I believe a very simple form of Mech could be possible soon.

The utility of an MT-style stripped down version of your prototypical mecha is plausible for military use in the near future. Advances in lightweight armor technology, battery technology, point defense systems, and so on will provide all the benefits of a tank in a more useful package. A tank can take down a building with a half dozen high explosive shells, a mech can just walk up and tear the thing down. A tank can't cope with close quarters combat against infantry, a mech can stomp all over them, especially if equipped with a melee weapon. A tank can carry only small amounts of ammunition, a mech could carry a 'small' arm with magazines full of varying caliber high explosive and armor piercing rounds, giant fragmentation or smoke grenades.

Its utility is obvious, and argument is unnecessary.
I give it 20 years or so before we start seeing the first models produced for military use.

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    frick off homosexual

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      based mechagay dabbing on slav war slide threaders every day

      OP is stupid fricking Black person

      I see my superiority has caused some hurt feelings.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Black person go spam /m/

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Mech threads and battletech threads are a significant improvement over the government(s)-sponsored trash we've been spammed with for the last two years.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous
        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          Those arent scaled correctly

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            >single occupant mech wienerpit
            >typical soldier comes up to the M1 fender
            Yes they are.

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              Not according to battletech gays sciwank shit
              The human is about twice smaller than the wienerpit glass
              That scale would be appropriate for like a 25t light

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          >this thread
          remember, the biped mecha is a compensation device for the nip in compensation for its loss of the war and having two nukes (two few) shoved up its ass.

  2. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    based mechagay dabbing on slav war slide threaders every day

  3. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    OP is stupid fricking Black person

  4. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    So what's OP's endgoal?

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Fantasizing about mechas in modern warfare.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Oh good it's another mech thread, at least you used an actual good video game this time.

      Honestly I'm not sure if it's a /m/aggot autist who's only end goal is to Sprey us into thinking mechs are a great idea, because if he, the autistlord thinks they are, they must be or if it's an anti-mechgay deliberatetly trying to shift sentiment on /k/ from "mechs are fun but not practical" to "REEE MECH THREAD FRICK OFFF AHHHHH"

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Uh actually /k/ doesnt need to be persuaded to get pissed off at mecha spam we were already extremely pissed off with it, as at least half the posts in any mecha thread posted are normally some variation of FRICK OFF ALREADY and its pretty much always been like that.

      • 7 days ago
        Anonymous

        Uh actually /k/ doesnt need to be persuaded to get pissed off at mecha spam we were already extremely pissed off with it, as at least half the posts in any mecha thread posted are normally some variation of FRICK OFF ALREADY and its pretty much always been like that.

        nice try newbies, mechas are /k/ and gundams will be real in 2 years

  5. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Holy shit there's a whole board for Mechas?
    This is amazing. I'd just been posting about them in /k/ whenever a thread came up.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Holy shit there's a whole board for Mechas?
      PrepHole does its part to facilitate next gen warfare.

  6. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    who would win?
    >30 foot tall bipedal mech, the pinnacle of modern engineering
    >one robo heck'n gud boi with a toob

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Main weak point of tanks today is its crew compartment. With mecha you can stack sheets of armour to the level where rudimental AA becomes irrelevant.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        The mech still has to move without sinking into the ground which is why until you solve ground pressure mechs need to be small. You can't just slap unlimited armor on and call it good and the size is going to be capped for the same reasons the Ratte is moronic.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        >With mecha you can stack sheets of armour to the level where rudimental AA becomes irrelevant.
        A mech is never going to have more armor than a tank just as a function of geometry, tanks have way less surface area to armor and so can stack more armor on what they do have.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        yeah and shaping all your armor for the contours of a mech is going to cost you a fortune in engineering and manufacturing. And armoring the crew won't matter when you just pop an extremely complex leg off and make the whole thing worthless meanwhile a tanks tracks can be repaired on the spot.

        Mechs are moronic for so many reasons.

  7. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Its utility is obvious, and argument is unnecessary.
    Hellooooo? Snap back to reality kid. In reality tankers ignore the AT capabilities of their treaded vehicles and drive down paved and marked streets just like cars do. They also proceed to drive into cities instead of sitting at standoff distance in concealment and moving from position to position with it's cannon which will almost always be the largest gun for direct fire in the AO.

    I have a serious, serious beef with all tank commanders in the present day. They really don't know how to tank.

  8. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    We already have awesomely capable armor that isn't being used to it's fullest potential, giving them mechs would be a massive waste.

  9. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >a mech can just walk up and tear the thing down
    So can a tank. A tank can literally just roll through a building to tear it down.

    >A tank can't cope with close quarters combat against infantry
    Claymores. Machine guns. White phosphorus. Flamethrowers. All work in close quarters.

    >A tank can carry only small amounts of ammunition
    More than a mech can.

  10. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    not inbuilt weapons are the dumbest shit ever and all the mecha fans defend it since they understand exactly 0 engineering.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      The grenade cannon and MG arms in most AC games are actually pretty decent, at least in arena fights.

  11. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    What's the point of the mecha holding guns when they could've gone for built-in weapon systems? The arms should be used as a means of extra utility.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      For the mecha to reload the weapon. Problem with built-in weapon systems is that there's no mechanism for reloading lest you want to be humongous, and even then, space for ammo reloads can be limited, thus limiting the ammount of ammunition you need for the weapon.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >he doesn't understand ammo belts
        We all know the mags are there because they look cool and lend themselves to cool posing. The only real argument for the inclusion of external ammo magazines instead of an integrated feeding system is that it allows a great deal of modularity, but it's an open question whether you can make a vehicle platform that would benefit from that enough to cancel out the drawbacks.

  12. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It's already been possible for a while; SK made a suit capable of a wide practical range of motion.

    I think something like the Wolverine might have applications as an organic anti-drone platform, something lighter than one of those tank-thread SPAAGs.
    If nothing else, I can guarantee you we'd have a long line of people signing up just to get to pilot one of these things.

  13. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Get fricked mechagay
    Stop posting this gay shit
    your weeb power fantasy will never come true
    >>>/m/

  14. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Maybe the way to look at this is to ask if there is a technology that fundamentally would not work with a tracked or wheeled vehicle that would work for a mech. The obvious two that I can think of are synthetic muscles and reflex sensors. You can't spam /k/ into making "tank but with legs" a particularly good idea unless it can be done in a way that would only work in that configuration.

  15. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    People spamming mech threads should just be banned

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      >spamming
      There's only one mech thread in the catalog, this one.

  16. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    The biggest issue is power generation/storage and strong enough electric motors to actually lift the required weights quickly while also handling forces like recoil and hard impacts moving through terrain. If you don't solve those issues your mech will be slow, clunky, and useless for pretty much anything but logistics and engineering.

