A spider tank will never be a tank, but other than maintenance issues like other anons pointed out a well designed spider combat vehicle with wheels on the feet is an attractive concept and I believe darpa is already experimenting with wheeled vehicles with articulated suspension.
>A spider tank will never be a tank, but other than maintenance issues like other anons pointed out a well designed spider combat vehicle with wheels on the feet is an attractive concept and I believe darpa is already experimenting with wheeled vehicles with articulated suspension.
6 or 8 legged tank could be made to be quite resistant to mines if you keep the lower part of the leg free of joints. Tracks aren't exactly reliable either, look at ukraine, everything is constantly detracted then killed by a drone after the crew flees. The main issue is the lack of suitable actuator technology, hydraulics are too unreliable, electric motors need large reduction gearing to produce enough force. If you had convenient artificial muscles like in battletech you would rapidly see walking vehicles.
>A spider tank will never be a tank, but other than maintenance issues like other anons pointed out a well designed spider combat vehicle with wheels on the feet is an attractive concept and I believe darpa is already experimenting with wheeled vehicles with articulated suspension.
6 or 8 legged tank could be made to be quite resistant to mines if you keep the lower part of the leg free of joints. Tracks aren't exactly reliable either, look at ukraine, everything is constantly detracted then killed by a drone after the crew flees. The main issue is the lack of suitable actuator technology, hydraulics are too unreliable, electric motors need large reduction gearing to produce enough force. If you had convenient artificial muscles like in battletech you would rapidly see walking vehicles.
Weren't they experimenting with wax and carbon fibre or some shit?
There's tubular linear motors too, with sufficient electrical power they could easily replace hydraulics. Not only does it solve the weight/leakage/maintenance issues, it also allows for regenerative suspension, so you actually charge the batteries when you absorb recoil. Additionally, electrical power can not only move the legs, but power any tracks/wheels/blowers, the entire cabin electronics, sensors, act as a mobile power station, and even potentially mount shit like lasers and coilguns.
There's no way the sideways movement of machine-spider legs comes close to the speed of a wheel, whether it's covered in tracks or not.
Tracks also spread the weight over a large surface area, spider legs concentrate it unless you do something pretty weird with them that isn't in OPs image.
Significantly more mechanical complexity. Less efficient. Slower (if the legs have wheels then it might do ok on roads). More challenging recoil management. Don't get me wrong, of all the legged vehicle ideas insectoid ones by far make the most (though still highly limited) sense unlike humanoid, but still not much. And to the extent they might be useful it'd probably be on a much smaller scale like those mechanical quadrapeds, not full size tanks. Something small enough to go through/make use of terrain a tracked vehicle wouldn't find passable, or to do so more stealthily. Missiles or smaller autocannons or the like, not large caliber guns.
>Significantly more mechanical complexity.
Sort of, Legs have in-built redundancy making a broken leg infinitely more functional than a broken track or wheel. >Less efficient.
Yeah but if a legged vehicle is used to cross terrain that a wheeled or tracked vehicle cannot then it become the most efficient mode. >Slower (if the legs have wheels then it might do ok on roads).
Only a problem if its a requirement, Fortifications can't run away. >More challenging recoil management.
Not at all, If anything legs can make better use of fully-fixed guns than tracks or wheels because no additional hardware is required to aim the whole vehicle.
Any walking tank that comes into existence will most certainly fit the past description of an assault gun used to directly attack fortified positions by way of conventionally inaccessible terrain.
Also anyone who talks about ground pressure being an issue with legged vehicles doesn't understand that legs and wheels do not work on the same principles and their relationship with ground pressure.
Overcomplicated articulation, higher ground pressure. There should be a vehicle equivalent to carcinisation, call it trackicisation maybe, whereby all combat vehicle motive systems eventually (d)evolve into tracks, the most efficient and effective method.
>There should be a vehicle equivalent to carcinisation, call it trackicisation maybe, whereby all combat vehicle motive systems eventually (d)evolve into tracks, the most efficient and effective method.
Tracks aren't the most efficient, though. Wheels allow higher speed at less maintenance effort and less weight.
Tracks are better for specific types of difficult terrain (landscapes destroyed by industrial warfare), and that's pretty much it.
We see the consequences of this right now, with wheeled vehicles increasingly replacing tracked ones not just in poorgay but also in industrialised countries. As armies shrink (making WW1 hellscapes impossible through sheer lack of scale), wheeled vehicles outcompete tracked ones.
>There should be a vehicle equivalent to carcinisation, call it trackicisation maybe, whereby all combat vehicle motive systems eventually (d)evolve into tracks, the most efficient and effective method
there is, but it's not the kind of tracks you're thinking of
Ground pressure is related to the size of contact surface, not the fact that something has legs.
The one in the OP has way too small contact surface, unless it is some purposeful design where the legs are supposed to sink in a certain depth.
Legs have the problem that unlike a car or a tank at any one point about half of the legs will be off the ground, so 3 legs have to have the same contact area as an equivalent weight tank has with both threads to get the same practical ground pressure.
In turn it means that when standing still, mechs and walkers would have absurd ground pressure or rather a near complete lack of it, relatively speaking
Never bet against GITS SAC. If they say robots should have squeaky voices, they are right until proven otherwise.
That show is so far ahead of its time its ridiculous. I remember when serious people with a lots of braid were giving briefings where it was obvious they had no idea what Al Quaeda was. Meanwhile muh fansubbed Japanimation cartoon with the sexy lady and the cute robots is patiently explaining the philosophical nuances of franchise terrorism in between action sequences.
Its amazing really, not really for the "hard scifi" elements, we don't have tachikoma or artificial brains after all but the "soft scifi" elements are bang on. 2nd Gig could have been written last week and people would think it was a bit on the nose frankly.
i love both 1st and 2nd gig but 2nd gig feels more like a movie that was split or extended into a show while 1st gig feels more like a normal tv show.
also the vaccine subplot which then became the actual reason why all of these events are happening was literally genius.
gits sac really feels like a lightning in a bottle moment in media history.
