The Mech: Militarily Feasible?

[Saul B]

Easy way to answer this question, is current technology level, probably not.

We get a high tech level and/or start exploring other planets, a mech type military unit will most likely be the best way to traverse and alien landscape, considering how it the mech would have to be set up, it'd be most natural for a human pilot to get out of a problem.

Just no. Like the OP said, exposed joints and unstability issues would be a massive problem. Helicopters/vertibird type things will prevail I think.

 

[fix-the-spade]

Would the Mech, or the rough idea, ever become a modern military practice?

No, not now, not ever.

As cool as they look a mech is pretty much the point list of what a military vehicle shouldn't be.

Massive, easily recognised from long distance.
Presents the largest target area possible.
Difficult or nigh impossible to effectively camouflage.
Every joint is a weak point.
Unstable with a high centre of gravity.
Over complicated.
Unstable firing platform.
Exceptionally poor terrain ability, with so much weight on such a narrow contact patch it would sink and get stuck on anything but solid rock. The CoG would make it prone to toppling over on soft, steep or rough ground.
Slow, keeping one doing a solid 40 across rough ground would be... interesting.

As cool as they are in sci-fi, they're one of those things that ain't going to happen.
Oddly, Mechwarrior (or Battletech at least) seem to be aware of this, there's a whole class of tanks dedicated to wrecking mechs from hidden positions at long range, since the mech sticks up and can't hide but also can't see the tank hidden against the background. Sadly absent from the games.

 

[TheScarecrow]

Depends on the size. Are we talking AT-ST types or more 80 tonne BattleTech 'Mechs?

 

[park92]

just use the abrams tank that has spider legs like in turok lolololol

 

[McNinja]

Spider legs would work better than bipedal. But until we find a more efficient energy source for our machines, mechs won't work.

 

[Deyja]

Most likely not.

but as someone said, shock and awe, and it would be fucking awesome! that exoskeleton i fucking insane, really gets me going hah. though i do not think they will ever actually use them in battle, but people will surely try to make em work.

 

[^=ash=^]

I would think that until we get a smaller and lighter power source a bipedal tank would not be usable in unstable ground. Engines are heavy and use a lot of fuel, plus our current robot designs aren't terribly good at keeping their balance while walking or running, much less attempting to dodge incoming artillery.

Hehe *imagines ASIMO with a gun*

 

[sgtshock]

on two legs, absolutely horrible idea

Now a spider robot might not be so crazy on difficult terrain.

The rednecks are on it already!

That was the coolest thing I've seen in a long time. Looks like something out of a sci-fi movie.

Anyway, the only advantages a mech would have over a tank (visibility, maneuverability) would be better fit for an attack helicopter. When you think about it, most mechs in movies or games are just Apaches on legs anyway.

 

[Irridium]

The only real use for them that I could see is heavy lifting and cunstruction.

As for combat, no, at least not in the forseable future.

 

[orangebandguy]

Maybe on a smaller scale, i.e Power Armour.

That'd be more feasible I think.

 

[Paragon Fury]

Gundam or Evangelion-esque mechs?

Not really.


But exoskeleton mechs, or smaller, man-sized ones, like from Starship Troopers, or District 9? Totally - we're already much of the way there.


Hell, the US Army even includes a mechanized, Juggernuat-esque soldier as part of its Future Soldier programs. The concepts and prototypes they used to show off were pretty cool, and the demo ones could actually do quite a bit already, like making it so that soldiers could lift and flip Humvees (albeit with a bit of difficulty) by themselves.


I still like the one concept they had though (they displayed it in the huge 18-wheeler recruitment trucks they used to send around) - it would've allowed complete Level V protection (IE: It would take a well-placed .50 cal round, or a sizable explosive to damage the suit and hurt the operator), and made it so a soldier could hold, and fire, a 25mm cannon and its ammo while standing up.

 

[MGlBlaze]

Mechs, probably not. Powered armour is a possibility, though.

Some sort of military mech will probably be made at some point, though, just as a 'proof of concept' thing to show it can be done. Besides, it would be AWESOME.

 

[Skuffyshootster]

The only practical mech I have ever seen is the one from District 9.

It's not a tank, rather a more agile bipedal robot covered in armor. The user is completely protected and has full control over it.

It also has a pretty sweet auto-pilot.

 

[dsmops2003]

A M1A2 or Leopard 2 would pwn a mech. Sabot round = Dead Mech

 

[Retardinator]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-9k4oUNHLJs

There's a difference between an exosuit and a mech.
OT: Anyone seen Star Wars? Giant mechs and cables are a bad combination...

 

[Paragon Fury]

on two legs, absolutely horrible idea

Now a spider robot might not be so crazy on difficult terrain.

The rednecks are on it already!

That was the coolest thing I've seen in a long time. Looks like something out of a sci-fi movie.

Anyway, the only advantages a mech would have over a tank (visibility, maneuverability) would be better fit for an attack helicopter. When you think about it, most mechs in movies or games are just Apaches on legs anyway.

True, but something akin to a mech has a an expotenially higher psychological impact than an aircraft does. It also could carry more muntions than any curent, or even next gen, rotary craft could ever hope to.

And is about 100 times more badass.

 

[Paragon Fury]

A M1A2 or Leopard 2 would pwn a mech. Sabot round = Dead Mech

Mechs have several advantages over standard armor:

1: Manuverability

2: Flexibilty

3: Adaptibilty

While in an open field, yes, most armored vehicles would be able to crush realistic mechs (though, if it were possible, not Gundam-esque mechs), as they would the time and the ability to aim and shoot. However, in most modern day battlefields, you'd be in an urban, rural or mountainious setting, and there, mechs would absolutely ruin other armored vehicles.

 

[dsmops2003]

A M1A2 or Leopard 2 would pwn a mech. Sabot round = Dead Mech

Mechs have several advantages over standard armor:

1: Manuverability

2: Flexibilty

3: Adaptibilty

While in an open field, yes, most armored vehicles would be able to crush realistic mechs (though, if it were possible, not Gundam-esque mechs), as they would the time and the ability to aim and shoot. However, in most modern day battlefields, you'd be in an urban, rural or mountainious setting, and there, mechs would absolutely ruin other armored vehicles.

In a close quarters urban fight neither a tank nor a mech have the advantage. An insurgent with an RPG or a RKG-3 would stop a tank/mech close combat. Mountains have a different problem for either a tank or a mech and that simply aircraft.

 

[Paragon Fury]

A M1A2 or Leopard 2 would pwn a mech. Sabot round = Dead Mech

Mechs have several advantages over standard armor:

1: Manuverability

2: Flexibilty

3: Adaptibilty

While in an open field, yes, most armored vehicles would be able to crush realistic mechs (though, if it were possible, not Gundam-esque mechs), as they would the time and the ability to aim and shoot. However, in most modern day battlefields, you'd be in an urban, rural or mountainious setting, and there, mechs would absolutely ruin other armored vehicles.

Look, if you have the technology to make shooting and moving at the same time feasible, it could be done ten times better on a tank.

And what makes you think tanks aren't maneuverable?

Towns and city streets are deathtraps for armor. Mech have the advantage of being maunverable (being that they're not much bigger than the soldier) and aren't limited vertically like tanks are, in addition to being able go into places a tank could never dream of.