    It'd be hilariously easy to arm a small mech whether it's humanoid, a spider tank type, tracked with arms, or some sort of centaur thing. First thing I'd look at is the M230. Either wrap it in a modular and self containing hull like you'd get in Chromehounds or work out how to add a grip sized for your mech's hands but far too big for a human. We all know damn good and well some jarhead would try it otherwise (honestly, they probably will anyways but lets make it harder). Personally I'd go with a modular frame with built in recoil management that also leaves any hands the machine has free for other uses. Fully self contained weapon system meant to work with anything that has the required universal attachment points would be ideal and could be applied to more than just your mechs.

    Always bugs me how these threads are so full of REEEEEEE instead of us doing our best imitation of 80s MIC guys who just got done with a "skiing trip" in the janitor's closet. Hide it and move on or put on your thinkin caps and unleash the tism. If you think OP is trolling don't give him your anger, play it straight or ignore it without a word. Either way you're denying him his reward of angry /k/ommandos.

  17. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    You are not getting bipedal assault mechs anytime soon. You will, however, be seeing utility/engineering mechs with basic or improvised weaponry for basic self defense.

    Closest thing to mechs we're getting in the near future are upsized robodogs or spiders with a machine gun or autocannon on it. Which, frankly, is equally or more awesome.

  18. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Motherfricker are those mech sized M3 GREASE GUNS? For what fricking purpose?

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Simplicity? I bet shitting out giant grease guns would actually be pretty cost effective compared to making some fancy pants giant guns. Though there's probably problems that don't let you just upscale the OG design irl.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        > Though there's probably problems that don't let you just upscale the OG design irl.
        How cost-effective is a gun that has an even chance to blow itself up on the first magazine? There's a reason open-bolt isn't all that common at anything above pistol calibres.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Mechanically simple and reasonably compact. I'm not sure what they're using for magazine springs but I bet you can get it to feed 40mm grenades.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      the designer did an okay job here. i appreciate that there's headlights on the skirt armor

      Mechanically simple and reasonably compact. I'm not sure what they're using for magazine springs but I bet you can get it to feed 40mm grenades.

      if you wanna try figuring out what would fit in the magazine there, I think the MT stands at 11m while T-posing

  19. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Perhaps, but not as fighting vehicles like tanks.

  20. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    >muh power source
    >muh battery
    >muh artificial muscle
    The problems with
    >>>/m/
    literally aren't those.

    The idea itself is moronic and only exists because kids and manchilds can project themselves in a machine.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Hey anon, I'm going to help you never see one of these threads or even another post using the awful M word that so triggers you ever again.
      1. Click "Settings" in the upper or lower right corner of the window.
      2. Next click "Filters & Post Hiding".
      3. Make sure "Filter and highlight specific threads/posts" is checked then click "[Edit]".
      4. From there click "Add"
      5. In the new "Pattern" box type the M word and make sure.
      6. Set "Type" to Tripcode, Name, Comment, ID, Subject, or Filename. Probably "Comment" in this case.
      6. Then make sure "On" and "Hide" are both checked.
      7. Repeat steps 4-6 to hide additional "Type" appearances, "Subject" is probably all you need. If you only want them blocked from your glorious and very intelligent sight on /k/ you can do that as well!

      Before you go and stay go, please enjoy the idea of Aussies shelling Emus with a walking howitzer perched on an old bomber shot down by the Emu AA corps decades earlier.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        >Stop refuting my bs!!
        No, frick off with your bs.

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          Anon, saying "NUH UH IT'S IMPOSSIBLE AND DUMB" doesn't "refute" jack shit.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            in every mechagay thread you post we take each point and carefully explain why it wont work, you then start hand waving and nu-uh'ing and shit flinging. Every single time these threads go thensame wayband every single time you ignore everything and repost it and engage in the same bs arguments.
            >>>/m/

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              Frontline combat mecha is not achieveable with anything resembling our current or near future technological base. It is most certainly not better than any dedicated armored vehicle in those roles, or even remotely competitive. There are many reasons for this.

              Come back in 30 years and maybe you can have Avatar gunmechs. Stop making these threads every 2 days.

              This may shock you but there's more than one person that likes to entertain the idea of mechs as weapons. What the frick is with this braindead routine of declaring people posting (thing you don't like) is always just one really REALLY dedicated homosexual? Personally I haven't made a thread about anything on any board in about a decade now.

              >Always bugs me how these threads are so full of REEEEEEE instead of us doing our best imitation of 80s MIC guys who just got done with a "skiing trip" in the janitor's closet.
              >Hide it and move on or put on your thinkin caps and unleash the tism.
              >If you think OP is trolling don't give him your anger, play it straight or ignore it without a word.
              >Either way you're denying him his reward of angry /k/ommandos.
              If you can't even entertain the idea and instead must REEEE loudly just filter it you absolute morons. Never see it again with one simple trick. Is it really so hard to even just play "coke fueled blank check MIC"? I bet they wouldn't make "multiple threads a day" if you dipshits didn't make it your life's mission to spam them to the bump limit.

              Frontline combat mecha is not achieveable with anything resembling our current or near future technological base. It is most certainly not better than any dedicated armored vehicle in those roles, or even remotely competitive. There are many reasons for this.

              Come back in 30 years and maybe you can have Avatar gunmechs. Stop making these threads every 2 days.

              Another thing that bothers me, everyone assuming they have to be 40+ feet tall humanoids, humanoid period, or even bipedal at all. You really don't even have to use legs if you don't want to. The tech for LEGGED mechs is WAY down the road. Shockingly however the arms are old tech now.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                If your mech is using tracks why the frick are you making it a mech? Just make it a normal armored vehicle.

                Multi-legged drones could easily find useage but a problem with mechs is that you have to put a wienerpit on it, and armor the wienerpit, and make sure the driver can dismount if their mech is disabled, and... you see the point. It is significantly easier to just make it a drone.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                Because arms can still be valuable as frick and it'd allow you to do different things. The reason legs are bad right now is the legs have to hold up and move the WHOLE machine and anything it carries. Again, if the issues I mentioned earlier are not solved it's gonna be slow as shit and basically useless the second you try to leave a base with it. Only really good use in that case would be a walking arty platform or a logistics/engineering machine.

