16 replies to this topic

[ZeProme]

Been thinking about this. Mechs are awesome and such but is it even possible to have a mech over 10 tons walking at high speeds? Cause the thought of mech's leg carrying the weight of mechs that goes fast (like 100km/h+) doesn't seem to be be possible.

Now I know that mechs have something that other types of military vehicles that don't have. The ability to travel over rough terrain and climb hills. However, the resources and the technology seems sophisticated. The fact that mechs can be disabled easily by getting cored and legged maybe makes them not work the resource to be devoted to like the Maus from WWII.

Armor wise, can they endure a lot of punishment? Can small weapons like RPG hurt them?

Mechs falling down from the drop ship... Can the legs endure the impact? Or is there suppose to be a parachute? Is it even enough to, say, help a mech successfully land without structural damage like the Atlas?

How do people get inside the cockpit?

If the mech's internal heat systems are hot, would the cockpit be as hot near shutdown?

Just some food for thought questions. I know that this is a game but just thinking of piloting a mech in real life makes me drool. Just wondering if it's possible.

[S3dition]

ZeProme, on 28 July 2013 - 07:05 PM, said:

Been thinking about this. Mechs are awesome and such but is it even possible to have a mech over 10 tons walking at high speeds? Cause the thought of mech's leg carrying the weight of mechs that goes fast (like 100km/h+) doesn't seem to be be possible.

Now I know that mechs have something that other types of military vehicles that don't have. The ability to travel over rough terrain and climb hills. However, the resources and the technology seems sophisticated. The fact that mechs can be disabled easily by getting cored and legged maybe makes them not work the resource to be devoted to like the Maus from WWII.

Armor wise, can they endure a lot of punishment? Can small weapons like RPG hurt them?

Mechs falling down from the drop ship... Can the legs endure the impact? Or is there suppose to be a parachute? Is it even enough to, say, help a mech successfully land without structural damage like the Atlas?

How do people get inside the cockpit?

If the mech's internal heat systems are hot, would the cockpit be as hot near shutdown?

Just some food for thought questions. I know that this is a game but just thinking of piloting a mech in real life makes me drool. Just wondering if it's possible.

1) 80 tons of walking goodness.
2) Mechs over 15 or so feet will be nothing more than targets, but they're still fun to pilot in games.
3) Can an RPG go through an M1, Leopard 2, or Challenger 2? (no).
4) We can technically drop a 68 ton M1. But why would we? At 1 per aircraft, there would be about a billion dollars worth of C17's to drop a single tank platoon worth $60 million.
5) With a ladder
6) This is why mech pilots wear nothing but jock straps:



Hope that helps.

[Zarlaren]

For a mech to happen you need the tech, First you need a reliable Gyro system to keep said mech from falling down for loss of balance, Need materials to build said mech, Need that fancy stuff to make the joints move, Need to make the joints just right to support the weight of said mech, Then the electronics,gadgets,weapons and armor. Even for a light Commando it proboly be a billion dollars to put one together through countless years of engineering and manufacturing also including labor costs the workers gotta get paid too proboly 200 bucks a hour for something like a mech for being so complex if we were to have one real life mech sometime in said future. As far as I know there is no Gyro System in todays tech or they be mechs now.

List of things to build a mech.

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Gyro
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Myomer
http://mwo.gamepedia.com/Engine
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Endo_Steel

Or just this http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Commando

Even for a light 25 tons having it walk on two legs is at this moment is beyond or tech range it would also be terribly expensive to engineer and build just one. Maby someday but today or tomorrow very unlikly.

[Sasha Volkova]

To answer the OP's question : ¨Mechs In-Game... Can They Be Real?¨
The answer is no.
They are not real.

K thx bye.

[9erRed]

Greetings all,

Reference the construction of a walking humanoid machine in real life.

History Line:
From the canon history, most of the construction of these Mech's was completed within an automated factory, just churning out parts and components. The advanced armour needed to be constructed in 0 gravity as dissimilar materials would not foam, blend, and bond within a planetary environment. Moving the Mech's arms and Legs required components connected within the chassis to act similar to muscles, these components were called Myomer bundles.
[Desc: Myomer, similar to modern electro-active polymers, is a fibrous material consisting of microscopically thin tubes filled with a substance (acti-strandular fiber) that contracts when voltage is applied and serves as artificial muscle in applications ranging from BattleMechs to artificial limbs. The central DI computer of a 31st century BattleMech automates the majority of the unit's functions, but lacks autonomy of action. Other BattleMech-mounted computers, designed for targeting or command and control, are massive by modern standards (from 500 kg to 3 metric tons), though how much of that mass is shielding or other supporting systems is unclear.
First Battle-mech designed in 2439 (Mackie)

Assembly was completed also within automated facilities, with Tech's only required to complete the programming and final testing of various systems.
-End History.