(not an anti vaxxer but just thought how interesting and like you said could be written last week)
i wonder how our current society would react to a vaccine or LITERALLY INJECTING MILLIONS OF MICROSCOPIC MACHINES INTO YOUR BODY
i understand that in gits humans were already cyberising at such and extreme rate by the time this tech came around most people probably thought lol who cares.
also i kinda feel like right now if we had micromachines(THAT WORKED) and cured all cancer literally no one would refuse it
hold on
>2019 AD
THEY WERE SPOT ON WHAT THE FRICK
(also lowkey the music even in small bits like this is great)
(also gits is /k/ as frick)
Not just injecting, but airborne. They casually mention that on days with high smog/air pollutants they spray micromachines into the air around the city and non-cyborgs should wear a face mask. >(also gits is /k/ as frick)
A Mateba is still one of my grail guns
11 months ago
Anonymous
well the point of the suppression of the vaccine was because micro machines were not just for medicine
they were well micro machines that could be programed to do anything.
such as the japanese miracle, micro machines designed to clean up radiation after nuclear weapon disasters or accidents
so the proponents of micro machines were actually correct and justified in their suppression of the Murai Vaccine in the end.
the vaccine had to be buried to save japan(and the world) from potential radioactive fallout from weapons or nuclear accidents
obviously they didnt know that at the time but you know...
also i love how they are most affect when spread before a nuke goes off.
i cant find a clip but im sure they talk about why in the show.
i think something about the micro machines being sucked back in by the vacuum created after a blast.
as it should be
when it walks its HEAVY
it has big thumping stomp sounds that shake the ground
it has weight
you as a viewer can FEEL that this is a tank, that this is a serious bit of military hardware.
I'm not talking about the big boy, which is a dumb-as-hell design. Do you know what's funny about these small ones? They could have need replace with micro cars with forward-facing machine guns and rotating Grappling hooks, and it would make more sense than fricking spider cars.
not having a cute alba gf as your commanding officer/handler on radio while you massacre hundreds of Legion robots with your tin can Judgement spider tank
god i want to frick lena
The true answer >no issues with tracks >no issues with weight >no issues with terrain >not vulnerable to pressure mines >weather means nothing to him >tempo tempo tempo
>no issues with weight
is that actually true? surely the anti grav system would require more power with the increased weight right? >no issues with terrain
except steep inclines(as far as i know) >not vulnerable to pressure mines
depends. it it creates a zero gravity "bubble" below it then sure but if it simply hovers using some kind of downward force then it would absolutely set off pressure mines.
Tbh might still not set them off antitank mines require a lot of pressure to go off so they don't get set off by lower value targets(like a person stepping on one). So it'd be a question of how much downward force spread over what area.
A hover tank which uses downward propulsion to hover, vs. using unknown magic to hover, will create as much surface pressure as a tracked vehicle of the same mass.
you're ignoring the fact that it would be spread over an area larger than the tracks of a tank, potentially multiple times larger, and would suffer from air and ground deflection further (slightly) reducing the pressure
it could be spread out in an area larger than the tank's dimensions if any of the propulsion is angled away from the tank
something I also thought of is if the propulsion system was spread out enough, and controllable enough such as multiple thrusters, you could temporarily shift propulsion away from the part of the system passing over any mines negating pressure based mines entirely provided you had the capability to detect them necessiating the move to the use of remote sensing mines like naval mines are
11 months ago
Anonymous
you dont actually know any of that.
you are assuming how a fictional device might work
11 months ago
Anonymous
I actually do >you are assuming how a fictional device might work
only in the sense that a hover tank specifically is fictional, yes
but helicopters (or drones, on a smaller scale) and ACVs exist and are direct analogues
both apply downwards and angled thrust that suffers from air and ground deflection and have ground pressure profiles larger than the craft itself
NASA has made, used and tested multiple thruster crafts that can maintain direction of movement while using completely different combinations of thrusters (because if they send one to mars and a thruster or two breaks, it still needs to be able to fly the same way)
11 months ago
Anonymous
hover tanks usually are not using air as a form of downward thrust
you are thinking of hovercraft.
hover tanks usually use some form of antigrav or maglev tech.
also if you put a fan directly above(pointing down) a scale you will see the scale move and display the amount of force it is feeling
so if a air thruster hover tank is pushing x tons of force down, then the ground directly below it is going to be feeling exactly x tons of force.
11 months ago
Anonymous
>hover tanks usually use some form of antigrav or maglev tech.
Runs into even more issues. Anti-grav isn't even theoretically possible so it's probably going to take so much power and complicated machinery that robotic legs would be practical in comparison.
Maglev dies if it runs over anything remotely conductive. A simple steel nail would be pulled in so hard it would pierce the engine housing. A copper wire would syphon off the electric charge and cause the vehicle to drop out of the air.
the propulsion on the back (some kind of conventional thruster) would do a burst that would be the same force as the recoil
-->|<--
so the crew and the vehicle would feel the recoil but the vehicle would not move out of position.
>all these spider tanks drawn with the tiniest surface area under their feet
Are artists moronic?
Are they completely unfamiliar with the most prominent issue plaguing large tracked vehicles?
"Hmm lets give a sixty ton tank just six small points of contact, three of which it has to raise off the ground at a time to actually move. I mean, 20 tons per palm footprint isnt that much, is it?" >Gets stuck in anything softer than tarmac.
I could actually see legs being very useful for hover tanks. The issue with hovering tanks, or ant kind if floating tank, is traction. They can't really accelerate, decelerate, or turn. Functional antigrav/repulsor tanks handwave this fundamental flaw.
What if you gave a hover tank legs? The weight of the tank mostly sits on their Antigav or repulsir system. The legs are used to anchor when firing, accelerate, decelerate. And quickly turn. It would ctrate a bizarre looking crawler tank that seemed incredibly nimble for its size.
Not a lot of scalability.
At small sizes, they're fine. But as they get larger they concentrate too much weight into too small of points, and have big issues with mobility and speed.
Basically GITS figured them out with the Tachikomas and going larger ain't worth it.
