Welcome to the future: South Korea develops the world's first mech - Polidicks

[QUOTE=UnidentifiedFlyingTard;51613458]What can a mech do that a tank cant? mech's are stupid as shit.[/QUOTE] Ignoring the technology trouble at the moment, I think mechs do have a place, but not at the large scale alongside of tanks, apcs or afvs. Robots like big dog are where the technology is extremely viable, for dealing with terrain otherwise impassible by vehicles with wheels or treads, or inside of buildings.

The only real niche a mech could really do is observation and recon because it can get higher off the ground to grt a better view. Such a mech would need to be a lot faster and a lot more stable to do that though. [editline]2nd January 2017[/editline] Essentially a mobile watchtower

[QUOTE=gokiyono;51613482]Pick things up is one thing.[/QUOTE] And what would you like to pick up that might actually be useful? A gun? Maybe a grenade? Hell, we can go medieval and pick up a shield? Oh wait, tanks are literally bigass shields with engines and a fuckin' gun that can and will shoot HE shells. Tanks can't pick things up, not because they are limited, but because picking things up is useless when you can just build the design around the thing instead. [editline]2nd January 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Kyle902;51613510]The only real niche a mech could really do is observation and recon because it can get higher off the ground to grt a better view. Such a mech would need to be a lot faster and a lot more stable to do that though. [editline]2nd January 2017[/editline] Essentially a mobile watchtower[/QUOTE] Or we can do away with the tower-part, and just mount a good FLIR camera on some sort of flying device. Such as a helicopter. Or a quadrotor. Or a conventional-flight drone. Or a very large stick.

[QUOTE=RaptorJGW;51612970]Mechs will never be a real thing in war. Sorry guys. Still looks cool regardless.[/QUOTE] What are you talking about? Mechs are like the link between tanks and men. Tanks can't go on all terrains, but humans can. Humans can't withstand small arms fire, but tanks can. Tanks aren't very mobile and can't strafe, humans can. A mech, or a bipedal tank if you will, can be both human-like and tank-like at the same time. A sort of "Metal Gear" between tanks and men. On a more serious note, you might also be a person who would think "tanks will never be a practical thing in war". You'd probably think that because they're not very agile that they'd be easy targets, but we still use tanks, so that logic must not hold up for some reason. The only reason why I agree with you that mechs will never be a real war thing is that we probably won't have a war in which we will have them active and need to use them.

[QUOTE=UnidentifiedFlyingTard;51613483]Yes because we don't already have things that can do that.[/QUOTE] While we do, a mech, at least in theory, can do the jobs of a lot of those machines with more ease and in some cases with less outside help. They can also go into hazardous environments and interact with them more than we could with the tech we have now. Though I'm not so sure if this one is cut out for that stuff yet. Probably not.

[QUOTE=RaptorJGW;51612970]Mechs will never be a real thing in war. Sorry guys. Still looks cool regardless.[/QUOTE] Nothing will ever stop my unrelenting desire to pilot an Armored Core.

[QUOTE=WaRRioRTF;51612971]A part of me wants to know how a fight between two of these things would look like.[/QUOTE] theres some guys organising mech paintball battles atm paintball pellets are the size of patatoes [editline]2nd January 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=ClarkWasHere;51613786]What are you talking about? Mechs are like the link between tanks and men. Tanks can't go on all terrains, but humans can. Humans can't withstand small arms fire, but tanks can. Tanks aren't very mobile and can't strafe, humans can. A mech, or a bipedal tank if you will, can be both human-like and tank-like at the same time. A sort of "Metal Gear" between tanks and men. On a more serious note, you might also be a person who would think "tanks will never be a practical thing in war". You'd probably think that because they're not very agile that they'd be easy targets, but we still use tanks, so that logic must not hold up for some reason. The only reason why I agree with you that mechs will never be a real war thing is that we probably won't have a war in which we will have them active and need to use them.[/QUOTE] If a tank cant go on the terrain, its either not worth it to go on it or people cant either... tank tracks are awesomely effective and pretty fast.

[QUOTE=Blizzerd;51613837]t If a tank cant go on the terrain, its either not worth it to go on it or people cant either... tank tracks are awesomely effective and pretty fast.[/QUOTE] Not even a tank can go through directly through a thick forest - having something that can actually move between trees would make for a terrific AA capability.

[QUOTE=RaptorJGW;51612970]Mechs will never be a real thing in war. Sorry guys. Still looks cool regardless.[/QUOTE] if mechs somehow became commonplace construction equipment, [I]someone[/I] would eventually use one for a civil war or terrorist attack or something. i mean considering the civil war in Syria's produced stuff like this [thumb]https://cdn.theatlantic.com/assets/media/img/photo/2013/02/diy-weapons-of-the-syrian-rebels/s20_58020753/main_1200.jpg?1420510747[/thumb] and this [thumb]https://cdn.theatlantic.com/assets/media/img/photo/2013/02/diy-weapons-of-the-syrian-rebels/s18_RTR396FL/main_1200.jpg?1420510746[/thumb] i don't think it's too much of a leap for one to be used domestically, if only because it looks cool

it looks just like the mechs from Avatar [IMG]http://www.hizook.com/files/users/3/Mech_Avatar_Movie.jpg[/IMG]

At least it's not North Korea.

