53 replies to this topic

[XxXAbsolutZeroXxX]

Tordin, on 21 December 2016 - 07:41 AM, said:

Sceptics and underminers said we humans would never take to the skies, never dive to the deep ocen, never to reach space, that thinking sending manned crafts to mars are insane and so on. And yet they have and will happen. Nothing is impossible, it just needs the right tech, time, cash and trust in "wild" projects. We are an amizing species with a brain of the truly creative, either it be for the better or worse.

I remember in 2012 - 2014, a lot of people said solar power would NEVER be cost effective.

They saw AMD, toyota and other manufacturers putting solar panels on the roofs of their factories and said it would never be feasible without a big dollar per watt loss in comparison to other forms of energy like nuclear.

Now in 2016, mere years later, there are many news articles which credit solar and wind as not only being feasible. But being ranked amongst the cheapest forms of energy available.

Its amazing how fast things can change.

[MarineTechs Protege]

List of reasons why mechs are never gonna be a things:

Tanks are more stable firing platforms
Tanks are far more mobile
Tanks will are, and always will be faster (as technology advances they will only get faster)
Bipedal mechs would be easy as crap to destroy (one good hit in the hip, knee, or ankle and its out)
Quad mechs would be quite a bit slower than a tank
A tank has treads and thus distributes weight across ground better, making it more suitable for more environments
A mech would get stuck in the mood in two seconds due to small feet
A mech could easily trip over literally anything
A mech is taller, thus just a bigger target to hit
A mech, even with sensors, would not be able to maneuver a city and better (probably worse) than a tank, and due to its height would be an easy target for militia and infantry hiding in buildings
A mech would actually have to have less armor to make way for all the more moving joints
A mech would not be able to carry as much weaponry because it would not be able to support the weight, for risk of stressing out and possibly damaging the joints
A mech would be a much easier target for attacking aircraft, due to its tall profile and inability to maneuver thanks to being on legs, not treads.

Should I continue?

Tordin, on 21 December 2016 - 07:41 AM, said:

Mechs, Tanks, Infantry etc thats the future. Noone replaces anyone, jsut different roles.
"Mechs not possible!" Bah, snobsnob. Sceptics are so funny.
Sceptics and underminers said we humans would never take to the skies, never dive to the deep ocen, never to reach space, that thinking sending manned crafts to mars are insane and so on. And yet they have and will happen. Nothing is impossible, it just needs the right tech, time, cash and trust in "wild" projects. We are an amizing species with a brain of the truly creative, either it be for the better or worse.

You do realize the military has gone into the logistics of mechs before right? I suggest you look at the powered armor combat suits and such that they pioneered and designed but were then found to be completely idiotic for use due to their cumbersome nature.

The technology now exists that a mech could potentially be used on the battlefield. If it were logistically feasible for the military to use them, then they would.

The military has always been leagues ahead in their technology. The internet existed as a military tech decades before it was ever made a public thing (despite what Al Gore will say lol). Same as drones and things like that. Drones have actually been in use for decades on end. The first remote control airplanes were pioneered back in the 50's with the Ryan Firebee being one of the first jet drone series ever made.

Walking mechs and such have been produced by the military before, and have been used in the past as prototypes. Such as the General Electric Walking Truck.

At this point (with more than 40 years of actual experimentation on this field with no success and only prototypes built) it seems unlikely mechs will ever have use outside of our fantasies. Frankly if the Boston Dynamics robots haven't gotten military use yet, I doubt any will.

[Lily from animove]

MarineTechs Protege, on 04 January 2017 - 01:45 AM, said:

List of reasons why mechs are never gonna be a things:

Tanks are more stable firing platforms
Tanks are far more mobile
Tanks will are, and always will be faster (as technology advances they will only get faster)
Bipedal mechs would be easy as crap to destroy (one good hit in the hip, knee, or ankle and its out)
Quad mechs would be quite a bit slower than a tank
A tank has treads and thus distributes weight across ground better, making it more suitable for more environments
A mech would get stuck in the mood in two seconds due to small feet
A mech could easily trip over literally anything
A mech is taller, thus just a bigger target to hit
A mech, even with sensors, would not be able to maneuver a city and better (probably worse) than a tank, and due to its height would be an easy target for militia and infantry hiding in buildings
A mech would actually have to have less armor to make way for all the more moving joints
A mech would not be able to carry as much weaponry because it would not be able to support the weight, for risk of stressing out and possibly damaging the joints
A mech would be a much easier target for attacking aircraft, due to its tall profile and inability to maneuver thanks to being on legs, not treads.