I'm not a fan of mechs, for obvious reasons, but here we go: >1. go hull down
An arachnoid mech could do that, lowering its profile to expose the minimum surface possible >2. high stress resistance
I'm not sure what you mean by this >3. wienerpit suspension
An arachnoid mech wouldn't need this, unlike a bipedal one, as you can have a gait that maintains the wienerpit stable >4. APS
I don't see why this would be an issue, as long as it is on the limbs of the arachnoid mech >5. emphasis on sensors
Same as above >6. stability enforcement
Yeah, all mechs would need active stabilisation, including arachnoid mechs. However, we already have that for flying wing planes, so idk >7. emergency propulsion
Yeah, that would be kinda difficult >8. some kind of magic engine machine
Eh, idk, you could probably use something similar to a tank engine, or whatever moves those huge-ass dump trucks in quarries. >9. intense maintenance
Yeah, that's a big downside of mechs
i feel like these legs always look weird.
like the tank is constantly using power just to hold its self up
why would you not create a leg system that is always off the ground and only uses power to lower its self.
also they never look stable enough.
I wasn't able to play it as a kid for that reason.
The difference is that I got into tabletop in my early adult years and once I got back into it, I was able to wrap my head around the mechanics.
Oblivion's quest writing and general dreamlike vibe are top notch, though.
how feasible would something like a terror drone or spider mine from starcraft be? something fast moving and cheap with a huge explosive strapped to it?
I mean yes the average slav would be cheaper than a robotic spider loitering munition. but seems like having a mine that can hunker down and wait and be able to chase down moving targets would be good. can't always have a flying drone over head.
A tread only has one failure point (Two if you count the wheels that turn the treads I guess) Each leg has at least 3 failure points. The connection to the tank and the joints. So for the tank you posted there, that’s 18 points of failure compared to 2 (4 max) of a traditional tracked vehicle.
Would a dwarf spider droid style drone be more effective than a spider tank? I feel like it's basically just a boston dynamics dog with a gun on it at that point.
>I feel like it's basically just a boston dynamics dog with a gun on it at that point.
I wonder how those would do if they could do autonomous navigation and jamming/IFF wasn't a problem.
I think that on wheels will be part of future warfare and anti terror operations. Some wheeleybois will have machineguns, some grenade launchers and some are small with automatic handguns. Just throw hundred of those at an enemy line zooming in at 30km/h.
insects are yucky >inb4
arachnids are yucky too and insects is generally understood to mean any form of tiny bugger. Also that thing has 6 legs not 8 or 10.
>more expensive than tracks >more weakpoints than tracks >Harder to make than tracks >now have to take legs into account when firing at certain angles
A better thread would be "name an upside"
flamable hydraulic fluid,
low top speed
not a significant enough advantage to justify quad and even quintuple manufacture cost
poor stability when firing heavy weapon (whole tank rocks back
concentration of weight on small surface area of feet causes tank to "dig in" on nearly all terains, including damage to concrete/cement
increased "footprint" reducing the amount of tanks that can be stored/transported on planes/ships.
the list goes on
Muh ground pressure is a troll meme.
Tank have problem with mud not because they'll sink into a hole they can't dig out, they have problem because it lead to having no grip at all, no solid surface to push over.
If a walking machine had a clearance of 1m and can lift its legs by that much, then it cannot be stopped by any mud that's not deeper, robbing it of solid surface to push on.
Again, it's only a matter of having contact with solid surface beneath instead of a floating layer that reform constantly because track DECREASE pressure.
Tank track were invented so it create artificial slopes regardless of the actual ground geometry. So it can climb a step as long as a tiny bit of the track reach the top instead of being stuck due to wheels geometry.
The complete opposite of mud being snow, which instead of flowing, pack into a denser and heavier snow.
Then you have ground pressure problem because you might never get enough clearance and since it pack, you are rewarded in crushing more surface.
That's why in mud you wear tight and smooth boot, while in snow you wear large snowshoes.
I don't think it's necessary, missiles have less recoil and weight less than a full armored turret, just strap a javelin, a radar, a .50 cal, a high definition camera with termals and night vision and a stinger on the arm, make it so that any of the weapons can shoot from the arm and deploy it on a mountain and boom, it can snipe tanks, it can snipe copters, it can frick mountain infantry if they happen to climb and it can call for arty strikes from behind the mountain, it can conceal itself behind the mountain and lift it's arm like if it were a periscope from a submarine to scout and shoot from the top of the mountain, maybe it can work as a jammer/wifi repeater/datalink too, tanks can't hit it (low elevation), arty... arty could hit it in theory but it may be harder than it seems, helicopters probably will die before they spot them, it sounds very strong for mountain warfare.
Downsides... it's complex, expensive, probably needs very skilled soldiers to operate, and could be hit by drones specially if the mountain doesn't have trees, ammo is a problem too... sounds hard to restock unless you make 1 variant specifically for logistics, and of course they suck for anything else that is not mountain warfare... I think, because it's not intended to directly fight tanks in open terrain, there is no need to give it armor, well, maybe against small arms.
11 months ago
Anonymous
>I don't think it's necessary, missiles have less recoil and weight less than a full armored turret, just strap a javelin, a radar, a .50 cal, a high definition camera with termals and night vision and a stinger on the arm
thats not really a tank then is it?
more like a multi legged hydraulic mobile weapons platform
11 months ago
Anonymous
>thats not really a tank then is it?
I don't really know, is it?
You probably gotta have room for a buncha bullshit under the tank to make it walk like that. Just tons of actuators and hydro reservoirs. It wouldn't look nearly as cool as a result and you know 90% of its purpose is to look cool.
That's like saying you can stop a tank with a rope that get caught between chassis and turret.
You are factually dumber than Starwars Empire's engineers.
>worse performance than treads on 99% of the planets surface area >substantially more manufacturing cost >more parts to break >can't be serviced in the field
i mean other than being able to climb slopes of like 60 degrees and treads can only do 50 whats the upside?
