HWR-00-Mk. I Monster Destroid Intial Prototype

[LORD KUNGFU]

I get your point. I think legs are cool too. I just dont see the advantages. YOu saying to many what ifs, and you bring the negatives that can happen to a tank, but can also happen to a legged vehicle. For one, if the terrain is rough, a walking vehicle will stumble, trip, when climbing a steep hill, it will fall, and roll down the hill. Even humans have a hard time climbing some things. So you like, what if the technology was so great, that the walker would have super balance and never fall. Well, to that, I say, what if they did the same thing for a tank, so it wouldnt fall, flip over, and it can sprount wings for instant flight for emergency get aways. What if the tank has super armor that could never be destroyed. What if the tank could hover so it could manuver in any direction in an instand making 90 degree turns and that would make any terrain a non obstacle.

You said that a walking vehicle can creep low, as not to be seen by the zentradi, but you pointed out the aliens have this great technology, so why couldn't they come up with a way to find you while you creep below the trees in the dark, like thermal detection. We have that technology today. It can be dark, cant see a thing, but the thermo display will show you out like were glow in the dark. Also, why would the super advanced aliens be hunting us down one by one, would they just use a bomb or something like a smart bomb to bomb us. Why the hell would they try to catch us to fight us like hand to hand combat. Its like me trying to chase down ants one by one to fight them hand to 6 hands. I just spray them with chemicals. We could kill the aliens with chemical warfare. we dont need hand to hand combat vehicles with legs.

If we had the technology to build what you are suggesting, then we would just make an unmanned walking vehicle or something like that as not to risk human life. So when we fought wars, we could just send out the super robots, while we sat back in the barracks and played nintendo. We have unmanned jets fighters, and even unmanned passenger commercial jets. There even predicting that the job of a pilot will soon be extict and replaced by tech engineers to monitor the planes as they fly themselves. Shoot, we would just have self thinking teminators by then.

Even hand to hand combat is dead today. Most modern warfare is all missles, rockets, and bombs. Nobody goes out there and wrestles with the enemy and stabs them with there bayonette.

Oh yeah, you said that a zentradi could jump on my tank and leave me helpless. Well, with all the modern technology, wouldnt I be able to see him coming before he got to me. Shoot him down before he got to me. A tank isnt just a metal box. They have as much techno crap in them as modern jets, they just dont fly. Plus, any smart leader would not send a tank on its own if that were the case. So if my tank was jumped by a zentradi, then the other nearby tank would shoot him off like a fly. Or my tank could have instant heat armor, so when a zentradi touch it he would fry. I could even electracute him. That would be a lot simpler than hand to hand combat. THere are a lot of better ways to overcome the obstacles you mention beside running around like a chicken with its head cut off in a giant 2 legged mech.

[1/1 LowViz Lurker]

I get your point. I think legs are cool too. I just dont see the advantages. YOu saying to many what ifs, and you bring the negatives that can happen to a tank, but can also happen to a legged vehicle. For one, if the terrain is rough, a walking vehicle will stumble, trip, when climbing a steep hill, it will fall, and roll down the hill. Even humans have a hard time climbing some things. So you like, what if the technology was so great, that the walker would have super balance and never fall. Well, to that, I say, what if they did the same thing for a tank, so it wouldnt fall, flip over, and it can sprount wings for instant flight for emergency get aways. What if the tank has super armor that could never be destroyed. What if the tank could hover so it could manuver in any direction in an instand making 90 degree turns and that would make any terrain a non obstacle.

But a tank with limbs to right itself is a robot. ;D A tank with wings is now a plane. A tank with indestructible super armor is a god. The definiation of tank just changed and you reinvented what the tank was. So where's the argument? My argument is against conventional tanks with no OT enhancement or anything.

If a tank toppled over it couldn't right itself. A robot can. Now you want a tank that uses robotic arms but is still classified as tank?

I think humans would want to model a machine off the human form for control reasons. I know this is all speculation but I have always seen bipeds as having more mobility and intuition. What I mean here is when the driver/pilot "feels" he must move, he controls the mech as if he were a giant himself with the same form factor of a giant person. What advantage does this have in combat?

Faster response time because you are not concerned with controls that seem mechanical and step-by-step but instead feel to you as straightforward and seamless in thier motion as if the mech were you. As one. Like the pilot is sort of strapped into a VR machine and his focus isn't on the complicated controls themselves and what his hands are doing, but just him knowing what to do without having to look and think before doing it. That kind of time wasted standing there is just going to give the enemy chances to kill you. The time a giant points and aims at you is the time you are already strafing into a safe zone out of his line of fire. You can't strafe, roll, duck, jump very well in a tank now can you? The idea here is that in a mech modelled after the human form you can pretty much keep a constant flow of movement in any direction while attacking, without having to stop and allow any opportunities to be targeted. It's just a convenience thing.

In a mech modelled after human form you are more likely to avoid threats by just moving around and knowing what is around you though movements that come naturally to you if you were imagining yourself as a giant human: Turning the head corresponds to the pilot turning his own head, moving the arm corresponds to moving a stick controller off the side, moving forward might correspond to somthing that mirrors what his legs are doing. All operations and limbs being moved simulataneously insted of being reliant on a seperate controll stick or for another crew person to worry about. Some of these controls are simplified for basic mechs but others would be more complex to allow for more interesting and flashy moves.

A tank by its very nature can only move and aim in a single direction at any one time. Tanks can't strafe. Ever see a human that can step in any of 360 directions on the spot without needing to turn before moving in that direction? Yes? Well that's what a mech should be able to do if it can move like a human or a specially gifted animal. Humans don't move so mechanically and in sequence as machines do, so why should mechs? Why not model mechs off the human body rather than adapt our bodies to accept a machine? The philosophy is that by making the machine more like you, you can start concentrating on what's important in combat, similar to how making an easier-to-use, intuitive computer program will allow for more work to be done than a more-complex slow one which confuses the user and makes them less productive. This is best shown in mac plus where the goal there was to make the pilot BE the thing it was controlling, speeding up response times to pull off feats not possible before.

You said that a walking vehicle can creep low, as not to be seen by the zentradi, but you pointed out the aliens have this great technology, so why couldn't they come up with a way to find you while you creep below the trees in the dark, like thermal detection. We have that technology today. It can be dark, cant see a thing, but the thermo display will show you out like were glow in the dark. Also, why would the super advanced aliens be hunting us down one by one, would they just use a bomb or something like a smart bomb to bomb us. Why the hell would they try to catch us to fight us like hand to hand combat. Its like me trying to chase down ants one by one to fight them hand to 6 hands. I just spray them with chemicals. We could kill the aliens with chemical warfare. we dont need hand to hand combat vehicles with legs.

Creeping low for cover is better than not being able to. If the aliens had the tech to see in the dark why wouldn't the humans? So it comes back down to the skill of the pilot. You assume both sides aren't prepared in some way for things that are common usage.

The reason for why the enemy wouldn't be alert 24/7 are the same reasons why Zentradi don't have radars or thermal displays implanted in ther brains or have mechs walking inside thier own ships where infantry would walk. By the way who says they are expecting you? What if you came in during a big battle and there were machines, soldiers all over the place fighting to create a distraction that wouldn't allow the giants time to scope you out? You're thinking as if the mechs can't plan thier attacks and co-ordinate thier moves in teams. Now if the Zents had cyborgs like giant terminators that might be another story.

There are different methods to take an enemy down. Would you live inside your tank and never come out of it? If somebody called you back to headquaters would you drive your tanks through walls to get to a location that isn't supposed to be accessible by that tank? No. When you get out of your vehicles as a normal person, your opening up opportunities for an attack. There is a special order to how the enemy has thier forces organised. What if you had to piss while you were in your glaug? There are all sorts of possibilities. I don't just make this stuff up because its fun. Also keep in mind that there is always going to be the eternal struggle between sword and sheild. One guy invents new weapons that kicks ass. Another guy builds counterweapons to defend against that specific weapon to defend with. And the cycle repeats.

