35 replies to this topic

[The6thMessenger]

Looking at the photo, i asked myself "is that really the scale of the urbanmech?". It's probably not, but if it is, i think i can figure out what kind of guns they are actually using.

Of course, i don't think it's canon, this is probably some third-party work. And ACs aren't necessarily one shot, or just burst -- that they can be smaller but would do the same damage per volley instead. But just looking at that thing, assuming that the soldier is two-meters tall, i could estimate that the AC20 used by the Urbanmech is 420mm Caliber, and the cannon closest to it is the Big Bertha Howitzer, but that's too heavy.

The Urbanmech itself is 900p tall, or on the established scale would be roughly 10 meters tall.

The tank on the left side, looks like an M1 Abrams, it's most likely not, and is probably larger, but it's the closest to the M1 Abrams. As with the scale, it looks like it's a 200mm cannon, best i could find is the M115.

As a conclusion, i think mechs are supposed to be far smaller than what they appear to us. Considering the weight of our tanks alone, the M1 Abrams at 60 to 72 tons, yet far smaller than a 30-tonner Urbanmech. Of course it's in the range of the length of the M1 abrams

I understand that BT is fiction and all, although as a gun fanatic, sometimes i do ponder about things. I fantasize a 6-barreled rotary cannon based on the M105mm Howitzer, fantasized about a 50-tonner Urbanmech variant that uses said 6-barreled rotary cannon, that would be an RAC/10.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 13 September 2017 - 03:47 PM.

[FupDup]

TL;DR: For our mechs to be realistic they would need to either be much heavier at the same sizes or be much smaller at the same weights. Right now they have very low density and lots of cavernous open space inside them.

I remember hearing somebody say that someone did a measurement and found out that the Atlas had a lower density than water because of how big it was for such a relatively low mass. And to think that PGI actually made the Atlas bigger than that with the rescale...

[Stf Sgt Marblez]

This makes me wonder how massive an Atlas or an Executioner would appear if using the same formula/method. Those two being the tallest mechs in MWO. Before anyone slse says it I know the Anni is taller than both, but its already a small skyscraper to begin with lets not try to think about that.

[Ruar]

The6thMessenger, on 13 September 2017 - 03:28 PM, said:

Looking at the photo, i asked myself "is that really the scale of the urbanmech?". It's probably not, but if it is, i think i can figure out what kind of guns they are actually using.

Of course, i don't think it's canon, this is probably some third-party work. And ACs aren't necessarily one shot, or just burst -- that they can be smaller but would do the same damage per volley instead. But just looking at that thing, assuming that the soldier is two-meters tall, i could estimate that the AC20 used by the Urbanmech is 420mm Caliber, and the cannon closest to it is the Big Bertha Howitzer, but that's too heavy.

The Urbanmech itself is 900p tall, or on the established scale would be roughly 10 meters tall.

The tank on the left side, looks like an M1 Abrams, it's most likely not, and is probably larger, but it's the closest to the M1 Abrams. As with the scale, it looks like it's a 200mm cannon, best i could find is the M115.

As a conclusion, i think mechs are supposed to be far smaller than what they appear to us. Considering the weight of our tanks alone, the M1 Abrams at 60 to 72 tons, yet far smaller than a 30-tonner Urbanmech. Of course it's in the range of the length of the M1 abrams

I understand that BT is fiction and all, although as a gun fanatic, sometimes i do ponder about things. I fantasize a 6-barreled rotary cannon based on the M105mm Howitzer, fantasized about a 50-tonner Urbanmech variant that uses said 6-barreled rotary cannon, that would be an RAC/10.

That's not an M1. It looks like an early Merkava turret on a Challenger hull. I looked through some Challenger photos but none have that low of a turret.

Probably closer to 60 tons rather than 70. Most likely using a 120mm smoothbore though.

[The6thMessenger]

FupDup, on 13 September 2017 - 03:31 PM, said:

TL;DR: For our mechs to be realistic they would need to either be much heavier at the same sizes or be much smaller at the same weights. Right now they have very low density and lots of cavernous open space inside them.