Should I continue?


You do realize the military has gone into the logistics of mechs before right? I suggest you look at the powered armor combat suits and such that they pioneered and designed but were then found to be completely idiotic for use due to their cumbersome nature.

The technology now exists that a mech could potentially be used on the battlefield. If it were logistically feasible for the military to use them, then they would.

The military has always been leagues ahead in their technology. The internet existed as a military tech decades before it was ever made a public thing (despite what Al Gore will say lol). Same as drones and things like that. Drones have actually been in use for decades on end. The first remote control airplanes were pioneered back in the 50's with the Ryan Firebee being one of the first jet drone series ever made.

Walking mechs and such have been produced by the military before, and have been used in the past as prototypes. Such as the General Electric Walking Truck.

At this point (with more than 40 years of actual experimentation on this field with no success and only prototypes built) it seems unlikely mechs will ever have use outside of our fantasies. Frankly if the Boston Dynamics robots haven't gotten military use yet, I doubt any will.

long list of assumptions, and basically what lot people claimed about previous new technologies and why they never would get common, yet have entirely replaced their previous ones.

[MarineTechs Protege]

Lily from animove, on 04 January 2017 - 02:50 AM, said:

long list of assumptions, and basically what lot people claimed about previous new technologies and why they never would get common, yet have entirely replaced their previous ones.

Not assumptions. Again the military has explored this technology before (if you had read the rest of the post you'd know about the Walking Truck, and military powered armor prototypes). These are not assumptions. The military has explored this technology, and this is what they are finding.

If they were feasible then they'd already be in commission in the military as the technology does exist.

[Kalimaster]

Cool. Let me know when they get the Jagermech DD in production. I want one soooooo bad.

[Lily from animove]

MarineTechs Protege, on 04 January 2017 - 02:22 PM, said:

Not assumptions. Again the military has explored this technology before (if you had read the rest of the post you'd know about the Walking Truck, and military powered armor prototypes). These are not assumptions. The military has explored this technology, and this is what they are finding.

If they were feasible then they'd already be in commission in the military as the technology does exist.

so did other militaries before, an bower could shoot like 40 arrows per minute and a gun just once in a while and they replaced stuff. Now we have guns shooting faster than anything before.

Wait until we get myomers and proper portable powesources. They aren't feasable because we don't have the needed tehcnolgies yet. Mechs will be a laod mor versitile than any tank can be. Don't forgte the way our mechwarrior mechs behave is not the battletech way. usually those mechs can climb and crouch and stuff. The military has just explored the techology at the current state of technology, and this is still far away from properly working mechs.

[MarineTechs Protege]

Lily from animove, on 05 January 2017 - 04:37 AM, said:

so did other militaries before, an bower could shoot like 40 arrows per minute and a gun just once in a while and they replaced stuff. Now we have guns shooting faster than anything before.

Guns didn't fully replace bows for a long time. Pistols were in use during the late medieval age, but they were not sufficient to replace bows until rifles came along.

Also people of the eras said and knew that guns would become the new weapons of the time. And they did. They didn't scoff at the idea of guns.

And even then they still retained swords and melee weapons because guns were still useless up close. Do you know how long it was before swords were no longer standard military weapons? Do you? The early 1900's. So it took guns around 400+ years of development to get anywhere near good enough to replace swords and bows entirely.

So we have been developing and testing mech ideas since the 1960's. And they have given us less productive results than drones did in the 1950's.

Lily from animove, on 05 January 2017 - 04:37 AM, said:

Wait until we get myomers and proper portable powesources. They aren't feasable because we don't have the needed tehcnolgies yet. Mechs will be a laod mor versitile than any tank can be. Don't forgte the way our mechwarrior mechs behave is not the battletech way. usually those mechs can climb and crouch and stuff. The military has just explored the techology at the current state of technology, and this is still far away from properly working mechs.