As for hand to hand, what good is a tank if I can just boost jump over it or step on it? Once you get within a certain range of a tank it is helpless. And what if I use a smoke bomb to blind you while you are looking around? Also you act as if a giant wouldn't be carrying thier own weapons to shoot at the tanks. A lot of the advantage has to do with the terrain and planning of the attack too. If you can't see me because I'm hiding behind a wall, (even if you have yf21 x-ray vision, it makes no difference if I ALSO have it) and my friend has grabbed your attention and allowed me a free shot, then you are toast. Remember the episode in macross where the sdf1 lands on mars and is trapped by the zentradi, and they ambush them by hiding low into the ground so they can't be seen until it is too late?

Bottom line: If you were in a mech you might have better chances imo because being bipedal, they have more mobility and direct control of the direction they want to move in. You can strafe and duck or run with barely a thought. If a tank had to play dodgeball it wouldn't last as long as a mech with proper legs to move around. Play Armored Core, tracks are slow. In order for a tank to match a mech, you would have to redefine what that tank is, because I'm going to assume you are reffering to the kind that runs on treads and can get bogged down or toppled over by a fictional-but useful-if-made-real robot and could only move in 2 directions at any time.

If we had the technology to build what you are suggesting, then we would just make an unmanned walking vehicle or something like that as not to risk human life. So when we fought wars, we could just send out the super robots, while we sat back in the barracks and played nintendo. We have unmanned jets fighters, and even unmanned passenger commercial jets. There even predicting that the job of a pilot will soon be extict and replaced by tech engineers to monitor the planes as they fly themselves. Shoot, we would just have self thinking teminators by then.

True. We already do have unmanned vehicles but they would not be smart enough to replace a human pilot. Everything has limits. It;s like the best sci-fi movies always show the limits of technology and never is that tech perfect. Take aliens for example, the colonial marines thought they were going to kick so much ass with thier superior technology and they ended up being stranded because of 1 stinking alien that managed to sneak onboard and crash the ship holdling thier ammo and supplies. They ended up having to call for help because they had a limit of how much they could shoot their way out. Once they ran out of ammo you could sense the doom of the grim reaper coming for them one by one. You can live a dream world where everything is perfect all you like but poo happens buddy. I'm not going to point out all the "what if" scenarios all day because to me these are obvious things and there would be just too many to list. I heard Darpa already had robot terminator-like soldiers being built but they said these were limited as decoy tarrgets to draw fire away from the flesh and blood soldiers. A mere distraction. Why? because they can be blown to bits by rocket launcher and they are dumb. Again: limits.

Even hand to hand combat is dead today. Most modern warfare is all missles, rockets, and bombs. Nobody goes out there and wrestles with the enemy and stabs them with there bayonette.

Agreed. That's why the Valks have no swords. But it's still cool when a Qrau gets within range to punch a hole in the face of a mech to blast somebody in the face at point blank range, or to have a pin point barrier shield to block incoming fire or to have a barrier on your fist to punch the armour plating. (really how much muscle is in a mech punch? Does anyone know? If mechs get within range they use thier limbs and engage in hand to hand combat when the opportunity arises. Just like what might happen in real life if your gunpod jammed and you were not given a choice in the matter. That scene in the movie "saving private ryan" comes to mind where the sniper is snuck up from behind and got stabbed in the heart by that nazi... tsk tsk You can never predict what's going to happen. Again, controllable limbs are far more practical than a machine with no limbs. Advantages: more precision, increased response time, and as close combat weaponry as fists or to grab other weapons. (not a primary weapon)

Oh yeah, you said that a zentradi could jump on my tank and leave me helpless. Well, with all the modern technology, wouldnt I be able to see him coming before he got to me. Shoot him down before he got to me. A tank isnt just a metal box. They have as much techno crap in them as modern jets, they just dont fly. Plus, any smart leader would not send a tank on its own if that were the case. So if my tank was jumped by a zentradi, then the other nearby tank would shoot him off like a fly. Or my tank could have instant heat armor, so when a zentradi touch it he would fry. I could even electracute him. That would be a lot simpler than hand to hand combat. THere are a lot of better ways to overcome the obstacles you mention beside running around like a chicken with its head cut off in a giant 2 legged mech.

I don't disagree with that. But the tanks with tracks that we see in that scene where the machine got fried by the zentradi "lasers of death from the heavens", demonstrates that range and speed plays an important role too. If you are talking about a monster, it is kind of like a gigantic tank with legs but with a massive line of cannons that shoot long distance and does heavy damage. the trade off for slow speed is awesome damage and good armor. Is there a trade off for a regult? I don't think so: it can leap up in the air and outmaneuver the tank. In the first episodes of macross we witness a regult able to keep speed with a gerwalk in flying mode. And that's only when it is running. Now imagine if a tank tried to shoot down a pod running at that speed? It would have as much chance as it would shooting a VF in Gerwalk flying.

Given that pods are bigger than vfs, that just translates into bigger strides and longer jumps than an equivalent gerwalk. Consider too the Qrua with massive boost on its back that only a fast pack-equipped fighter can challenge. Speed is important, range is important. Tanks I assume just aren't what they were before they introduced robotic limbs that allowed for immediate response times to shoot targets down in as little time as possible. (watch roy as his head laser locked onto those minimissiles in mac 0. If a tanks could spin on a dime or had an independant robotic head that kept up with the gunner head/eyes maybe, but even then it would have to be moving away from missiles at a decent speed while shooting them down to avoid the destruction, something which a tank might not be fast enough to do. ie no boosters to jump out of way or legs to hop into safe zone)

In my mind/world/fantasy:

Monster beats tank because it is simply bigger with better range. May have comparable speed to tank, and bonus of not getting squashed by enemy mecha that can outmaneaver tank and step on it.

Regult beats tank because it doesn't rely on slow tracks or the conventional old technology meaning it has better maneuverability and speed with other advantages like independant omni directional guns on the body of the thing. (no need for a turret which is slow when each barrel can move indpenedantly)

Heck, you could shoot several things at once if you felt like it.

Battroid destroys tank because having hands allows for more precision, more simultaneous tasks to be performed at any one time (block shots with shield, while reloading, while running, while using head cam to survey area all in real time etc) as well as righting the machine when it falls, and picking up enemy weapons to fight the giants with. (dropped guns and ammo)

It would be a different story if we were comparing some new tank that didn't use the treads and had dramatically increase movment ability. (like a hover tank which could strafe in any direction and not compromise the accuracy of the fire because of terrain)

Keep in mind I'm giving fictional world scenarios by using the rules of the world and not basing this in reality. In reality mechs don't exist, there is no OT that has been creating transformable machines, and the machines don't match the movement of the humans to a point that the controls would allow small people to act and move just like giant men. I'm not arguing about the feasiblity of the machines in real life, but instead the feasibility of the machines in the creator's world playing by its rules and time. And by the rules of the world: tanks were older technology designed to fight against conventional human-made weapons. Mechs were built in response to fighting giant aliens and other advanced machines, with all the most high tech equipment put into these mecha first. I assume the zentreadi being able to withstand the vacuum of space were early prototypes to a design of super soldiers that could survive in any enviroment. (The protodevil were the end result - with no reliance on technology - no need for machines to kill stuff)