THIS moronic one?
how about >twelve fricking points of guaranteed failure
EACH one of these gigantic knee joints is a servicing nightmare and obvious weakpoint
fricking points of guaranteed failure
As opposed to the twenty joints on each side of a tank? With axis highly integrated into the structure? Much closer/easier to hit? Instant mobility kill if 2 are hit leading to abandoning near pristine tank?
Good luck hitting such small constantly joints on purpose.
OP pic might be fictional but save a few caveat it could be entirely worth the trouble. >increased clearance >hulldown everywhere you want >escape most of the blast of landmines >mud is less or no longer a problem >can move sideway >main limitation in tank design is fitting on train, truck & airplane. If the leg fold, they can be neatly contained. >leg take the damage before the structure >tip of a leg is damaged? No mobility kill, replace with dumb metal, small penalty >most of the leg is damaged? Still no mobility kill, remove leg, as big as a rolled track, install new one, won't even need a crane >need extra equipment? strap it on the legs, won't weight down the structure >need to transport it fast? self load by train, or strap wheels on the legs and tow it. >need to traverse a river? either use the clearance or attach ballast to the legs
The real big problem is to power those actuators (electric/hydraulic) and having cheap sensors an computer can use to walk. The main problem that killed GE walking truck was the impossible stress if piloting manually.
>need extra equipment? strap it on the legs, won't weight down the structure
try carrying 5kg on your ankle
Now try 5kg in a pants pocket
Weight on extremeties is UTTERLY moronic
>main limitation in tank design is fitting on train, truck & airplane. If the leg fold, they can be neatly contained. >I think the issue with tanks is they are too big, lets make them multiple times larger
Instead of a spider tank, why not a spider spg? Could be capable of reaching and firing from places normal spgs can't (such as standing in shallow water which could reduce frag from counter battery fire) and stop, fire and gtfo quicker than tracked or wheeled spgs, at the expense of being slower.
*Forgot
Cant even handle a single Tunguska.
Watch out, Somaliland!
>those tiny wheels
That’s not a tank moron, it’s clearly an ifv! /s
>/s
go back you fricking homosexual
A spider tank will never be a tank, but other than maintenance issues like other anons pointed out a well designed spider combat vehicle with wheels on the feet is an attractive concept and I believe darpa is already experimenting with wheeled vehicles with articulated suspension.
>A spider tank will never be a tank, but other than maintenance issues like other anons pointed out a well designed spider combat vehicle with wheels on the feet is an attractive concept and I believe darpa is already experimenting with wheeled vehicles with articulated suspension.
6 or 8 legged tank could be made to be quite resistant to mines if you keep the lower part of the leg free of joints. Tracks aren't exactly reliable either, look at ukraine, everything is constantly detracted then killed by a drone after the crew flees. The main issue is the lack of suitable actuator technology, hydraulics are too unreliable, electric motors need large reduction gearing to produce enough force. If you had convenient artificial muscles like in battletech you would rapidly see walking vehicles.
>convenient artificial muscles
Springs can simulate that, idk how it would be integrated into a spider mech tho
There's tubular linear motors too, with sufficient electrical power they could easily replace hydraulics. Not only does it solve the weight/leakage/maintenance issues, it also allows for regenerative suspension, so you actually charge the batteries when you absorb recoil. Additionally, electrical power can not only move the legs, but power any tracks/wheels/blowers, the entire cabin electronics, sensors, act as a mobile power station, and even potentially mount shit like lasers and coilguns.
Weren't they experimenting with wax and carbon fibre or some shit?
slow af
>slow af
Came to post those exact words.
There's no way the sideways movement of machine-spider legs comes close to the speed of a wheel, whether it's covered in tracks or not.
Tracks also spread the weight over a large surface area, spider legs concentrate it unless you do something pretty weird with them that isn't in OPs image.
>There's no way the sideways movement of machine-spider legs comes close to the speed of a wheel, whether it's covered in tracks or not.
Have you fricking seen a spider move? Theyre fast as frick boy. Why couldn't we replicate that?
>Tracks also spread the weight over a large surface area
This is literally the reason Spiders have 8 legs. They spread their bodyweight across 8 legs.
Spiders use comparatively massive hydraulics to move like that.
We can't replicate that same effect at scale.
>immediately sink
Significantly more mechanical complexity. Less efficient. Slower (if the legs have wheels then it might do ok on roads). More challenging recoil management. Don't get me wrong, of all the legged vehicle ideas insectoid ones by far make the most (though still highly limited) sense unlike humanoid, but still not much. And to the extent they might be useful it'd probably be on a much smaller scale like those mechanical quadrapeds, not full size tanks. Something small enough to go through/make use of terrain a tracked vehicle wouldn't find passable, or to do so more stealthily. Missiles or smaller autocannons or the like, not large caliber guns.
He said "a SINGLE downside" you mathlet.
It literally can't fly, a capability that would be extremely useful for relocating fast.
It has at least 1 leg
>Significantly more mechanical complexity.
Sort of, Legs have in-built redundancy making a broken leg infinitely more functional than a broken track or wheel.
>Less efficient.
Yeah but if a legged vehicle is used to cross terrain that a wheeled or tracked vehicle cannot then it become the most efficient mode.
>Slower (if the legs have wheels then it might do ok on roads).
Only a problem if its a requirement, Fortifications can't run away.
>More challenging recoil management.
Not at all, If anything legs can make better use of fully-fixed guns than tracks or wheels because no additional hardware is required to aim the whole vehicle.
Any walking tank that comes into existence will most certainly fit the past description of an assault gun used to directly attack fortified positions by way of conventionally inaccessible terrain.
Also anyone who talks about ground pressure being an issue with legged vehicles doesn't understand that legs and wheels do not work on the same principles and their relationship with ground pressure.
Why so massive?
Overcomplicated articulation, higher ground pressure. There should be a vehicle equivalent to carcinisation, call it trackicisation maybe, whereby all combat vehicle motive systems eventually (d)evolve into tracks, the most efficient and effective method.
>There should be a vehicle equivalent to carcinisation, call it trackicisation maybe, whereby all combat vehicle motive systems eventually (d)evolve into tracks, the most efficient and effective method.