I believe you mean: if we get those things. There is a strong chance it probably won't happen in any of our lifetimes.

Also no. Because as technology increases, tanks will only become more and more advanced.

And BattleTech mechs are rather unrealistic (in that they gain their sense of balance from the pilot via the neurohelmet). Also even in BattleTech mechs are not that far used. Around 3029 the current estimate is that there was at maximum 100,000 mechs in service across all successor states and factions. This is 1: mechs are expensive, 2: they are meant to supplement a main unit, and 3: are in reality just a tank on legs.

In reality mechs are not going to be that smart of an idea. Too many easy damaged parts, way to many things which can go wrong (just a single calibration issue in say one single joint and it could fall over), and a mech could be completely rendered useless by an EMP blast as well. Tanks can still fight and do stuff if hit by an EMP blast. Yes it would immobilize them, but tanks have gun turrets and such for a reason.

Edited by MarineTechs Protege, 05 January 2017 - 06:01 PM.

[Lily from animove]

MarineTechs Protege, on 05 January 2017 - 06:00 PM, said:

Guns didn't fully replace bows for a long time. Pistols were in use during the late medieval age, but they were not sufficient to replace bows until rifles came along.

Also people of the eras said and knew that guns would become the new weapons of the time. And they did. They didn't scoff at the idea of guns.

And even then they still retained swords and melee weapons because guns were still useless up close. Do you know how long it was before swords were no longer standard military weapons? Do you? The early 1900's. So it took guns around 400+ years of development to get anywhere near good enough to replace swords and bows entirely.

So we have been developing and testing mech ideas since the 1960's. And they have given us less productive results than drones did in the 1950's.

I believe you mean: if we get those things. There is a strong chance it probably won't happen in any of our lifetimes.

Also no. Because as technology increases, tanks will only become more and more advanced.

thats just nonsense, from myomers a tank won't benefit as it simply uses tracks.
Also when you know swords have coexisted AGES with guns before they were repalced why do you think mechs won't exist a long time together with tanks ebfore the may replace them.

and your example about swords, so gunpwoderwepons exists since the 11th century. and swords still existed until 1900. so guns took those 400 years according to you (which isn't accurate at all). But that we research mechs for 60 years without proper results insantly denies that they may get better in 300 years than tanks? Wow sry but I don't feel the need to discuss that any further with a person that has such a low amount of consistenty in his own logic or argumentation.
And no, battletech mechs don't gain their balance by the pilot, you are even more wrong here. The battlemechs even without the pilot have own behaviors to stabilise themselves and stuff. You haven't even gathered the lore of battletehc correctly.

The neurohelmet is a way to also control the mech, utilizing the pilots sense for balance.
just a bit from sarna

"The neurohelmet reads the brainwaves of the pilot. The basic model of neurohelmet focuses on the human sense of balance. With a multi-ton gyroscope and powerful myomers in the limbs, BattleMechs can stand upright and remain balanced on their own, but the limited intelligence of BattleMechs and natural conservatism of their control computers means they often need to be told when it is acceptable to be off balance, which may be helpful in battle as MechWarriors push their machines. The neurohelmet also provides feedback to the MechWarrior, helping them retain their own sense of balance as they sit 10 to 12 meters in the air atop a swaying, weaving bipedal giant robot."

so the battlemech can keep balance on it's own. it doesn't requires the neurohelmet at all. The neurohelmet just helps the pilot to "feel" the mech and it's positioning. Thats a great advantage to get. And no they are in the lore also not a tank on legs, they have hands can do various stuff with these and still also crouch and much more.
Thsi entire discussion with your is based on like 50% of misinformation about the BT lore. And 40% misinformation about how technology already developed in the past. Then theres probably 10% correct information you spread. Thats tiresome and not even a base for a proper discussion.

what aldebaran robotics and boston dynamics do is just the 11th century version of gunpowder weapons stage.

Edited by Lily from animove, 06 January 2017 - 03:04 AM.

[MarineTechs Protege]

Lily from animove, on 06 January 2017 - 02:54 AM, said:

what aldebaran robotics and boston dynamics do is just the 11th century version of gunpowder weapons stage.

