Why mecha?

General questions, debates, and rants about RPGs

Moderator: Moderators

kzt
Knight-Baron
Posts: 919
Joined: Mon May 03, 2010 2:59 pm

Post by kzt »

Prak_Anima wrote:More legs distributes weight across a wider area, meaning that the machine is less likely to sink into the ground.
How big do you plan to make the feet?

An M1A2, weighing 70 tons, has a ground pressure of 15.4 pounds per square inch.

Assuming a 70 ton vehicle and 4 legs and moves like a horse you'll have all four legs off the ground at once, then one leg lands. So that leg holds all 70 tons of the vehicle, plus the momentum. To get the same ground pressure (ignoring the momentum issue) the as a M1A2 you need each foot to be about 9 feet in diameter.
User avatar
Whipstitch
Prince
Posts: 3660
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2011 10:23 pm

Post by Whipstitch »

TBH, I doubt that bounding or a horse gallop would be a good model to extrapolate from anyway given that such tricks are most effective in species that have crazy slinky spines that let them change up their stride length with frightening ease.
Username17
Serious Badass
Posts: 29894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Username17 »

kzt wrote:
Prak_Anima wrote:More legs distributes weight across a wider area, meaning that the machine is less likely to sink into the ground.
How big do you plan to make the feet?

An M1A2, weighing 70 tons, has a ground pressure of 15.4 pounds per square inch.

Assuming a 70 ton vehicle and 4 legs and moves like a horse you'll have all four legs off the ground at once, then one leg lands. So that leg holds all 70 tons of the vehicle, plus the momentum. To get the same ground pressure (ignoring the momentum issue) the as a M1A2 you need each foot to be about 9 feet in diameter.
Why the fuck would you use a horse gallop? Elephants (8.8 tons) never have more than three feet off the ground at a time and manage a top speed of 40 KPH. That is clearly more appropriate to be compared to a 70 ton, 56 KPH MBT than a horse.

Also remember that just because you only have one leg touching the ground, it does not imply that that leg is supporting all your weight. Believe it or not, your vehicle is actually moving up and down, meaning that the weight is not fully distributed to a single leg at any time.

-Username17
kzt
Knight-Baron
Posts: 919
Joined: Mon May 03, 2010 2:59 pm

Post by kzt »

FrankTrollman wrote: Also remember that just because you only have one leg touching the ground, it does not imply that that leg is supporting all your weight. Believe it or not, your vehicle is actually moving up and down, meaning that the weight is not fully distributed to a single leg at any time.
So lets assume two feet are always on the ground all the time, and it moves such that you never have to support the entire vehicle landing as it moves. For example, a horse's typical ground pressure standing is 25 psi, it goes up to perhaps 500 psi running. But we'll ignore that. So each foot would be about 6 feet in diameter to keep the ground pressure the same as a tank.

If you make the feet smaller the ground pressure rises. For example with elephant sized feet a 70 ton vehicle would have a ground pressure of about 3000 pounds per square inch while standing on 2 feet. Which implies it would have some serious issues in a lot of terrain.
Last edited by kzt on Sat Nov 17, 2012 8:07 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Prak
Serious Badass
Posts: 17361
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Prak »

There's also the fact that eight legged spiders effectively move in a tripod stance, having three legs on the ground at all times.
Cuz apparently I gotta break this down for you dense motherfuckers- I'm trans feminine nonbinary. My pronouns are they/them.
Winnah wrote:No, No. 'Prak' is actually a Thri Kreen impersonating a human and roleplaying himself as a D&D character. All hail our hidden insect overlords.
FrankTrollman wrote:In Soviet Russia, cosmic horror is the default state.

You should gain sanity for finding out that the problems of a region are because there are fucking monsters there.
User avatar
Previn
Knight-Baron
Posts: 766
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 2:40 pm

Post by Previn »

kzt wrote:If you make the feet smaller the ground pressure rises. For example with elephant sized feet a 70 ton vehicle would have a ground pressure of about 3000 pounds per square inch while standing on 2 feet. Which implies it would have some serious issues in a lot of terrain.
Is there any particular reason you're aiming for 70 tons? I realize the tank is ~70 tons, but I'm not sure why that means a mech must be 70 tons as well.
DSMatticus
King
Posts: 5271
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 5:32 am

Post by DSMatticus »

Previn wrote:Is there any particular reason you're aiming for 70 tons? I realize the tank is ~70 tons, but I'm not sure why that means a mech must be 70 tons as well.
I assume he's specifically talking about using mecha to replace armored vehicles, in which case assuming a similar total weight is fairly reasonable.
User avatar
Vebyast
Knight-Baron
Posts: 801
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2010 5:44 am

Post by Vebyast »

FrankTrollman wrote:Also remember that just because you only have one leg touching the ground, it does not imply that that leg is supporting all your weight. Believe it or not, your vehicle is actually moving up and down, meaning that the weight is not fully distributed to a single leg at any time.
Unfortunately, it's the maximum ground pressure we care about, and the maximum ground pressure will always be greater than the average ground pressure.