The issue with mechs is for the same price you could have a drone or multiple tanks. Cost is usually the issue and two tanks will probably beat a mech any day of the week, and a remote drone with air to surface anti armour munitions almost certainly will. The point it it does not fill a role not already covered by existing things, sure it's better across several roles but it far too expensive. Power armour is likely to be about as sci-fi as the battlefield gets.

[QUOTE=Ogopogo;51613498]Ignoring the technology trouble at the moment, I think mechs do have a place, but not at the large scale alongside of tanks, apcs or afvs. Robots like big dog are where the technology is extremely viable, for dealing with terrain otherwise impassible by vehicles with wheels or treads, or inside of buildings.[/QUOTE] We have had that technology for thousands of years already they're called Mules and Donkeys. [QUOTE=Kyle902;51613510]The only real niche a mech could really do is observation and recon because it can get higher off the ground to grt a better view. Such a mech would need to be a lot faster and a lot more stable to do that though. [editline]2nd January 2017[/editline] Essentially a mobile watchtower[/QUOTE] A person can already recon better and if a person can't get there we have UAVs. Honestly a Mech will never see any sort of use in any military role ever, its not tough like a tank and its not light and mobile like a person, it also doesn't fly or swim, and its really expensive.

Mechs would never be useful in an actual military situation- in logistics is where they would be most effective(both military and civilian logistics) where they are basically extremely flexible and large power tools. [QUOTE=duckmaster;51614019]We have had that technology for thousands of years already they're called Mules and Donkeys.[/QUOTE] Animals are unreliable in situations of high intensity(such as a warzone) since they operate on instinct and require lots of upkeep and management, as well as training. [QUOTE=thisguy123;51613991] Power armour is likely to be about as sci-fi as the battlefield gets.[/QUOTE] This! Exoskeletons of the load-bearing type have proven to be very effective for preventing soldier fatigue on the move, and they're entirely mechanical! Electronic ones have the capability to be even more effective.

[QUOTE=gufu;51613887]Not even a tank can go through directly through a thick forest - having something that can actually move between trees would make for a terrific AA capability.[/QUOTE] This is true. Now, if only we had something small, bipedial and highly mobile and adaptable already. Like, I don't know... A soldier on foot? Man, that'd be great. Imagine that, soldiers on foot. How exactly would you make a mech capable of navigating dense woods? It'd have to be smaller than a compact car in width and also rather short, and at that point you just got a machine too small to perform any job a dude with a Stinger missile can't do.

[QUOTE=Riller;51614198]This is true. Now, if only we had something small, bipedial and highly mobile and adaptable already. Like, I don't know... A soldier on foot? Man, that'd be great. Imagine that, soldiers on foot.[/QUOTE] Foot soldiers usually don't do too well against small arms fire. Not that I'm arguing for the idea mechs are a good idea, but there's a reason tanks exist, mobility isn't the sole quality of a military asset.

[QUOTE=ZombieWaffle;51614167]Mechs would never be useful in an actual military situation- in logistics is where they would be most effective(both military and civilian logistics) where they are basically extremely flexible and large power tools. Animals are unreliable in situations of high intensity(such as a warzone) since they operate on instinct and require lots of upkeep and management, as well as training. This! Exoskeletons of the load-bearing type have proven to be very effective for preventing soldier fatigue on the move, and they're entirely mechanical! Electronic ones have the capability to be even more effective.[/QUOTE] And a robotic mule wont have insane upkeep? good luck powering or maintaining it out in extended periods of deployment. I also don't think powered exos will get far either cause hasn't it shown that these future soldier kits people keep making are unreliable heavy, and quite frankly useless, and caused nothing but frustration to the soldiers using them.

[QUOTE=Riller;51613524]And what would you like to pick up that might actually be useful? A gun? Maybe a grenade? Hell, we can go medieval and pick up a shield? Oh wait, tanks are literally bigass shields with engines and a fuckin' gun that can and will shoot HE shells. Tanks can't pick things up, not because they are limited, but because picking things up is useless when you can just build the design around the thing instead. Okay? I weren't talking about picking up swords or grenades.

[QUOTE=Scot;51613013]It isn't meant for war (yet at least), it's made for exploring/searching in hazardous conditions.[/QUOTE] Does a power source capable of sustaining more than a few minutes' worth of activity even exist yet?

