Of powered armor, mechs and feasibility.

[adam_grif]

About once every month, I'll inevitably get into the only argument I find more loathsome than the Space fighter debate - Are mecha plausible and/or practical vehicles? I've been arguing the negative position on this issue for what seems to be several thousand years now, and I wanted to see what you folks thought.

Standard arguments in favor:

- Legs give them maneuverability and speed that tanks can't hope to match.
- Mechs are really intimidating.
- Legs are much better than wheels or tracks because they can cross all sorts of uneven or difficult terrain that regular vehicles can't.
- Being a 50 foot tall robot gives you a height advantage against normal vehicles. It's like having the high ground all the time!
- Look at this! -insert picture of real world robot- See? They already exist in the real world. Military applications can't be far behind.
- Future advances in -insert field- will make it feasible and practical.

Standard arguments against:

- The human body isn't readily scalable. A 50 foot tall robot in a human shape can't move like a 6 foot tall human in a mo-cap suit can like you see on your shitty Anime.
- Giant robots exert considerable pressure on the ground below them because of the small size of their feet relative to their height. This means that a lot of the uneven, unstable or rough terrain isn't going to be traversable by these sorts of things.
- 50 foot tall humanoids are huge, fat, slow targets. They can't reasonably expect to hide anywhere except behind skyscrapers and mountains, and thus have the dubious distinction of being even easier prey than tanks for gunships and CAS craft.
- Intimidation is secondary to military utility. A visually intimidating but easily defeatable vehicle will not be feared for long.
- Humanoid shapes are unstable firing platforms, so to-scale tank cannons are unlikely to be used. Being limited to scaled down guns and recoilless weapons is a loss of flexibility.
- Humanoid shapes have a much higher surface area : volume ratios, meaning that you have to use more armor for a given volume of equipment, ammunition etc that the vehicle carries.
- Advances that make mechs mechanically feasible to construct can be used to make tanks and other vehicles better, so that status quo doesn't change.


Eventually people will come up with stupid future scenarios like "tanks were banned by international treaty, so everyone uses mechs now!" After abandoning their dreams of skyscraper sized robots duking it out, they'll shift to the Powered Armor angle, and try to get smaller and smaller robots that still qualify as mecha.

Essentially, the problem seems to be that there's no niche where the kind of 10-15 foot robot is really needed. Powered Armor at least seems reasonable because it's just an enhancement for regular infantry, but then we run into blurry lines of what exactly the difference between PA and a smallish Mecha is. I generally propose that you can stop considering it a powered armor when it becomes too large to fit through average doorways, and that this is also the point when they hit diminishing returns for usefulness.

If a PA/Small Mech are designed for open combat, they'll get slaughtered by IFV's and possibly even heavier infantry weapons. If it gets too large, it stops being able to avoid AP tank fire, and if it gets so-large that it's armor is thick enough to stop a 120mm APFSDS round, it becomes a big, juicy, expensive target for one of the larger ATGMs or a cruise missile.

Giant robots in cities will be ripping up and destroying infrastructure without intending to do so, and lose any and all advantages to "being tall" because there's buildings everywhere. Enemy tanks, IFV's and infantry can hide behind smaller buildings that the mechs can't, and if they're small enough to do so, then they're going to be very vulnerable to enemy fire. Having half your body stick out from the tops of most buildings makes you a laughably easy target for enemy air-support to take out, or even ground units that can fire guided missiles without maintaining LoS.

However, PA seems useful for infantry combat, so long as it can go everywhere an infantryman can. Firing rocket launchers indoors is an ill-advised move, and if you can get them to resist most common infantry calibers, then that's going to be a significant tactical advantage for the people that have them. But once you cross the threshold where you can't traverse buildings anymore, you're stuck on streets where armored vehicles exist to ruin your day, and infantry can fire rockets at you.


Discuss.

[Shroom Man 777]

Shroomy answer:

gundajapanimechanimumangoes are shit lol (this is the truest statement I'll make in this thread. probably)

Non-asshole answer:

Mecha are complete shit as armored vehicles meant to compete with tanks. They simply can't. Their design is complete bullshit. The tank is simple and to the point, it's a mere vehicle designed around a weapon meant to kill the fuck out of things - whereas a mecha has extraneous crap that's full of crap. Mechas are useless in any real war scenario.

Powered armor, if it's feasible, MIGHT be useful if the technology works. There's no other real equivalent for it to compete with, is there? If the technology is not-shit, it might see SOME use in the battlefield. But it won't be widespread kit, since overly complicated expensive heavy shit tends to become specialized kits for specialized troops.

Maybe:

Mechas might work in space. In zero-g, a multi-limbed vehicle might be useful in jumping around a heavily cluttered giant sprawling mess of a space station. It's less of a bullshit gundam doing jew-jitsu space karate chops, and more of a maintenance orangutan - like a space shuttle if it was sprouting, like, half a dozen made-in-Canada robotic arms or something. It could possibly be weaponized, but it won't be a useful full space warfare platform. At best, a weaponized zero-g space orangutan would be useful in working with space troopers in space station CQB. Like, in zero-g urban warfare.