Now you can make parrallells here with the way the VF transformable robots are designed: They too are designed to survive in any environement, (underwater, atmoshpere, space, in areas with little land, in areas where hovering is required etc) almost independant of a seperate transport vehicle. A tank is not designed to survive in any environment. Put it in water and it will sink. Put it in space and it will float away. Put it on uneven ground and it could topple over (whether by accident or with a little help from zentreadi getting close, picking it up like a toy and throwing it ). Unlike a battrois which can pick itself up like a human giant and put up some sort of resistance. It is both anti-giant and all-enviroment (through the modular design) vehicle/robot/whatever-you-want-to-classify-it. But they are more practical than the existing tanks in that universe at that time. Even the slower ones (monsters) because of the fact (fictional fact) they benefit from the newer OT discoveries. And when I say practical I mean practical for the creators world. (ie designs based on specific needs, not on feasibility in real world) Phew, that is one monster (pun intended) reply, I hope there is no response. *feint*

Edited October 29, 2004 by 1/1 LowViz Lurker

[LORD KUNGFU]

once again, a zent would not get close enough to a tank to grab it and throw it, becuase he would have been shot down. Its like, if you saw a really small person with a gun pointing at you, even though you are much bigger than the person holding the gun, and much bigger than the gun itself, your not going to approach the person and just slap him around and grab him and throw. By that time, he would have shot you. You are much bigger than a bullet, but the bullet will take you down faster than a punch from mike tyson. So, the same goes for the zentradi. WHile your busy trying to go toe to toe with the zen, I would have already shot down 10 of them. You said it yourself, you would mess with a scorpion, though a scorpion is super small, you dont touch it. Like a zentradi wouldnt tough a tank after being bit.

Your also making it sound like a mech would be indestructable. It would actually be more prone to malfunction due to its complicatedness. And it doesnt matter how much it can bounce around on its legs, doing karate chop with its arms, and summersaults over the mountain tops, it can still be shot down by zetradi weapons. And if q rau is close enough to see you, why is it going to dive at you and fight you and let you throw a punch at it. Wouldnt it just shoot you if you were that close and visible.

Why would you want to bounce around in a mech with 2 legs or arms. When the zendradi are on the ground, say ground soldiers. Just fly around in aircraft and pick them off. dont even use any ground vehicles. Adding limbs for combat purposes is not feasible. Weapon tech has already made it that way. Im not saying that a robot would not be feasible at all. It could be used as a scout vehicle, and use the limbs to pick up stuff or what ever. Like the robot arm on the space shuttle. But in combat, it would just be more stuff to break.

YOu also mention that the vf can go underwater, but say a tank cant. Well, why would they have the tech to a make a jet transform into a robot, and go underwater, but for some reason cant figure out how to make a tank work in water. You trying to compare a super futuristic mech to a wwII tank tech. So by then, tanks would have evolved tremendously, and probably could right themselves if flipped. Of course a tank has its limitations. Im not saying thats tanks are the most perfect vehcles ever. THere are much better options like aircraft, smart missles, lazer guided missles. chemical weapons, in this case, loud speaker to hear singing is a good weapon. Just human like mech is not really a good option.

A tank would have many defenses against zentradi. A tank could have a force field. If a zentradi did happen to grab a tank, it could have saw blades or similar items to turn on and saw the flesh of the zen. It can shoot acid in the zentradis eye. Were just making up stuff anyway, I would have the tank simply have an impenatrable force field. Or I can just have claymores go off the sides of the tank if a zentradi gets near.

I dont even like tanks. Never even been in one. Im an aviator myself. But I have flown over tank formations, and no matter how fast my aircraft is or well armored, when you have a tanks barrell pointing at you, your just thankful that they are on your side.

******* You ever watch battle bots, or robot wars, or any robot fighting shows. When ever somebody brings a robot that walks, it just gets whopped on. They never win. Its always the simplest robot. The one with 4 wheels or tank treads with no weapons, just a simple wedge design. They always seem to win.**** That means that a walking robot is not a good idea. At least for combat.

[LORD KUNGFU]

ok, let put it this way. Let say you just heard that a hundred people are coming over to your house to try and kill you. You have a few hours to prepare. And you just happen to have a mech sittin in your garage. Not a large mech, but one a little bigger than a human that you can fit into. Would you go bouncing around in your mech trying to fist fight those people, or would you rather have a bunch of guns, or even just one gun, like an m-60. If you simply had the m-60 with enough ammo, you could simply mow the enemy down in a matter of minutes. Or at the very least, due some major damage.

They do things a certain way in macross for showiness, and not realistic combat strategy.

[1/1 LowViz Lurker]

Ah, it depend on the value of the target. If the target is worth lots to the enemy I might even go in with a kamikaze attack to make sure nothing leaves alive.

But of course I would choose a gun. I'm not saying mechs don't need them. But having human limbs and moving like a human is easier than like something else. Your hands can aim, you head can look, your feet can keep you centrered. These things I would do in real life while trying to kill my opponent. If under fire I run.

Now I'm not disagreeing with the idea that mechs need to be armed and also move fast. (monster was an exception since it isn't going to be up close and personal) But lets play the what if game again.

When the sdf1 landed on earth and they found giant airlocks and giant doors and giant rooms for what else, giants? ....what do you think would have inspired them most in how they would build thier mecha?

Answer: The fact that by making your mecha human shaped you could at some point meet these giants on thier own homeland and open thier doors, sneak up to thier airlocks, grab thier own weapons and ammo, (with your human shaped hands) grab hold of them physically if you managed to sneak onto one of thier ships. Even gosh, press buttons on thier own scout ships and control the giant ship control panels using the mechas hands.

Don't think of the battroid as just a military vehicle but rather as an anti-giant suit. Those hands might even be useful for grabbing items from behind enemy lines and bringing back something valuable to un spacy. Of course most of the time the hands were used to grab people and rescue them, but that doesn't mean they couldn't have been used for many many other things. All of the humanoid deisngs paid off in later episodes where they were short on ammo and forced to duke it out. (earth was a wasteland after sw 1 and the defeat of bodol. Peopoe would be starving because of food shortage and you would have to fight for resources and that included ammo and food. It's like a post apoc world like mad max only with mechs.)

You see I don't like to think of the battroid as a giant robot (human perspecitve) but more like regular-sized vehicle especially tailored to infiltrate alien enemy lines and access everything a regular sized zentradi could access by being one of them.

This is all just speculation on my part, but to me limbs are important on some mechs and the human form is much more versatile than a simple vehicle like a tank which is speciallised only for shooting. Why have something that only shoots when you can have something that does that AND THEN SOME. Don't you think it is better to be able to have a hand that can grab just about any weapon and use it? Whether it be a gunpod, a large metal pipe, (think this would have done max good in that episode when he had to rescue hikar, misa and kakazaki) or a zentreadi shield.

Destroids are great for shooting and have the firepower but that's only because they were speciailised for 1 task. Ground combat. VF are more than that. They may need to interact with giant sized door handles, giant people, and generally go toe to toe in instances where other humanoid mecha which are too fast for destroid to shoot down, and must be handled face to face in a closed environment where two very good pilots are going to duel.

And please I don't care how useful 1 mode is for just destroying things in an open space. When I meant all-environment I also meant all situations. That means indoors like the battroid battle that max and millia were having inside the sdf1. A fighter jet would have had a lousy day trying to find a good angle to shoot from while avoiding all those obstacles.

Think about the philosophy of the transform like they emphasised in mac 0 where roy physically grabs shin and tosses him around. It's not just for flash, shin may need to master this mode for encounters with other mecha that aren't possible to fight with in fighter mode. Yes he could shoot the crap out of them but you got to understand that these mechs have jetpack on them that allows them to speed directly at you and try to smash your robot head off to blind you. (it actually happened in the tv series)

If people can get scared of an unstoppable 911 style plane crashing into a building, think about a big mech doing that to you, with a pilot who doesn't care if he is going to die or not. It might not sound so scary if you are ready for them, but think of the poor colonial marines in Aliens when they got thier asses whupped..

