1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Other We need power armor

Discussion in 'General' started by azazel1024, 17 Mar 2011.

  1. PureSilver

    PureSilver E-tailer Tailor

    Joined:
    16 Dec 2008
    Posts:
    3,152
    Likes Received:
    235
    Yeah, those are powered exoskeletons as opposed to 'mecha' (the difference being that the exoskeletons are strapped over individual limbs, as opposed to mecha-style remotely linked to them). You can see in the video the dude carrying ammo boxes - in others he's loading bombs onto aircraft etc. Like I said - those will be in-theatre before we're out of Afghanistan, I think, but they won't be replacing tanks, they'll be replacing forklifts.

    To be honest, I'm quite happy with the unpowered one as something to mess around with. Combine that suit with some sort of compression/rebound mechanisms in the ankles (like Powerisers) to compensate for additional stride and I'd build one next weekend. The concept of being 12 feet tall and running at 10mph is just too appealing not to.

    Anyone want to draw up some plans in Sketchup? I'll settle for a complete clone for the moment...
     
  2. BRAWL

    BRAWL Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    16 Aug 2010
    Posts:
    2,666
    Likes Received:
    184
    The things that will replace tanks will be bi-pedal, and they're a long way off... Think Red Faction 2 Battle Armour. The arms are weapons and the shoulders missile launchers...

    OR it'll be Space Marines, simple lol
     
  3. omicron

    omicron Baud.

    Joined:
    8 May 2004
    Posts:
    722
    Likes Received:
    24
    Its easier and cheaper just to build robots, sadly, at least in SAR scenarios.


    Unlikely. If you look at the majority of modern armed forces, tanks (MBTs) are being phased out in favour of smaller, more mobile CRV(T)s due to changing priorities. Bi-pedal anything is simply not feasible at the moment and looks to be so far off, technologically, that it's impossible to speculate on. I'd suggest it's unlikely we'd be cladding all of our infantry in large suits though, simply because infantry units are designed to be expendable, for the most part, and such equipment would not be cost effective.

    The future of war is unlikely to be hordes of men charging at each other like medieval times, though; war becomes more and more surgical and efficient, and humans all the more removed from the act of killing, as time goes on.

    If you want a picture of the future of warfare, don't think of space marines but unmanned drones.

    Even for infantry, who will be necessary for many many years to come, the idea of wearing half a ton of metal or ceramic is a little ridiculous, especially in lighter roles like recon. I can definitely see some sort of more discrete, half-exoskeleton, though, especially if it allows troops to run faster, and for longer, with little penalty. For that to happen, though, we need a big breakthrough in battery tech and that just doesn't seem to be on the horizon any time soon.
     
    Last edited: 20 Mar 2011
  4. BRAWL

    BRAWL Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    16 Aug 2010
    Posts:
    2,666
    Likes Received:
    184
    It's true... war in the past 20 years has changed from "Your enemy is x, y and z" to "your enemy can strike anywhere". I'm not talking Metal Gear Rex style Walking battle-tanks. I'm talking 10feet high, heavily armoured servo driven units. Once again I use the example of Red Faction 2's Battle Armour. Two big massive Chainguns/Miniguns on it's arms, a flamethrower and missile/rocket pods.

    Robots and AI will never totally take over... I can say about 40% of the forces might be automated, such as drones. But the actually teams on the ground will always be there. There is never going to be a replacement for the human mind, we will never be able to create a system whereby it can understand everything around it, think part logically part emotionally about when, where and what they are going to do and that is essential.

    Hmm... I think it's entirely feasable. For operations like Afghan/Iraq/Libya (I say the last one lightly) or peacekeeping... armour like that of a Space Marine's would be invaluable. Massive protection all round, capable of taking even the heaviest blast of explosives, taking the round from an anti-material rifle, IED's and even chemical weapons. I'll pull the 40K bit out now and there are actually scouts in Space Marine chapters... they wear light weight armour and clothes just as Scount Snipers/Recon do these days compared to Marines / MBT troopers, so! Scouts themselves would definatly be exo-skeletion based, armour not as heavy or maybe semi-powered?

    Battery life is the major draw back of almost everything with humanity at the moment. We just don't seem to be able to have a battery with a decent lifespan that doesn't die quickly. When that's mastered we can look at moving forwards me thinks...
     