I remember hearing somebody say that someone did a measurement and found out that the Atlas had a lower density than water because of how big it was for such a relatively low mass. And to think that PGI actually made the Atlas bigger than that with the rescale...

Maybe they should just x10 all the BT stuff. It would make sense to me if the Atlas at such scale we have at MWO is actually at 1000 tons, or the urbanmech on the photo at 300 tons. The Panzer VIII Maus alone is at 188 tons, yet it's smaller and tightly packed.

[Trissila]

The6thMessenger, on 13 September 2017 - 03:28 PM, said:

The Urbanmech itself is 900p tall, or on the established scale would be roughly 10 meters tall.

No need to speculate. BT rulebooks state that the average Battlemech is indeed 30 feet, or roughly 10 meters, tall.

[Rovertoo]

I kinda figured that the BT ton was based off of some sort of long lost lostech standard ton, and over the years a 'ton' became to mean something closer to 5 tons.

Either that or the mechs are made of styrofoam.

Edited by Rovertoo, 13 September 2017 - 04:57 PM.

[qS Sachiel]

FupDup, on 13 September 2017 - 03:31 PM, said:

TL;DR: For our mechs to be realistic they would need to either be much heavier at the same sizes or be much smaller at the same weights. Right now they have very low density and lots of cavernous open space inside them.

I remember hearing somebody say that someone did a measurement and found out that the Atlas had a lower density than water because of how big it was for such a relatively low mass. And to think that PGI actually made the Atlas bigger than that with the rescale...

Bulk density less than water? Again, every steel ships that floats has pbulk<pwater. Steel is heavier than water. The major flaw of bt in real world I'd say is their feet. 100ton would probably drive their feet into lots of terrain every time they took a step. Those feet would need to be big ole pancakes to distribute such weight.

[Prototelis]

The scaling in all of the mechwarrior games is weird.

[InfinityBall]

qS Sachiel, on 13 September 2017 - 05:10 PM, said:

Bulk density less than water? Again, every steel ships that floats has pbulk<pwater. Steel is heavier than water. The major flaw of bt in real world I'd say is their feet. 100ton would probably drive their feet into lots of terrain every time they took a step. Those feet would need to be big ole pancakes to distribute such weight.

Ships do that because they have to. If you could stuff an extra thousand tons of gear and fuel into a frigate without making it sink, they'd happily do it. OTOH, f there's tons of empty space in a battlemech, they'd make them smaller and more dense while carrying the same payload.

[The6thMessenger]

Hmm, about it's cannons. The big bertha has a cumulative mass of 47 tons, but the Urbanmech only has 30 tons. Maybe it's not the same power or something?

What if a 6-barreled 90mm caliber rotary cannon instead was used ala RAC/10? You think that would be even feasible?

[Nightbird]

Trissila, on 13 September 2017 - 04:29 PM, said:

No need to speculate. BT rulebooks state that the average Battlemech is indeed 30 feet, or roughly 10 meters, tall.

The average battlemech is also the heavy mech, which is slightly larger and heavier than the urban mech

Even carbon fiber would be too heavy to to make PGI's mechs, they would need to use foam. Sci-fi foam!

[Kaeb Odellas]

I prefer the interpretation that a mech's stated tonnage only refers to free tonnage available for engines, weapons, equipment, etc. So a fully-loaded Atlas carries 100 tons' worth of stuff and weighs considerably more than 100 tons.

Granted, that would make the Atlas a 90 ton mech, or 95 tons with Endo Steel. Locusts become 18/19 ton mechs.

[Y E O N N E]

I always justify it in my head by saying the 'Mech mass is what it can carry and not how much is in the whole package.

[SeventhSL]

An M1A2 tank weighs around 65 tones here on earth, so yes defiantly a weight to scale issue in Battletech if given weights are the total for the mech as measured here on earth.

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

NlGHTBlRD, on 13 September 2017 - 05:52 PM, said:

The average battlemech is also the heavy mech, which is slightly larger and heavier than the urban mech

Even carbon fiber would be too heavy to to make PGI's mechs, they would need to use foam. Sci-fi foam!

Aren't the the skeletons some kind of foamed steel?