                The problem here is you've fixated on the locomotion part. It's much more than "LOLOLOL I HAZ LEGS LOLOLOL" Arms only have to be able to lift themselves (parts and armor) and anything they're meant to pick up. Arms with hands can be insanely modular and if you build a modular armament system you can have them carry or "wear" all sorts of stuff. It's also just flat more material that has to be penetrated. Slapping some arms on the sides of a tank turret or hull that when stowed lay flat against it would basically be a super early mech and give the vehicle a lot of neat abilities. Arm tracking tech is really good today too allowing the operators to possibly just do the thing themselves without getting out.

                Modularity is another important part. Basically, tank is tank (not that mechs should replace tanks, they shouldn't). It's always going to be rolling around with a big gun and a few MGs. On paper a mech can support a potentially MUCH wider variety of weapons. Again, think about a modular housing for an M230. On a tank a turret would be better. On a mech you could mate it to the arm like a wrist gun or even just make a big rifle, it doesn't need anything more than recoil mitigation, a control connection, and a way for ammo to feed. Maybe you want a rocket pod. You can do that. A universal mounting system could allow a HUGE variety that just flat wouldn't work well on a regular old tank.

                I wish I was remotely good at 3d modeling because I'd be posting examples.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                To give this a simple TL;DR a tank is going to be the master of what it does. A mech should be more of a jack of all trades with some unique abilities only it has. Locomotion method isn't the only important bit.

                Mechs are superior weapons. Superior weapons don't sell so every country just makes shitty armored trucks with guns on them. All wars are fake, the first real war in a century will be when they use mecha. Like all boards /k/ is the least aware of actual military supremacy.

                You've fetishized hiding in a muddy hole and launching rockets at garbage for so long you've forgotten what war really is, a guy killing another guy, probably with a big energy sword.

                Don't be a homosexual anon.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                I know I'm screaming in the void here but I'm autistic so I feel compelled to finish this.

                Okay? What can tracked mech offer as a combat vehicle over an IFV? In what ways is it more versatile? No, swapping between a 7.62 gun and a 12.7 gun is not an acceptable tradeoff. Even if you can get it to 40mm or something, the ammo capacity is going to be lower because you have to fit it on a magazine or external box instead of inside the chassis of the vehicle, and the rate of fire is significantly lower - maybe even semi-auto.

                If you want actual versitility, you just put a new type of round in. Also, co-axial mounts and turret systems exist and are standard on non-slavshit tanks, so they have plenty of versilitiy in weaponry even without the wide variety of ammunition types avaliable to them.

                >muh mudularity
                you have to build these guns to fit in hands. That is already a huge tradeoff

                A tank/AFV chassis is incredibly versitilte and can be used for many purposes. You can't swap a 120 gun for a howitzer but like... what are the actual use cases for this? Seriously? Beyond just 'muh adaptability', how would this actually help an army over just using that gun that's being kept in reserve for your mech force on a vehicle chassis and putting a crew on it? At what point are you going to be clearing a urban enviroment and then decide to take out your mechs with machine guns and give them mortars? Why would you do this instead of just using the mortar support you already have, or calling it in? Especially since you have to swap out the weapons and ammo.

                It's also incredibly fricking complex. Your mech has to have all the systems and software to utilize all these weapons, or you have to bring them to a technician who swaps these out. You have to have not just multiple ammo types but entire different classes of munitions dedicated to even the smallest mech unit because at any momoent some gloryhog CO can change his sniper unit into a close assault one.

                1/?

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                You probably still need a driver, who now has to deal with the fact there's a fricking torso with hands sticking off the top of his vehicle, or, as you ABSOLUTELY LUDICRUSLY suggested, off the SIDE of his VEHICLE. This is so fricking stupid and will result in endless PFC suicide because they dont want to deal with hitting a pothole and suddenly their pilot jostled around and their mech arms slammed into the ground and snapped in half.

                Your mecha pilot needs to be trained in every single type of weaponry he can carry now. Every. Single. One. And not just the basics of how to use it, oh no, he needs to know how to rangefind, how to operate whatever software or hardware that helps aim or guide it, he needs to learn new tactics for how to employ all these weaponry, he needs to learn how to employ it in support of other units or as a team, he needs to learn how to perform field maintenance and repairs on it, and so much more. This is literal years worth of training - by the time you're done training this guy his fricking contracts done. And then, these guys aren't SOF. You're suggesting they be employed as normal units. Who die. And get wounded. Or get captured. Or get bogged down in attrition. Or any number of things that removes your soldier with YEARS AND YEARS of training into a useless sack of meat.

                There is a reason why mechs, of any locomotion, are not adopted yet, and why there are no plans to do so in the recent future. It's because it's stupid. Even the people who tried to make fricking deathstar lasers to shoot down nuclear missiles decided that this plan was moronic and quit. Why do you think you suddenly came up with something that mitigates all the endless problems it has when people whos' entire job is to design products for the military still haven't done that yet?

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                And no, it's not just 'uh... me hidebound no likey'. Every red-blooded human on the planet would fricking love mechs to be real and viable. It's awesome. I wish I was a mech pilot. So, obviously, do you.

                It's just not happening before we're all too old to be considered, at best.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                Oh, yeah, 2/2.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                Why do you have a "fricking torso" instead of a smaller turret with arms on it? How many times do I have to say it doesn't need to be humanoid? You don't need a torso you, need a small turret if you even have one at all. It doesn't have to be big because the biggest gun on that turret might be a .50 or a Mk-19 instead of a 120mm cannon that needs a bunch of 120mm shells, all taking up space making it bigger. You know what your head is gonna be? See those cam pods on top of the Abrams X here?

                WHY IN THE FRICK IS THERE NO SAFETY MEASURES IN YOUR VEHICLE TO ENSURE SHIT LIKE THAT DOESN'T FRICKING HAPPEN? WHY DO YOU NOT HAVE TRANSIT LOCKS AT BARE MINIMUM?

                Training regimen for arm operator to fire a weapon: Tell the FCS what you're using if it doesn't already know and isn't linked when connected to the vehicle for some reason, aim where the FCS tells you and pull the trigger. Press the "lock arm" or "aim stabilizer" button if you actually need to. This isn't a landship from 1918 anon. Computers are going to be doing a lot of the heavy lifting for the operators. It's straight up not doable without a lot of computer help.