Tracks aren't the most efficient, though. Wheels allow higher speed at less maintenance effort and less weight.
Tracks are better for specific types of difficult terrain (landscapes destroyed by industrial warfare), and that's pretty much it.
We see the consequences of this right now, with wheeled vehicles increasingly replacing tracked ones not just in poorgay but also in industrialised countries. As armies shrink (making WW1 hellscapes impossible through sheer lack of scale), wheeled vehicles outcompete tracked ones.
Only up to a particular weight, around 36 tons. Which is why I said efficient AND effective; when you want to transport heavier items, tracks rule.
>There should be a vehicle equivalent to carcinisation, call it trackicisation maybe, whereby all combat vehicle motive systems eventually (d)evolve into tracks, the most efficient and effective method
there is, but it's not the kind of tracks you're thinking of
Watch any battlebots match with a robot with legs and you will understand everything
Mechadon was the coolest shit id ever seen though as a 12 year old
>spider tank
That's a insect tank. Spiders have, you know, eight legs frenly fren.
Realist.
The main gun and the coax are specialized arms.
It contains buglers that can put an end to wars. No spider tanks allowed.
It has legs, i.e. high ground pressure.
Ground pressure is related to the size of contact surface, not the fact that something has legs.
The one in the OP has way too small contact surface, unless it is some purposeful design where the legs are supposed to sink in a certain depth.
Legs have the problem that unlike a car or a tank at any one point about half of the legs will be off the ground, so 3 legs have to have the same contact area as an equivalent weight tank has with both threads to get the same practical ground pressure.
In turn it means that when standing still, mechs and walkers would have absurd ground pressure or rather a near complete lack of it, relatively speaking
Legs decrease the size of your contact surface, that was his point...
Miss these lil homies like you wouldn't even believe.
Your MBT will never ask you about individuality, the soul, and god.
Why would you design your autonomous spider tank to have a child's voice?
kids are cruel
because its an "ai" that was "born" very recently
so it literally has the brain and personality of a child.
Because kawaii uguu!~
>dubbed
they just wanted to help Mr. Bato
These ruined gits for me
There is no plausible explanation for why they would have cutesy personalities
>inb4 some weebshit ummm akshully
All it makes me think about is how to adapt them to live action, exactly riding the line between innocent and ruthlessly efficient.
Never bet against GITS SAC. If they say robots should have squeaky voices, they are right until proven otherwise.
That show is so far ahead of its time its ridiculous. I remember when serious people with a lots of braid were giving briefings where it was obvious they had no idea what Al Quaeda was. Meanwhile muh fansubbed Japanimation cartoon with the sexy lady and the cute robots is patiently explaining the philosophical nuances of franchise terrorism in between action sequences.
Its amazing really, not really for the "hard scifi" elements, we don't have tachikoma or artificial brains after all but the "soft scifi" elements are bang on. 2nd Gig could have been written last week and people would think it was a bit on the nose frankly.
i love both 1st and 2nd gig but 2nd gig feels more like a movie that was split or extended into a show while 1st gig feels more like a normal tv show.
also the vaccine subplot which then became the actual reason why all of these events are happening was literally genius.
gits sac really feels like a lightning in a bottle moment in media history.
(not an anti vaxxer but just thought how interesting and like you said could be written last week)
Trust the micromachines bigot!
i wonder how our current society would react to a vaccine or LITERALLY INJECTING MILLIONS OF MICROSCOPIC MACHINES INTO YOUR BODY
i understand that in gits humans were already cyberising at such and extreme rate by the time this tech came around most people probably thought lol who cares.
also i kinda feel like right now if we had micromachines(THAT WORKED) and cured all cancer literally no one would refuse it
hold on
>2019 AD
THEY WERE SPOT ON WHAT THE FRICK
(also lowkey the music even in small bits like this is great)
(also gits is /k/ as frick)
Not just injecting, but airborne. They casually mention that on days with high smog/air pollutants they spray micromachines into the air around the city and non-cyborgs should wear a face mask.
>(also gits is /k/ as frick)
A Mateba is still one of my grail guns
well the point of the suppression of the vaccine was because micro machines were not just for medicine
they were well micro machines that could be programed to do anything.
such as the japanese miracle, micro machines designed to clean up radiation after nuclear weapon disasters or accidents
so the proponents of micro machines were actually correct and justified in their suppression of the Murai Vaccine in the end.
the vaccine had to be buried to save japan(and the world) from potential radioactive fallout from weapons or nuclear accidents
obviously they didnt know that at the time but you know...
also i love how they are most affect when spread before a nuke goes off.
i cant find a clip but im sure they talk about why in the show.
i think something about the micro machines being sucked back in by the vacuum created after a blast.
It doesn't RUN! It drives around on it's wheels! The legs are only there to TURN IT. When it does walk on its legs, it's SLOW AS FRICK.
as it should be
when it walks its HEAVY
it has big thumping stomp sounds that shake the ground
it has weight
you as a viewer can FEEL that this is a tank, that this is a serious bit of military hardware.
I'm not talking about the big boy, which is a dumb-as-hell design. Do you know what's funny about these small ones? They could have need replace with micro cars with forward-facing machine guns and rotating Grappling hooks, and it would make more sense than fricking spider cars.
did you have a stroke typing that? because i felt like i was having a stroke reading that.
It was late at night and I was being stupid. So stupid that I totally forgot about my post until now. Anyway, Spider cars are dumb!
frick tachikoma! fuchikoma love for ever!!
red is best!
It's not a dragonfly CAS drone.
fuel cost, mechanical complexity
Why don't spider tanks also have arms so they could pick up things? They could throw rocks at the enemy or something.
dumbo, the arms would be guns
Vulnerable to bird tanks.
Might as well be magical star wars hover tanks.
maybe they should try building one to figure out if its useful
I have atracknachnophobia
Very nice, underrated.
I'm scared of spiders
They are too cute.