Edited October 29, 2004 by 1/1 LowViz Lurker

[Mellow Yellow]

How come when they make mecha in the form of a human, it has to be limited to how a human moves? Why can't they bend thier elbows both ways so it can shoot backwards, or move it's head, arms, and hips 360 degrees so it can shoot stuff dead faster?

[1/1 LowViz Lurker]

That reminds me: DD ivanov had that inspector gadget stretchable head in macross zero. I thought that was cheesy. Just like the fight arnie had with the terminatrix in terminator 3. What on earth would he do if somebody blew the neck off and he lost the head? Anything that has retractable pieces that stretch for too long look silly imo

[wolframbane]

A few years ago I modified an image of what I envisioned a Mark I Monstr to look like, it is essentially a Mark II sans arms.

[KingNor]

1/1 lowviz lurker:

you can't seriously expect people here to think that a robot shaped like a human would be a REAL LIFE better solution to combat than say a tank can you?

i'm having trouble figuring out if you're argueing that the mechs in anime are justified or if you're saying that in real life mechs would be better.

there is no way you can convince me that a simple tank with treads that run the entire length of its body and a good big turret is going to be less stable in uneven terrain as a tall robot that puts all its weight onto two tiny feet.

even in anime its a streach. Macross goes a good way to try and rationalize it's machines but even so, i don't see the valks or destroids doing much that standard non-transformable machines coudln't do. you dont' need a robot to kill giants, a tanks gun would easily kill a huge person

in fact i'm fairly certain there are human small arms that would probably be effective, like shot gun slugs and elephant guns, big sniper riffles. soft bodies are really pretty easy to kill with guns.

you're argument for why mechs are better than conventional weapons is really completely flawed.

robotic arms woudln't make things easyer to aim, instead 2 axis of rotation (like a tank) you'd have 3 axis in the shoulder, 1 in the elbow and another 3 in the wrist.

not only that but if this was human shaped, like on legs... then instead of the stable hard surface of a tank sitting on the ground, you have your multi jointed arms balanced on top of two robotic legs with all the same problems of axis control. i'd bet most of the mech would be covered in censors and computers to calculated all this standing, movieing, motion and such, any damage to the mech would probably make it imposible for it to walk, move, or fight.

mechs are silly outside of sci fi, and even in sci fi if not handled right, they tend to be silly.

i am certain there will never be walking robot war machines simply because the technology needed to make them feesable would be incorperated into more conventional weapons platforms to make them EVEN more reliable.

Edited October 30, 2004 by KingNor

[peter]

1/1 lowviz lurker:

robotic arms woudln't make things easyer to aim, instead 2 axis of rotation (like a tank) you'd have 3 axis in the shoulder, 1 in the elbow and another 3 in the wrist.

You've got a really good point here. I don't know jack-squat about guns or even firing them, but don't snipers sometimes use bipods for more stability? It's not often I've seen or heard of a sniper supporting the entire weight of the gun with his arms while firing....so isnt' that actually reducing the # of axis of rotation?

Edited October 30, 2004 by peter

[ewilen]

I don't really want to endorese the notion of Macross-type mecha in the real world, but on the narrow issue of treads/wheels vs. walking vehicles, I do believe that a walker would be more able to negotiate many types of uneven terrain. Treads are superior to wheels or legs for soft ground, since the weight is distributed over a large area, and they're better than legs (but not as good as wheels) in terms of speed because the motion is more efficient. However, in very uneven terrain, a tank-type vehicle can still get stuck (e.g., crossing a deep/wide ditch) or overturn (moving crosswise on a steep grade), and be unable to right itself. Legged locomotion can potentially deal with these problems more effectively. That's at least one reason why robotics engineers continue to explore legged robots.

http://www.mcgill.ca/reporter/32/18/buehler/

http://tech2.nytimes.com/mem/technology/te...75AC0A9629C8B63

http://www.economist.com/science/tq/displa...tory_id=1620734

http://www.ai.mit.edu/projects/leglab/home.html

Edited October 30, 2004 by ewilen

[KingNor]

I don't really want to endorese the notion of Macross-type mecha in the real world, but on the narrow issue of treads/wheels vs. walking vehicles, I do believe that a walker would be more able to negotiate many types of uneven terrain. Treads are superior to wheels or legs for soft ground, since the weight is distributed over a large area, and they're better than legs (but not as good as wheels) in terms of speed because the motion is more efficient. However, in very uneven terrain, a tank-type vehicle can still get stuck (e.g., crossing a deep/wide ditch) or overturn (moving crosswise on a steep grade), and be unable to right itself. Legged locomotion can potentially deal with these problems more effectively. That's at least one reason why robotics engineers continue to explore legged robots.

http://www.mcgill.ca/reporter/32/18/buehler/

http://tech2.nytimes.com/mem/technology/te...75AC0A9629C8B63

http://www.economist.com/science/tq/displa...tory_id=1620734

http://www.ai.mit.edu/projects/leglab/home.html

its true legs have advantages over wheels/treads in some situations, but for the most part. whee's/ treads are a better option.

also, with so few moving parts. wheels will also be faster than legged vehicles. there is no way a mechanical leg could ever be faster than a wheel. it has to go forward, reverse direction, make ground contact, push, then stop and reverse direction again.

wheels simply sit and spin.

then there is mass involved, a wheel is a disc with a tube on the end. its balanced and symetrical, and doens't have to deal with general stresses of having the wight of the vehicle come down on it every revolution.

a leg is not symetrical, has lots of moving parts, lots of connections like joints. is put under lots of un even pressure..

seriously, its just not a viable option.

probably the only vehicle in macross deserving of legs is the monster. in some quarys VERY large shovels use platforms something like legs to "walk" from location to location. this thing is anything but agile.

i... really can't make it any more clear than that, i've made my point.

[ewilen]

Yes, I agree that wheels and even treads are faster than legs. I think I said that in my post. I also agree that they're simpler. But again, legs are superior in broken terrain. There is even a prototype logging machine designed for such terrain, which has legs.

http://www.safnet.org/archive/902_machine.cfm

http://www.plustech.fi/Walking1.html

The purpose is partly to minimize environmental impact (legs don't flatten everything they pass over) but the literature also explicitly cites improved mobility. Again, if you read the other links I posted, this is also one of the reasons for continued robotics research into leg-based locomotion.

[KingNor]

I really like the Monster, i wish it was more prominent in the serise. In fact i think most of the secondary mecha in macross are very unique and should have gotten more screen time.

I think it would be cool if the next macross serise focused on a Destroid battle group, like a Monster, and some of the smaller ones that support it. it could be cool.

[THOR]

I'd like to weigh in on the legs vs wheels debate.

If I have win a race on ground that is level or as difficult as a baja race, I'd go with wheels. Great for long distances.

If I had to move on a very jagged surface or balance on a beam or climb or polka, I'd go with legs. Great for short distances.

Mecha have a distinct advantage in an urban or obstacle laiden setting. They lose their effectiveness on open ground. And forget about dodging a rail gun or laser. You would never see it coming in time to react.

While we are at it, I think with the advent of rail-guns and particle accelerators, armor would eventually become useless.

[Noyhauser]

don't be so sure about that. People have been predicting that such and such weapon advance will make such and such obsolete. And still developers have come up with varying ways of countering new "wonder weapons." Tanks were predicted to be obsolete by the 1970s because of advances in guided missile technology, and today they still are around. Furthermore we have British AFV prototypes that use electromagnetic fields that can defeat HEAT warheads. Those two technologies you listed have major power issues that make it very unlikely that we will ever see them on the battlefield in the near future.

[ewilen]

Another potential anti-anti-armor technology is active armor--i.e., a system that detects an incoming missile (or even shell) and shoots it down before impact.

Rail guns and particle accelerators still need a targeting mechanism. If they use completely passive sensors (optical) they can't be dodged; otherwise, if you know you've been sighted, evasive maneuvering/taking cover might work. And of course you can maneuver/take cover preemptively in a high-threat environment--the tank in front of you goes up in flames, so you go hull-down.