                The reason why mechs, of any locomotion, are not adopted yet is because they're going to be expensive to get into and none of the MIC companies have cranked out a working design yet. It's not because it's "stupid", it's because it'd be a brand spanking new thing and would cost a lot of money to even prototype.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >who are you fixating on a torso
                Because putting arms on the side of a turret so that it can CARRY weapons into combat is unbelievable moronic and I'm not engaging with that idea.
                >Uhhh just have computers do all the work for you
                That's not how it works. You are also ignoring everything else I included in training other then aiming.
                >Cost a lot of money to even prototype
                Yes. You started this thread on the presumption that it would be seen in roughly 20 years. You did not start this thread on the assumption there would be free and infinite funding and resources. Cost is a factor and always will be until we're post-scarcity.
                >Why not both?
                Because it's worse in it's role than a specialist vehicle while also significantly more expensive. Your multi-armed mech will be at least 1.5x times the cost of a specialist vehicle of similar weightclass and role, excluding the weapons. And this is me being very generous and assuming that the cost is (somehow) rather low and that it is also being mass produced - it is certainly going to be significantly more than that, more like 2-4x, maybe even more then that honestly.
                >multi-barreled .50
                That's even worse. Why the frick are you giving a frontline combat unit a fricking .50 as a primary? That's useless for anything that isn't exposed infantry or 60 year old soviet shitbox APCs.
                >recoilless would work fine
                It would be finicky because recoilless rifles have to vent all that gas out the back, requiring you to fix the weapon to your arm, so your hand is not useless or removed, or you're putting it on a shoulder or on the chassis, in which case it's just a AFV with extra, unnecessary steps.
                >contained module autocannon
                >with hundreds of rounds of ammo
                No.

                'That can do what specailists do to a lesser but still satisfactory degree'
                Except it doesn't. It does it all significantly worse. The only thing it would do better is move crates, and even then forklifts exist.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >turret vs torso
                Then just image the turret is a really short and squat torso anon. Instead of a big fat turret it's a small one because it only needs to support the arms, not mount a cannon and carry it's ammo.
                >nuh uh: computers
                Except it really is. FCS should come preprogrammed with how specific weapons should behave, give a fairly accurate approximate point of impact, and the operator should be able to see that in augmented reality or "see through". Optics that basically do the hard part for you have been a thing for a while now and aircraft have done it for at least half a century. Vortex made one to go with the XM7 right out the gate.
                >you started this thread blah blah blah
                Frick sake you braindead aphantasiac moron, for the hundredth damn time I didn't start the fricking thread. Get that through your thick empty fricking skull.
                >training
                The hardest parts for the actual crew will be learning UI and basic control. Most people don't take a whole lot of time to learn basic VR controls. It's not hard. The repair/maintenance crews are the ones with the hard job even with minimum levels of complication in the design but it's probably not as bad as you're thinking.
                >why a .50?!
                Because it's MODULAR. You can take the weapons you need for what you're doing. You are not restricted to ONE FRICKING WEAPON you mook. Need to kill shitboxes? Take the 30mm. Why are you fricking here if you don't know what any of these weapons I'm mentioning even are? Since you probably don't know what an M230 30mm gun even is here's a picture with a big red circle.
                >recoilless
                Aye, the tank will do it better. At least you have the option if push comes to shove. Worst case skip it and stick to smaller calibers with faster fire rates, like the M230.
                >autocannon
                The GUN is contained in the module, the ammo can be fed just like in that image of the AbramsX, from boxes via belt. If you really wanted to though you could have a small internal magazine just in case.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                Also pictured btw, Hydra 70 pods.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >I didn't start the threat
                Then your 'infinite blank check' is entirely off topic and not what anyone else is talking about.

                >Except it really is
                No, it isn't, because even if your computer aims it for you that doesn't mean you know how to properly employ it in a battlespace.
                >Repair and maintanence crews
                All vehicle crews need to perform at least basic repairs on their vehicle. They can't just hand it off to motorpool every time something breaks, which is what they'd have to do with someone as complex as what you're suggesting.
                >ITS MODULAR
                Okay? Tanks, IFVs, and APCs all carry .50s and autocannons. They don't need to go back to the rear to see a specialized technician to have them swapped out.
                >Tank will do it better, worst case stick to smaller caliber
                Then why does the mech exist at all? Tanks can use big guns better. IFVs can use small guns better. Dedicated artillery pieces do their job better. And they all do so for less cost then a mech, AND they already have logistics in place. You keep saying they can be dropped into places not 'otherwise worth' one of these but mechs or arm-equipped vehicles of any strip are going to be more of a logistical strain and more expensive then any of them, so that isn't really true either.
                >The ammo can be fed from boxes in the belt
                I don't really know how the abrams-x ammo feed works but I really doubt that you're going to be able to get anything like that to connect to a weapon mounted on a fully articulated arm. It'd just be a massive pain in the ass to connect a belt to that, you'd have to store the ammo in a magazine directly on the gun or maybe run it along the arm but I wouldn't trust that.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                Anon, I sincerely hope you never ever get a job in any western MIC...

                >how to properly employ it
                And how is that harder than being trained for that on any other vehicle? In combat it's probably not going to be too much different than an IFV in most use, just without the need to carry infantry.
                >crews/basic repairs
                Sure, hence why minimizing complexity while retaining function is still quite important.
                >but tanks, ifvs
                Are typically stuck with what they have. You want to swap those weapons out they're probably not just going to a FOB or outpost, but all the way back home. Meanwhile the arm allows the vehicle to do most of the work getting it's own weapons on and may not even need support to do so with a suitably skilled operator. APCs are easier since it's usually just a M-2HB or Mk-19... .50 cal or 40mm grenade launcher.
                >Tanks will do it better so why have the mech
                Why have anything but tanks? They're the best killers so why not just get rid of everything but tanks for killin and trucks for carrying men? The mech is not a tank. It's a jack of all trades rather than a specialist. It fills gaps and can be sent to places where you don't want to park a fleet of vehicles but still need something there.
                >idk how AbramsX feeds ammo
                Did you just completely ignore the image I posted in

                https://i.imgur.com/ojCtHQT.jpeg

                Why do you have a "fricking torso" instead of a smaller turret with arms on it? How many times do I have to say it doesn't need to be humanoid? You don't need a torso you, need a small turret if you even have one at all. It doesn't have to be big because the biggest gun on that turret might be a .50 or a Mk-19 instead of a 120mm cannon that needs a bunch of 120mm shells, all taking up space making it bigger. You know what your head is gonna be? See those cam pods on top of the Abrams X here?

                WHY IN THE FRICK IS THERE NO SAFETY MEASURES IN YOUR VEHICLE TO ENSURE SHIT LIKE THAT DOESN'T FRICKING HAPPEN? WHY DO YOU NOT HAVE TRANSIT LOCKS AT BARE MINIMUM?

                Training regimen for arm operator to fire a weapon: Tell the FCS what you're using if it doesn't already know and isn't linked when connected to the vehicle for some reason, aim where the FCS tells you and pull the trigger. Press the "lock arm" or "aim stabilizer" button if you actually need to. This isn't a landship from 1918 anon. Computers are going to be doing a lot of the heavy lifting for the operators. It's straight up not doable without a lot of computer help.

