Jump to content

What combat role could a mech play on a real battlefield?


guitarxe

Recommended Posts

You DO realise you just said the EXACT same thing I did, only with different words? The point is that during half the stride cycle, it's 80% gravity. During the other half (the "up phase I mentioned; when the leg is lifting your mass up to the top of the pendulum cycle), the muscle is doing 80% of the work. Either way, you were trying to say that gravity does 80% of the work for the entire stride, and that is entirely incorrect.

 

Ok, let's make this as simple as possible... yes, at any one time 80% of ONE HALF the cycle is powered by the muscles. Meaning one leg is under 80% power half the time. My little world is called reality, how about you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 250
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

You know what? Get stuffed. You are a brick wall. NOTHING gets through to you, and your debate technique consists of:

 

 

 

I guess they will be best, if they equip the mecha with Reality Shielding as efficient as that you have employed.

 

I'm done arguing this. A whole PARADE of folks have come through and posted on why this is not practical or efficient in comparison. We have shown you the math. We have shown you real-world, apples-to-apples comparisons. MOST of the posters here were downright dismissive, and blew off the very idea as a joke. I at least tried to enlighten you on the reasoning behind it.

 

You cannot, or do not want to, get it through your head- nor do you even dignify it with a real response. You claim "omigawd, your maths are SO wrong", but never actually disprove them. Everyone that has posted on here, other than you two, has agreed it's a silly idea, mechanically speaking.

 

You two are fanboy zealots, and no amount of reality will change that. I see my effort is wasted, and therefore withdraw from this entire asinine endeavor. I have no doubt that you will pat yourself on the back at your "victory" in the debate.

 

Thank you. All peer reviewed, scientifically backed research from accredited sources I would expect to be beyond your capacity to understand. As previously stated, you saying it's an apples to apples comparison means you have no idea what you're saying nor attempted, or lack the capacity to understand, that you are making an assumption about a multi-bodied non-linear system based off a linear single bodied system. I never brought in metabolism and the actual efficiency of human muscles, that was another person. I've been taking about the mechanics of human gait.


Edited by Malleolus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know what? Get stuffed. You are a brick wall. NOTHING gets through to you, and your debate technique consists of:

 

 

 

I guess they will be best, if they equip the mecha with Reality Shielding as efficient as that you have employed.

 

I'm done arguing this. A whole PARADE of folks have come through and posted on why this is not practical or efficient in comparison. We have shown you the math. We have shown you real-world, apples-to-apples comparisons. MOST of the posters here were downright dismissive, and blew off the very idea as a joke. I at least tried to enlighten you on the reasoning behind it.

 

You cannot, or do not want to, get it through your head- nor do you even dignify it with a real response. You claim "omigawd, your maths are SO wrong", but never actually disprove them. Everyone that has posted on here, other than you two, has agreed it's a silly idea, mechanically speaking.

 

You two are fanboy zealots, and no amount of reality will change that. I see my effort is wasted, and therefore withdraw from this entire asinine endeavor. I have no doubt that you will pat yourself on the back at your "victory" in the debate.

 

The only person that put forward actual debate was ShuRugal, but human gait is vastly more multidimensional than what he covered, and you know what? He took it for what it is and I'm going to trust that he ACTUALLY IS GOING TO READ the information put forward. I've been working on biomechatronics for 15 years twit. If he still has consternation after reading it, I'm perfectly fine with that.


Edited by Malleolus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I call BS. Apples to apples, here. You have to assume, when making comparison, that the power plant technology is available equally to walkers or conventional vehicles.

 

That said, a cursory look at an exercise calculator website (https://www.healthstatus.com/perl/calculator.cgi) indicates that 60 minutes each of the following exercises have these caloric (energy) requirements:

 

14-16 mph cycling, 960 kcal

4 mph walking, 468 kcal

12-14 mph cycling, 792 kcal

12 mph running, 2,028 kcal

8 mph running, 1,224 kcal

 

This means that, in terms of energy efficiency, as measured in kcals per mile (total calories burned in an hour divided by distance covered in 60 minutes) you get:

 

13mph cycle= 61 kcal/mi

12 mph run = 169 kcal/mi

 

15mph cycle= 64 kcal/mi

4mph walk= 117 kcal/ mi

8mph run= 153 kcal/mi

 

That means you can move at the same speed on a bicycle for 37% as much energy as required to run that speed, or you can move the same distance THREE TIMES FASTER on a bicycle for approximately half the energy expended even to walk it- which is much more efficient than running, as has been pointed out.

 

And all this is based not on a machine designed to move wheels, but rather on a machine designed to (rather inefficiently) transfer energy from a machine designed to walk (your legs) into power to drive wheels. So it's STILL not quite apples-to-apples, because there's an unnecessary level of mechanical friction (all the gears and axles of the bike in addition to the inefficiency of your legs) working against the bicycle.