Not really. Because the minute guns were made they were in military. Mechs have been being made since the 60's. I don't see them being used.

Lily from animove, on 06 January 2017 - 02:54 AM, said:

so the battlemech can keep balance on it's own. it doesn't requires the neurohelmet at all. The neurohelmet just helps the pilot to "feel" the mech and it's positioning. Thats a great advantage to get. And no they are in the lore also not a tank on legs, they have hands can do various stuff with these and still also crouch and much more.
Thsi entire discussion with your is based on like 50% of misinformation about the BT lore. And 40% misinformation about how technology already developed in the past. Then theres probably 10% correct information you spread. Thats tiresome and not even a base for a proper discussion.

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Neurohelmet

Quote

Critical to the functioning of BattleMechs, the neurohelmet is worn by the MechWarrior inside the cockpit and connects pilot to machine. This allows the 'Mech to use its pilot's sense of balance to keep it upright.

Uh huh. Yup. You keep on pretending to yourself.

If you are gonna quote Sarna. Quote all of it. You are being intellectually dishonest.

[Lily from animove]

MarineTechs Protege, on 06 January 2017 - 01:05 PM, said:

Not really. Because the minute guns were made they were in military. Mechs have been being made since the 60's. I don't see them being used.

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Neurohelmet


Uh huh. Yup. You keep on pretending to yourself.

If you are gonna quote Sarna. Quote all of it. You are being intellectually dishonest.

Show me these military mechs? there are currently none, they just experiment with robots , somewhat legs and some exoskeletons. So what the military has isn't even "mechs".

you make such bad comaprisons, it's like saying, look thats a tank



just because it has threads like a tank has.

tell me which part on sarna says my part is incorrect? nowher eis said, the neurohelm is needed for the emch to keep balance. The emch can do this without the neurohemlet. You stated it needs the neurohelmet for balance. But that is simply incorrect.

[MarineTechs Protege]

Ignorant buffoon.



Welcome to the Walking Truck, a military transportation vehicle that was built in 1965. It was shelved after a few years.



Welcome to the Big Dog, walking autonomous robot. Project started in 2005. It was shelved by the military as it was deemed to loud, and rather cumbersome. They tried to build a successor to this, Spot Mini, but it was also shelved because it couldn't carry much weight (only 40 pounds) and wasn't suitable.

Welcome to the age where mecha is shelved regularly by the military because it doesn't outdo what we already have, in any way, shape, or form.



This is the Hardiman exoskeleton power armor: started in 1965, and shelved in 1971 for being impractically heavy and cumbersome, with severe limitations.



This is the LIFESUIT prototype. Its been a prototype since the 1980's, not shelved yet. But it is severely limited (only being able to travel a total of a mile on full charge).



There ya go, a history of the Military shelving powered armor, mecha, and robots, because they don't trump what we already have.

[Lily from animove]

MarineTechs Protege, on 09 January 2017 - 04:34 PM, said:

Ignorant buffoon.



Welcome to the Walking Truck, a military transportation vehicle that was built in 1965. It was shelved after a few years.



Welcome to the Big Dog, walking autonomous robot. Project started in 2005. It was shelved by the military as it was deemed to loud, and rather cumbersome. They tried to build a successor to this, Spot Mini, but it was also shelved because it couldn't carry much weight (only 40 pounds) and wasn't suitable.

Welcome to the age where mecha is shelved regularly by the military because it doesn't outdo what we already have, in any way, shape, or form.



This is the Hardiman exoskeleton power armor: started in 1965, and shelved in 1971 for being impractically heavy and cumbersome, with severe limitations.



This is the LIFESUIT prototype. Its been a prototype since the 1980's, not shelved yet. But it is severely limited (only being able to travel a total of a mile on full charge).