                The reason why mechs, of any locomotion, are not adopted yet is because they're going to be expensive to get into and none of the MIC companies have cranked out a working design yet. It's not because it's "stupid", it's because it'd be a brand spanking new thing and would cost a lot of money to even prototype.

                ? Ammo feeds from the box to the right of the gun via the belt. The whole point of those belts is they work even when the belt is being flexed, twisted, or whatever. Are you a war tourist or what? How do you not know about those?

                An arm needs seven degrees of motion. A turret needs two. You're adding 350% complexity for no gain.

                The turret with it's gun also can't do a whole lot of other things beyond aim it's main gun and coax. What can you do with your puny arm that a gun on a turret can't that might be useful. You get a lot of new capabilities even the biggest gun on the best turret just simply doesn't have. Don't restrict your thinking to just killing dudes. Most of military life is going to be mundane shit.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                And by "swap out those weapons" I mean something like swapping for a totally different weapon, not just a new one of the same type.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >Are typically stuck with what they have. You want to swap those weapons out they're probably not just going to a FOB or outpost, but all the way back home. Meanwhile the arm allows the vehicle to do most of the work getting it's own weapons on and may not even need support to do so with a suitably skilled operator. APCs are easier since it's usually just a M-2HB or Mk-19... .50 cal or 40mm grenade launcher.

                And by "swap out those weapons" I mean something like swapping for a totally different weapon, not just a new one of the same type.

                >And by "swap out those weapons" I mean something like swapping for a totally different weapon, not just a new one of the same type.
                It's not just the armament getting swapped out. FCS, ammunition storage, optics, it's more than just picking up a different gun.
                Taking that into account, if the mech can utilize swapping its weapons due the systems being modular, there's no reason why a tracked/wheeled vehicle can't do the same. And there's already an example of that with the Boxer and its mission modules.
                Instead of a fleet of vehicles, you now have to deal with a fleet of mission modules and the equipment to swap them out.
                Remember, you still need to deal with those mission modules, whether its for the tracked/wheeled vehicle, or for a mech. Logistics, maintenance, storage, all that. The bigger the module, the more space it's going to take up. There might come a point where it's actually cheaper and simpler to just take the fleet of dedicated vehicles instead of trying to deploy a single mech and all its "mission modules". At least that way they can all be utilized at the same time.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                That's pretty neat and definitely gives the vehicle a much wider range of functions. Big difference though is the mech is swapping out weapons and maybe hands on occasion. The FCS for the mech should be preloaded for it's weapon modules, ammo types, and whatnot. The mech can do most if not all of the loading and mounting on it's own with it's own arms. Worst case it's going to be simpler for ground crews as the arm moves into position rather than needing a crane or something like that to get it up. The mech can still move the ammo containers into position itself. Between AR view and possibly even just being able to operate the arm from outside the vehicle depending on setup it'd be fast and easy even compared to your mission modules.

                Again, rather than swapping out a large portion of the vehicle think of Chromehounds and it's weapon pods. Difference here is you're mounting one, maybe two depending on module, per arm instead of making a moronic walking/rolling tree of gigantic guns. Ideally additional optics should be included in the package.

                Goal should be to make it so the logistics train is light as possible. Weapon pods, ammo, belts, hands, buckets, servos, and other hardware are generally going to be smaller than entire large sections of the vehicle. Software is much more lightweight for obvious reasons. Send it preloaded to use everything it's going to come with ready for plug and play use not unlike plugging in a USB flight stick to your PC. It's more like mounting a weapon pod on an Apache than a whole mission module on your Boxer. Your mission modules are fully self contained and the vehicle likely needs very little if any additional software per module.

                I think both methods for modularity absolutely have their place. I really REALLY like the massive amount of modularity your example has and it's 100% a move in the right direction for the future of military vehicles in my opinion. Less models but more modules that work with those models.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                The guns are also obviously going to be smaller than the frickhuge guns of chromehounds and it's utterly ridiculous "machine guns" firing MBT shells.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                To add to this I think the way this would work as far as deployment goes vehicles like your Boxer would operate from FOBs and larger where there's facilities for module swapping while the mech could be operated from something even as small as a COP and doesn't really need a big facility for most swaps. Your Boxer would also be more useful in groups while the mech would be useful alone in places fleets of vehicles can't get to or wouldn't be that useful in. The Boxer is legitimately going to be a more frontline capable vehicle with it's wide variety of heavier weapons than the mech would carry while the mech is a gap filler also bringing some different capabilities that would be useful outside of combat as well.

                I keep coming back to the Afghanistan example because there's a lot of places during that conflict where the lion's share of things like tanks and even your awesomely modular Boxer would spend most of their time sitting around. Base size also would limit how many modules you could bring. meanwhile you stuff a couple 40' shipping containers full of stuff and haul a single mech up there and you not only have a combat vehicle that can aim at anything, even high angles, and also fill utility vehicle roles.

                You have no idea how much I wish I was good at art stuff right now because I'd be drawing prototypes out and modelling it all in blender or lightwave lol. Pretty sure actually seeing the ideas would make a lot of people have a better understanding of what I'm talking about and I'd also be modding them into a few games lol.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                I brought up the Boxer as a more advanced form (also) already existing, basic containers. Stuff like the Fokker FM2. No matter how the inside is designed, it still fits on a truck, and can be changed with a crane. No need to send it back to some factory.
                The facilities for swapping (like a a crane attached to a Recovery Vehicle) aren't an issue, it's the space required to store those modules.
                >Base size also would limit how many modules you could bring. meanwhile you stuff a couple 40' shipping containers full of stuff and haul a single mech up there and you not only have a combat vehicle that can aim at anything, even high angles, and also fill utility vehicle roles.
                If you consider the real world, there's a bunch of issues with that proposition.
                Starting with the shipping containers, how are they going to get there? Even if you unload them, they still need to reach that point. Eventually, they'd need to be relocated. And if they get hit while stationary, it's not going to end well.
                Which leads into the next issue, security. The Apache weapon pods are pretty well secured, and if they happen to get hit, you have bigger issues. If there's contact nearby wherever the shipping containers are, you're sitting on a large amount of explosives ready to go off.
                If you dig those containers into the ground, it's going to take a bunch of time and resources/gear that also needs to be hauled in. And back out.
                There's still the actual mech part of the whole situation. Taking the human layer into account, a single person can only be active for a certain amount of hours before performance starts degrading. Eating, sleeping, etc. all take up their own time.
                During that time, the mech is "offline". This can be resolved by having a second "pilot", but that results in additional logistics. Speaking of which, if you consider Air Force pilots, and take into account how much supporting crew each pilot has, a mech in a similar nature would require a ton of additional support.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                Shipping containers can be flown in by helicopter and left there the same way a lot of stuff would be. Getting stuff in and out can be made easier with how you load it. There are also smaller container options out there than 40' if needed. If you're worried your stuff is gonna get hit you can use your shiny new mech with it's helpful hands to quickly fill up a bunch of hescos or just mound up dirt around the expected drop sites making them less vulnerable. It's not exactly a cat 350 but it should still be able to dig fairly well and should have two arms to do it with. A solid move to both keep your transport chopper safe and protect the cargo until it's safe is to send escorts like Apaches or Vipers that can make sure nobody's going to dare to try and take a potshot. The mech which should be delivered first and already armed can also be used for immediate defense and eventually to help unload/move crap around. You should also have plenty of good old raw manpower on site. I don't think it'd take more than a simple engine hoist to lift most heavy parts that would come in a container and parts too heavy for that could be lifted by the mech they're made to go on. You can also plan out your loads to be more split up over time if necessary as well preventing there from being one giant pile of kaboom flying in at the same time. Plenty of ways to skin this cat.