  5. azazel1024

    azazel1024 New Member

    Joined:
    3 Jun 2010
    Posts:
    487
    Likes Received:
    10
    I don't believe infantry is designed to be expendable, at least not in a first world military. It costs tens of thousands of dollars to train and equip a single private. Not something that is all that disposable.

    Besides, bipedal or quadrupedal modes of transportation do have advantages. They can tackle terrain that wheel and tracked equipment simply cannot navigate. They can operate in an urban or mountain environment many orders of magnitude better. I don't ever picture walking tanks for military applications (okay, we might see mecha some day), but heavily armored, powered, suits of armor yes.

    Heck simply being able to carry enough armor to defeat a heavy machine gun round at medium to longer ranges or defeat an indirect RPG or grenade hit would make a power armored soldier significantly more durable that such a soldier is now.

    It does also sound like power storage densities might be "solvable". Lithium-air batteries seem to be promising 10x the storage density that lithium ion batteries do now. If that were even remotely true, that would translate in to 1-2kw/hr per kg of achievable storage densities. A suit of armor using 2kw at "full operational speeds" (IE running around, lifting heavy things, etc) could get away with around 1kg of batteries per hour...and if the thing can haul a lot of weight, 15-20kg of batteries should easily provide as long as maybe 24hrs of operational life (and longer if operating at low powered settings).

    2kw by the by equates to about 4-5x a strong person's maximum exertion level (Tour bikers output around 600w at maximum effort on a sprint).

    I don't picture fusion powered suits able to withstand a main tank round with nary a scratch able to fly through the air and space.

    Just my 2 cents.
     
  6. wst

    wst Active Member

    Joined:
    30 Aug 2009
    Posts:
    822
    Likes Received:
    89
    Each missile the Rapier anti-aircraft system fires costs £150,000, iirc. Troops are fairly expendable :p
     
  7. Elton

    Elton Officially a Whisky Nerd

    Joined:
    23 Jan 2009
    Posts:
    8,575
    Likes Received:
    189
    Furthering wst's comment, look at how much an F-22 raptor costs.

    Or an F-15 pilot.
     
  8. BRAWL

    BRAWL Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    16 Aug 2010
    Posts:
    2,666
    Likes Received:
    184
    In the UK by the end of Phase One training you've cost the government £27,000 in training expenses alone x 60 recruits every two weeks x 5 sites = £8,100,000 every two weeks on recruitment. Thats not counting DAOR (Discharge As Of Right) that occurs, which is about 40%... so the costs of training soldiers is incredibly high. Thats just the financial cost... the mental cost is something totally different, anyway moving away from that subject...

    Bipedal walkers would be much better than convetional war-machines. I'm not talking battle-tech or even Metal Gear Rex/Ray. I'm thinking 12 foot, modular platforms controlled by a single-human operator who can be more agile and carry more firepower than the average battlefield vehical (M1A1/Chally2).

    24 hours just isn't enough time... Imagine if you needed to be in the field for six weeks? Some troops do this... there would need to be insane power capacity in these systems. Once again I hop onto the "fusion reactor" side of it, because that kind of power is just so amazing and long-lifed.

    Troops are never expendable, never say that again or I'll guy you with a cup of coffee lol. Sure a missile costs more... but it's a one-shot wonder, right? A soldier can adapt, be flexible, take out multipul targets in a host of enviroments.

    You're the same. Troopers are never expendable.
     
    [ZiiP] NaloaC likes this.
  9. Silver51

    Silver51 I cast flare!

    Joined:
    24 Jul 2006
    Posts:
    2,962
    Likes Received:
    287
    What about one or two RTGs (radioisotope thermoelectric generator.)
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioisotope_thermoelectric_generator

    You might not want them in an environment where they're likely to get shot at, but it should be okay for localised heavy lifting in emergency scenarios where a power source isn't available.
     
  10. BRAWL

    BRAWL Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    16 Aug 2010
    Posts:
    2,666
    Likes Received:
    184
    Tell you what they'd be good at? Sticking in a the chassis of a M1A1/Challenger 2, armouring it up and using it as a power stop for the armour units. Carry those round on your back is a sure-fire way to get a crater to come into existance lol
     
  11. VipersGratitude

    VipersGratitude Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    4 Mar 2008
    Posts:
    3,042
    Likes Received:
    415
    Historically they cerainly were. Human wave attacks were used extensively in WWI (like that final scene from Blackadder, or a Zerg Rush)

    Even from the etymology infantry means footsoldiers who are too inexperienced for cavalry, children in other words...based on the latin infans - child who doesn't speak yet.