But then the principles that apply to ground vehicles or air vehicles won't apply to said "mecha". It's not even a mecha, by any standard definition.

[Ford Prefect]

This argument has always been dumb. No matter how many times some brings up how mecha are so inefficient in comparison to tanks from an engineering perspective, the fact remains that a tank cannot headbutt anyone. Res ipsa loquitur.

[adam_grif]

Bullshit. Just install a crane and a head near the hatch. Shit, you could just have some cable attached to it and a winch, then you could have Rocket Propelled Headbutts.

Fuck yeah!

[Serafina]

Powered armor IS (or rather, would be) usefull as a replacement for infantry.
This does of course presume that it
-doesn't get too big or unmaneuverable
-not too expensive (tought it could still be usefull for small-scale applications even then).

Mechs are NOT a general replacement for tanks. They might be usefull in some areas, but hardly the replacement for our main combat vehicle.
Mechs need a lot more specific technology compared to tanks. Nearly all of that technology would also benefit tanks.

A non-complete list:
-an efficient means of propulsion - technology to make legs feasible. This is about the only thing that would NOT benefit tanks.
-enough power to achieve significant speeds - would benefit tanks.
-Weapons that can put enough firepower&ammunition on such a chassis - but they could also be employed with tanks
-armor that can protect the vulnerable joints of the mech - would also benefit tanks

You already listed some disadvantages - but you forgot visibility. A mech of comparable mass to a tank would stand much higher - therefore making it a highly visible target. This is quite an undesirable trait, since "a visible target is a dead target."

The strongest argument against humanoid mechas is that everything that can be done by a bipedal mech could also be done by a quadropedal one (or more than that). Bipedalism is simply an enormous disadvantage for stability.
That would also allevitate the problem of space (for weapons etc.) to a point.

[adam_grif]

When we discuss non-bipedal robots, by nature they simply become tanks with legs instead of tracks. What are big, tank sized legs good for that treads aren't?

[Jusu]

As much as I like the whole concept of mecha, they're nothing more than an oddity. I did see that John Deere did make a hexaped walking machine, but mainly to go in places where a caterpillar'd machine would ruin sensitive environmental areas.Avoid the Comments

Other than that, I don't see why we'd want mecha. Hours upon hours of maintenance, doing the same thing other machiens can for cheaper, basically every point people made. The closest I'll see for non PA mecha would be stuff from PatLabor, namely that nifty police one that can raise itself over traffic to respond to emergencies. But the U.N. APC with 6 legs from one of the movies could be considered pushing it. If anything, a quadruped heavy industry machine. Something with manipulator arms for heavy objects. But then, if you're willing to spend that much on a construction robot, you could've bought 14 Backhoe Loaders and swap out the arm with stuff.

As for tank with legs.Um, people say going up mountains. I say. RPG to the foot or stay on a mountain with very loose ground. If I can haul a mountain howitzer up, that thing is fucked.

In short. I may be a fan of mecha, but I don't see em replacing my beloved Leopard 2.

[Vendetta]

The strongest argument against humanoid mechas is that everything that can be done by a bipedal mech could also be done by a quadropedal one (or more than that). Bipedalism is simply an enormous disadvantage for stability.
That would also allevitate the problem of space (for weapons etc.) to a point.

Quadrupedal would still probably be too few, it would still be basically immobilised by the loss of one leg.

A hexapod design could avoid that, but it makes locomotion more complex and slower, so still isn't an advantage over treads.

[Lord of the Abyss]

Other than that, I don't see why we'd want mecha.

Sports of some kind perhaps; something where the impracticality of it doesn't really matter compared to the fun/coolness factor.

[Jusu]

Other than that, I don't see why we'd want mecha.

Sports of some kind perhaps; something where the impracticality of it doesn't really matter compared to the fun/coolness factor.

American Football?

[adam_grif]

Other than that, I don't see why we'd want mecha.

Sports of some kind perhaps; something where the impracticality of it doesn't really matter compared to the fun/coolness factor.

Yes, the spectator sport is an acceptable use of mecha, but remember that this thread is related to military applications.

American Football?

No, actual battles. Maybe fisticuffs, maybe 20 foot tall robots with to-scale assault rifles.

I'd watch it.

[Ariphaos]

When we discuss non-bipedal robots, by nature they simply become tanks with legs instead of tracks. What are big, tank sized legs good for that treads aren't?

By not necessarily being big and tank sized?

Legs are good for unstable surfaces where the location of pressure placement is important. Treefalls, rock slides, etc.

[Temujin]

Mechs, aside from specialty construction equipment like the John Deere hexaped, are just ludicrous bullshit.

Power Armor, as per the most recent SSTs thread, actually has some usefulness given advanced enough technology; and may in fact be the only way for "infantry" of any kind to remain on a battlefield. That is assuming everything doesn't just go robotic. I could also see it utilized in space and planetary exploration as an advanced form of space suit that provides better protection and mobility to the wearer.