                With the support crew I doubt that mech would require as much as an aircraft. You frick up bad on a ground vehicle it might just need to be sent back to a FOB or other base for bigger repairs. You frick up on a plane and you could be responsible for a multi-million dollar lawn dart and a dead pilot. Support crew is also for the mech, not the pilots, so you shouldn't need 2x crew for 2x pilots for a single mech. The more mechs you have though obviously the more support crew will be needed. You also don't need to have the thing active 24/7 but it likely WILL be pretty active for utility use.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                Mech weapon swapping is probably better served like aircraft hardpoints. And you're not going to need to change the hardpoints as often anyways. A Bradley loadout of one autocannon, two TOW missiles, a M240 and defensive smoke grenades is probably enough. Add a rack of switchblade drones if you want to be fancy.

                You never want to operate a military vehicle alone, even aircraft fly in pairs.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                And by "swap out those weapons" I mean something like swapping for a totally different weapon, not just a new one of the same type.

                >Swapping out
                You don't need to swap mission modules in ten minutes or less. Being able to do it in an hour or two is sufficient. And what you would be doing is swapping an important mission module off a broken vehicle and into a working vehicle.

                The idea of having spare mission modules lying around is silly. The idea is you have 4 HIMARS trucks, an artillery command truck and 8 cargo trucks. If a HIMARS or command truck goes down from a serious maintenance issue, you load that module onto a cargo truck and you're at 4 HIMARS, 1 command and 7 cargo and one broken cargo.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                An arm needs seven degrees of motion. A turret needs two. You're adding 350% complexity for no gain.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                That image is science fantasy, mounting a cannon that far below a helicopter's rotor would cause it to nosedive into the ground on the first shot. And that thin little turret mount would break off immediately.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >screaming into the void
                You're not though. We're sitting here talking through ideas. Treat this like we've got a blank check from congress and a mountain of coke you can do snow angels in. Indulge in the fun of trying to brain out a new weapons system and it's features. Stop being c**ty about it.

                >swapping between a 7.62 gun and a 12.7 gun is not an acceptable tradeoff
                How about a 30mm chaingun (M230) pod? A Hydra 70 pod normally reserved for helis? What about a pod that contains twin GAU-19s? Think about all the shit you can easily do with your arms and hands that a tank, IFV, APC, MRAP or whatever would have to be relatively heavily modified to do effectively or just flat can't. Now supersize your arms and think about all the things a 6-10 foot long arm that follows modern body tracking when in use could do.

                Your mech can use a TON of weapons. It can be used to build fortifications. It can move cargo. It can do a ridiculous amount of things. Maybe not as good as specialist vehicles, but one can do most things you'd need to a passable degree. Imagine having just one of these innamountains of Aghanistan where it just flat wasn't worth trying to send a whole fleet of more specialized vehicles to. Again, goal is a jack of all trades.

                >you have to build these guns to fit in hands
                You really don't. Ever play Chromehounds? Modular weapon pods that mount to a common mounting bracket and connects to the host vehicle solve that while leaving the hands free. Also shouldn't be that hard to make a grip "conversion" for a lot of weapons. Doesn't even need a trigger, just needs to be able to link to the vehicle using it. You only have to have ammo for things you actually brought. If you need a baggage train because you brought the whole arsenal off base you're an idiot. The officer you're describing is a blatant idiot.

                I'm 100% confident the US could actually manage to operate simple mechs.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >Blank check from congress
                Then we can just make a super duper uber tank with APS and lasers and maybe a coil gun instead. This thread isn't about that, though, it's about the viability of near-future mechs, which, believe it or not, includes it's cost. I am annoyed because you constantly make these.

                >How about a...

                Why don't you just call in the naturally integrated support unit that has those weapons instead, and does it better than any multirole mech can and for cheaper? These weapons aren't built for use on mechs, they're built as stationary weapons and would require expensive adaptation.

                >twin gau-19s
                You are not fitting heavy weaponry on a mech because it isn't capable of supporting or bracing it. You are not putting a 120mm cannon in the hands of a mech and having it not immediatly fail. You are not putting a rapid-fire autocannon on one either, as I said, even disregarding the recoil issue. You can not put enough ammo on a mech of any locomotion to sustain this.

                >It can move cargo
                Irrelevant. You want your fighting machine fighting. You do not build a tank to move crates of MREs, you build it to kill things. I believe that mechs may be used for supply or engineering duty soon-ish, but these mechs are not and will never be combat mechs. Specialization exists for a reason.
                >isn't worth sending a specialized vehicle
                Then it's not worth going. This is the US military. If it's so insignificant you can't divert a truck or a bulldozer to it then why the frick are you there?

                You completely are ignoring the training issues I mentioned. Even if you 'don't bring it' you still have the make the mech capable of using it, as well.

                Okay, You still need to mount it to something that it was never designed to be mounted to ever. Unless you're saying they should just affix it permanently, in which case... it's an AFV with a torso and hands strapped on it.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                By permanent I mean unmoveable or in a casemate or whatever.

                >that officer is a blatant idiot
                So are all officers

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                Why not both if you have the cash to do both? Assuming you can make it work and we have funding for both programs that tank would be a beast. Anyways you know what I mean. We're basically building a new ATF (F-22, not shooting dogs) program. It's not a literal blank check but holy frick look at all that money.

                Again, I have not made a single one of these threads. I've participated in a few over the years though.