Under this scenario, heavy armor may become obsolete, but an agile vehicle that embodies tactical/operational mobility superior to dismounted infantry, and which is is adequately protected against small arms/light artillery, would still have a place on the battlefield.

[CoryHolmes]

I'm rather fond of the idea of man-sized or near-to-man-sized power armour units as being the next logical step in urban warfare. A small legged unit would be able to make use of stairs, buildings, and other urban structures, while a wheeled/tracked vehicle would be stuck out in the open.

Check the first couple episodes of Gasaraki or even MADOX for a good demonstration of this.

[1/1 LowViz Lurker]

Cory, ewilen, good points. I guess my idea is that with enough funding and enough time who knows what the future can hold? I like to be openminded about the future which is why I'm interested in all the darpa research into robots inspired by how insects move in nature.

King I think we have a misunderstanding. I agree that wheels in the real world are more efficient in the open plain but not under the needs of the humans in the macross world/universe where the battlefield varies. A destroid with legs has some advantages that just wouldn't be there with wheeled ones. And yes it probably was only put there for coolness factor but all sci-fi suffers from that. (light sabers are stupid and don't exist but those are jedi who can use the force to beat armed opponents?) within the world limbs are put to practical uses not just there for appearances only.

It's about keeping options open. A single pilot of a mech would need several machines to do 1 task. He would need a machine with wheels, then a giant robot (or machine with limbs for the one on one fights to do all the things max did when rescuing misa, hikaru, kakazaki and fighting) then on top of that a seperate plane to fly around.

1) The plane would be useless up close and personal because it might crash into many things in an enclosed space. Combat-wise this is silly.

2)the robot wouldn't travel fast enough to avoid attacks from multiple incoming targets. But like I said roy was seen gunning down MM using head laser + gunpod and he could swivel faster in giant-human/battroid mode than he would in fighter mode which can only aim in 1 direction at a time. And we know the battroid can hide behind buildings only partially exposed using cover like humans do in a gun fight. Tanks would might need to expose themselves.

and

3)without gerwalk, trying to resuing people by flying into areas where there is no place for a jet to land (or if the land was too damaged) wouldn't be possible. (think of it like the harrier jet but with arms to hold objects. Macross plus makes exceleent use of this when isamu rescues guld in this mode while slowly cushioning the descent.)

The vf sort of emobdies all of those things to become an all terrain, all-environment and all-combat-situation vehicle. Giants are not going to sit around and wait for the little pilot to exit his vehicle and let him shoot them. Because the giants can survive in different environments, they have the mobility advantage by having limbs, being bigger and using machines that can hop right above tank fire. Glaugs and pods with long treads may have added unnecessary weight to a machine that is designed to hope like a kangaroo from 1 small uneven surface to another. No need to roll when you can boost jump. Let me ask you a question: could a tank fall off a sheer cliff and guarantee that it lands right side up? The legs are the regult's failsafe and balance to be able to do this jumping task. It would still be classfied as a land vehicle mind you, but a land vehicle that was truly all-terrain and indpendant from other vehicles to get around.

Also unlike the conventional tanks, thier pods could submerge underwater avoiding detection. I continue to believe the reason they need humanoid robots was because they wanted to end the need for several types of vehicles that overspecialised in 1 thing and instead gave them abilities that could do many tasks in one. So they came up with variable mech. And favoured limbs which could grip objects and react to the environment the way a giant human would react to his environment. That is: to gain readiness advantages like being able to strafe which tanks can't achieve without first turning. (thier movements are predictable and slow, like somebody who refuses to use a keyboard and mouse control setup in a FPS game and doesn't circle-strafe. )

A tank doesn't jump sideways or do those rolls on the ground that the battroid is seen doing. Nor would a tank skate along the surface standing vertical and upright, or hop like the regults. But tanks just weren't designed to avoid giants, only fight in human wars where the opposition did not have machines with several omni directional cannons which could shoot several directions at once. A turret to me is slow and inefficient, whereas a human piloted mech with swivel action is fast. It's just the way I imagine it because the robots are enhanced to match the ablilty of the fluid motion of a human. (and not the other way around where the human learns to master a complex machine and rely on more than 1 crew to do a task. His own body is mapped and mech matches the sensitive motions of the human in real time.

I respect your opinions about the real world practicalities of tread with turret, but you are not going into space with them, expecting to fly in an atmoshpere with them, or do all the things you do in the anime using the robot to fight toe to toe. (ie when britai managed to overpower the mech after they ran out of ammo.)

Certain weapons and technology is suitable for certain type of things (guns still rule but what happens if you have no ammo like the marines in the aliens movie and the aliens outnumber you? The battroid in macross could use ANY dropped zentradi troop's weapon, thanks to having hands, just as Zentradi giants were seen using vf1 gunpods in the episodes after sw1 with kamjin's rebel forces)

There are advantages to limbs which are needed to do things other than combat. But my points about moving are more anime magic and alien tech enhanced. They don't take into account real world physics just as some of the vf1 fighter mode behaviour doesn't take into account the physics of real life either. I wanted people to assume that because it was possible with vehicles in the air, maybe it could be possible with mechs on the ground. ie legs that are sophisticated enough to be able to run really fast so much that giant ostrich-like mechs could keep up with pilots in flying gerwalk mode.

In summary: I just want to keep an open mind about the fact that monster (not designed to move as fast as othr mechs but having better range) could acually run in that universe thanks to the alien technology. Not to convince everyone that robots in our world will overtake the roles of tanks. As mentioned in one of my other responses the battroid isn't just a machine for taking out other mechs and giants, but also a zentradi infantry-sized suit to augment the human body. 1)Increased strength, 2) bigger stride, 3) armour that is thick enough to withstand abuse, but without losing all the abilities a giant would lose. (ie abilit to walk up stairs or terrain where the elevation varies too much, ability to fight indoors, ability to push buttons and grab levers with ease, etc all matching the things the giants would do with thier own hands.)

My conslusion is that the humanoid form for a robot offers more options and versatility than a tread-only tank with no limbs, or a ground-combat-only destroid with no hands to perform specialised functions like opening giant doors, picking things up, manipulating large objects intuitively etc Todays surgeons can already perform complicated tasks remotely without the surgeoun needing to be in the same location of the patient thanks to robotic hands that respond very accurately to the hands of the surgeon.

I imagine this kind of thing being implemented in the vf1 hands when it is handling it's own gunpod or doing other things like gripping objects accurately and easily and lining up targets quicker and more intuitively than what a turret could on uneven terrain because it's motions do not capture the fine motions of the hand. Combined with the head laser system which can map the eye moves, and head moves (speculation of course) and you've got a robot that can increase the effiiciency it does things by being wired right to the form factor of the human.

Going into a room and moving your head, while keeping your arms steady while moving your legs all at the same time in a co-ordiated manner is much quicker than doing these task sequentially and treating them as seperate steps. Pilots shouldn't need to think in this mode, just respond like they naturally would if they were giant people. I'm not sure if I am using the right terminology but my definition of mobility is that a machine should be fast at reacting (using it's robotic limbs to maneuver, say in a closed environement with obstacles cluttered all over the place) and not just have good topspeed moving in a straight predictable line on flat surface. All kinds of jumping, rolling on ground, dodging and falling over and getting back up from falls should be acceptable things and the reaction should be immediate so that if a battroid fought a tank, the gunpod held in direct line with the tank would easily rip it open all the while the mech is able to hide partially behind a wall or building. I like to think that the mech in battroid mode wouldn't be a treated like a machine requiring driver to steer it and gunner to aim, but more like a giant soldier with super fast reaction speed. Humans don;t have wheels on thier bodies so it would be counter-intuitive and slow reaction speeds. All the old predudices of how slow real-world robots are and how that kind of movment defies physics should be thrown out the window. Otherwise it wouldn't be scifi.

