pilot's suit isn't considered part of the combat unit (camouflage and all...), Screaming Mantis is exoskeleton if it can't maintain it's shape without a pilot.


>>15784876
>techincally i assume iron mans armor qualifes as a robot as well since its autonomous at times.
Well, yes. It have all the quality of a robot with it's AI.
Myself I decided to consider its ability to carry "a decision-maker" to have "Mech" supersede "Robot".
Robot being defined by autonomous decision, it would lose that since a Mech is defined by having a decision maker aboard.
(to be clear, if a robot carry passenger, the passenger are to be there as live-cargo, not decision maker)

>ps, i never realized mecha fandom was so small. this board moves slow, the games we have options for are terribly limited, and the shows are largely leftovers from the 80s 90s and early 2000s...
>is mecha just not that popular? :c

Don't believe 4chan is a proportional representation of the Internet. I'm not saying we are elitist but it's mostly insane fools who come here.

Plus, a lot of the "mecha fandom" here are anime-lover with... let's say, not the widest knowledge about mecha. ex : people who only watched some Gundam and don't know about Patlabor or The Expanse because their "Ultimate Gundam-Seed-Destiny forum" don't attract those fans.
That and "filter bubbles" effect. If the place was shock full of mecha fans, it wouldn't mean mecha is popular on a worldwide scale, just that there's more of us here.
Or maybe you knew that and was mostly just complaining rhetorically ,

File: [ANAf] TKD 02 [www.animemf.net] Seba_767.mp4_snapshot_14.01_[2017.08.17_00.57.11].png (1MB, 640x1440px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 640x1440px

>>15777183
>>15779033
>>15779274
>>15779320
The whole show was subbed in spanish https://userscloud.com/go/9nupdt1zt3pv/
And yeah this mecha design is pretty sweet and militaristic

>>15782532
I would have thought the MGL32's 6 shot capacity would have more shock than the one shot M320

>>15787424
The pike wouldn't fit in the cylinder. It's like a foot and a half long

File: 089.jpg (888KB, 1280x1828px) Image search: [Google]

888KB, 1280x1828px

>>15785011
Fucking lord I love the B&B unit's designs

My take is they're all exoskeletons except for crying wolf. It's control method and scale; are they wearing it or driving it?

>>15782093
Why wouldn't this prototank work?

>>15781961
The anatomy on the space marines is fucking weird. They are barely human anymore.

>>15778441
What does /m/ consider Bolo-tier tanks as?

>>15787956
Because rifle rounds will still punch through it.

File: trainguns.jpg (64KB, 800x576px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 800x576px

>>15781687
Idea reminds me of train guns.

File: 1245592885414.jpg (692KB, 1036x1600px) Image search: [Google]

692KB, 1036x1600px

>>15787911
>My take is they're all exoskeletons except for crying wolf. It's control method and scale; are they wearing it or driving it?

Wearing imply the suit require their strength at some point to support themselves. Considering the design this would kill all but Octopus.

Control method have nothing to do with it, it's all signal, mimicking the pilot won't make a 1000tons mech a power suit and you could make an exoskeleton stupidly controlled by buttons, joystick or voice.
And scale isn't a criteria, only an after effect, you could make a exoskeleton for giant that isn't a mech and most Ironman "suit" are full mech

>>15787956
Not enough transistor

>>15779781
robosim

>>15782379
you shouldnt have to move really at all. the body's interface with the suit would be to control it.
Like pressure sensors with actuators to apply counterpressure to indicate the machine reaching its limits.

>>15787956
Too vulnerable to uneven terrain. Too hard to see out of, too vulnerable to land mines, too slow, too thin armor to resist even basic AP rounds.

>>15778441
Tanks are damned boring, though. They've got one gun on one turret on two treads. That's all a modern tank has to play with. You can't get up to any crazy stunts, you can't demonstrate any martial skill, you just drive and shoot. That's it.

File: Abrams_Reload.webm (2MB, 720x404px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 720x404px

>>15790100
Das Boot still manages to be one of the most tense war movies ever made, and arguably sub warfare is far more boring than tank warfare. Its only boring if the director is a talentless hack who somehow can't make multiple armored vehicles with huge guns shooting at each other exciting or tense.

>>15770345
No, robots are inherently silly, stop worrying about 'muh realism'.

>>15770919
In this context we are using a robot to describe an armoured fighting vehicle with legs as typically depicted in shows.