Also, note that tanks have very, very low ground pressure. They're designed to have huge contact patches so they can drag large loads, which has a side effect of reducing their ground pressure significantly. For example, an M1A2 actually exerts half as much ground pressure as your car (~30 PSI, slightly more than the tire inflation pressure) or a mountain bike (~50 PSI).

Legs still mean better rough-terrain capbility, though, since you can alwyas just pull your foot out of any holes you make in the ground. Think of walking through sand - you're leaving giant divots in the ground, sure, but you don't care because you just keep walking. A spider tank would seriously tear up any ground it crossed, but it wouldn't be slowed down too much.

More interesting is the question of dragging. Lifting things isn't a problem; as I mentioned previously, the limiting factor there is really the durability of your arms. Dragging, though, could be limited by how much traction you can get. Feet are kind of limited in that regard. On the other hand, mecha are big enough to dig their feet in pretty deeply, or they could go to their knees to increase the size of their contact patch.
DSMatticus wrote:
Previn wrote:Is there any particular reason you're aiming for 70 tons? I realize the tank is ~70 tons, but I'm not sure why that means a mech must be 70 tons as well.
I assume he's specifically talking about using mecha to replace armored vehicles, in which case assuming a similar total weight is fairly reasonable.
Could be. Mecha might actually be lighter than MBTs; they'd be depending more on maneuverability, redundancy, and compartmentalization than on actual armor. A tank dies if it loses even a bit of one of its tracks, but a spider that loses a leg just keeps walking. Actually killing one means hitting it in the torso, and a sufficiently fast mecha could make that incredibly difficult. Mecha probably won't be bipedal for the reasons I laid out earlier; legs are good, but there's no compelling reason to look human.
DSMatticus wrote:There are two things you can learn from the Gaming Den:
1) Good design practices.
2) How to be a zookeeper for hyper-intelligent shit-flinging apes.
User avatar
Whipstitch
Prince
Posts: 3660
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2011 10:23 pm

Post by Whipstitch »

Mecha would probably do better competing with ground support and artillery vehicles that top out in the 30 ton range rather than full on MBTs anyway.
kzt
Knight-Baron
Posts: 919
Joined: Mon May 03, 2010 2:59 pm

Post by kzt »

Ground pressure is just one of the many ways that mecha are silly. To cover briefly some others:

visibility: What can be seen can be hit and what can be hit can be destroyed. 60 foot tall moving office towers are kind of easy to see from anywhere. If you can be spotted from 15km out by a FO with a radio and laser designator you are going to have a very bad day.

Surface area: Mecha have a very large surface area compared to a modern AFV. Armor is heavy (and thick armor that can stop anti-armor weapons is absurdly heavy) and the more surface area you have to cover the more you are either going to end up with an absurdly heavy vehicle or an vehicle that can't stand up to .50 cal SLAP or 30mm APDS, much less an AT rocket.
User avatar
Previn
Knight-Baron
Posts: 766
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 2:40 pm

Post by Previn »

kzt wrote:Ground pressure is just one of the many ways that mecha are silly. To cover briefly some others:
Expect that ground pressure isn't necessarily an issue. It depends on how heavy mecha actually are. At best you can say it might be an issue.
visibility: What can be seen can be hit and what can be hit can be destroyed. 60 foot tall moving office towers are kind of easy to see from anywhere. If you can be spotted from 15km out by a FO with a radio and laser designator you are going to have a very bad day.
Why is it 60' high? Why isn't it 15 feet high instead? Also, why are you counting only the horizontal for targeting, because a mech would have a small profile from above.
Surface area: Mecha have a very large surface area compared to a modern AFV. Armor is heavy (and thick armor that can stop anti-armor weapons is absurdly heavy) and the more surface area you have to cover the more you are either going to end up with an absurdly heavy vehicle or an vehicle that can't stand up to .50 cal SLAP or 30mm APDS, much less an AT rocket.
Well, tanks aren't uniformly covered in armor. In fact their top armor is actually really thin, as is the rear armor. It's going to depend on what and how the mech is armored. A mech of reasonable size can also use cover better than a tank is likely able to. A mech will also have more parts it can lose, a 6 legged mech could lose 2-3 legs and still be mobile. Even a biped mech with arms isn't out of the fight if it loses a leg since it can still drag itself about or crawl and has most if not all of it's range of fire.