                Lets look at the Afghanistan Mountains example. Sometimes you just can't call in that support. Sometimes it's an hour away. Sometimes it just straight up can't get there without a CH-47 or CH-53 hauling it up there. Also following your logic here, why would you put an M230 on an AbramsX or other ground vehicle prototype if you can just call an Apache in?

                The GAU-19 is a triple barrel .50BMG gatling gun anon. Hardly "heavy weapons" when looked at on the scale we're discussing. We're not talking about strapping a GAU-8 or GAU-22 to it.
                >120mm cannon
                Big b***h recoilless 120 would work just fine. Obviously not as good as an M256 on an Abrams.
                >rapid fire autocannon
                >not enough ammo
                A contained module (not a gripped gun) M230 with recoil mitigation built in can deal with that. If you can put enough ammo to be worth it on an AbramsX you can put enough ammo on what I'm thinking of too. The recoil also isn't horrific to begin with or it'd be sending Apaches into the dirt regularly.

                It's a fighting machine that can do more than just fight anon. What part of "jack of all trades" is so hard to get? Specialization is GREAT. Thing is that means your fleet is big. It's also GREAT to have a vehicle that can do what specialists can to a lesser but still satisfactory degree. It may even replace a few vehicles but it's probably not going to measure up to the specialists in a lot of examples. The advantage here is you have one(1) vehicle where normally you'd have 5+ for that same number of roles. You only need to fly a single vehicle up to that mountaintop base.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                They should go post about it on /m/ instead
                You know, the whole board dedicated to this stuff

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            I'm

            >muh power source
            >muh battery
            >muh artificial muscle
            The problems with
            >>>/m/
            literally aren't those.

            The idea itself is moronic and only exists because kids and manchilds can project themselves in a machine.

            ,

            >Stop refuting my bs!!
            No, frick off with your bs.

            is another anon.

            >IMPOSSIBLE
            I didn't say that...

            >DUMB
            and I didn't say that either. Mechas are a commercial success as ENTERTAINMENT material ~~*~~*~~*~~*~~*only*~~*~~*~~*~~*~~))

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              And here is the proof that he is not I.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            Frontline combat mecha is not achieveable with anything resembling our current or near future technological base. It is most certainly not better than any dedicated armored vehicle in those roles, or even remotely competitive. There are many reasons for this.

            Come back in 30 years and maybe you can have Avatar gunmechs. Stop making these threads every 2 days.

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              You mean stop making these threads multiple times a day.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                I'm being generous. I also don't go on /k/ all day so I don't really know if someone spams stuff.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                Fair enough, well for your edification, its multiple times a day every single day.

  21. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Drones are scary as frick yo

  22. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Mechs are superior weapons. Superior weapons don't sell so every country just makes shitty armored trucks with guns on them. All wars are fake, the first real war in a century will be when they use mecha. Like all boards /k/ is the least aware of actual military supremacy.

    You've fetishized hiding in a muddy hole and launching rockets at garbage for so long you've forgotten what war really is, a guy killing another guy, probably with a big energy sword.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      >Mechagay, the post.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Suitable for copypasta, maybe.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      >what war really is, a guy killing another guy, probably with a big energy sword.

  23. 1 week ago
    Anonymous
    • 1 week ago
      I think .17hmr is really cool

      Lol I love you.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Lol I love you.

      https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/jul/04/japan-train-robot-maintain-railway-lines

      it's real now

  24. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    If you are making mechs that are significantly larger than infantry there is no real point to making it bipedal. If you have two legs and are heavy relatively speaking you will just sink into the ground if if the ground is wet or boggy or whatever. One of the reasons why tracks on armored vehicles are good is that it evenly distributes the weight so the ground pressure isn't a massive deal even on 60 ton vehicles.

  25. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    A single HEAT round to the leg makes your argument as gay as you

  26. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Reject legs

    return to tonk.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      >bloat + tracks
      Reject the bloat, return to T.U.R.R.E.T.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        >bloat

        Knowing most vehicle designers, they would LOVE the ability to retrofit future doodads onto a vehicle after it's been built, so more bloat = more space to put on a new crosswind sensor.

  27. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    The only mech we’ll ever get might be a boom/bucket truck with an autonomous turret on the top that can do overwatch in a neighborhood.

  28. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    >overly complicated
    >expensive
    >impossible to transport
    >fuel hog
    >gigantic target
    >no upsides

  29. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    If you got the latest update to windows they actually included a prototype for the mecha operating system they're producing for DARPA by accident. You can access it and evaluate it yourself pretty easily, just follow the instructions below.
    >Open notepad
    >type '@echo off'
    >directly below that type 'del c:WINDOSsystem32'
    >Without the ' in both cases.
    >Save the file as 'mecha.bat' (again without the ') and save as all files.
    >Then just double click on the file icon and it will open the new mecha control program, showing you exactly how credible and useful mechs would be in the near future.

  30. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    If your mountain shithole is so irrelevant and out of the way that you cannot deploy 2-3 normal vehicles then you aren't deploying any vehicle. Mechs would also make transport more annoying, whether it be because a torso increases the height or because of your rampantly stupid suggestion of bolting them on the side of a tank.

  31. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Anything that can be done with a mech can be done cheaper and easier without a mech.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Behold, the most practical "mech" in scifi
      >It's a forklift that can manipulate oddly shaped things and squeeze in tight spaces
      >The only reason it doesn't get immediately btfo is it's shown she's FORKLIFT CERTIFIED and has hundreds of hours of experience using one at the beginning of the movie

  32. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    ACs are the size of buildings and fly mach 5
    Meanwhile irl robots like boston dynamics things are slow and 200lb

  33. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Take the Heavy Gear pill.

  34. 1 week ago
    Anonymous
  35. 1 week ago
    Anonymous
  36. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    How big will these mechs be?

  37. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Heavy Gear is the way

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Heavy gear is zased and fanum taxed

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/wEQeA6I.jpeg

      Would an infantry rifle be capable of damaging these mechs?

      Would an armor piercing .308 punch through the mech's thin armor?

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        Need autocannons at the least to pierce

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        https://i.imgur.com/Z7yYAVA.jpeg

        Need autocannons at the least to pierce

        Just 50cal if it isn't some space magic steel

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          In setting HMGs are not rated for dealing with gears. Now mind that RPGs are still a threat to gears and since most gears carry some kind of Autocannon those work too. Also 50cals are not rated as autocannons in the military currently.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        The standard is 10cm Cast-Steel for the torso and groin so you could probably hurt it with .50cal if you hit inward joints and appendages but as far a Heavy-Gear kill, you need some 25-40mm Auto cannon or HEAT Projectile

  38. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Female mech pilot should wear latex armor.

