This is more retarded than the Girls und Panzer carrier towns and I love it.
if this thing existed on mars or something similar, it would be perfectly sensible
the local sand and gravel might aswell be razor blades compared to what we have on earth
you aren't landing high-speed with any existing form of rubber on that fucking shit >b-buh muh roveh?
the mars rover moves 3 miles an hour
Yeah, sure. Mars having an atmospheric density about 0.2% of Earth is something we can totally design fixed wing aircraft to deal with, even with all the added drag of taking off from water (that we're keeping liquid in -200°F weather), but having a pressurised gas system or a roomba battalion or whatever to sweep the deck clean is apparently just too much.
>Mars having an atmospheric density about 0.2% of Earth is something we can totally design fixed wing aircraft to deal with
pretty sure NASAfags already did all the math and those fixed-wings are being tested for future missions
something that is important to remember is that 1/500th of the atmosphere means 1/500th of the lift but also 1/500th of the air resistance
and since air resistance grows exponentially compared to potential fixed-wing aircraft geometry the higher speeds get, a non-existent atmosphere is more beneficial the faster you go compared to earth
it's "possible" in the most technical sense of the word. It just not possible that you could build something like this and then keep it running for use in combat
It IS possible, just not economically viable or strategically advantageous enough to do so. Maybe later when we start mining kuiper belt and exploring mars. In that case i can see movable bases the size of a small carrier being very useful and may even be necessary
Also they're huge targets and also either wreck infrastructure everywhere they go or need special designed infrastructure which limits their movement.
Maybe the carrier is too massive. But the ideas of the assault ships carrying a shit ton of CIWS and C-RAM to protect itself while also carrying missiles and naval tier cannons for offensive capabilities would seem pretty cool irl.
It IS possible, just not economically viable or strategically advantageous enough to do so. Maybe later when we start mining kuiper belt and exploring mars. In that case i can see movable bases the size of a small carrier being very useful and may even be necessary
I like the idea found in rts games of bringing back a futuristic form of foraging logistics. Rather than sending food parties out to forage for berries, kill animals and collect water. You're mining and sending the material to mobile refinery and fabrication modules to manufacture everything from ammunition to armored vehicles without needing a supply line.
Would be interesting if something like that actually came into existence. I know that NASA made plans for having a sort of mini refinery that they would've jammed into a Saturn V for a planned moon base being powered by a nuclear reactor. So it's not like the idea is completely baseless.
Because missiles and planes exist, ships are used to lug crap between continents plus water allows almost unlimited size. Landship will get stuck on anything but perfectly flat terrain.
Maybe on the Moon something like that would work. The lower the gravity, the more feasible mega-vehicles become.
But anything that scale on Earth moves too SLOW. Just look at how fast the NASA crawlers go.
>Just look at how fast the NASA crawlers go
That's done so that they wouldn't fuck up the billion dollar spaceplane that they're about to shoot up into space.
iirc Kharak had much lower mass and lower gravity than our Earth so large vehicles like that were more viable. also worth noting, entire planet is a desert with a lot of flat surfaces.
irl i don't think this kinda stuff is really useful and maintenance of those giant tracks must be hell
p.s. based Deserts of Kharak enjoyers ITT
Nah, gravity was comparable. It's the combination of almost the entire planet being desert and a relative abundance of easily reachable resource deposits (aka the place is a spaceship graveyard essentially) that made it somewhat plausible for them to build their vehicles this big. Also Homeworlds-verse manufacturing technology is genuinely cracked, they're basically 3D-printing multi-megaton starships later on.
>>Why isn't it possible?
Rivers, ravines. Vehicles cross them over bridges, but bridges have mass limit.
Panzerkampfwagen VIII Maus was too heavy for bridges and it supposed to cross them by deep fording and fording is big PITA.
How has there not been a missile tank yet? Something that could just park behind a hill and NLOS spam a shit ton of extended range javelins or some other missile system? Could also act as a C-RAM emplacement for maneuver units with lasers and shit that could also kill drones. All while still having some point defense system for CQB/personal defense and all be put on an armored chassis like on top of the hill of an Abrams or some shit.