If I saw one knocked out in combat I would cry.
not having a cute alba gf as your commanding officer/handler on radio while you massacre hundreds of Legion robots with your tin can Judgement spider tank
god i want to frick lena
>Lena stop being relevant in later book
Frick 86.
I want to marry her but she’s in love with some nip edgelord
cost vs tracks
>downside
the enemy will have a frog tank
Big, so it doesn't travel well on conventional roads, much less in a forest terrain.
why no hovertanks
The true answer
>no issues with tracks
>no issues with weight
>no issues with terrain
>not vulnerable to pressure mines
>weather means nothing to him
>tempo tempo tempo
Frick mechs
>no issues with weight
is that actually true? surely the anti grav system would require more power with the increased weight right?
>no issues with terrain
except steep inclines(as far as i know)
>not vulnerable to pressure mines
depends. it it creates a zero gravity "bubble" below it then sure but if it simply hovers using some kind of downward force then it would absolutely set off pressure mines.
Tbh might still not set them off antitank mines require a lot of pressure to go off so they don't get set off by lower value targets(like a person stepping on one). So it'd be a question of how much downward force spread over what area.
A hover tank which uses downward propulsion to hover, vs. using unknown magic to hover, will create as much surface pressure as a tracked vehicle of the same mass.
you're ignoring the fact that it would be spread over an area larger than the tracks of a tank, potentially multiple times larger, and would suffer from air and ground deflection further (slightly) reducing the pressure
it could be spread out in an area larger than the tank's dimensions if any of the propulsion is angled away from the tank
something I also thought of is if the propulsion system was spread out enough, and controllable enough such as multiple thrusters, you could temporarily shift propulsion away from the part of the system passing over any mines negating pressure based mines entirely provided you had the capability to detect them necessiating the move to the use of remote sensing mines like naval mines are
you dont actually know any of that.
you are assuming how a fictional device might work
I actually do
>you are assuming how a fictional device might work
only in the sense that a hover tank specifically is fictional, yes
but helicopters (or drones, on a smaller scale) and ACVs exist and are direct analogues
both apply downwards and angled thrust that suffers from air and ground deflection and have ground pressure profiles larger than the craft itself
NASA has made, used and tested multiple thruster crafts that can maintain direction of movement while using completely different combinations of thrusters (because if they send one to mars and a thruster or two breaks, it still needs to be able to fly the same way)
hover tanks usually are not using air as a form of downward thrust
you are thinking of hovercraft.
hover tanks usually use some form of antigrav or maglev tech.
also if you put a fan directly above(pointing down) a scale you will see the scale move and display the amount of force it is feeling
so if a air thruster hover tank is pushing x tons of force down, then the ground directly below it is going to be feeling exactly x tons of force.
>hover tanks usually use some form of antigrav or maglev tech.
Runs into even more issues. Anti-grav isn't even theoretically possible so it's probably going to take so much power and complicated machinery that robotic legs would be practical in comparison.
Maglev dies if it runs over anything remotely conductive. A simple steel nail would be pulled in so hard it would pierce the engine housing. A copper wire would syphon off the electric charge and cause the vehicle to drop out of the air.
Energy intensive and vulnerable to uneven terrain. Just one crack in the ground and you loose all your lifting pressure.
How would it deal with recoil if it just floats?
the propulsion on the back (some kind of conventional thruster) would do a burst that would be the same force as the recoil
-->|<--
so the crew and the vehicle would feel the recoil but the vehicle would not move out of position.
I dunno homie maybe the same way it deals with the force of gravity that's supposed to keep it from floating in the first place
We already have Hover tanks. They're called Helicopters.
It has the same type of vulnerabilities as the
AT-AT
WRONG they have six legs
all hail the true saviors of humanity.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/zqG5DGHoDS8
>all these spider tanks drawn with the tiniest surface area under their feet
Are artists moronic?
Are they completely unfamiliar with the most prominent issue plaguing large tracked vehicles?
Yes to both questions anon.
"Hmm lets give a sixty ton tank just six small points of contact, three of which it has to raise off the ground at a time to actually move. I mean, 20 tons per palm footprint isnt that much, is it?"
>Gets stuck in anything softer than tarmac.
>tarmac
Anon that thing is getting stuck in anything softer than the WW2 built sections of the Autobahn
Cool spider tank > dumb physics
I could actually see legs being very useful for hover tanks. The issue with hovering tanks, or ant kind if floating tank, is traction. They can't really accelerate, decelerate, or turn. Functional antigrav/repulsor tanks handwave this fundamental flaw.
What if you gave a hover tank legs? The weight of the tank mostly sits on their Antigav or repulsir system. The legs are used to anchor when firing, accelerate, decelerate. And quickly turn. It would ctrate a bizarre looking crawler tank that seemed incredibly nimble for its size.
Some one should write this book.
1: Giving spiders a tank.
>Name a single downside of a spider tank.
It only shoots webs.
Legs
Not a lot of scalability.
At small sizes, they're fine. But as they get larger they concentrate too much weight into too small of points, and have big issues with mobility and speed.
Basically GITS figured them out with the Tachikomas and going larger ain't worth it.
>and going larger ain't worth it.
except they do have successful larger spider tanks.
this thing was insane
Just read the old /k/ checklist of what mechs would need to be viable MBT replacements, everything applies more or less as is
>1. go hull down
>2. high stress resistance
>3. wienerpit suspension
>4. APS
>5. emphasis on sensors
>6. stability enforcement
>7. emergency propulsion
>8. some kind of magic engine machine
>9. intense maintenance
I'm not a fan of mechs, for obvious reasons, but here we go:
>1. go hull down
An arachnoid mech could do that, lowering its profile to expose the minimum surface possible
>2. high stress resistance
I'm not sure what you mean by this
>3. wienerpit suspension
An arachnoid mech wouldn't need this, unlike a bipedal one, as you can have a gait that maintains the wienerpit stable
>4. APS
I don't see why this would be an issue, as long as it is on the limbs of the arachnoid mech
>5. emphasis on sensors
Same as above
>6. stability enforcement
Yeah, all mechs would need active stabilisation, including arachnoid mechs. However, we already have that for flying wing planes, so idk
>7. emergency propulsion
Yeah, that would be kinda difficult
>8. some kind of magic engine machine
Eh, idk, you could probably use something similar to a tank engine, or whatever moves those huge-ass dump trucks in quarries.