-Now can we or would we want to construct this type of chassis?
If it was to be used off planet and within a hostile environment, probably yes.
-Do we have the tech required to produce a walking 20 to 25 ton vehicle? Yes. Current developments within the artificial limb and exoskeleton industry are starting to use the new electrically activated artificial Muscles under development. (Again read military and DARPA)
-Do we currently have the powertrain units to move these Mech's, yes, but they are not for civilian use. (read Military only)
-Do we currently have gyro and auto controlled systems that allow these elements to move without falling down and not requiring direct input from the "pilot"? Yes. Although only in it's military application at this time, it does exist.
- Would we want to arm these Mech's and use them for direct combat? Probably not, as airborne and orbital weapons would quickly reduce these relatively slow moving target elements to scrap and salvage.


Keep in mind that the Corporations that (within this history line) produce these mech's are global and even planet sized in some case's. So cost and engineer wise it would not be a problem to tool a few factory's to build one. The original design and use of mech's was for cargo handling, farming, forestry, and activities within dangerous or hazardous environments.


And as a note the transport of these Mech's was dedicated to specifically designed transports, either off loaded on the ground or "Hot Dropped" from very low orbit with disposable Jump Jet packs. (yes even the atlas had these packs) But that was only used for very serious circumstances as there was always a great risk in doing this type of "drop'. The timeline Neural helmet worn by pilots was only required for when the mech was off balance and needed the pilots sense of balance to remain standing, or to lean into an impact or recoil effect. (we are currently testing similar devices for artificial systems, paraplegic or handicapped users. Also DARPA for the military)


Just for info on where we are now with walking and operating self powered elements, either 4 legged or 2. (just upscale everything)

- LS3 "big-dog".


- "Petman" 2 legged walking.


- many videos about "Asimov"


All for now,
9erRed

Edited by 9erRed, 03 August 2013 - 06:44 PM.

[Anjian]

Mechs can't be real. To understand why, lets not talk about ground pressure at the moment, which is the other valid argument. Tank threads let you distribute weight over a larger surface area than feet, but that never seemed to stop the dinosaurs. That is the ground pressure argument.

But there is something called armor distribution or armor applied over surface area. To get maximum protection the amount of armor must be applied over the smallest surface area. Thus 20 tons of armor applied over a large surface area doesn't have the density and the thickness over 20 tons applied over a smaller surface area. Given that, tanks already have superior lower surface area than mechs in addition to the ground pressure argument.

However this argument may not applied if the mech is shaped like a cockroach or a crab. An insect like mech might actually have lower overall surface and frontal area than a tank, while multiple legs deal with distributing the ground pressure.

But but, a mechanism with better distribution of surface pressure is also likely to have more rolling or movement resistance, because there is more surface contact to the ground. That is why if you want to move fast or faster, you need feet (see cheetah and ostriches). This is also why motorocycles are efficient movers. But to use bipedal legs for speed and minimum ground pressure, we want our mech to be as light as possible, probably using graphene or carbon nanotube technology, with hollow internal structures and porous armor plating.

In addition to lowering exposed surface area, protection is also enhanced with two other factors. The first is lowering total front, side and rear profiles. The second armor must be angled and sloped to increase deflection. Sloped armor can also decrease radar detection.

So instead of a humanoid, our realistic mech should look more like a cockroach with cricket legs, very low, very minimal frontal and side profiles, angled, streamlined armor for maximum shot deflection. The bipedal movement is going to be forward jointed (like human knees) if you want to move forward faster, or reverse jointed (like bird knees) if you want to jump higher.

To complete our mechs, I would prefer the mechs to be not human piloted, but controlled via a network using an AI with human controllers. In effect our fast moving insect like mechs function as land based armed drones.

I think I can make a scifi movie out of this.

Edited by Anjian, 05 August 2013 - 03:01 AM.

[Zarlaren]

A 20 to 25 ton mech could be possiable maby a todays gyro could do that much but to attempt to build a 100 ton Atlas in real life I would disagree a gyro would support a 100 ton Atlas at todays gyro to keep it balanced. It would be a great step for man kind if a Atlas could be built in todays tech. Also a Omega 150 ton mech would also be a great challenge for the Gyro system. Could you imagine trying to balance 100 -150 tons? 100 tons is 200,000 pounds 150 tons is 300,000 pounds if a todays Gyro can balance that i'll be amazed.