>How has there not been a missile tank yet?
Focusing most of your defense/offense in fewer "super-unit" just make it easier to make huge loss on your side because their cost would expand exponentially without being more protected than several single-use units.
Trying to ARMOR would be an exercise in futility.
Even MBT are losing that war and they hide their explosive ammo deep inside, the only reason naval ship survive is because they travel on a medium that give them lot of time to react and forbid all but aircraft/missiles from getting in range fast.
It would also be essentially impossible to ARMOR since even tank are losing that war, the slightest hit would set off the missile.
Then there's the usual problem of having unit too-big to travel through tunnel, road, bridge, aircraft.
>How has there not been a missile tank yet?
it's been experimented with but the few that actually entered service were basically tank destroyers and filled a role that you could do for a lot cheaper with something like a wheeled vehicle with an ATGM launcher
If you want to maximize ammo capacity a gun is about 5x more volume efficient than missiles while if you're shooting beyond line of sight heavy single-direction armor is a waste.
Better to have more trucks and have multiple FARPs set-up to service your aircraft. The maintenance teams can also ride around to where they're needed.
Here, fixed.
Work on all terrain (provided they are excessively flat desert with a strong ground so it don't sink)
how would they prevent water evaporation or spilling due to small inclines or simply stormy weather from getting rid of their swimming pool????
garden gnome magic
Replace water with mercury. Lower vapor pressure.
A FUCKING SLIDE
anyone else think that looks so cosy, imagine it being like 35 degrees desert dry heat and just going for a swim
This is more retarded than the Girls und Panzer carrier towns and I love it.
if this thing existed on mars or something similar, it would be perfectly sensible
the local sand and gravel might aswell be razor blades compared to what we have on earth
you aren't landing high-speed with any existing form of rubber on that fucking shit
>b-buh muh roveh?
the mars rover moves 3 miles an hour
Yeah, sure. Mars having an atmospheric density about 0.2% of Earth is something we can totally design fixed wing aircraft to deal with, even with all the added drag of taking off from water (that we're keeping liquid in -200°F weather), but having a pressurised gas system or a roomba battalion or whatever to sweep the deck clean is apparently just too much.
>Mars having an atmospheric density about 0.2% of Earth is something we can totally design fixed wing aircraft to deal with
pretty sure NASAfags already did all the math and those fixed-wings are being tested for future missions
something that is important to remember is that 1/500th of the atmosphere means 1/500th of the lift but also 1/500th of the air resistance
and since air resistance grows exponentially compared to potential fixed-wing aircraft geometry the higher speeds get, a non-existent atmosphere is more beneficial the faster you go compared to earth
I'll point out they have really big fish on the deck
it's "possible" in the most technical sense of the word. It just not possible that you could build something like this and then keep it running for use in combat
square law and heat dispersion also fucks you
These
Also they're huge targets and also either wreck infrastructure everywhere they go or need special designed infrastructure which limits their movement.
Maybe the carrier is too massive. But the ideas of the assault ships carrying a shit ton of CIWS and C-RAM to protect itself while also carrying missiles and naval tier cannons for offensive capabilities would seem pretty cool irl.
comme ça?
If your tank is that big, why not add a 2nd main gun?
It needs some small turrets like the T-35 to engage multiple targets at once.
Now we're talking.
Best game I just wish the campaign and missions were longer
The game in question literally has "alien artifacts" it's using to keep cool that you find in mission 2/3
It IS possible, just not economically viable or strategically advantageous enough to do so. Maybe later when we start mining kuiper belt and exploring mars. In that case i can see movable bases the size of a small carrier being very useful and may even be necessary
I like the idea found in rts games of bringing back a futuristic form of foraging logistics. Rather than sending food parties out to forage for berries, kill animals and collect water. You're mining and sending the material to mobile refinery and fabrication modules to manufacture everything from ammunition to armored vehicles without needing a supply line.
Would be interesting if something like that actually came into existence. I know that NASA made plans for having a sort of mini refinery that they would've jammed into a Saturn V for a planned moon base being powered by a nuclear reactor. So it's not like the idea is completely baseless.