There ya go, a history of the Military shelving powered armor, mecha, and robots, because they don't trump what we already have.

as said, they aren't mechs, they are mostly robots or vehicles with legs. These vehicles are explicitely stated to not be mechs. And thats why my previous comparison of the KettenRAD to a tnak is what you do here, you try to tell people the kettenrad is a tnak, which it isn't, They just have threads in common but that doesn'T defines them as tanks. And said vehicles and cinstructions above are not classified as mechs. You showed us a Cybernetic Walking Machine (which is the classicifcation for the walkign truck. which isnt a "mech"). you showed us the Big dog, but him and his buddies are ROBOTS. not mechs. and an exoskeleton. and they are still not mechs. Do you buy cars with the same accuracy of classifications? I mena do you go to the trader and say I want a red car and end up buying this



because obciously, is red, shaped like a car has 4 tires. Doesn't changes the fact thats it is not an automobile.

You are the guy who comes into a discussion about apples starting to talk about oranges because they are round too, and pears because they have seeds within too and tomates because some are red like apples too.
But that still won't contriute properly to the discussion about apples.

All you showed are various machines utilizing legs, yet none of them is a mech by definition.

Edited by Lily from animove, 10 January 2017 - 01:59 AM.

[MarineTechs Protege]

Lily from animove, on 10 January 2017 - 01:57 AM, said:

as said, they aren't mechs,

My definition a mech is:

Is a walking vehicle with limbs, the term was created to distinguish these from Powered Armor.

I did differentiate between the military mechs and powered armor here. Again the General Electric walking truck IS A ******* MECH by the goddamn definition.

It walks on limbs, and not wheels. It is much larger than its pilot. By definition its a mech. And it is shelved. Just like every other military mech project.

You have yet to provide your definition of a mech. Unfortunately for you, the term mech can be used to describe practically anything that walks on legs and weighs a couple tons.

You are just one of those people who refuses to accept anything you don't like, so you commit the fallacy of "Moving the goal Post" so that you don't have to accept that this is a mech, just so you can say "that's not a mech it just uses legs blah blah blah."

Come back when you can actually prove that the General Electric Walking Truck isn't a mech.



By definition this is a mech, and constitutes one of the first designs of a mech from War of the Worlds.

Edited by MarineTechs Protege, 10 January 2017 - 02:11 AM.

[Lily from animove]

MarineTechs Protege, on 10 January 2017 - 02:08 AM, said:

My definition a mech is:

Is a walking vehicle with limbs, the term was created to distinguish these from Powered Armor.

I did differentiate between the military mechs and powered armor here. Again the General Electric walking truck IS A ******* MECH by the goddamn definition.

It walks on limbs, and not wheels. It is much larger than its pilot. By definition its a mech. And it is shelved. Just like every other military mech project.

You have yet to provide your definition of a mech. Unfortunately for you, the term mech can be used to describe practically anything that walks on legs and weighs a couple tons.

You are just one of those people who refuses to accept anything you don't like, so you commit the fallacy of "Moving the goal Post" so that you don't have to accept that this is a mech, just so you can say "that's not a mech it just uses legs blah blah blah."

Come back when you can actually prove that the General Electric Walking Truck isn't a mech.



By definition this is a mech, and constitutes one of the first designs of a mech from War of the Worlds.

your definition isn't the common/scientific definition. if they don't even define it as a mech themselfs, much fun living in your "it's a mech" world. We can also talk about dogs and I start declaring everythign as a dog that has 4 legs a nose and fur. But thats doesn't makes a cat a dog just because MY definition does.

you are one of those people who refuse to use words as what they mean, which makes just every commnication with you pointless because the base for word based communication is a definition both, sender and receiver use. The proof is, that the company themselves describe it as a Cybernetic Walking Machinen and not a mech.

So when you want to handle the term mecha right, you will get a few issues because you either try to differenciate correctly, then it needs to be humaoid in shape, which said vehicle isn't or your use the wider term or the original meanign mecha, but then even a tank would be a mecha. But what you do is drawing the line where it pleases you outside of any facts or definition.

Edited by Lily from animove, 10 January 2017 - 07:16 AM.

[MarineTechs Protege]

Lily from animove, on 10 January 2017 - 07:13 AM, said:

your definition isn't the common/scientific definition.

The common definition is so broad it describes the Walking Truck as a mech. In fact the common definition is so broad it literally states that anything that is significantly larger than the pilot, and uses limbs instead of tracks or wheels is considered a mech.

There is no scientific definition as the term 'mech is entirely colloquial.

