mechas and walkers - doom-bringers or death-traps?

[Moach_Mayhem]

it occurred to me the other day...

we see Mech's in all sorts of sci-fi battlefields, be it in movies or games... they always look really cool and deal unstoppable dammage to whatever dares opose them...

but how good a war-machine is an AT-ST like contraption? in a real (or realistic sci-fi) war context - would a "walking tank/apc" really be a good idea?

futuristic scenarios depict such walking robots as all-terrain fearless metal beasts that feature ideally unmatched habilities to deal with unwelcoming environments....

but let's look at it from a combat-engineering point-of-view...

pros:
- infantry-like terrain negotiation habilities
- faster than walking
- tank-like weapons capacity and armor
- awe-strinking presence pounds horror upon the most dauntless of foes
- can easily move over dragon's teeth, hedgehogs and other barriers, where tanks and cars would be stuck
- can "duck" and "pop" in and out of the line of fire

cons:
- incredibly complex piece of machinery with thousands of moving parts
- would probably require advanced onboard computers to handle
- needs one hell of a power supply
- not very stable a platform for firing heavy-recoil guns
- could easily "sink" a leg in muddy terrain or soft sand/snow
- stands out tall above ground, a very easy, slow-moving target for AT soldiers
- slow as a pig....
- as stealth as a marching band


so, say one would set off creating a futuristic-combat addon pack for ArmA2 or something, how would you advise on the presence of mechs and the like

justifiable? or just a hands-down death-trap?


discuss

[Daniel]

It's hard to think of a situation where a bi-pedal mech would be the platform of choice.

Big mechs are impractical due to sheer weight and high profile. Smaller mechs might be viable if air transportable, as a sort of quick reaction asset. In this case it would have to weigh in at around 10 tons or less, unless designed around a heavier lifting future aircraft (V-44?).

Perhaps a one man mech, say 3 or 4 metres tall, capable of providing accurate fire support in rugged terrain. More intimate support than most platforms while retaining armour against small arms fire. Could be something of a platoon level asset. But then it wouldn't be much use in a conventional war, where air superiority could be contested or lost.

[NeMeSiS]

Except for being awesome, i cant think of 1 real advantage of choosing legs over tracks as something to put your guns on. All of your pro's except the dragons teeth are advantages over infantry, not over tanks. And unless the mech is huge things like dragons teeth would still be obstacles.

[ArmAriffic]

If it try's to fire a big gun it just falls over, lol "I'll get em' (BOOM) oh crap"

[ck-claw]

Depends if the mechs/walker was controlled by our very own 'Walker'

Kind Regards!

[Moach_Mayhem]

another point worth considering is that although the "ducking" hability could be just as well provided by a tank or armored car with a gun turret mounted on an extending boom or crane...

perhaps if the mech is to be kept mostly out of harms way, perhaps primarily as a load-carrying and infantry-assist platform, it could be more useful in a real battle... guns for self-defense, sure, why not?

but i too fail to see the use of such type of vehicle as a hard-combat asset

i would imagine maybe two-three meters tall mechs with long lightweight legs and wide-area feet working as a mobile infantry support system, ideally unmanned, remotely controlled by a platoon member....

AT-ST's don't strike me much as a battle-worthy apparatus... i mean, even ewoks can have the better of them... let alone AT4-toting highly trained combatants....

hence, me raising this discussion.... sci-fi wars are loaded with gun-sporting mechs to such extent that it even diverts from how poorly they would perform in a real armed conflict

is there conceivable justification (awesome factor aside) to the existance of such hardware in future combat, or is this myth truly "busted"?

[Max Power]

With conventional materials, it's difficult to make a road vehicle that's resistant to amour piercing machine gun fire. APCs until recently were vulnerable to .30 calibre rounds up close. The bradley and newer vehicles resist these calibres but are heavier (twice as heavy as the m113 for the bradley). This walking vehicle would need to have quite heavy armour because it is standing upright and would be quite an easy target. I think it would be lots and lots of horsepower to stay maneuverable. In order to jump, for instance, it would need a power to weight ratio of 1:1, I think.

Just playing with numbers, for a bradley sized and armoured mecha with todays materials, let's call it 40 tons. With feet 1 meter long and 1 meter wide, it has a ground pressure of 20 tonnes per square meter. That's 28 psi. That's twice the ground pressure of a m1a2. I guess this would be for a 6 meter tall mecha. If this is at all accurate, to have the ground pressure of a tank, you'd need a mecha with 1/3 its height in foot length and width to get down to the ground pressure of an MBT.

[ryguy]

Mechs would only make sense with four legs. In fact the army has already commissioned a four-legged mech, seen here:


Of course there's the mobility aspect, it can go anywhere a human can go. If there were a tank-sized, low-profile, four- or six-legged mech (nothing like the star wars ones), it actually would make sense. Otherwise, tracks are the better solution.

[Big Dawg KS]

A bipedal/multiped vehicle would be far better at supporting infantry in urban/close quarters environments (or has the potential to depending on its size and maneuverability).

In an open field though, unless it could get really low, it'd be quite vulnerable.

[[APS]Gnat]

A bipedal/multiped vehicle would be far better at supporting infantry in urban/close quarters environments (or has the potential to depending on its size and maneuverability).

In an open field though, unless it could get really low, it'd be quite vulnerable.

Yes, biped good for Urban, low profile tracked good for country.
If the biped could "lay-down" (onto wheels for example) then you could potential get the best of both.
But as said, they would be extremely complicated (and hence delayed in implementation) bit of machinery ...... but very do-able at current technology.

I think the Exo-skeleton type machine will come first to the battlefield.
Already a few projects out there where theyre testing.
-Carry heavy packs
-Carry heavy weapons
-Run faster, longer.
-Extra strength for urban (structure) assualt etc
-Less "restrictive" to the body
-More likely to be taken up by the average foot soldier.