Is it possible in real life?
yes and no
it doesn't look stable, it would fall easily
>>7661717
what about this
Grossly impractical.
>>7661717
How much ocelot could a revolver revolve if a revolver could revolve ocelots
>>7661724
Probably, with enough power almost any shape can fly.
>>7661723
What about that shit that has been coming out like Yamaha recently developed where they made a robot that can ride motorcycle without it falling down? Just throw some of those counterbalances on the ass end and Rex can walk around with no problem.
>>7661724
That wingspan sucks, but they're supposed to have a big ass rocket under the wings so maybe, but the fuel range would be shit so it doesn't matter anyway. Unless you use memedrive, then everything works.
>>7661724
Theres one in the novel filled with slipspace engines, I wonder if that one is possible
>>7661717
no.
My main beef with these is always energy. Think of what it would take to move something like that, how much energy would be required. We have nothing remotely capable of doing that.
>>7664146
>they made a robot that can ride motorcycle without it falling down
>that's totally the same as balancing bipedal movement :^)
a motorcycle is inherently self stabilizing you retarded fuck, it has not a single thing in common with walking
No, but one of my professora is working on a weapon to surpass metal gear
>>7664770
your professor's growing erection is not a viable military weapon
Of course it would possible to build a metal gear, but it would be retarded and useless in actual warfare.
>>7664752
welcome to year 2000
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JlRPICfnmhw
>>7665068
I'm sure he knows about "Mr. Can Climb stairs sometimes but other times falls and breaks his hip." His point is still valid that the balance of a walking gyroscope is completely different than balancing a biped. And even though there have been some interesting developments in quadrupedal robots with refined balancing and bipedal support rigs, we're still far a scaleable, stable bipedal rig that can survive combat scenarios. Not that such a thing has any advantages over traditional weaponry.
>>7665078
>technology can't improve
>>7665445
>> implying it can improve
>>7665445
It can improve, but there will always be certain matters of fundamental efficiency. And as technology improves things that are already better-suited for the role your trying to fill will also improve.
If you want to fantasize about giant fighting robots at least go more Ghost in the Shell: SAC and less Metal Gear.
Rail guns are possible though.
http://youtu.be/o4ZqfEJTGzw
I cant wait for boston dynamics to build a Gekko and drop that shit in a war. they almost have it with their atlas robot
>>7664729
Nuclear
>>7665684
My prof is building essentially that. Except a bit smaller and more ostrich like. Boston dynamics is shit btw. Much of their technology is where it was in the 90s.
>>7665698
IM WIIIILD
>>7664839
Then we must build a weapon to surpass metal gear.
>US actually tries to create REX
>Makes the fatal mistake of putting a total fanboy in charge
>He keeps the intentional weakness of the pilot seat opening up when the radome is destroyed