Lily from animove, on 10 January 2017 - 07:13 AM, said:

So when you want to handle the term mecha

Mecha and Mech are not the same. Mecha is a genre. Mech is the name of a giant stompy limbed robots.

Lily from animove, on 10 January 2017 - 07:13 AM, said:

you are one of those people who refuse to use words as what they mean, which makes just every commnication with you pointless because the base for word based communication is a definition both, sender and receiver use. The proof is, that the company themselves describe it as a Cybernetic Walking Machinen and not a mech.
definition.

You have refused to even give a definition for what you consider a mech. So until you do, your opinion is moot. Also there is not company which describes their walking robots as a mech. "METHOD-1" manned robot project by "Korea Future Technology"

So by your logic "If they don't call it a mech it isn't a mech."

That's an argument from ignorance. By the common definition of mech, Walking Truck is a mech.

Quote

The term (mecha) may also refer to real world piloted humanoid robots / non-humanoid robotic platforms, either currently in existence or still on the drawing board (i.e. at the planning or design stage). Alternatively, in the original Japanese context of the word (see Characteristics), 'mecha' may refer to mobile machinery/vehicles (including aircraft) in general, manned or otherwise.

Come back when you have a leg to stand on. Walking Truck is a mech.

Edited by MarineTechs Protege, 10 January 2017 - 08:59 AM.

[Lily from animove]

MarineTechs Protege, on 10 January 2017 - 08:58 AM, said:

The common definition is so broad it describes the Walking Truck as a mech. In fact the common definition is so broad it literally states that anything that is significantly larger than the pilot, and uses limbs instead of tracks or wheels is considered a mech.

There is no scientific definition as the term 'mech is entirely colloquial.

Mecha and Mech are not the same. Mecha is a genre. Mech is the name of a giant stompy limbed robots.

You have refused to even give a definition for what you consider a mech. So until you do, your opinion is moot. Also there is not company which describes their walking robots as a mech. "METHOD-1" manned robot project by "Korea Future Technology"

So by your logic "If they don't call it a mech it isn't a mech."

That's an argument from ignorance. By the common definition of mech, Walking Truck is a mech.



Come back when you have a leg to stand on. Walking Truck is a mech.

I don't refuse my definition I use the one thats common, if you take the "mech" definition it has to be a humanoid piloted thing. the truck is piloted yet not human. The Dog is not piloted. and the other is just an exoskeleton.

My definition is irrelevant if a definition exists. Unless I just want to talk to my own living and communicating in my own world.

[MarineTechs Protege]

Lily from animove, on 11 January 2017 - 02:21 AM, said:

I don't refuse my definition I use the one thats common, if you take the "mech" definition it has to be a humanoid piloted thing. the truck is piloted yet not human. The Dog is not piloted. and the other is just an exoskeleton.

If your definition is that it has to be a humanoid piloted thing, then no chicken walker is a mech, because chicken legs are not humanoid. Therefore the mech is not humanoid, therefore not a mech. By that definition Timber Wolf is not a mech. Neither is Goliath, Scorpion, or any robot with more than 2 humanoid legs, with only two arms, a cockpit on top and centered over the torso etc.

Come back with a definition that works. Again the three legged robots from war of the Worlds are considered mechs. Walking Truck is one, and is globally accepted as one, and if you look up real life mechs, it is one of the ones that will pop up.

Come back when you aren't relying on False Equivocation. The global standard for mechs concedes that Walking Truck is a mech. There is no definition of mech that requires it to be humanoid. It only requires it to be a robot, piloted by a human, which is substantially larger than said human.

[Lily from animove]

MarineTechs Protege, on 11 January 2017 - 02:41 AM, said:

If your definition is that it has to be a humanoid piloted thing, then no chicken walker is a mech, because chicken legs are not humanoid. Therefore the mech is not humanoid, therefore not a mech. By that definition Timber Wolf is not a mech. Neither is Goliath, Scorpion, or any robot with more than 2 humanoid legs, with only two arms, a cockpit on top and centered over the torso etc.

Come back with a definition that works. Again the three legged robots from war of the Worlds are considered mechs. Walking Truck is one, and is globally accepted as one, and if you look up real life mechs, it is one of the ones that will pop up.