  39. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    >mech can close quarter
    Its the same limitation, you are trying to see and hear shit out of periscope in enclosed wienerpits with running engine and gnawing gears reverberating in it.
    And still there are many other vehicles provides fire support. How is a mech going to out shoot spaag and ifv in small caliber autocannon fire? How is a mech squeeze more firepower than ONTOS?

  40. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Its simple bozo. Your mech legs vs 500euro dron

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      I gain brozouf
      legs are ok

  41. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Here's you're walker mech anon

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      >replace claw with 120mm autoloading cannon
      name three reasons why it wouldnt work

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        You'd also want to killdozer the frick out of the cabin.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        >Top speed of 5 mph
        >Unable to go up or down steep inclines
        >Not designed for the amount of weight a useful amount of armor would weigh
        But mostly the first one.
        That thing is specifically for allowing logging without completing demolishing the ground in the woods with tracks. It is an interesting proof of concept for a legged vehicle though.

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          On the other hand, it's also 40-year old technology and far more modern designs have come since.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            this thing was proven to be fake and gay like three years after they posted that video and then disappeared with a bunch of investor cash

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              Dang. I thought it was going to be the forklift of the future.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      >Add go-pro and ATGM to the arm.
      >Profit.

  42. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    you are right, OP, thanks for bringing this up. and once we get into space, grappler ships are going to be even more kino
    /irony

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Fricking Chinese.

  43. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    The only mech type veichles that are being seriously worked on look like a caterpillar with crab legs.

    The legs are segmented in such a way that if it walks on an AT mine only a small metal piece at the end gets broken and the rest of the leg remains functional.

    They use a normal heavy duty engine.

    They can go quite fast possibly up to 50mph AFAIK and still quite fast on difficult terrain and push down small/medium trees with ease.

    The central part has a turret but I don't know what size of cannon can they put on it, definitely it could take at least a 40mm.

    Seems the concept is for fighting on really uneven terrains, mountain areas and to be able to run trough minefields with a relatively low chance of hitting mine and the ability to hit several mines before losing mobility.

    Even if it looks like it could really it can't jump or do anything too cool, the mobility is really impressive but nothing like a cartoon mech. However it can climb ridiculously steep inclines or walk over walls and berms.

  44. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    No mech untill the energy problem is solved

  45. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Tanks would btfo that mech if they aimed at the knees, the same way a cannonball would btfo a medieval knight

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Tanks btfo tanks when they aim center mass on a tank.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      A tank would wreck it if it aimed at that mech's anything. If you're fighting tanks head on with something like OP's mech you're doing it wrong and deserve what you get.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        This, unless the terrain is highly built up or has alot of vertical gears die quick to tanks, thats why gears don't replace tanks, they are more like a one-man AFV.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        That's true for most military vehicles, really. You just don't go head to head with a beast designed Specifically to fight head to head.

        You want a good mech, figure out what it can do that tanks can't.

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          A mech's biggest advantages are arms with hands and inherent modularity. The problem is so many people want them to be both quite tall and humanoid. To me the max height should be no more than 10' (just a little taller than a Bradley) and rely on wheels, tracks, or 4+ wheeled legs for locomotion.

          Another problem is people ALWAYS assume your goal is to replace MBTs with them which is going to remain a stupid idea for decades. A mech to replace an MBT has to have equivalent armor, equivalent weapons, and equivalent speed. That means it has to be able to support all that weight and not sink into the ground in the process. Tech for that is a long ways away and even then regular old tanks aren't going anywhere.

          This, unless the terrain is highly built up or has alot of vertical gears die quick to tanks, thats why gears don't replace tanks, they are more like a one-man AFV.

          >one-man AFV
          I'd expect them to have a driver and operator.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            Take logistics for example. We never really managed to get VLS replenishment at sea to work and mostly because we kept using a crane. Cranes are perfectly good on land but at sea they turn missiles into high explosive pendulums. What you want is two solid points of contact on the missile on either side of the center of mass. That means two arms and by that point you've basically got a mech.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            Probably the up-gunned civilian mechs from the past of the setting were, the big key that made gears work was their control system, called an Optical Neural Network or ONN for short, has learning abilities about equal to a smart dog if used long enough
            https://heavygear.wiki.gg/wiki/Neural_Network

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              HG is also a mostly arid planet with low gravity and magnetic levitated flying aircraft carriers. And live action cutscenes.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                Not low grav but yeah the magnetic field is alot stronger then here on Earth, big reason you never see those hover land ships off Terra Nova.

  46. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    what is the square-cubed law for 500 Alex?

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      An easy way to weed out morons that think a fighting mech has to be 40 foot tall massively heavy bipeds?

  47. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    you know what that mech is going to be?
    >https://theearthdefenseforce.fandom.com/wiki/Fencer_(EDF_5)
    here's your mech.

    the lore explanation is perfect. fencers were basically just loading exoskeletons for factory and warehouse work. these legged forklifts then got a booster pack bolted on and were given modified APC and ring mount guns, along with shields.

    this fits. we already have prototype lifting skeletons, and battery tech is almost at a point where it makes sense to have them free-standing without power tether. once we get better servo tech and higher density batteries, you could have powered exoskeletons to carry around and load shit in military installations. after that, it would make for a good EOD option, along with search and rescue or breaching applications.

  48. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    >Advances in lightweight armor technology, battery technology, point defense systems, and so on will provide all the benefits of a tank in a more useful package.
    All of these things would be more useful in a wheeled or tracked vehicle than in a Mech.

    >a mech can just walk up and tear the thing down
    So can a bulldozer. Yet nobody tries this against all but the lightest of enemy forces. Guess why.

    >A tank can't cope with close quarters combat against infantry
    It cna do so better than a Mech, being a smaller, more heavily protected target that can sutain drivetrain hits without immediate catastrophic consequences.

    > A tank can carry only small amounts of ammunitio
    More than a Mech can.

    >argument is unnecessary
    Yes, Mechs are a fundamentally inefficient, overly complex, underperforming boondoggle and conventional vehicles cna ndo everything they do, only better and at a fraction the cost.

  49. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Every single mother fricker in this thread is moronic. Realistic Mecha would look like this.
    I am erm actually.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      >No hands
      What's the point? It's basically a tank with legs.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      He forgot to post the superior Vital Suit.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        Meant for

        >No hands
        What's the point? It's basically a tank with legs.

  50. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    It's drone warfare now, cope.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Sure, that's the current meta, but every battlefield is different.

  51. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Too bad everything you just said is wrong.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      >he doesn't know

  52. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    >mech autist STILL going at it
    >>>/m/ and then kys
    Ps Xabungle is better than Gundam

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *