No.13497
impractical
No.13500
a bunch of venture capitalists in the US are funding R&D into it rn. don't know if it's bullshit or not
No.13506
So it's less sturdy than a tank with fragile limbs sticking out everywhere, unable to fire tank weapons better than tanks due to either needing to go stationary to fire or carrying less potent weapons in it's puny arms and it's basically an expensive , high tech coffin where there is a lot less room for hits/grazes or low caliber weapons not to mulch the pilot.
And that's assuming you can develop a sufficiently advanced vomit disposal system that can also keep the pilot's everything unscrambled after a few hours of walking.
But maybe if every country agreed to forgo other weapons of war, we could make super cool mechsuits that wield novelty sized infantry guns! Even then I doubt anyone would like to enter the mecha coffin, and if you got the tech you can probably make them autonomous or remote controlled.
No.13507
>>13497>>13503We're won't have mechs until we're spacefaring. Aerodynamics of course don't apply in space so clearly we're gonna need mechs when we start killing each other up there
No.13508
>>13507We won't even need legs in space.
No.13509
>>13506tactics isn't a spreadsheet
No.13510
>>13506So basically it becomes viable in space. We just need psychic teenagers to pilot them.
No.13513
>>13496Because science fiction is retarded.
No.13514
>>13511And it could swim with the legs. This needs to be made.
No.13538
>>13508Maybe not. But we will need Gundams. Why? Cause I wanna fucking Gundam.
No.13578
>>13506You know, maybe killing the pilot
is the point of the mech suit.
No.13581
there is no advantage to mechs that six-legged tanks wouldn't also have. In general tanks are just more practical there's no reason to stick to the humanoid form when making weapons of war.
No.13582
>>13581There is no advantage to six-legged tanks that a tracked tank wouldn't also have. Too bad there's no need for tanks these days. A truck mounted howitzer firing guided shells can accurately destroy ground targets from tens of kilometers away all while avoiding direct fire from enemies.
No.13679
>>13511The top picture is a PTL02 if anybody else was wondering what it is.
No.16242
>>13506>>13508/thread
>>13509but physics and economics often are. you either funnel TONS of money into the military to make bipedal mechs or you settle down with tanks
>>13507>>13511>>13514beyond being way too complicated to mass produce beyond being a lockheed martin toy, you also need to factor in the fact that they need to fire large caliber ammunition. In space, this would send it fucking flying. The joints would constantly be under stress.
There is NO reason to have a legged mech over wheels. Trust me, I fucking LOVE mechs, but theres no chance we're seeing them in our lifetimes, if ever. Even then, it'll probably be elon musk showing off a dumb little robot to get soyboys on twitter chatting.
No.16244
>>16243So a man portable and easily concealable 12.7mm mg can penetrate their armor?
No.16245
>>16244Yes but in Votoms these are issued to all infantry even raw recruits due to them being mass produced on a insane scale to the point the army sees them as completely expendable (with both armies resorting WWI tactics of just throwing wave after wave at each other's kill zones and hoping they have more numbers to "win" the battle).
No.16371
>>16245If it makes economic sense to mass produce something like a scopedog it also makes economic sense to produce a wheeled or tracked vehicle with better armor and better armament than a bipedal powered armor. A vehicle would have a smaller area to armor means more protection can be applied for the same weight. Wheels or tracks are easier to build than walking legs so a less powerful engine can be used while ensuring the vehicle has the same or even faster speed compared to a mech. Vehicles have better weight distribution compared to an upright mech meaning larger armaments can be mounted on the vehicle and the firing platform will be more stable too.
No.16429
>>13578But I.
Am already saved…
No.16612
Robots can move in ways that would break human bodies?
Return on investment with upkeep?
Unique IPs: 15