[QUOTE=gokiyono;51614297]Okay? I weren't talking about picking up swords or grenades.[/QUOTE] Then what [I]would [/I] you pick up? I'm genuinely interested. [QUOTE=_Axel;51614225]Foot soldiers usually don't do too well against small arms fire. Not that I'm arguing for the idea mechs are a good idea, but there's a reason tanks exist, mobility isn't the sole quality of a military asset.[/QUOTE] Oh, I know, but mobility is the only quality ever mentioned relating to mechs, and the only argument people ever bring up when claiming they are partially better than tanks. And hell, even on mobility, mechs are fundamentally flawed. Imagine the fuckin' ground pressure per square inch of a mech's foot mid-step? It'd dig into even slightly soft ground faster than you can say "Well fuck maybe mechs were a bad idea after all!"

[QUOTE=RaptorJGW;51612970]Mechs will never be a real thing in war. Sorry guys. Still looks cool regardless.[/QUOTE] mechs would be useful in war even if they dont act like gundams, you can use them as huge armor walls. you can use them as basically more manuverable forklifts to create entrances in combat or close off areas. Medical Mechs to pick up injured people off the field and run back to a safe point to get them to recover. you arnt gonna see 100ft mechs killing peeps, more for utility purposes.

[QUOTE=Wii60;51614405]mechs would be useful in war even if they dont act like gundams, you can use them as huge armor walls. you can use them as basically more manuverable forklifts to create entrances in combat or close off areas. Medical Mechs to pick up injured people off the field and run back to a safe point to get them to recover. you arnt gonna see 100ft mechs killing peeps, more for utility purposes.[/QUOTE] But again, an armoured bulldozer or an APC-based ambulance does the job already, but [I]better[/I]. People who vouch for mechs seem to have no idea that the things they want already exist, just better and less dumb.

[QUOTE=Riller;51614432]But again, an armoured bulldozer or an APC-based ambulance does the job already, but [I]better[/I]. People who vouch for mechs seem to have no idea that the things they want already exist, just better and less dumb.[/QUOTE] we are already developing awesome exoskeleton tech, a mech would simply be a bigger bulletproof exoskeleton imo. It would prob be terrible in combat but in utility it would be great. bulldozers are slow but mech tech can progress to the point where we can do stuff faster.

I think people shouldn't readily dismiss the utility something like this may offer. I mean sure right now they're pretty much useless in a warzone but who knows what further developments may yield.

[QUOTE=Riller;51614432]But again, an armoured bulldozer or an APC-based ambulance does the job already, but [I]better[/I]. People who vouch for mechs seem to have no idea that the things they want already exist, just better and less dumb.[/QUOTE] I think the point is less "we have a ton of shit that does the thing but better" and more "we can have one thing that does multiple things well"

[QUOTE=Riller;51614397]Imagine the fuckin' ground pressure per square inch of a mech's foot mid-step? It'd dig into even slightly soft ground faster than you can say "Well fuck maybe mechs were a bad idea after all!"[/QUOTE] Yeah. There's a reason why this thing is sitting in a museum instead of becoming a standard (idea was to damage the ground less than tires with chains) [t]http://www.theoldrobots.com/images27/Plustech-12.JPG[/t] A mech that would be any use as a armor wall would also weight a shit ton, and would require huge amount of power. Man invented wheel for a reason, why should we try to do more inefficient machines?

[QUOTE=Wii60;51614456][B]we are already developing awesome exoskeleton tech[/B], a mech would simply be a bigger bulletproof exoskeleton imo. It would prob be terrible in combat but in utility it would be great. bulldozers are slow but mech tech can progress to the point where we can do stuff faster.[/QUOTE] Exo suits are highly different because they augment the body. They assist our standard functions but mechs have to do all the complex parts by themselves and the human input is just control usage in which case, we should just use another vehicle which is proven to get the job done reliably. By the the time we are able to construct mechs, even just for utility, we will have far superior technology. Mechs are a product of their time and the rule of cool is almost entirely what dictates them. Why waste so much time trying to figure out the hefty issues of balance or power and to emulate humanoid movement when we could quite possibly find a propulsion system that provides the same maneuver capability using things we understand better at potentially 3/4 the cost?

[QUOTE=lxmach1;51614475]I think the point is less "we have a ton of shit that does the thing but better" and more "we can have one thing that does multiple things well"[/QUOTE] Again, the limiting factor is always price, Tanks are reliable, proven and easy to repair for the most part and probably far cheaper than a mech will ever be. That being said, while we never see mechs in war I hope people like the man working on this project do build mechs for the sake of mechs. Just because you can doesn't mean you should... but it IS really friggin' cool.

I don't see why mechs are impractical. Look at the Battletech universe.

People do tend to dig bit too quickly "it doesn't have military usage, so it is useless." Mechs are not very viable in many tasks, and it might be hard to find a niche, at least here. I'd imagine there potentially could be some use in space or other celestial bodies, if the tech improves. Then again, even then legs probably lose to alternative options. Zeong is the future. [QUOTE=PaChIrA;51615160]I don't see why mechs are impractical. Look at the Battletech universe.[/QUOTE] Because it is fiction.