[Zarlaren]

And also what engine would be able to move a 100 ton Atlas fully geared and armored useing todays engines? Nuclear is out of the question it would weigh too much to contain the radiation with lead and concrete. Piston engine would also weigh too much and you would need to stock fuel ether gasoline,diesel,propane, and natural gas which would also weigh too much. Steam engine might if you can stock enough coal which still might weigh too much. Electric motor maby but you would need a battery the size of a house or office building two or three stairway which would still weigh too much.

So what engine do we throw on it that would still allow for it to be within the 100 ton limit using todays engines? Solar panels would be too weak energy output and windpower is unreliable. Hydrogen maby but it would be expensive as putting pure platinum toilets in your house. Rocket or Jet engines would maby work but still got the fuel weight to worry about.

Another thery would be if you look at star trek tech you can add a matter and anti matter engine called a warp core but we don't have that yet ether so were stuck with the previous choices or another engine we have today I might of overlooked.

Edited by Zarla, 05 August 2013 - 05:46 AM.

[Zarlaren]

The next question would be would a 100 ton Atlas be enough for the military and would they be happy with it's performance even at 3050 year tech specs of ppc's,erppcs,lasers and so on? If for say boom they got a Atlas would they use it?

Edited by Zarla, 05 August 2013 - 07:42 AM.

[9erRed]

Greetings all,

Reference all the talk of surface armour over specific area's and protection gained by "more or sloped" armour.

We need to understand what types of armour are being used today to provide this current level of protection.

The armour used today is composed of multi-layered dissimilar materials designed to disrupt, break, and slow down or stop a penetrating projectile. (read- Sabot, Slap, Hesh, Hep) And to break the jet formed "Heat" type penetrators they employ stand-off explosive plates or pre-ignition slats or fencing to start the penetrator jet forming beyond it pre-set optimal distance. [so we have kinetic, shock, and chemical methods to defeat armour.]
Currently some Heat double warheads can penetrate nearly a meter of armoured steel(RHAe), DU rounds similar.

Todays armour is a mixture of protection over weight trade-off, with cost being factored as a 3rd or 4th criteria. These types of armour are produced under strict secrecy for methods and composites used, using standard and advanced construction methods. (some including metals, ceramics, jells) [Read all manufactured within a terrain based environment]

Breakthroughs in armour protection are being chased by improved and smarter warheads, again better materials and thicker armour. Adding weight and design changes to the vehicles being protected, requiring larger drive-trains to push this mass. Here in lies the trade-off, speed, mobility, protection and when weaponized firepower.

Here's an example of one current breakthrough armour:

Advanced Modular Armor Protection (AMAP)- AMAP is making use of new advanced steel alloys, Aluminium-Titanium alloys, nanometric steels, ceramics and nano-ceramics. The new high-hardened steel needs 30% less thickness to offer the same protection level as ARMOX500Z High Hard Armour steel. While Titanium requires only 58% as much weight as rolled homogeneous armour (RHA) for reaching the same level of protection, Mat 7720 new, a newly developed Aluminium-Titanium alloy, needs only 38% of the weight. That means that this alloy is more than twice as protective as RHA of the same weight.
AMAP is also making use of new nano-ceramics, which are harder and lighter than current ceramics, while having multi-hit capability. Normal ceramic tiles and a liner backing have a mass-efficiency (EM) value of 3 compared to normal steel armour, while it fulfills STANAG 4569. The new nano-crystalline ceramic materials should increase the hardness compared to current ceramics by 70% and the weight reduction is 30%, therefore the EM value is larger than 4.Furthermore the higher fracture toughness increases the general multi-hit capability.


Now lets jump to an as of yet unreachable source of armour production. Zero gravity.

Real-life Back History - over 20yrs ago NASA tested a small space based fabrication unit to attempt to construct large arrays of structural framing for space based structures. Using a nuclear furnace and foaming the metals to extrude mile long triangle frames. The method worked and produced very strong metals. (Gravity not having a bearing on the formation, foaming, or blending of the materials, titanium was a large component of the metals) Again this method produced excellent results but at a very high cost. Today it costs about $10,000 a pound to get to orbit, back then it was even higher.

It's a common fact in many industries that foamed materials provide lighter structures and depending on the materials used much stronger materials. (foamed cement, metals as some examples.) But again at a very high cost (and sometimes prohibitive) for production machinery and manufacturing. - Do I want the very best protection on 10 vehicles for 20 billion each, or just very good for 1 million each on 1000 vehicles. So, if I could get lighter materials produced in 0 gravity that provide 10 or more times the strength and protection and I could reduce the weight being carried, would I?

