Kalashnikov unveils 4.5 tonne bulletproof walking tank
94 replies, posted
Probably not, robotics are way better than this and they have been for decades.
I am regarding this thing specifically, because the great thing is, that you could look at some shitty overpriced toy from a decade ago and still consider it better than this
Like they aren't exactly impressive, but those crappy robot dog toys are still way less rigid looking than this.
Yeah, because no one will be left to say it after they come into use.
At least not in English...
The only advantage to mechs that I could think of is height and being able to maybe step over barriers that tanks could not. That's about it.
Looks like someones first attempt with 3dsmax
Nice viral stunt
I bet this genuinely worries some people
ofcourse it does - look at all coments out here.
50 bucks says that it's about this, and that these news organizations were just played like idiots
Kalashnikov Will Make an A.I.
У вас есть двадцать секунд, чтобы повиноваться
Right brain: it's going to be the PAC walker from 2142 I'm so excited reeee
Left brain: it's going to look like shit
Reality: it looks like shit
I mean, imagine seeing that thing on the battlefield and then you hear
"Comrade you now go pilot the thing"
Fucking scary shit tbh
So they literally only stick around in popular culture due to the cool factor, even though they'd still be completely impractical in real life even once we have the capability to make "good" ones.
That's... kinda depressing, actually. I wonder if this is what it felt like when someone thought that old "spy-watch with a video signal to another person" trope was the coolest idea as a kid only to grow up to today's world and realize that video calls on a smartwatch accomplishes little other than eyestrain and making you look like a dweeb.
By the looks of those joints it can only walk in a straight line. :V
spoiler alert, it can't walk, period
What a waste of resources.
Humanity is only getting more urbanised. Armoured vehicles are an important part of warfare even in the ruined cities of the modern battlefields so there is a niche role for combat machines that can move through completely devestated streets. Outside of that there's very little point.
I'm genuinely curious. Is there any sort of practical advantage that mechs would have over a tracked IFV/tank? To be real generous, let's assume we're talking an Armored Core style mech that is absolutely capable of locomotion and mounting heavy weaponry without risking falling over at the slightest inconvenience.
i can see the practicality if it's actually got decent tech and some sort of autonomy to control itself from tripping
imo the biggest fault is maintenance
if some guy on the field hits your suspension in an mbt you can hunker in it until returned to a motor pool where they can wrench off the bad roadwheels and pop a few new ones on and place it back on tracks, some vehicles are even capable of limited movement without tracks iirc
but if you take an rpg or something to a full sized leg it cant be as easy as that, you'd have to open up the entire thing and replace the whole leg.
you'd basically need to bolt a shitload of reactive plates onto it or be really careful.
What even would be the industrial use for this...
It's likely just a concept to get some hype. Russia has already released several videos on humanoid robots, capable of performing many tasks including walking, entering and driving vehicles, opening doors, using power tools and so on. This "mech" isn't representing of their current robotic technologies.
I got all hyped up for a garbage can... feelsbadman
Nope, there's no way in hell they'd ever be cost effective. Firstly, fuel - walking is pretty energy inefficient. We use wheels for a reason. Second, moving parts. More moving parts = more complexity = more failures = more repair costs. Again, wheels and treads are real simple, there's a reason we use them so much. Third, that added complexity creates more manufacturing cost.
Now on to tactical shit. Mechs are taller than tanks. That's bad, that means they can't hide behind shit. That's bad. Tanks are flat for a reason. Additionally, that height makes them easier to spot from a longer distance. That's bad for obvious reasons. Next on the list is armor. Wheels are low-profile, sturdy and redundant. The wheels of a tank are hard to hit and if they're hit, a single wheel's failure is no issue. Just disengage it and keep rolling. Treads are nice like that. Legs don't have that advantage. Knock one out and congratulations, the whole thing is completely immobile. Legs are also really hard to armor since there are so many moving parts and joints. Tanks are all one big piece so they're easy to armor. We retrofit tank armor by just slapping it on top. Things wouldn't be so easy when trying to armor mechanical legs.
I could go on and on but mechs are just a horrible idea, no matter how much I want them to be a great one. Luckily, tanks already exist and they're fucking awesome.
Legs are incredibly good at dealing with terrain, far better than any wheeled or tracked vehicle.
A large scale 4-legged Boston Dynamics-esque tank would be able to traverse almost anything.
Cause it is Russian propaganda so they can project their surface level "macho" image to their citizens and the rest of the world.
Assuming it'd even be able to hold itself up while climbing if it was that large, which I doubt. Square-cube law.
i want to see this piece of shit in combat, it'd be hilarious
Reminds me of that Megabots tournament thing from years ago, which ended up being a catastrophic disappointment for everyone involved.
Turns out the company behind that went bankrupt this year. Go figure.
Boston Dynamics' "alpha dog" impressed me with its size and lifting capacity
I can imagine a light tank on a scaled up 4 or 6 leg setup would work, but idk if it could ever be practical. The R&D would be hell.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.