9 replies to this topic

[Kattahn]

I had so much fun reading this post that I did some reasearch...

The armor being used on Mech's, even the earliest mech's is lighter and stronger than the armor in existence now so it stands to reason that a stronger cannon would be needed to do the equivalent amount of current day tank armor. It also, necessarily, explains why a 100 ton Atlas can stand 60' tall. A 100 ton mech today (assuming it was intended to be effective both offensively and defensively and not simply trying to be capable of motion) would likely not be capable of even half that height (The Abrams tank is the same weight as a Dragon and is only 24 ft long, which is about as tall as a Jenner). The reasoning behind the armor being equally viable against all forms of attack is that it is the lowest common denominator (See hardened armor, reactive armor, reflective armor etc... each being more effective against certain types of damage).

That said I think the biggest believability hurdle that Battletech is challenged with is the fact that understanding of the rate at which technology would improve over time was just not very well known in the 80's (nor, really is it now). We have already invented or have early proofs of concepts for many technologies which were not commercially available when Battletech was written and/or are not available until he far future in Canon.

• Myomer
  Canon - Invented 2350
  RL - Available soon (see EAP Electro-Active Polymers)
  
• Guass Rifles
  Canon - Invented 2590
  RL- Prototypes exist now (you can even make one) and they will be equipped on Naval vessels within the next 20 years
  
• Targeting Computer
  Canon - Invented 2860
  RL - The technology described in TW has been available since early 80's on the M1 Abrams tank
  
• Rocket Launchers
  Canon - Invented in 29th and 31st centuries
  RL - Seriously? The chinese had them in 2000BC and militarized Rocket Launchers were used in practically every war in the last century
  
• Jump Jets
  Canon - Invented 2471
  RL - What did they land on the moon with, springs?
  
• And many more. Feel free to add on. It's kind of fun to look up Technologies on Battlewiki then google them...

Barring a zombie apocolypse or some other societal collapse it should be feasible to field a vehicle equivalent to early mech's in weight, size, firepower and performance within the next 20 - 50 year (I know there are projects in work now but they are non-military and would require completely different design goals to meet the requirements of a real military Battlemech), The only hurdle left to overcome by then would be a good reason to do so. Civilian applications seem many; recreation, forestry, mining, hazardous/underwater environment, planetary exploration... However the military applications for a mech actually seem to decrease with size. Light mech's could be useful for Urban Pacification (UrbanMech?), but medium and larger mechs are just big expensive targets.

Still fun to think about though

[Gun Bear]

Its nit pick here but the Jump Jets on a 'mech are different than rocket boosters on a spaceship.

[FD Wulfette]

Your forgetting PPC's Reytheon is currently working on (NOW Declassified) Forced Particle Beam Weapons (ie PPC)

[Talon Thorn]

In truth, the only true hurdle to overcome would be a viable power source.

[KalebFenoir]

Talon Thorn, on 07 October 2012 - 08:16 PM, said:

In truth, the only true hurdle to overcome would be a viable power source.

Pretty much.

I'd like to toss out for the list of 'things we have now that, if combined, create Voltr-.... I mean a Battlemech".

1) in addition to EAP, there's also flexible polymer mesh http://www.huffingto..._n_1772227.html which might be able to act as Myomer. In fact, if you combine EAP and this mobile mesh stuff, you would have a pretty solid framework for myomer

2) Prototype 'mechs' are already being designed, though right now they lack all these sweet technologies. We've all seen the Kuratas http://io9.com/mecha/ and if you haven't, then watch that vid.


I'd love to add stuff about brain-sensing gyroscopic technology being developed, but I just don't have that info or know where it is I can't help but think it IS being developed though.

If you add all this stuff together, and toss in that still-out-of-reach compact power source, then I think we can expect to see the Mackie walking off the construction lines eventually. LoL...

Wouldn't that be totally ironic if, when they did make a mech-like machine, they unintentionally called it 'Mackie' for some reason, and never realized the significance?

[Banshee Bullet]

I was told that the weights of mechs aren't actually masses, it's just a class system.

Also, imagine an Atlas on a planet with 1.5x earth's gravity

[Terror Teddy]

Banshee Bullet, on 11 October 2012 - 05:51 AM, said:

I was told that the weights of mechs aren't actually masses, it's just a class system.

Also, imagine an Atlas on a planet with 1.5x earth's gravity

Well, the Weight is the maximum loadout weight that it can carry (including it's own chassi and engine. So an Atlas with 20 tonnes to spare only weights 80 tonnes.

I would like to see increased engine performance on an unladen mech and additional gravity effects.

-Jumpjets in 0,5 gravity
-Slowing down in 0,5 gravity (remember - your MASS is still there but your WEIGHT is less so speed is increased but slowing down is still a problem)
-Knockdown and pushback in 0,5 gravity (knocking a mech backwards 20 meters over a cliff?)

[Banshee Bullet]

sadly gravity affects aren't gonna happen. all these planets are 1.0 earth masses

But again, I was told an atlas' mass is way over 100 tons. They just use the tonnage system to catagorize mechs. Why else would they all round off at 5's?

also, decelerating wouldn't be any harder than accelerating in low gravity.

Edited by Banshee Bullet, 11 October 2012 - 06:11 AM.

[guardian wolf]

KalebFenoir, on 11 October 2012 - 05:37 AM, said:

Wouldn't that be totally ironic if, when they did make a mech-like machine, they unintentionally called it 'Mackie' for some reason, and never realized the significance?

I will create the first mech, completely based off the Mackie, and then, name it so. This is my life goal.

[ExSlyder]

I'm new to MWO, only because I just found out about it. I've played Battletech and MW since the 80's. As for the gyroscopics that someone mentioned. The tech exists now, just look at any smartphone. They all have gyroscopic sensing capabilities. The reason I thing the gyros are so "BIG" in mechs, is not the gyro itself, but the additional mechanical hardware that would be required to keep a mech upright. But even that tech exists. Look for example at the 2 wheeled motorized scooters that mall cops are using now, doesn't matter if they are rolling uphill or down, the driver is always upright.

(Still in the process of downloading/patching the game)

ExSlyder