We'd also need to determine the types of armor that is available vs the types of weapons likely to be encountered. If it gets to the point where we're using energy shielding because slab armor isn't covering it, weight really isn't a factor.

Nothing you're citing is actually against mech as a whole, only against every specific types or ideas. If posit that mechs are fast strike units, humanoid in form and between 10-12 tons and ~10; tall, all the engineering issues you're citing are essentially null. People claimed that helicopters, aircraft carriers, cars and planes would never be useful or catch on either.
User avatar
Whipstitch
Prince
Posts: 3660
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2011 10:23 pm

Post by Whipstitch »

Yeah, that's why I was thinking primarily of rocket based artillery, actually--something that can be relatively light and depends on shoot 'n' scoot tactics anyway.
kzt
Knight-Baron
Posts: 919
Joined: Mon May 03, 2010 2:59 pm

Post by kzt »

Previn wrote: Nothing you're citing is actually against mech as a whole, only against every specific types or ideas. If posit that mechs are fast strike units, humanoid in form and between 10-12 tons and ~10; tall, all the engineering issues you're citing are essentially null. People claimed that helicopters, aircraft carriers, cars and planes would never be useful or catch on either.
No, the ground pressure issue is certainly still there. A normal person has a static ground pressure (standing, not peak while moving) of 8 PSI. If you assume the feet are 4 times larger you'd have a static ground pressure of 400 PSI. The peak ground pressure while running would probably leave footprints in concrete. They certainly can't move through a building without crashing through the floor. If you assume they have some sort of giant snowshoes that would help, but it makes it hard to move down a street or though a doorway.

But yeah, the issue is what the mission you expect the damn thing to do? Based on that, how much can it weight, how big does it need/is it allowed to be, and how much armor does it need to have in what aspects? Big and heavily armored is going to be a serious problem. Small lightly or unarmored will probably work better.
User avatar
codeGlaze
Duke
Posts: 1083
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2011 9:38 pm

Post by codeGlaze »

kzt wrote:
Previn wrote:rriers, cars and planes would never be useful or catch on either.
No, the ground pressure issue is certainly still there. A normal person has a static ground pressure (standing, not peak while moving) of 8 PSI. If you assume the feet are 4 times larger you'd have a static ground pressure of 400 PSI. The peak ground pressure while running would probably leave footprints in concrete. They certainly can't move through a building without crashing through the floor. If you assume they have some sort of giant snowshoes that would help, but it makes it hard to move down a street or though a doorway. [...]
What about shocks/springs/etc in the feet?
This is actually a question I've thought about a LOT.

It also extends to things like giants and other extremely large creatures in (any) fiction setting. How do such things walk, run and jump with out leaving craters constantly?

ESPECIALLY big ass metal thangers.
Last edited by codeGlaze on Sun Nov 18, 2012 6:09 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Previn
Knight-Baron
Posts: 766
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 2:40 pm

Post by Previn »

kzt wrote: No, the ground pressure issue is certainly still there. A normal person has a static ground pressure (standing, not peak while moving) of 8 PSI. If you assume the feet are 4 times larger you'd have a static ground pressure of 400 PSI. The peak ground pressure while running would probably leave footprints in concrete. They certainly can't move through a building without crashing through the floor. If you assume they have some sort of giant snowshoes that would help, but it makes it hard to move down a street or though a doorway.
You are aware that there were dinosaurs that moved around on 2 legs and weighed 9-13 tons? The ground pressure issue may or may not be there for mechs, it depends entirely on the size and weight. If a mech weights 1 ton, but has surface contact area of two 5 square foot feet, the psi is NOT an issue. Even with the need for an 11' wide area to move through, that would fit in smaller areas than the M1A1.

You are seriously not getting multi-ton machines that fit through a doorway, so I'm also not sure why you're sending them 'crashing into buildings' when that's not something you expect of any armored vehicle. That's what you'd send power armored infantry or robots for, not mechs. You don't send a 70 ton, 60' tall mech into an office building doorway like an idiot.