>9. intense maintenance
Yeah, that's a big downside of mechs
gay spider
>Name a single downside of a spider tank.
uh, how about the rolled up newspaper tank? ever think of that, smart guy?!
Got a zippo tank just for that rolled up newspaper tank of yours.
i feel like these legs always look weird.
like the tank is constantly using power just to hold its self up
why would you not create a leg system that is always off the ground and only uses power to lower its self.
also they never look stable enough.
Can't fold up into a ball and roll around.
>gets gunked up with mud/dust/debris and cant fold back up or function properly.
I knew K. Bride didn't just make those up.
I'm about 50 hours into my first Morrowind playthrough, it's unreal how good it is.
Oblivion is better, fights in Morrowind suck
I wasn't able to play it as a kid for that reason.
The difference is that I got into tabletop in my early adult years and once I got back into it, I was able to wrap my head around the mechanics.
Oblivion's quest writing and general dreamlike vibe are top notch, though.
big boi
Briareos looks goofy with the bunny ears.
The catgirl sisters were great, though.
But corner view.......
That's not Rampage.
How would you ever repair this if a limb seized or was destroyed
This is my favorite realistic concept for a spider tank. Courtesy some Turkish industrial design student but well thought out.
bump
Thanks, didn't have these.
That’s just one of those trophy trucks with the stupidly tall suspensions, but stupid
*slices your tires*
I think it makes more sense to have sentient writhing masses to tendrils that simply violate the landscape to make it unassailable.
how feasible would something like a terror drone or spider mine from starcraft be? something fast moving and cheap with a huge explosive strapped to it?
just chuck a bomb
I mean yes the average slav would be cheaper than a robotic spider loitering munition. but seems like having a mine that can hunker down and wait and be able to chase down moving targets would be good. can't always have a flying drone over head.
ATGM, optical sensor, and a small computerized controller makes way more sense. Much faster, cheaper, and surer
>Spider tank
>6 legs
anon wtf
You might get tired.
We're gonna need a bigger shoe
Go to bed Dr. Miguelito Quixote Loveless
It's not as cool as a crab tank
This. Why would you only want the legs and not the snibbedy snibbs?
ok but what about this
He cute
:3
>no periscope/optics what-so-ever
Crab tanks only go sideways.
>crab battle
No hole to stick your dick in. Real spiders and tanks have a similar flaw
Imagine fixing every join of that, imagine having to fabricate that shit when it breaks.
Vulnerable to Para Power rays.
I have an image but I'm under a range ban for posting images (??!)
Damn, Beast Wars 3D has held up pretty good.
Scary (might scare your allies)
No Sickle anti-infantry vehicle posted yet. Shame. Shaaaame.
useless complexity
The bottom
A tread only has one failure point (Two if you count the wheels that turn the treads I guess) Each leg has at least 3 failure points. The connection to the tank and the joints. So for the tank you posted there, that’s 18 points of failure compared to 2 (4 max) of a traditional tracked vehicle.
>A tread only has one failure point
Every fricking link in the tread is a failure point.
Hard countered by raid
pounds per square inch
The walker concept only has vidality in ricky, uneaven forested terrain. There are some tree logging machines that have legs irl because of this.
Love spider themed tanks
Price and leg maintenance
AHEM!
hate jedi
hate the republic
hate the core worlds
love me droids
love me trade federation
love me Confederacy of Independent Systems
Would a dwarf spider droid style drone be more effective than a spider tank? I feel like it's basically just a boston dynamics dog with a gun on it at that point.
>I feel like it's basically just a boston dynamics dog with a gun on it at that point.
I wonder how those would do if they could do autonomous navigation and jamming/IFF wasn't a problem.
I think that on wheels will be part of future warfare and anti terror operations. Some wheeleybois will have machineguns, some grenade launchers and some are small with automatic handguns. Just throw hundred of those at an enemy line zooming in at 30km/h.
>wheels will be part of future warfare
Wheels will roll supreme!
Is that the Tsar tank?
Yep, you just know Putin would field it if it still existed
What happens when it gets impregnated by pic related?
>Tarantula Hawk VTOL
Now THAT is some primo grade nightmare fuel.
insects are yucky
>inb4
arachnids are yucky too and insects is generally understood to mean any form of tiny bugger. Also that thing has 6 legs not 8 or 10.
Ground pressure.
ground pressure is a meme, elephants have twice the ground pressure of an Abrams and have no problem traversing swamps
>more expensive than tracks
>more weakpoints than tracks
>Harder to make than tracks
>now have to take legs into account when firing at certain angles
A better thread would be "name an upside"
>"name an upside"
looks neat 🙂
There are none. The monkeylord is the pinnacle of experimental bot design.
flamable hydraulic fluid,
low top speed
not a significant enough advantage to justify quad and even quintuple manufacture cost
poor stability when firing heavy weapon (whole tank rocks back
concentration of weight on small surface area of feet causes tank to "dig in" on nearly all terains, including damage to concrete/cement
increased "footprint" reducing the amount of tanks that can be stored/transported on planes/ships.
the list goes on
Ground pressure don't matter if you're fighting in an urban environment and the verticality helps a ton.
are these spider tanks or tank spiders?
Tank spiders would just be spiders that live inside tanks.
Muh ground pressure is a troll meme.
Tank have problem with mud not because they'll sink into a hole they can't dig out, they have problem because it lead to having no grip at all, no solid surface to push over.
If a walking machine had a clearance of 1m and can lift its legs by that much, then it cannot be stopped by any mud that's not deeper, robbing it of solid surface to push on.
I'd have to see it in practice, I feel like a spider tank balls deep in mud is still going to be a bad time.
Raspubreastsa is what 2ft deep, the spider tank shouldn't have any problem lifting its legs that much
Provided it can drag the leg out of the mud and not lose balance in the process.