Edited October 31, 2004 by 1/1 LowViz Lurker

[KingNor]

1/1 low viz you make no sence, you're arguments and examples are speculation based on speculation. you offer oppinion as fact. and you're basicly talking out of your ass, please stop, and for gods sake cut the post size, wtf!

Certain weapons and technology is suitable for certain type of things (guns still rule but what happens if you have no ammo like the marines in the aliens movie and the aliens outnumber you?

wtf.. you'll die, did being able to fight hand to hand help the marines any? no.

and if you run out of ammo how likely is it the enemy did too? very VERY implausable senario.

I imagine this kind of thing being implemented in the vf1 hands when it is handling it's own gunpod or doing other things like gripping objects accurately and easily and lining up targets quicker and more intuitively than what a turret could on uneven terrain because it's motions do not capture the fine motions of the hand

my god man, tanks have no trouble at all lining up targets when on uneven terrain, where the HELL are you getting this reasoning from? turrets have sophisticated technology that makes aiming them a SNAP. and they already do it today. what the hell are you talking about?

Going into a room and moving your head, while keeping your arms steady while moving your legs all at the same time in a co-ordiated manner is much quicker than doing these task sequentially and treating them as seperate steps.

Have you ever driven a car? ever talked to a tank operator? operating machinery isn't this insanely complicated task that breaks your concentraition and leaves you vunerable. airplane operators and tank crews often talk about their machines becomeing an extension of themselves. this arguement makes no sence. a mech would require just as much training as a tank or plane. wtf. infact, trying to do simple tasks but with a even slightly diffrent body would probably prove to be very disorienting. driving a tank is simple, aiming a turret is simple. operating a walking robot is NOT SIMPLE.

All kinds of jumping, rolling on ground, dodging and falling over and getting back up from falls should be acceptable things and the reaction should be immediate so that if a battroid fought a tank, the gunpod held in direct line with the tank would easily rip it open all the while the mech is able to hide partially behind a wall or building.

aside from jumping, a tank could do all these moves you mentioned, (it woudln't need to roll since its already lower and more stable than a tumbling robot) and in case you forgot, tanks can hide behind cover too. but you're also forgetting that a tank is infinately more strong than the average building, a missle could just go through the ply wood and drywall and still hit the targget.

tanks are VERY good already at keeping their guns on target, they don't need to stop to aim or fire. i don't know what you're trying to prove here.

Humans don;t have wheels on thier bodies so it would be counter-intuitive and slow reaction speeds

what the bloody crap are you talking about, people drive cars all the time, its a very intuitive machine to operate. you turn the wheel and the car turns, it's EASY. i don't know about you but i can floor the gas pedal in my car much faster than i can get to a full sprint.

All the old predudices of how slow real-world robots are and how that kind of movment defies physics should be thrown out the window. Otherwise it wouldn't be scifi.

no, actually, ignoring real world physics is the realm of fantasy, not sci fi. good sci fi does its best to UPHOLD the laws of physics and reality as much as possible. hence the SCIENCE part of the name.

1/1 seriously stop telling me stuff that doesn't make sence. dont' TELL me that turrets on uneven terrain are hard to operate when they arn't and that wheels will confuse pilots. that is total crap!

don't tell me remote control cars will outrun humans when i've owned gass powered RC cars that could reach 80mph.

dont' tell me cars are slower than the zentradi in macross, when NOW ADAYS cars will do 140 150 pretty easily and fast cars cacn reach 200, i dont' think any zentradi could run that fast.

don't tell me complicated ass legs will ever be faster than wheels made with the same technology, wheels are simpler, they are easyer to use. if there is technology to make legs work, it can be use to make wheels even faster!

don't tell me driving tanks are difficult when i have friends in the army that say its easyer than driving a car.

giant robots are cool to look at, neat to imagie, fun to watch animated, you sh ouldn't need more reason than that. stop telling me a bunch of false and innacureate CRAP to try and rationalize them.

[VF19]

We could just simplify this problem with feet that have retractable rollers.....

The best solution would be massive hydraulic claws on the feet that blast themselves into the ground.

[Noyhauser]

To get away from LV's ideas, i'd like to posit a more realistic vision for a humanoid type military combat vehicle.

There is a game made by Dream Pod 9, called heavy Gear, which took a lot of influence from Armored trooper Votoms (not even close to what Fasa did with macross though). They presented a far more realistic vision of how bipedaled walker techology might be applied to warfare. It was a bit sci-fi ish, although we had ALOT of Mil, and Ex mil types who really kept the idea real. Using the statistics provided by DP9 for their capabilities we developed what I would consider realistic combat doctrine for these vehicles. Humanoid form was more for modularity in weapons, and adaptability for combat situations, allowing Gears to be jack of all trades sort of units. On flat ground they were demolished by tanks, and in streets, infantry had advantages over them. They were most useful on broken up terrain, where tanks were unsuitable (forests, cities, badlands ect). They viewed to be more mobile as well. However they were cheap enough to be massed produced on a scale tanks couldn't. They used gas engines (actually a new type called V-engines which is an actual design), had far less armor than tanks, used rollers under their legs to gain more efficiency for long distances, and were pretty down to earth designs. Their armor was weaker because the humanoid shape creates shot traps for incoming rounds, and prevents the application of a uniform shape for armor (like tanks do, look at the soviet T series)

Heavy gear's designs were realistic given the technological advancements they assumed would occur (the ability to cheaply build these vehicles would be the most contentious). And without those assumptions, it would be difficult to imagine why you would want to design such a complex piece of machinery. I would say that for the most part, the Idea of a humaniod combat vehicle resides on the fiction side of science fiction

However DP9 started to get away from this, and what I would call anime munchkinism set in. It also neglected the line by some poor decisions. I've kinda parted ways from Heavy gear, its nolonger the game I loved for so long.

Edited November 1, 2004 by Noyhauser

[LORD KUNGFU]

We could just simplify this problem with feet that have retractable rollers.....

The best solution would be massive hydraulic claws on the feet that blast themselves into the ground.

pshhhhhhhh!

[1/1 LowViz Lurker]

1/1 low viz you make no sence, you're arguments and examples are speculation based on speculation.  you offer oppinion as fact.  and you're basicly talking out of your ass, please stop, and for gods sake cut the post size, wtf!

Certain weapons and technology is suitable for certain type of things (guns still rule but what happens if you have no ammo like the marines in the aliens movie and the aliens outnumber you?

wtf.. you'll die, did being able to fight hand to hand help the marines any? no.

and if you run out of ammo how likely is it the enemy did too? very VERY implausable senario.

I imagine this kind of thing being implemented in the vf1 hands when it is handling it's own gunpod or doing other things like gripping objects accurately and easily and lining up targets quicker and more intuitively than what a turret could on uneven terrain because it's motions do not capture the fine motions of the hand

my god man, tanks have no trouble at all lining up targets when on uneven terrain, where the HELL are you getting this reasoning from? turrets have sophisticated technology that makes aiming them a SNAP. and they already do it today. what the hell are you talking about?

Going into a room and moving your head, while keeping your arms steady while moving your legs all at the same time in a co-ordiated manner is much quicker than doing these task sequentially and treating them as seperate steps.

Have you ever driven a car? ever talked to a tank operator? operating machinery isn't this insanely complicated task that breaks your concentraition and leaves you vunerable. airplane operators and tank crews often talk about their machines becomeing an extension of themselves. this arguement makes no sence. a mech would require just as much training as a tank or plane. wtf. infact, trying to do simple tasks but with a even slightly diffrent body would probably prove to be very disorienting. driving a tank is simple, aiming a turret is simple. operating a walking robot is NOT SIMPLE.