 

Are you QUITE SURE walking is as efficient as you think it is?

 

To make an apples to apples comparison here you have to let the car do drift racing... THE WHOLE IDEA about an excercise is to waste(!!!) energy?

 

As for the bike try that a t lower speed and on an rough terrain...

 

In essence: if we would waste that high amount of energy while walking, we would be chuffing Donuts and chocolate, with Coke all day to consume enough "fuel"!

 

There is a reason science is putting so much effort into mimicking natures movement apparatus and efficiency. They have a whole area of new science developed from that.

 

I can't help if you can't or won't believe me, but I would suggest, you consider who may be the smarter guys: me, or the M.I.T., DARPA etc. geniouses? If you don't believe me, have a look at what these eggheads are breeding these days... may be you manage to convince them how stupid there efforts are? :smilewink:

Shagrat

 

- Flying Sims since 1984 -:pilotfly:

Win 10 | i5 10600K@4.1GHz | 64GB | GeForce RTX 3090 - Asus VG34VQL1B  | TrackIR5 | Simshaker & Jetseat | VIRPIL CM 50 Stick & Throttle | VPC Rotor TCS Plus/Apache64 Grip | MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals | WW Top Gun MIP | a hand made AHCP | 2x Elgato StreamDeck (Buttons galore)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In essence: if we would waste that high amount of energy while walking, we would be chuffing Donuts and chocolate, with Coke all day to consume enough "fuel"!

 

The point is that it is an efficient form of movement for uneven terrain. Once you start looking at a paved surface, riding a bike is much more efficient, in fact, a well maintained road racing bike is the most energy efficient form of transportation available to man, save maybe for one with an aerodynamic body. Evolution wasn't driven to give man a form of movement that works best on tarmac.


Edited by sobek

Good, fast, cheap. Choose any two.

Come let's eat grandpa!

Use punctuation, save lives!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The point is that it is an efficient form of movement for uneven terrain. Once you start looking at a paved surface, riding a bike is much more efficient, in fact, a well maintained road racing bike is the most energy efficient form of transportation available to man, save maybe for one with an aerodynamic body. Evolution wasn't driven to give man a form of movement that works best on tarmac.

 

Of course, but the argument centered around a walker mechanism in rough terrain! Nobody would argue a Ferrari is faster on a race track, than a Range Rover, though the Range Rover excels off road. We are constantly shifting terrain and arguments here... I think I'm out... this is getting pointless.

Shagrat

 

- Flying Sims since 1984 -:pilotfly:

Win 10 | i5 10600K@4.1GHz | 64GB | GeForce RTX 3090 - Asus VG34VQL1B  | TrackIR5 | Simshaker & Jetseat | VIRPIL CM 50 Stick & Throttle | VPC Rotor TCS Plus/Apache64 Grip | MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals | WW Top Gun MIP | a hand made AHCP | 2x Elgato StreamDeck (Buttons galore)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am more powerful than a Mech

 

That would make you a Transformer then. :P

 

Cool! :thumbup:

ASUS ROG Maximus VIII Hero, i7-6700K, Noctua NH-D14 Cooler, Crucial 32GB DDR4 2133, Samsung 950 Pro NVMe 256GB, Samsung EVO 250GB & 500GB SSD, 2TB Caviar Black, Zotac GTX 1080 AMP! Extreme 8GB, Corsair HX1000i, Phillips BDM4065UC 40" 4k monitor, VX2258 TouchScreen, TIR 5 w/ProClip, TM Warthog, VKB Gladiator Pro, Saitek X56, et. al., MFG Crosswind Pedals #1199, VolairSim Pit, Rift CV1 :thumbup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I definitely was and will be civilized. Anyway, I really thinknwe are at a point where arguments are repeated and we can't add additional useful input... we may detail our arguments, make more, and complicated calculations to proof something, cite websites and wikis etc. , but in the end it's still the same arguments. Also I don't think we will convince each other of the opposite opinion. What's left is getting emotional and try to win a manly shouting contest, so why bother? Cheers all! Was a lot of fun, though! ...and try not to take these kinds of discussions too serious... it was a lot of "ifs" and "whens" from the start ;-)

 

@ Guitarxe the OP, what is your opinion by the way?