If you want to claim that PSI is an issue, you need to strictly define the size and weight fo the mech, and probably tie that into the jobs it's going to be doing.
User avatar
Prak
Serious Badass
Posts: 17361
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Prak »

Iron Man's weight, in suit, is given as being something like 600 lbs, that seems relatively reasonable for powered armour units, and it's "light" enough that it won't be too much trouble on most floors (old/cheap buildings maybe, but they'd get shot to shit in a firefight anyway).
Cuz apparently I gotta break this down for you dense motherfuckers- I'm trans feminine nonbinary. My pronouns are they/them.
Winnah wrote:No, No. 'Prak' is actually a Thri Kreen impersonating a human and roleplaying himself as a D&D character. All hail our hidden insect overlords.
FrankTrollman wrote:In Soviet Russia, cosmic horror is the default state.

You should gain sanity for finding out that the problems of a region are because there are fucking monsters there.
kzt
Knight-Baron
Posts: 919
Joined: Mon May 03, 2010 2:59 pm

Post by kzt »

Previn wrote: You are seriously not getting multi-ton machines that fit through a doorway, so I'm also not sure why you're sending them 'crashing into buildings' when that's not something you expect of any armored vehicle. That's what you'd send power armored infantry or robots for, not mechs. You don't send a 70 ton, 60' tall mech into an office building doorway like an idiot.
Well, if you choose to ignore that I was talking about YOUR post that laid out the mech we were talking about as: "If posit that mechs are fast strike units, humanoid in form and between 10-12 tons and ~10; tall" I can't do much about that. But it makes a discussion work better if you don't spend your time setting strawmen on fire.
kzt
Knight-Baron
Posts: 919
Joined: Mon May 03, 2010 2:59 pm

Post by kzt »

Prak_Anima wrote:Iron Man's weight, in suit, is given as being something like 600 lbs, that seems relatively reasonable for powered armour units, and it's "light" enough that it won't be too much trouble on most floors (old/cheap buildings maybe, but they'd get shot to shit in a firefight anyway).
600 pounds would be ok for buildings, etc, sure. An average man has 1.9 square meters of surface area, I'll round to 2. We'll assume his armor weights 300kg. So you have 150 kg per meter square, minus power supply, motors, etc. Steel weights about 0.008 kg per cm^3. 10,000 cm^3 of steel weights 80 kg, or 160kg for 1 cm coverage of the entire body. As M995 AP can go though a cm of steel at 100 meters that probably isn't enough, but it will do as a basis since you'd be using fancy laminates, etc. (You also need some space behind the armor for deformation etc, but we'll ignore that too.) That would leave 140 kg for power supply, cooling, motors, etc.

I'd guess that the critical element is a power supply that can drive the motors for hours without a lot of weight or producing a lot of waste heat.

Edit: Oh yeah, the surface area is based on a nude person. If you put a backpack full of a power supply and hydraulic pumps and then armor the pack you either need to thin out all the armor or increase the proportion of armor to anything else. You'll likely end up with a suit that is largely immune to fragmentation but AP rounds are only stopped in certain areas unless you get some sort of magical power supply and/or armor system.
Last edited by kzt on Sun Nov 18, 2012 7:48 am, edited 1 time in total.
Username17
Serious Badass
Posts: 29894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Username17 »

Racing bikes already have a ground pressure that is more than 10 times that of a standing man. And they really don't cut through asphalt. Bitching about ground pressure is fairly silly, because it turns out that unless you're concerned about falling through snow or walking on water or something, you have an absolutely huge amount of available ground pressure range that it is acceptable to be in.

-Username17
kzt
Knight-Baron
Posts: 919
Joined: Mon May 03, 2010 2:59 pm

Post by kzt »

FrankTrollman wrote:Racing bikes already have a ground pressure that is more than 10 times that of a standing man. And they really don't cut through asphalt. Bitching about ground pressure is fairly silly, because it turns out that unless you're concerned about falling through snow or walking on water or something, you have an absolutely huge amount of available ground pressure range that it is acceptable to be in.
Sure, vehicle ground pressure of something with tires is generally about equal to the tire pressure. And yes, street vehicles use tires with pressure from 30 to 120 PSI. However hundreds of PSI of tire pressure isn't at all common until you get to jet aircraft tires and it's easy to get a crazy level of ground pressure with the classic mech concepts.