>So it's not like the idea is completely baseless.
>completely baseless
I see what you did there.
Because missiles and planes exist, ships are used to lug crap between continents plus water allows almost unlimited size. Landship will get stuck on anything but perfectly flat terrain.
Maybe on the Moon something like that would work. The lower the gravity, the more feasible mega-vehicles become.
But anything that scale on Earth moves too SLOW. Just look at how fast the NASA crawlers go.
>Just look at how fast the NASA crawlers go
That's done so that they wouldn't fuck up the billion dollar spaceplane that they're about to shoot up into space.
Just fit a chainsaw instead of the digger
Love the game, hate it's unpopular and the MP is dead. Singleplayer was way too short and AI is worthless.
Let me guess you downloaded Homeworld desert of kharrak from epic games for free and are obsessed with this game?
Me too
Man, what a fucking disappointing game that was. It was just a shell of a game with a highly scripted campaign.
>damn the game has writing and story to keep you engaged and immersed instead of being an empty dead sandbox njoooooo
iirc Kharak had much lower mass and lower gravity than our Earth so large vehicles like that were more viable. also worth noting, entire planet is a desert with a lot of flat surfaces.
irl i don't think this kinda stuff is really useful and maintenance of those giant tracks must be hell
p.s. based Deserts of Kharak enjoyers ITT
Nah, gravity was comparable. It's the combination of almost the entire planet being desert and a relative abundance of easily reachable resource deposits (aka the place is a spaceship graveyard essentially) that made it somewhat plausible for them to build their vehicles this big. Also Homeworlds-verse manufacturing technology is genuinely cracked, they're basically 3D-printing multi-megaton starships later on.
Why not make them big enough to be a self sufficient city.
I'm so mad that this book got such a shoddy adaptation.
Honestly they should just have made a cartoon out of it
You would have to do a centipede type design.
>quoting le reddit meme
Die
>American Psycho is r*ddit
I fucking hate you
Yeah. It is.
moronino how new are you?
Checkem (my nuts)
It's been stolen and it's time to move on
Okay, but why would you know that?
I use normie social media and reflexively refer to everything that's not here as reddit
Pic is from a 2 second google search of "american psycho meme reddit" to prove my point
Because you'd attract the sandworms
>>Why isn't it possible?
Rivers, ravines. Vehicles cross them over bridges, but bridges have mass limit.
Panzerkampfwagen VIII Maus was too heavy for bridges and it supposed to cross them by deep fording and fording is big PITA.
How has there not been a missile tank yet? Something that could just park behind a hill and NLOS spam a shit ton of extended range javelins or some other missile system? Could also act as a C-RAM emplacement for maneuver units with lasers and shit that could also kill drones. All while still having some point defense system for CQB/personal defense and all be put on an armored chassis like on top of the hill of an Abrams or some shit.
*hull
>How has there not been a missile tank yet?
Focusing most of your defense/offense in fewer "super-unit" just make it easier to make huge loss on your side because their cost would expand exponentially without being more protected than several single-use units.
Trying to ARMOR would be an exercise in futility.
Even MBT are losing that war and they hide their explosive ammo deep inside, the only reason naval ship survive is because they travel on a medium that give them lot of time to react and forbid all but aircraft/missiles from getting in range fast.
It would also be essentially impossible to ARMOR since even tank are losing that war, the slightest hit would set off the missile.
Then there's the usual problem of having unit too-big to travel through tunnel, road, bridge, aircraft.
I'm sure making an armored box on top of an Abrams hull that's just filled with javelins would be fine.
>How has there not been a missile tank yet?
it's been experimented with but the few that actually entered service were basically tank destroyers and filled a role that you could do for a lot cheaper with something like a wheeled vehicle with an ATGM launcher
I presume you mean something like the thing from one of the WT april fools events that was just a hull with a fuck load of VLS cells
If you want to maximize ammo capacity a gun is about 5x more volume efficient than missiles while if you're shooting beyond line of sight heavy single-direction armor is a waste.
Stares in Hebrew
Better to have more trucks and have multiple FARPs set-up to service your aircraft. The maintenance teams can also ride around to where they're needed.