Edited by Tterrag, 14 June 2012 - 05:00 PM.
![](https://static.mwomercs.com/forums//public/style_images/master/icon_users.png)
![](http://static.mwomercs.com/img/house/merc-corps.png)
Real world mech applications
#41
Posted 14 June 2012 - 04:54 PM
#43
Posted 14 June 2012 - 04:54 PM
#44
Posted 14 June 2012 - 04:55 PM
Using a mech for construction I think makes more sense.
#46
Posted 14 June 2012 - 05:09 PM
#47
Posted 14 June 2012 - 05:10 PM
Torcip, on 14 June 2012 - 04:06 PM, said:
Go tell that to a tanker who just broke track on a small rock. It happens alot.
Seeing as how technology seems to take great leaps in short amounts of time, I could see tanks with walking legs being really quite useful. Think about it. If the technology was there to make a very dextrous walking machine, and efficiently and cheaply, then yes it would probably make tracked tanks obsolete. Theres no need to prove the effectiveness of walking vs. rolling, the evidence is all around us in nature. The trick is making the technology to replicate it on a mechanical vehicle a practical solution.
Edited by Gigadouche, 14 June 2012 - 05:14 PM.
#48
Posted 14 June 2012 - 05:16 PM
#49
Posted 14 June 2012 - 05:23 PM
You see the mobility of a bipedal or even quad form vastly out shines the weight distribution and stability of tracks and wheels when tracks and wheels wouldn't otherwise be able to make it through the dense under brush or up the steep inclines of said impossible to pass terrain. That's why most of Vietnam was fought on foot, because the vehicles just couldn't get far into those dense over grown jungles, and why traditionally tanks don't do too well in Afghanistan.
#50
Posted 14 June 2012 - 05:24 PM
Gigadouche, on 14 June 2012 - 05:10 PM, said:
Go tell that to a tanker who just broke track on a small rock. It happens alot.
Seeing as how technology seems to take great leaps in short amounts of time, I could see tanks with walking legs being really quite useful. Think about it. If the technology was there to make a very dextrous walking machine, and efficiently and cheaply, then yes it would probably make tracked tanks obsolete. Theres no need to prove the effectiveness of walking vs. rolling, the evidence is all around us in nature. The trick is making the technology to replicate it on a mechanical vehicle a practical solution.
If you could somehow make even a single small unit vehicle that could move like a dolphin or big fish I think you would have complete underwater superiority
#51
Posted 14 June 2012 - 05:24 PM
Gigadouche, on 14 June 2012 - 05:10 PM, said:
Go tell that to a tanker who just broke track on a small rock. It happens alot.
Seeing as how technology seems to take great leaps in short amounts of time, I could see tanks with walking legs being really quite useful. Think about it. If the technology was there to make a very dextrous walking machine, and efficiently and cheaply, then yes it would probably make tracked tanks obsolete. Theres no need to prove the effectiveness of walking vs. rolling, the evidence is all around us in nature. The trick is making the technology to replicate it on a mechanical vehicle a practical solution.
You were saying?
#52
Posted 14 June 2012 - 05:27 PM
KageRyuu, on 14 June 2012 - 05:23 PM, said:
You see the mobility of a bipedal or even quad form vastly out shines the weight distribution and stability of tracks and wheels when tracks and wheels wouldn't otherwise be able to make it through the dense under brush or up the steep inclines of said impossible to pass terrain. That's why most of Vietnam was fought on foot, because the vehicles just couldn't get far into those dense over grown jungles, and why traditionally tanks don't do too well in Afghanistan.
A single daishi on the field of any of our past war would completely change the war and I imagine that anyone would surrender seeing one barreling down on you
#54
Posted 14 June 2012 - 05:33 PM
#55
Posted 14 June 2012 - 05:40 PM
#56
Posted 14 June 2012 - 05:43 PM
BenEEeees VAT GROWN BACON, on 14 June 2012 - 05:28 PM, said:
(not requoting a video, you can watch it above)
I do believe the only reaon that tank stopped was because the driver stopped it, probably so as not to kill the civilian driver. It seemed to move on by itself just fine.
#57
Posted 14 June 2012 - 05:44 PM
#58
Posted 14 June 2012 - 05:46 PM
ShadowLop, on 14 June 2012 - 05:43 PM, said:
I do believe the only reaon that tank stopped was because the driver stopped it, probably so as not to kill the civilian driver. It seemed to move on by itself just fine.
I merely wanted more tank crushing cars videos to continue... of course it stopped only to assess the damage, and not because it jammed. It's pretty obvious.
#59
Posted 14 June 2012 - 05:50 PM
#60
Posted 14 June 2012 - 05:50 PM
5 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 5 guests, 0 anonymous users