All kinds of jumping, rolling on ground, dodging and falling over and getting back up from falls should be acceptable things and the reaction should be immediate so that if a battroid fought a tank, the gunpod held in direct line with the tank would easily rip it open all the while the mech is able to hide partially behind a wall or building.

aside from jumping, a tank could do all these moves you mentioned, (it woudln't need to roll since its already lower and more stable than a tumbling robot) and in case you forgot, tanks can hide behind cover too. but you're also forgetting that a tank is infinately more strong than the average building, a missle could just go through the ply wood and drywall and still hit the targget.

tanks are VERY good already at keeping their guns on target, they don't need to stop to aim or fire. i don't know what you're trying to prove here.

Humans don;t have wheels on thier bodies so it would be counter-intuitive and slow reaction speeds

what the bloody crap are you talking about, people drive cars all the time, its a very intuitive machine to operate. you turn the wheel and the car turns, it's EASY. i don't know about you but i can floor the gas pedal in my car much faster than i can get to a full sprint.

All the old predudices of how slow real-world robots are and how that kind of movment defies physics should be thrown out the window. Otherwise it wouldn't be scifi.

no, actually, ignoring real world physics is the realm of fantasy, not sci fi. good sci fi does its best to UPHOLD the laws of physics and reality as much as possible. hence the SCIENCE part of the name.

1/1 seriously stop telling me stuff that doesn't make sence. dont' TELL me that turrets on uneven terrain are hard to operate when they arn't and that wheels will confuse pilots. that is total crap!

don't tell me remote control cars will outrun humans when i've owned gass powered RC cars that could reach 80mph.

dont' tell me cars are slower than the zentradi in macross, when NOW ADAYS cars will do 140 150 pretty easily and fast cars cacn reach 200, i dont' think any zentradi could run that fast.

don't tell me complicated ass legs will ever be faster than wheels made with the same technology, wheels are simpler, they are easyer to use. if there is technology to make legs work, it can be use to make wheels even faster!

don't tell me driving tanks are difficult when i have friends in the army that say its easyer than driving a car.

giant robots are cool to look at, neat to imagie, fun to watch animated, you sh ouldn't need more reason than that. stop telling me a bunch of false and innacureate CRAP to try and rationalize them.

King, in a scf fi world there are no facts just "fictional realism" based on the rules the creators decide to make up. However they can be inspired by the real world and fans can rationalise the reasons about the mech design to themselves. (it's anyone's opinion - my ideas are not dogma, or absolute truth, just a suggestion to help explain the need for robotic limbs on vehicles that do more than 1 thing)

That's what I've done here. If the conventional tanks were so great for all the purposes the VF and destroids were applied to, then it wouldn't really be a sci fi since conventional human weapons would be enough and there would be no need to design new machines suited for the specific tasks that the mechs are shown for.

Just remember: The tv series shows actual battroids engaged in hand to hand combat with the giants. Tanks would be harmless in this instance if you could imagine giant men existing. Ammo would be in short supply, so in desperation they go toe to toe. (have you ever seen a post-apocalyptic movie like mad max? That's what the events after sw1 were like with bandits and rebels stealing things and people like kamjin acting like cowboys in an old western )

This is why I'm trying to make sense of the use of legs on a monster. You don't have to understand the reasoning because the machines don't really exist for us to measure thier efficiency vs other machines. You just have to have an open mind about what could be possible in an alternate reality. (as if there were a place jjust like earth and the human technology tree went down a different path instead of the one we have in real life)

As for the example about the lack of ammo, the robots have super strength. A punch from a robot is enough to at least do a massive dent to armor or crush the head camera of the mech. No I am not talking out of my ass because this is what actually happens in the realms of the various anime. A tank would be useless if ammo ran out. A mech with hands to pick up dropped zentradi weapons wouldn't.

The comment about the tank turret speed:

--------------------------------------------------

I believe a mechanical hand (or the hand off a giant man) would be quicker to gun several targets down than the turret. Regardless of whether it exist yet, its just more natural. If a giant existed holding a giant machine gun or a regult had it's omnidirectional cannons I would go for them over the tank turret in a wildwest-style shootout.

About tanks in general:

----------------------------

Sorry, it's just hard for me to explain in words without a picture. But imagine very, very, uneven terrain and lots and lots of variation in the surface and elevation like the pictures you see in the links ewilen gave of the forest robot.. A regult would just be less troublesome in some enviroments than a tank with treads.

In enclosed environmetns; like, say hallways, tanks still don't strafe the way a human giant would be able to. I guess you have to play lots of FPS videogames to understand where I am coming from. It has to do with very sudden quick and sharp movments. Nevermind.

Cars being intuitive:

-------------------------

I agree. I'm not saying that cars are hard to drive. My point was that humans need machines to map thier own natural movements so they can do things intuitively, just on a bigger level. (it's every little kid's fantasy) See the philosophy of lots of humanoid mecha is that they are in fact like suits that are 'worn' which correspond to the human's movment. This is an abstract concept but the ideal is to have something where the pilot doesn't feel like they are steering something, but rather just moving thier own body and the mech responds to the movements and mimmics it. A good example is the 'Loader' ripley uses in aliens. The humanoid design (limbs instead of wheels with permanent gun attachments) allows a range of acrobatic maneuvers and tasks that can match the giant men. (jumping, strafing, dodging, rolling, running, ducking, holding of giant items and giant weapons etc) I don't even think some of the destorids would be able to pick themselves up.

Real-world physics:

-----------------------

No way man. I have to disagree here. I'm not trying to get you angry or piss you off or anything. I just disagree. In lots of good sci-fi, some of it can be done, some of it is just there to look cool, and some could be the subject of xfiles (like concepts of antigravity and how it might work) that I speculate are too top secret for general public. (yeah I believe in ufos and the possibility of alien lifeforms)

There are a lot of cool things being done in macross that are not possible in the real world but I think others have probably touched on them better than me by giving detailed explanations so I won't go into it.

"STOP TELLING ME BS LV!"

-------------------------------

ok ok already I will lay off the topic for good. So cranky.

^

Here's a prototype regult. Enlarge this, add a cockpit to sit in, slap some armor on, arm it with guns and limitied flying ability, and off you go.

Edited November 1, 2004 by 1/1 LowViz Lurker

[LORD KUNGFU]

Hey low viz, if we did have the robots that mimicked human movement with a pilot doing the movement too, then the mecha would be very limited due to the fact that it has a human pilot. The pilot would still suffer from fatigue. Also, a lot of our technology today already superseeds what a human body can handle. I dont really see a human pilot in a walker bouncing up and down for every step without suffer brain damage, doing flips and if fighting a giant alien, could you imagine the shock of fighting, falling, and what ever else may happen. If you were to fall in a somewhat tall mecha, the human would be very at risk to death. Just driving my car up a curve at 10 mph is rough enough. So what ever kind of mecha design, it doesn't matter, the human factor will always limit it. Like I said before, if we had that technology, we would not even being using humans anyway, it would all be AI OR remote controlled.

Yeah, if you think about it, there is no way the human body could handle a walking, fighting, mecha.

[Zentrandude]

think the worst thing for a mech to do is punch or kick/stomp. nomatter what tech level it would had most of the joints/bearings and even the armor can get damage and jam up or break.

also by the way this might be what your talking about with armor, flying ability, ect lowvis.

[LORD KUNGFU]

wow, that robot looks a lot like the godaikin Laserion.

[KingNor]

1/1

the turrets man.. c'mon think about it....

tank turret 2 rotation points. 2 axis of rotation

mechanical human arms holding a robotic mech gun:

ball joint in the shoulder (3axis) x2

elbow joint in the elbow, duh (1 axis) x2

ball joint in wrist (3axis)x2

fingers (lots a joints)x5

not countng the fingers thats 14 axis of rotation all working togeather to aim the gun.