[qS Sachiel]

InfinityBall, on 13 September 2017 - 05:35 PM, said:

Ships do that because they have to. If you could stuff an extra thousand tons of gear and fuel into a frigate without making it sink, they'd happily do it. OTOH, f there's tons of empty space in a battlemech, they'd make them smaller and more dense while carrying the same payload.

Yes.
Again, it comes down to materials. Of course you want the smallest target you can afford, perhaps though futuretech materials are very durable at the expense of density though, meaning you still get a 100t total tonnage, very durable vs the power that it absorbs in punishment (and can dish out) at the expense of having a bulkier bot.

You're right that a ship requires that pbulk to maintain buoyancy, but perhaps a mech cannot afford to scrape off the volume based purely on the material restriction.

Again, comparing a 100t atlas to a current age MBT doesn't work because space magic (not your quote, infinity).

Edited by qS Sachiel, 13 September 2017 - 06:32 PM.

[The Lighthouse]

qS Sachiel, on 13 September 2017 - 06:30 PM, said:

Yes.
Again, it comes down to materials. Of course you want the smallest target you can afford, perhaps though futuretech materials are very durable at the expense of density though, meaning you still get a 100t total tonnage, very durable vs the power that it absorbs in punishment (and can dish out) at the expense of having a bulkier bot.

You're right that a ship requires that pbulk to maintain buoyancy, but perhaps a mech cannot afford to scrape off the volume based purely on the material restriction.

Again, comparing a 100t atlas to a current age MBT doesn't work because space magic (not your quote, infinity).

It is way too light for its size. The fact is, due to the size, You will have a huge problem piloting mech if there is any moderately strong wind occurs.

Even worse, according to specifications, the size of light mechs is not that small compared to heavy mechs. Firemoth (11.4m high) is actually about as same size as Mad Dog (12m). A 20 ton mech with height of 11.4 meter...

Bradley light combat vehicle in real life has about 28 tons with 7m in length. The fact that Firemoth is a humanoid robot, the overall volume of Firemoth is much, much bigger than Bradley.

So basically what happens is, in right condition, there is a high chance Firemoth would fly in air because weight per volume is way out of reality. It is way too light that it is impossible to walk with 162km/h, let alone 216 with MASC.

As I said in other thread a while ago, it is not really a good idea to maintain the claim that Battletech has any support from real life physics. It is actually far more fantasy than your average fantasy settings.

[qS Sachiel]

The Lighthouse, on 13 September 2017 - 06:49 PM, said:

It is way too light for its size. The fact is, due to the size, You will have a huge problem piloting mech if there is any moderately strong wind occurs.

Even worse, according to specifications, the size of light mechs is not that small compared to heavy mechs. Firemoth (11.4m high) is actually about as same size as Mad Dog (12m). A 20 ton mech with height of 11.4 meter...

Bradley light combat vehicle in real life has about 28 tons with 7m in length. The fact that Firemoth is a humanoid robot, the overall volume of Firemoth is much, much bigger than Bradley.

So basically what happens is, in right condition, there is a high chance Firemoth would fly in air because weight per volume is way out of reality. It is way too light that it is impossible to walk with 162km/h, let alone 216 with MASC.

As I said in other thread a while ago, it is not really a good idea to maintain the claim that Battletech has any support from real life physics. It is actually far more fantasy than your average fantasy settings.

Yeah definitely agree.
Forget a strong wind, imagine an AC20 to the face. Down and out.

bipedal mechs can alter their lean depending on speed to counter drag, but again, like i believe and you said, there is a poor crossover between real phys and BT phys.

Still, like to geek out occasionally and consider it ;P

[CancersCincar]

Yeonne Greene, on 13 September 2017 - 06:04 PM, said:

I always justify it in my head by saying the 'Mech mass is what it can carry and not how much is in the whole package.

I've imagined something similar to that. The "tonnage" being referred to doesn't include everything, more likely it's a more in depth classification than "light" or "assault" that's a bit easier to remember. Nobody would remember a fine detail like "Oh yeah the Atlas weighs 235.35 tons in total" but if you can just say "An Atlas is 100 tons of firepower" you know that you're dealing with the biggest payload an enemy can throw at you.

Edited by CancersCincar, 13 September 2017 - 09:32 PM.