>in practice
Dude, just go walk in mud.
Again, it's only a matter of having contact with solid surface beneath instead of a floating layer that reform constantly because track DECREASE pressure.
Tank track were invented so it create artificial slopes regardless of the actual ground geometry. So it can climb a step as long as a tiny bit of the track reach the top instead of being stuck due to wheels geometry.
The complete opposite of mud being snow, which instead of flowing, pack into a denser and heavier snow.
Then you have ground pressure problem because you might never get enough clearance and since it pack, you are rewarded in crushing more surface.
That's why in mud you wear tight and smooth boot, while in snow you wear large snowshoes.
replace the cab with a tank turret and we are halfway there.
I don't think it's necessary, missiles have less recoil and weight less than a full armored turret, just strap a javelin, a radar, a .50 cal, a high definition camera with termals and night vision and a stinger on the arm, make it so that any of the weapons can shoot from the arm and deploy it on a mountain and boom, it can snipe tanks, it can snipe copters, it can frick mountain infantry if they happen to climb and it can call for arty strikes from behind the mountain, it can conceal itself behind the mountain and lift it's arm like if it were a periscope from a submarine to scout and shoot from the top of the mountain, maybe it can work as a jammer/wifi repeater/datalink too, tanks can't hit it (low elevation), arty... arty could hit it in theory but it may be harder than it seems, helicopters probably will die before they spot them, it sounds very strong for mountain warfare.
Downsides... it's complex, expensive, probably needs very skilled soldiers to operate, and could be hit by drones specially if the mountain doesn't have trees, ammo is a problem too... sounds hard to restock unless you make 1 variant specifically for logistics, and of course they suck for anything else that is not mountain warfare... I think, because it's not intended to directly fight tanks in open terrain, there is no need to give it armor, well, maybe against small arms.
>I don't think it's necessary, missiles have less recoil and weight less than a full armored turret, just strap a javelin, a radar, a .50 cal, a high definition camera with termals and night vision and a stinger on the arm
thats not really a tank then is it?
more like a multi legged hydraulic mobile weapons platform
>thats not really a tank then is it?
I don't really know, is it?
Only useful for stunlocking heavy Core units while your peewee or flash tank horde moves in.
Spider tanks are absolutely useless in real life.
>Only useful for stunlocking heavy Core units while your peewee or flash tank horde moves in.
>Spider tanks are absolutely useless in real life.
Get in the patterning machine, meatbag.
fuchikoma postan'
increased pressure on the ground from the individual legs creates an immediate sinking problem
>walking on two legs means I'm going to sink into the ground
damn bro guess I'm getting a scooter thanks for the heads up
The future is infantry on tracks
Footprint too small for weight.
just make the feet wider 🙂
like snow shoes.
You forgot the cute anime girl that's fused with it
hmmmm
god could you imagine
insect porn is literally the most demonic thing I ever seen in my 40 years of porn fapping career
even before fricking actual demons
You probably gotta have room for a buncha bullshit under the tank to make it walk like that. Just tons of actuators and hydro reservoirs. It wouldn't look nearly as cool as a result and you know 90% of its purpose is to look cool.
>Name a single downside of a spider tank.
I just need a rope to trip it
That's like saying you can stop a tank with a rope that get caught between chassis and turret.
You are factually dumber than Starwars Empire's engineers.
also the only reason the AT-AT fell over is because it kept trying to move(and because its waayyyyyyy too tall)
I'm wondering what kind of wall it could go through if you put beam saber thingy in front of the legs
huh?
Cut through stuff anon, even if SW """logic""" is a joke, it would be funny to imagine them making a contraption like that.
mud
>worse performance than treads on 99% of the planets surface area
>substantially more manufacturing cost
>more parts to break
>can't be serviced in the field
i mean other than being able to climb slopes of like 60 degrees and treads can only do 50 whats the upside?
THIS moronic one?
how about
>twelve fricking points of guaranteed failure
EACH one of these gigantic knee joints is a servicing nightmare and obvious weakpoint
fricking points of guaranteed failure
As opposed to the twenty joints on each side of a tank? With axis highly integrated into the structure? Much closer/easier to hit? Instant mobility kill if 2 are hit leading to abandoning near pristine tank?
Good luck hitting such small constantly joints on purpose.
OP pic might be fictional but save a few caveat it could be entirely worth the trouble.
>increased clearance
>hulldown everywhere you want
>escape most of the blast of landmines
>mud is less or no longer a problem
>can move sideway
>main limitation in tank design is fitting on train, truck & airplane. If the leg fold, they can be neatly contained.
>leg take the damage before the structure
>tip of a leg is damaged? No mobility kill, replace with dumb metal, small penalty
>most of the leg is damaged? Still no mobility kill, remove leg, as big as a rolled track, install new one, won't even need a crane
>need extra equipment? strap it on the legs, won't weight down the structure
>need to transport it fast? self load by train, or strap wheels on the legs and tow it.
>need to traverse a river? either use the clearance or attach ballast to the legs
The real big problem is to power those actuators (electric/hydraulic) and having cheap sensors an computer can use to walk. The main problem that killed GE walking truck was the impossible stress if piloting manually.
>need extra equipment? strap it on the legs, won't weight down the structure
try carrying 5kg on your ankle
Now try 5kg in a pants pocket
Weight on extremeties is UTTERLY moronic
>main limitation in tank design is fitting on train, truck & airplane. If the leg fold, they can be neatly contained.
>I think the issue with tanks is they are too big, lets make them multiple times larger
that only has 6 legs
Inefficient locomotion.
Tanks are that way as they focus on speed.
Sure spider tanks maybe slightly more versatile during mountain climbing, but for 99.9% of the war, it will be less efficient.
They are good.
thats not a spider, thats a dog 🙂
Instead of a spider tank, why not a spider spg? Could be capable of reaching and firing from places normal spgs can't (such as standing in shallow water which could reduce frag from counter battery fire) and stop, fire and gtfo quicker than tracked or wheeled spgs, at the expense of being slower.