NOW think about this logically. if they have the technology to make robot joints. they're going to use that technology in a tank turret too. so joint speed isn't a factor, they'll be similar in speed. (point being they won't use super technology in the robot yet continue to make tanks using methods from the 1980's)

what in this situation makes you think that the dozen joints in the mechanical arms are going to work better than the two joints in the mechanical turret?

forget for a second that one looks human and one looks like a tank, its the SAME technology in both. can you really tell me that using all those joints to aim a gun (which btw, is being held by robotic hands rather than being attached to the vehicle) that could be pointed using TWO joints instead, is really a better solution?

as for that robotic dinosaur..

it's neat and all but i'm pretty sure my RC car from radioshack ($30bucks) could knock it right over.

[JELEINEN]

To get away from LV's ideas, i'd like to posit a more realistic vision for a humanoid type military combat vehicle.

There is a game made by Dream Pod 9, called heavy Gear, which took a lot of influence from Armored trooper Votoms (not even close to what Fasa did with macross though). They presented a far more realistic vision of how bipedaled walker techology might be applied to warfare. It was a bit sci-fi ish, although we had ALOT of Mil, and Ex mil types who really kept the idea real. Using the statistics provided by DP9 for their capabilities we developed what I would consider realistic combat doctrine for these vehicles. Humanoid form was more for modularity in weapons, and adaptability for combat situations, allowing Gears to be jack of all trades sort of units. On flat ground they were demolished by tanks, and in streets, infantry had advantages over them. They were most useful on broken up terrain, where tanks were unsuitable (forests, cities, badlands ect). They viewed to be more mobile as well. However they were cheap enough to be massed produced on a scale tanks couldn't. They used gas engines (actually a new type called V-engines which is an actual design), had far less armor than tanks, used rollers under their legs to gain more efficiency for long distances, and were pretty down to earth designs. Their armor was weaker because the humanoid shape creates shot traps for incoming rounds, and prevents the application of a uniform shape for armor (like tanks do, look at the soviet T series)

Heavy gear's designs were realistic given the technological advancements they assumed would occur (the ability to cheaply build these vehicles would be the most contentious). And without those assumptions, it would be difficult to imagine why you would want to design such a complex piece of machinery. I would say that for the most part, the Idea of a humaniod combat vehicle resides on the fiction side of science fiction

However DP9 started to get away from this, and what I would call anime munchkinism set in. It also neglected the line by some poor decisions. I've kinda parted ways from Heavy gear, its nolonger the game I loved for so long.

Patlabor is another good example of at least a semi-realistic look at giant robots. The labors are smaller sized and are mostly used for construction, fire/rescue and police duties (military labors were introduced later). Excepting obvious anime in-jokes like the Ingram, the labors are very functional in design.

Another interesting take on this subject is an essay that Shirow wrote concerning legged tanks. His proposed design for a low to the ground, hexapodal tank would work pretty well, given that you can get all the engineering worked out.

As for Heavy Gear, I do like their designs (glad I'm not the only one who spotted the VOTOMs influence; a lot of HG fans are in denial about this), but a lot of the reason for why they work so well in the setting is due to Terra Nova itself. IIRC, the area where all the fighting occurs is a very difficult place to use aircraft in and limits the use of long range weaponry because of high winds and heavy magnetism (which conversely allows them to use those big hovering battleships).

[Final Vegeta]

Some drugs were invented before they find out what illness they actually cured, so you start sticking legs and arms to everything and sooner or later you will find a use for them

FV

[LORD KUNGFU]

as for that robotic dinosaur..

it's neat and all but i'm pretty sure my RC car from radioshack ($30bucks) could knock it right over.

LOL! Yeah, an rc car, or even a $10 sling shot with a good sized rock would take it out.

lIke I said before, check out battle bots. The legged bots never win. In fact, they usually loose in a matter of seconds.

But that dino bot is super cool though.

[Sundown]

Sorry, it's just hard for me to explain in words without a picture. But imagine very, very, uneven terrain and lots and lots of variation in the surface and elevation like the pictures you see in the links ewilen gave of  the forest robot.. A regult would just be less troublesome in some enviroments than a tank with treads.

In enclosed environmetns; like, say hallways, tanks still don't strafe the way a human giant would be able to. I guess you have to play lots of FPS videogames to understand where I am coming from. It has to do with very sudden quick and sharp movments. Nevermind.

FPS and videogames are not a good judges on tank cannon accuracy or "giant human body" weapon accuracy while strafing.

I've researched a fair amount into military tactics and firearms handling, and done a tiny bit of real life shooting and some airsofting myself. One cannot hit anything reliably while strafing back and forth at any significant speed. The more sudden the movement, the more it jars your aim. The idea one gets about what's possible in real life from a videogame, doing the strafing-snipe dance that's possible in FPS's, is largely flawed. And it is in fact one of the number one reasons why "tactical" shooters don't play out tactically, and why real life tactics don't work... because it's possible to strafe, dodge, zig zag, and shoot at the same time in a way that it's just not possible in real life. Real world tactics fail because the real world tactics are made to deal with real life humanoids as a real life humanoid. Games simply eliminate most of the physical effects involved in real life moving and shooting, and simplify it with something that just doesn't follow any form of real world physics.

A bipedal mechanical body moving at speed would also encounter the same sorts of instability that would require extremely advanced software to negotiate and eliminate. Granted, the body itself could also be designed to minimize such instability, but the technology and complexity and engineering involved is extreme.

Modern tanks already have extremely complex and accurate targeting computers that compensate for moving over somewhat rough terrain. Like another poster said, targetting's a snap, and you're misjudging their capabilities. Strafing would likely be easier-- just turn your tank sideways and go forward and reverse. And it'd be infinitely smoother than some giant mechanical reproduction of a human trying to do the same thing, having to deal with all the human body's problems with shooting accuracy and stability, just over smooth terrain. A tank can knock out targets a mile away doing this. A human with a sniper rifle doing the same can't even hope to hit something beyond some tens of yards. Advanced software and advanced mechanical design can work to minimize the problem, but with limbed and sudden side to side movement, you have much more inherent instability and innacuracy to deal with... not less.

As for your constrained example... some gigantic hallways... firstly, I'm not sure what military objective would have gigantic hallways constructed conveniently for robots to fight in. And secondly, if by hallways you mean urban areas, anti-tank infantry units would largely have a field day on bipedal robots with huge profiles and have got to be easy as snot to hit.

Completely rocky and nearly impassable terrain's another matter, and with the technology required to create limbs able to negotiate that sort of terrain with agility, it'd probably be better just to slap such retractable limbs onto a tank, perhaps modify the turrent to allow for more extreme angles of aim, keep all the advantages of a tank, and be done with it.

-Al

Edited November 1, 2004 by Sundown

[KingNor]

as for that robotic dinosaur..

it's neat and all but i'm pretty sure my RC car from radioshack ($30bucks) could knock it right over.

LOL! Yeah, an rc car, or even a $10 sling shot with a good sized rock would take it out.

lIke I said before, check out battle bots. The legged bots never win. In fact, they usually loose in a matter of seconds.

But that dino bot is super cool though.

agreed, the dinobot is very cool. 1/1 you have any vids of it romping around? can it actually move under it's own power? do you know what it's called i'd like to look it up.

sundown that's exactly what i've been trying to say, you did it much clearer than i could thanks!

[Aurel Tristen]

Another correction: The HWR-00 Mk.I Initial Prototype Monster Destroid DID have rail guns, however they are not the large main cannons on top, they are the 3-barrel arrangment in each arm surrounded by the dowser weapons. These were replaced by the Raytheon LSSN-20F and later the LSSN-20G model large surface-to-surface missile launchers in the Mk. II.

[KingNor]

i knew those hands looked like they had guns in them.