Come back when you aren't relying on False Equivocation. The global standard for mechs concedes that Walking Truck is a mech. There is no definition of mech that requires it to be humanoid. It only requires it to be a robot, piloted by a human, which is substantially larger than said human.

Yes by proper definition chicken walkers are not fully humaoid, thats why they are called walkers in other universes utilizing avionoid legs. In the battletech univese these are still called mechs, but we talk about RL here.

But your current definition you used would even make these things mechs:

http://www.wbur.org/...19/strandbeests

simply becasue they have legs and move (since oyu seem to not care about leg kind, leg count and if it's piloted or not)

Edited by Lily from animove, 11 January 2017 - 03:21 AM.

[MarineTechs Protege]

Lily from animove, on 11 January 2017 - 03:18 AM, said:

Yes by proper definition chicken walkers are not fully humaoid, thats why they are called walkers in other universes utilizing avionoid legs. In the battletech univese these are still called mechs, but we talk about RL here.

In real life the definition of mech is so broad that no scientific organization uses it. Method-1 is not called a mech.

Lily from animove, on 11 January 2017 - 03:18 AM, said:

But your current definition you used would even make these things mechs:

http://www.wbur.org/...19/strandbeests

simply becasue they have legs and move (since oyu seem to not care about leg kind, leg count and if it's piloted or not)

Talk about the lord of all strawmans. You really do have trouble reading like a normal human being don't you? I guess you missed that very important detail of them having to have a pilot. But you know, keep on being intellectually dishonest the way you have this entire conversation.

[Lily from animove]

MarineTechs Protege, on 11 January 2017 - 05:55 AM, said:

In real life the definition of mech is so broad that no scientific organization uses it. Method-1 is not called a mech.

Talk about the lord of all strawmans. You really do have trouble reading like a normal human being don't you? I guess you missed that very important detail of them having to have a pilot. But you know, keep on being intellectually dishonest the way you have this entire conversation.

you yourself showed "Big dog" as an example, and that one does not have a pilot, so don't tell me I can't read, you argued with military experimenting on mechs by bringing up the "Big Dog". You can't even follow your own used arguments. all you did was constantly bringing oranges to the apple discussion. Then suddenly again when we tak about the definition of the apple you try to tell me I don't talk about apples. Because I used your defintion of an apple and showed you an pear that fitted the definition you slapped on the apple. But suddenly you bring up MY defintion of the apple (which never changed) and say my pear doesn't fits my apple defintition.

You were the one who brought up invalid fruits, and when I used your invalid logic you suddenly call mine invalid because you cannot see the same mistake in your logic when i willingyl show this flaw to you with an extreme example. you seriously have basic logical issues.

All you do her eis shine with massively broken logic, like you said:

Quote

"Welcome to the Big Dog, walking autonomous robot. Project started in 2005. It was shelved by the military as it was deemed to loud, and rather cumbersome. They tried to build a successor to this, Spot Mini, but it was also shelved because it couldn't carry much weight (only 40 pounds) and wasn't suitable.

Welcome to the age where mecha is shelved regularly by the military because it doesn't outdo what we already have, in any way, shape, or form.

yet boston dynamics keeps researching on it.



yes thats fundamental research scientific stage. ther ehave been air vehicles in the basic research since the ancient. and there were tons of shelved concept, yet we have very advanced airplanes today and flight is a regular thing. These robots and walkers are exactly the counter parts to those early and shelved concepts.

Quote

because it doesn't outdo what we already have,

that was the case for the trains, that was the case for cars, that was the case for guns. it was basically the case of most inventions who were in the stages of fundamental research. And walking vehicles are at the same stage too. And they will surely in future have a role because they will be able to do things tanks can't do.

It's like benzs first car, which couldn't outdo anything as well.

We had steam engined cars, trams and tractors as well. And once electicity and gasoline kicked in they were much more competitive suddenly. With proper better power and engine researches even concepts like the bog dog may one day succeed because it does eradicated their issues what maked them shelved projects for the current time. But time advances and so does technology unless we bomb mankinds civilisation to crap.

Edited by Lily from animove, 11 January 2017 - 06:52 AM.