What tactical or operational gap will sticking legs on a vehicle fill?

>>15781321
>tanks aircrafts and helos

Artillery. Everyone forgets about artillery. Ukraine proved that artillery is still the king of the battlefield.

>>15787424
Or they can just use a grenade machine gun, which has been around for over half a century

>>15790100
t.has no idea how hard it is to train a troop of tanks to be an effective fighting unit, let alone entire divisions of the things.

File: babiru__by_duster132-d8je1vv.jpg (982KB, 2290x1485px) Image search: [Google]

982KB, 2290x1485px

>>15790106
Do we still use manually loaded tanks? I thought they were mostly auto-loaders, now.

>>15790165
Nope. Western aligned Nations all use tanks with a human loader, aside from France.

It's faster to fire using a human loader, you've got more men in the tank so maintenance and overwatch is easier, loading different types of munitions is quicker and you've got an extra man in case one of the crew is wounded.

File: realistic.jpg (123KB, 1002x661px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 1002x661px

>>15790185
>>It's faster to fire using a human loader,
That is sort of a lie. Trained human loader in perfect condition, CAN load few rounds faster than most of modern autoloaders. However, human loader can`t keep sustained rate of fire and can`t load fast enough on move (which autoloader is perfectly capable of).
>>you've got more men in the tank so maintenance and overwatch is easier
That is correct, however, modern tendency is to live maintenance and repaires to technical crew, not tank crew. Well, same idea military planes use. Overwatch is augmented by technical means now.
>>loading different types of munitions is quicker
Not an issue for autoloaders since T-72. Selecting and switching munition is as easy as pressing the correct switch.

>>15790165
things to know : army equipment take a long time to replace, that's why we are always equipped for the previous war.

My job have me look at military stuff, the next generation is being developed to be even more modular in the hope of upgrading it with cheaper module.

File: military_dron_by_ociacia-d8dg78i.jpg (263KB, 900x1097px) Image search: [Google]

263KB, 900x1097px

>>15790364
It doesn't always look pretty, but tarps and padding around moving parts definitely seems realistic and practical.

>>15770345

bruh, im so sick of these threads

>>15781321
>In open field combat power armors would get butchered by tanks, aircraft and helos.

so literally how it is right now with everything vs aircraft

File: Titans__A_Brief_History_1_by_ukitakumuki.jpg (232KB, 601x850px) Image search: [Google]

232KB, 601x850px

>>15790452
ok

>>15770409
>anything with a head can be killed in one shot
Isn't that only if the head serves some kind of vital function? In most cases it just has cameras.

>>15790106

Is that crew wearing CBRN uniforms? And is it standard wear for an M1?

>>15790287

I saw a video of a T-72's autoloader in action and noticed it was a two-part system (i.e. shell and propellant were separated).

The Rheinmetall L/44 on the other hand uses combined charges and shells, which makes loading faster to the extent of nearly being equivalent to a T-72.

Makes me wonder what would happen if you combined an autoloader with the combined rounds of the L/44. And gave it a L/55 barrel and electrothermal ignition to boot.

>>15790701

Who the hell would put more vital components on a sensor dome, anyway?

I mean, I should have pointed this out earlier - giant robots might not make too much sense, but humanoid human-sized drones are nice in that you don't need to worry about obvious weakpoints. Machines can go through a hell of a lot more punishment than humans.

File: 703_max.jpg (323KB, 750x979px) Image search: [Google]

323KB, 750x979px

>>15791257
>Not putting all of the suit's electronic control into the head for no reason at all

It's like you aren't from /m/

File: BAYONETS!.jpg (561KB, 2232x1688px) Image search: [Google]

561KB, 2232x1688px

>>15781687

>>15791257
>>I saw a video of a T-72's autoloader in action and noticed it was a two-part system (i.e. shell and propellant were separated).
That is a requirement to fit in the carousel. If you remove the crew space from equation (like it is done on T-14), or move the whole loader out from the turret (like French engineers done), you can use "single part" rounds.

>>15772655
>Ball is exploding, making it the victor

>>15790418
From what I gather, Nagano's PA in FFS are mainly made up of pressurized fabric with metal inserts, which makes a lot of sense as it puts a good layer between the user and whatever's trying to kill him at any point of time.
Also means that you can transport your PA in regular AFV any anywhere else you could put infantry into.