Shagrat

 

- Flying Sims since 1984 -:pilotfly:

Win 10 | i5 10600K@4.1GHz | 64GB | GeForce RTX 3090 - Asus VG34VQL1B  | TrackIR5 | Simshaker & Jetseat | VIRPIL CM 50 Stick & Throttle | VPC Rotor TCS Plus/Apache64 Grip | MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals | WW Top Gun MIP | a hand made AHCP | 2x Elgato StreamDeck (Buttons galore)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmm, imagine Mech sized Tanks! Obvious advantage: you can drive unbuttoned all the time :D

Shagrat

 

- Flying Sims since 1984 -:pilotfly:

Win 10 | i5 10600K@4.1GHz | 64GB | GeForce RTX 3090 - Asus VG34VQL1B  | TrackIR5 | Simshaker & Jetseat | VIRPIL CM 50 Stick & Throttle | VPC Rotor TCS Plus/Apache64 Grip | MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals | WW Top Gun MIP | a hand made AHCP | 2x Elgato StreamDeck (Buttons galore)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:megalol:

Shagrat

 

- Flying Sims since 1984 -:pilotfly:

Win 10 | i5 10600K@4.1GHz | 64GB | GeForce RTX 3090 - Asus VG34VQL1B  | TrackIR5 | Simshaker & Jetseat | VIRPIL CM 50 Stick & Throttle | VPC Rotor TCS Plus/Apache64 Grip | MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals | WW Top Gun MIP | a hand made AHCP | 2x Elgato StreamDeck (Buttons galore)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you don’t like your Mech on a bike

Perhaps it’s better on a trike

 

Maybe you want no wheels at all

And even say it’s way too tall

 

Now we worry about the gait

The next concern will be the weight

 

All of this is well and fine

But don’t forget the bottom line

 

When these machines come into play

The Terminator will blow them all away

 

:D


Edited by cichlidfan

ASUS ROG Maximus VIII Hero, i7-6700K, Noctua NH-D14 Cooler, Crucial 32GB DDR4 2133, Samsung 950 Pro NVMe 256GB, Samsung EVO 250GB & 500GB SSD, 2TB Caviar Black, Zotac GTX 1080 AMP! Extreme 8GB, Corsair HX1000i, Phillips BDM4065UC 40" 4k monitor, VX2258 TouchScreen, TIR 5 w/ProClip, TM Warthog, VKB Gladiator Pro, Saitek X56, et. al., MFG Crosswind Pedals #1199, VolairSim Pit, Rift CV1 :thumbup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I started with mechwarrior gaming back in 1995, and it's funny that the same debate still rages 20 years later. :D

 

One thing is for sure, I certainly had a lot of fun online gaming with the Mechwarrior crowd, and back then we didn't realize it, but we were making memes even then. I think the big thing is that we simply had fun, no one was too worried about the armor thickness of a certain mech being able to deflect a ER-PPC, or an LBX-20 at 100 meters. It's just science fiction rock em sock em robot fun.

 

This one came about because someone complained that the mechs looked to "naked"

 

nakedmadcat_zpsec4397ec.jpg

 

And this was pretty much the general rule of thumb after playing online and leaving the Microsoft "Zone" even back in the late 90's.

 

g1357563413489730486_zpseddcf8c4.jpg


Edited by Invader ZIM
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Battletech provides a background story to provide a "believable" scenario. Lostech, succession wars blasted production facilities etc.

Though a bit far stretched, it gives a lot off explanations why nobody is simply producing a few hundred Maverick like missiles and game over...

What I find intriguing about this discussion is, we don't approach it from the Battletech side, but from the Future Warfare perspective. What will or can change/improve land forces if mobile, armored walkers are possible to produce? What will be its job? How will that change combat?


Edited by shagrat

Shagrat

 

- Flying Sims since 1984 -:pilotfly:

Win 10 | i5 10600K@4.1GHz | 64GB | GeForce RTX 3090 - Asus VG34VQL1B  | TrackIR5 | Simshaker & Jetseat | VIRPIL CM 50 Stick & Throttle | VPC Rotor TCS Plus/Apache64 Grip | MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals | WW Top Gun MIP | a hand made AHCP | 2x Elgato StreamDeck (Buttons galore)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Nope! But it sounds reasonable... to built even a mockup suite you need to think about certain mechanics and the joint protection! If you consider older Battlegear from the medieval, they had very inventive ideas to achieve that. Maybe WETA workshops can help with that (made all the armor for Lord of the Rings) . They have professional armor smiths, that know a lot about this.

Shagrat

 

- Flying Sims since 1984 -:pilotfly:

Win 10 | i5 10600K@4.1GHz | 64GB | GeForce RTX 3090 - Asus VG34VQL1B  | TrackIR5 | Simshaker & Jetseat | VIRPIL CM 50 Stick & Throttle | VPC Rotor TCS Plus/Apache64 Grip | MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals | WW Top Gun MIP | a hand made AHCP | 2x Elgato StreamDeck (Buttons galore)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...