Ok, lets jump to what a Mech would weigh as it's built. I'll start with a what we call a light mech as that would probably be where construction would start if this machine was ever considered for construction.


Example a Commando3A:

From canon the empty frame weighs 2.5 tons (no power-plant/armour)
-could we build a working movable chassis within that weight, probably yes.
(with solid titanium round shafts @ 1.53xdia2 lbs per foot, that's a lot of metal we could use, and not even using foamed blended materials.)
Max out armour with 5.6 Tons (max armour on that chassis)
- use all the best types and methods available
- could we do that, yes. But at what protection level and what weapon types are we defending against.
(Armour is not wielded to the frame but applied so it can be replaced)

So here we have a chassis that is strong, armoured and now weighs in at 8.1 Tons.
[as a note just the turret on a Leopard tank weighs 21 tons]

Keep in mind there are no weapons here so providing a large amount of power for energy weapons is not a considering factor. Providing a power plant to drive everything would depend on the power requirements of all the chassis systems used. Motors, computers, gyro stabilizing systems, units to flex and move appendages, cooling systems. If no weapons are installed that's 16.9 tons of weight we can dedicate to an engine or power plant. That's a crazy amount of space and weight to drive this structure.
For the best power to weight ratio (staying environmentally friendly) lets use a current large "rechargeable" fuel cell stack called the PEMFC that has a 1500 W/kg ratio as that should provide most if not all the energy we may need. Even 10 tons (9071Kg) of this fuel cell material produces large amounts of energy. [around 13,600Kw] So now either store the excess power or only produce it on demand, another deciding factor.

So as you see it would be technically feasible to construct one, again would we want to, probable not. Having no immediate requirement for the construction and cost of this type of element would probably render the design to never be built.

Sorry for bouncing around on topics but just thinking out loud,
9erRed

Edited by 9erRed, 05 August 2013 - 05:22 PM.

[ZeProme]

Very informative all. That's some good opinions there, thank you all!

I encourage others to join the discussion!

[Zarlaren]

But If I was to choose which mech I wanted it be the Atlas. Can the Atlas be real sure if tech from 3050 power jumps to 2013 and suddenly we can build a Atlas from scratch effortlessly like we knew what we were doing.

[Zarlaren]

If we can have 3050 tech in 2013 now then when we get to 3050 would tech power double would we have super mechs twice as powerful and strong?

[ZeProme]

Probably even more stronger than nucleur weapons? :/

The thought of imaging walking mechs with really high amounts of tonnage really makes me think... it just won't happen.

I think I can see it for lower tonnages. But then, the technology, cost of resources and production would probably scale off the chart compared to... say a modern tank.

Realy though, mechs only have one thing that surpasses other types of locamotives, it's the fact that it's bi-pedal and it can traverse over steep terrain. But then again, if you control space, you can just do orbital bombardment so walking mechs aren't needed. Plus, the tanks in the future could possibly be even more cheap and useful through production.

Just saying.

[9erRed]

Greetings all,

Originally the Mech chassis was designed for commercial use only, replacing labor intensive tasks or hazardous duties. The mining industry, the forestry industry, and possibly firefighting or rescue would all benefit from single vehicle elements that could deliver the requirements that a Mech chassis could bring.

We already have working prototypes of material loading/handling chassis and the military is seriously looking into endoskeleton frames for assisting with loading munitions on vehicles. I'm sure that the 'rough' country or isolated areas could benefit from a Mech that specialized in firefighting, as half the problem is getting to these sites with the equipment required to successfully fight and put down a fire.
As we proceed to the edges of our planets atmosphere and look at devices that can be used to assist in construction of space bound equipment and facilities, this is where the cost related to constructing this type of machine may be the least of the issues. We already have companies and organizations seriously looking at getting new resources from near by space locations, including asteroids, and planetary bodies. All excellent endeavors that could require the use of self contained, extremely durable, working manned machines.

Just saying,
9erRed

[Colonel Fubar]

History has proven if a man can dream it, it can be done.

[9erRed]

Greetings all,

Reference:
History has proven if a man can dream it, it can be done.

Now normally that would be true, but in today's world,

- if you can't make money with the idea.
- or gain any advantage.
- or someone pays you because they want one or both of the previous items.
- or it's crushed because it wasn't someone else's idea.
- it would disrupt or harm any current tech's it would replace.

It mostly gets relegated to the back burner till it's really, absolutely needed.

Just some thoughts, but you keep up that rosy outlook,
9erRed

Edited by 9erRed, 27 April 2014 - 08:54 PM.