[andrewgpaul]

I would have thought that one argument against anime mecha-wanking is that Gundam had to introduce special pseudo-science radiation just to make the things halfway viable.

[adam_grif]

Even then, neutralizing radar doesn't lead to mechs in space. Their excuse for arms and legs was to... move around in space. Like, turn and rotate without expelling remass. Shame engineers already have things to do that, better, without sticking stupid arms and legs on something.

The idea that very long range combat can't occur without radar is hilarious.

[Shroom Man 777]

but adam_grif space tanks cant stick their fingers up each others butts but mechas can thus: cogito ipso facto sumo! frod frod frod SQUAWK SQUAWK SQUAWK

There's nothing mechs have on tanks. The only thing they've got going for them is that they are in silly gundajapanimechanimumangos that are so profound and deep with such philosophical plots and intriguing characters and amazing unbelievable settings that provoke the mind and stir thoughts and promote intellectual discussions and hypothesizations of randome altarnate realties in which the future is so real(istic) yet different, where war and technology and humanity have intertwined in so many unexpected ways, and where giant facepunching stupidly-technicolored giant robot dungams are at the very center of this future war for the very fate of humanity.

(I would love to see an animu where tanks fly into space and have melee battles with one another and shit while the tank crews cry and emote and do battlefield philosophy re: fate of the future. The space tanks must also be colored all technicolor with reds, whites, and blues and have frilly doodads that make no sense but look sorta cool. KIRAAA! ATHERIN!!!! then the bad guys can have long womanly hairs and wear metal masks so they will seem more complicated and evils and the tanks can do jiujitsu on one anothers)

[Srelex]

If RL mechs could behave as they did in anime, i.e. being able to jump around like martial artists and move at incredible speed, then they would prove very useful tools in, say, city fighting. Unfortunately, anime physics don't apply to RL, so no. That said, I think mech/exoskeleton technology could prove useful in non-battlefield roles, like power loaders.

[Iosef Cross]

Tanks are in essence the realistic form of mecha.

[Oskuro]

The greatest advantage of legs seems to be the ability to traverse really harsh or uneven terrain, so I guess reasonably sized mechs could have a use as scouts, artillery platforms or transport vehicles. They could even be usable to deploy tanks through said harsh terrain whenever air deployment is not possible.

Although, of course, we could also consider tanks with retractable legs for harsh terrain.

[Temujin]

It would be getting into soft sci-fi (but aren't we already ), but some sort of hovertank would provide that ability as well. Of course with our current technological understanding, it would be limited to a lightweight scout vehicle at best.

[Jusu]

I'd rather see an Anime with an actual tank battle, I still think PatLabor is better than most Gundams, and the more recent MS Igloo OVAs just showed how merciless Tanks can against Zekes when properly led and coordinated. Powered Armor could prove useful. Allow the common infantryman to be able to shoulder more loads effectively, and if the thing is disable, shed unnecessary shit and the guy is still able to move around and shoot.

[Drone]

The only thing I can really think of that Mechs have in combat over tanks is the ability to sidestep. Even with a higher profile, not 50 feet or whatever but maybe 10-12 feet, they'd be harder to hit, simply because like a boxer they can slip punches/ incoming fire, with slight movements laterally. That and in urban combat they have a much smaller turn radius than a tank would, but again, that's one that's more like a Locust from BT, small by the standards of Mechs, and able to use buildings as cover.

[Temujin]

I'd rather see an Anime with an actual tank battle, I still think PatLabor is better than most Gundams, and the more recent MS Igloo OVAs just showed how merciless Tanks can against Zekes when properly led and coordinated. Powered Armor could prove useful. Allow the common infantryman to be able to shoulder more loads effectively, and if the thing is disable, shed unnecessary shit and the guy is still able to move around and shoot.

Its been a long while since I saw the original Gundam, but I thought that one of the major offensives by the Earth forces that led to a decisive Zeon defeat pitted conventional armour against Zeon mechs? Of course, I believe that happened off screen.

[Samuel]

The only thing I can really think of that Mechs have in combat over tanks is the ability to sidestep. Even with a higher profile, not 50 feet or whatever but maybe 10-12 feet, they'd be harder to hit, simply because like a boxer they can slip punches/ incoming fire, with slight movements laterally. That and in urban combat they have a much smaller turn radius than a tank would, but again, that's one that's more like a Locust from BT, small by the standards of Mechs, and able to use buildings as cover.

You can do that with tanks by driving at an angle to your target. Speed up or slow down to dodge when moving and foward/reverse at a standstill.

[Drone]

The only thing I can really think of that Mechs have in combat over tanks is the ability to sidestep. Even with a higher profile, not 50 feet or whatever but maybe 10-12 feet, they'd be harder to hit, simply because like a boxer they can slip punches/ incoming fire, with slight movements laterally. That and in urban combat they have a much smaller turn radius than a tank would, but again, that's one that's more like a Locust from BT, small by the standards of Mechs, and able to use buildings as cover.

You can do that with tanks by driving at an angle to your target. Speed up or slow down to dodge when moving and foward/reverse at a standstill.

You're still only moving along one axis.