Why not make Moble Suits?, page 7

privacy

Pages: << 4 5 6 7 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 0 times

reply posted on 24-11-2008 @ 03:24 AM by projectvxn

US Army Tests Robot Suits

We could expand upon this type of framework: Add armor, computerized visual displays with external censors and because of the amplified strength of the individual soldier he can carry a bigger, more powerful weapon, and alot more weight including ammo.

Before we talk about Large Mechs we should try something a little more our size. I think we can indeed do this today.

reply posted on 29-11-2008 @ 06:33 AM by mdiinican

Originally posted by projectvxn
US Army Tests Robot Suits

We could expand upon this type of framework: Add armor, computerized visual displays with external censors and because of the amplified strength of the individual soldier he can carry a bigger, more powerful weapon, and alot more weight including ammo.

Before we talk about Large Mechs we should try something a little more our size. I think we can indeed do this today.

There are very big fundamental differences in concept between a powered suit, a piloted walking mecha, and a walking robot. They may be mechanically similar, but they do not fill the same roles. A robot sentry gun has more in common conceptually with a landmine than it does with an infantry scale combat robot.

(useful) powered armor is closer to regular infantry than to anything else. useful powered armor is powered armor that doesn't significantly hinder an infantryman's ability to fight normally, while affording them greater load bearing capacity and general strength, while still leaving them small enough to go into buildings and use regular sized cover. This is tough to do, but could be a reality in just a few years. the problem, of course, is the power supply. It's generally got to be small gas or monopropellant engines.

A piloted mecha is most similar to dedicated combat AFVs in their tonnage range. For the weight they'll be much slower over flat to moderate rough terrain, slower over most types of rough terrain, more expensive, and will present a less desirable target profile, with less mass available as armor to cover it. Due to their height, they won't be able to fit as high of recoil weapons per ton. This may or may not be a problem; big kinetic guns might be going out of style.

Robotic combat infantry is a good idea. Unfortunately, it's also one of the most difficult to implement things I can think of that could quite possibly be created with today's technology. The problem isn't the chassis, that can take the form of whatever is deemed most useful per dollar spent. The ptoblem is the brains of the operation. Getting a machine that can recognize what should be shot at and what shouldn't could take decades. Hell, I only trust PEOPLE to do that because there's nothing better available. Barring real AI, giving a machine the ability to respond to strange and rapidly changing situations autonomously will be mind-bogglingly difficult.

Given enough money, right now I'm sure any number of companies could rig you up a smart little killing machine that could do the job of killing people in built up terrain far better than a human being, whilst under direct human control. It isn't the chassis that's the problem. Mabye we're a few years out on adequately quick limbs for legged propulsion of such a thing; that isn't the main obstacle. An army of directly remote-controlled vehicles isn't feasible, and won't be in the future.

I think that the best option is that in the meantime, while the more interesting near-future technologies become viable, we work on creating dedicated vehicles more suited to the problems we currently face. There should be a dedicated armored fighting vehicle for supporting infantry in cities and other built-up terrain, while not expecting to face real armour. There should be a dedicated convoy escort vehicle, and a dedicated low cost, close air support aircraft that can be operated from unprepared landing strips.

There's no major problems we face that scream out a need for legs. There are, however, major problems we face that demand good 360 degree vision and high main gun elevation and depression capabilities.

reply posted on 23-10-2009 @ 08:37 PM by OutlanderHuman24

reply to post by WolfofWar

Well, if you know about the elite, then youd know that for them to make a mech it would cost next to nothing as they control everything. As for the fuel, im quite positive that the tech for free energy has already been made.

reply posted on 23-10-2009 @ 09:58 PM by MyAwesomeFace

Well either then cost, wieght would be the biggest factor. Most night armor weights 100 lbs; it would be close to 180 punds with all the exta gear. If you were to get knocked over in that there was no way for you getting up. Plus you need to be sure that this armor it to stop all bullets. Modern body armor can stop MOST bullets but not all of them. There is no body armor out there that can stop a 50.cal bullet

reply posted on 3-12-2011 @ 07:19 AM by machee

KPI I am very impressed with your knowledge, I get the impression that you are a science or technical professional of some sort in the defence industry. I do generally agree with your view point. The only thing is, I am not entirely convinced that such a complex machine as the killer kitty can be as low cost as a typical motorcycle. In comparison, I feel the motorcycle as compared to the killer kitty is like a calculator versus a cray computer. On the other hand, I do agree that the modern soldier is much more expensive as a singular fighting unit than most people will imagine, and with that in mind, the economics may actually favour the killer kitty. The rate of bringing the numbers to the battlefield is also in favour of manufacture versus birth & training of course. All that being said, the thread has mainly talked of the very large mecha to human and animal sizes. How about going further? What about bird or even insect sized ones? Swarm technology is still in its early stages - at least that's what they let us think - but using the massed/expendability/economics combination of points raised by KPI, they did be alot more fearsome. Could you imagine a swarm of robin size things carrying coin sized high explosive payloads coming at you? Try hitting that with a MG! The only way would probably be a fuel air explosive or something to that effect... which will also kill yourself in the process since they would be pretty close by the time you realise the threat. There is an assumption that the birds are EMP shielded of course. Deployment wise, they can be delivered by artillery or missile somewhat like in a cluster bomb. Targeting by satellite or UAV etc. Of course this is like a seek and destroy or area denial type of system. Due to size/cost constraints they are unlikely (given achievable technical ability in the immediate future) to be very discerning so they can't be used where non-combatants are about of course.

edit on 3-12-2011 by machee because: (no reason given)

Pages: << 4 5 6 7 >> ^^TOP^^