    So when you talk of infantry you're really talking of unskilled mute babies. It might be ruthless, but strategically I can think of no better cannon fodder. :D
     
  12. BRAWL

    BRAWL Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    16 Aug 2010
    Posts:
    2,666
    Likes Received:
    184
    Historically... since 1980's onwards the soldier has become the professional. Well the British Army isn't huge, we can't send swathing attack loads of infantry and people unlike the US. But as for my own experience, soldiers definatly aren't expendable.
     
  13. Xir

    Xir Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    26 Apr 2006
    Posts:
    5,257
    Likes Received:
    88
    The problem is they're fighting kids who's training including armament cost 200$.
    And they're disposable.
     
  14. PureSilver

    PureSilver E-tailer Tailor

    Joined:
    16 Dec 2008
    Posts:
    3,152
    Likes Received:
    235
    Uh, soldiers are not just cheap, they're pretty much disposable. Witness what we pay them - nothing, how much we spend on their families - nothing, how much they get for crippling injuries suffered in the line of duty - a pittance, how much we spend on equipping them - read my lips, N O T H I N G. The MOD seems to spend half it's time sacking people by e-mail and the other half trying to claw back compensation money from IED victims.

    And that's in the UK. In other, less scrupulous parts of the world? The Russian army doesn't get paid. Iran used 'human wave' attacks during the Iran-Iraq war that wouldn't have looked out of place in the First World War. The cost of a child soldier in somewhere like Liberia is almost nothing. Therefore, there just isn't the incentive to replace humans on financial grounds. Even the most dangerous jobs are done by humans - bomb disposal, for example - partly because the robots that are intended to replace them cost £120,000 each.

    Soldiers do a dirty job for not much money. The equipment they deploy might well cost several thousand times their annual salary (for example, the salary-to-cost ratio for the pilot of an F35 will be over 2,000-1), and will receive considerably more attention from defence planners. If they can take all of that and still be proud of their jobs, why would the army want to replace them when it's already getting such great value for money?
     
    Last edited: 23 Mar 2011
  15. BRAWL

    BRAWL Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    16 Aug 2010
    Posts:
    2,666
    Likes Received:
    184
    Thats fine... when said $200 child runs into multi billion dollar/pound power-armour equipped chaingun weilding doom bringer... we'll see who's expendable.
     
  16. Sloth

    Sloth #yolo #swag

    Joined:
    29 Nov 2006
    Posts:
    5,634
    Likes Received:
    208
    As unsettling as it is to think about, soldiers are not an infinite resource, they get used up similar to anything else. They may all survive a single battle, or a single soldier may survive multiple deployments, but as the scope gets broader it becomes apparent that no conflict sees 0% losses, not matter how striking the advantage. Stategists know this and must plan around it, the projected losses are effectively expended resources which they are willing to pay to accomplish their mission. This is why unmanned drones are pushed so hard: if you're going to lose something, make it some metal and silicone rather than a human life.
     
  17. BRAWL

    BRAWL Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    16 Aug 2010
    Posts:
    2,666
    Likes Received:
    184
    Oh of this I am aware... it happens in games occassionally. Take Civ5 for example (yes... shush before you complain) where I've had a Barbarian Brute beat a Giant Death Robot... at full strength and I've sat there and gone "EH?!" the same can occur.

    With great technological superiority comes the ego with it... look at the Tolan from SG1, thats how we'd all end up. Scoffing at our enemies until they're immune and probing us with large 6ft devices... eh?

    Hopefully by the time we have decent power armour the worlds given up on war and we've realised that "Oh yeah, you might be black, white, orange and green... but hell you're human!"... oh wait, I said Hopefully... haha silly H word... you lead to disappointment.

    ---

    In conclusion, you are all my slaves now, and I demand working Power Armour by years end. Nexxo will be first to perish under it's tread.
     
  18. Xir

    Xir Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    26 Apr 2006
    Posts:
    5,257
    Likes Received:
    88
    [​IMG]
    surprisingly often :D

    I for one welcome our new, power-armored overlord master... :D
     
  19. BRAWL

    BRAWL Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    16 Aug 2010
    Posts:
    2,666
    Likes Received:
    184
    haha, you see thats an American wreckage... if it was British, it'd run efficantly and wonderful (despite the beaucracy behind the armour, the pilot would be signing forms when in combat).

    Excellent... You hereby added to the Cult Mechanicus! haha
     

Share This Page