I've seen a picture of an military jet that discovered that some idiot had installed a street rated manhole cover instead of a flightline rated manhole cover on an airfield. Wheel assembly went right through the manhole cover, brought the plane to sudden and very expensive stop.
User avatar
Vebyast
Knight-Baron
Posts: 801
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2010 5:44 am

Post by Vebyast »

kzt wrote:But yeah, the issue is what the mission you expect the damn thing to do? Based on that, how much can it weight, how big does it need/is it allowed to be, and how much armor does it need to have in what aspects? Big and heavily armored is going to be a serious problem. Small lightly or unarmored will probably work better.
Mecha are going to be almost completely unarmored. The issue is surface area (need to put armor here) versus volume (can use this for stuff). A tank is a giant rectangle, so you get a lot of usable volume per unit of surface area you have to armor. A mecha is a series of long, thing tubes, so there's a ton of surface area per unit of usable volume, which means that armoring it is more difficult. Even worse, those long thing tubes are your legs, which you're actuating by applying torques to swing them around. Any weight you put on them is going to slow you down significantly. So you really can't armor your legs at all. Torso armor is better, but still not good. So it's likely that you'll put on just enough to stop small arms and depend on maneuverability and AMS for everything else.
Whipstitch wrote:Yeah, that's why I was thinking primarily of rocket based artillery, actually--something that can be relatively light and depends on shoot 'n' scoot tactics anyway.
Actually, I've just realized something. There's an entire role that mecha fit perfectly: medium urban combatant.

Tanks can kind of drive over small obstacles (though bigger cars and czech hedgehogs stop them easily), and infantry can walk between cars and over rubble, but nothing in the middle can get through. Throw in the fact that helicopters don't work in cities (updrafts, can't dodge, can't hide behind buildings and all they do is hide, etc) and you have a ready-made niche. Mecha are land helicopters, not walking tanks. They can walk over anything anybody tries to do to block a street, they can instantly go around a corner if something big drives into view, and if something gets too close (say, a dude with a molotov cocktail or a satchel charge) they can just slap it silly. Their height doesn't matter because buildings are definitely taller than they are; the extra height actually helps them see into upper floors and see over small barriers, which is a huge help. They also have hands, which means they can lift particularly wedged blockages out of the way. And, these days, all you need to do to kill a tank is realize there's one nearby and throw some of these into the air. So that's what mecha do: sprint around chucking missiles at things.
Also, I don't think that two legs is the way to go. Four or six legs will almost always be better. That way you can lose one or two to enemy action without much loss of capability. It also makes it easier to cross really rough rubble. Best of all, though, is that you can do spider legs or lizard legs rather than mammal legs, which means you'll be lower, maybe even low enough to get into larger buildings. Think something like this, albeit with improved vertical range of motion on the upper leg links and with rocket or mortar tubes everywhere.
Last edited by Vebyast on Sun Nov 18, 2012 8:34 am, edited 4 times in total.
DSMatticus wrote:There are two things you can learn from the Gaming Den:
1) Good design practices.
2) How to be a zookeeper for hyper-intelligent shit-flinging apes.
User avatar
Prak
Serious Badass
Posts: 17361
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Prak »

After watching that demo vid, I now want to get one, and add quad-copter rotors to it for a flying spider bot.
Cuz apparently I gotta break this down for you dense motherfuckers- I'm trans feminine nonbinary. My pronouns are they/them.
Winnah wrote:No, No. 'Prak' is actually a Thri Kreen impersonating a human and roleplaying himself as a D&D character. All hail our hidden insect overlords.
FrankTrollman wrote:In Soviet Russia, cosmic horror is the default state.

You should gain sanity for finding out that the problems of a region are because there are fucking monsters there.
User avatar
Vebyast
Knight-Baron
Posts: 801
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2010 5:44 am

Post by Vebyast »

Prak_Anima wrote:After watching that demo vid, I now want to get one, and add quad-copter rotors to it for a flying spider bot.
If you do so, I'd suggest that you somehow mount the rotors on the knees or the ends of the legs. I don't think anybody's managed to make a variable-geometry n-rotor yet. Right now they just mess with the rotor power. Being able to point rotors in different directions would open up all kinds of crazy options.
DSMatticus wrote:There are two things you can learn from the Gaming Den:
1) Good design practices.
2) How to be a zookeeper for hyper-intelligent shit-flinging apes.
User avatar
Prak
Serious Badass
Posts: 17361
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Prak »

What would be awesome is to just modify the legs to become rotors
Cuz apparently I gotta break this down for you dense motherfuckers- I'm trans feminine nonbinary. My pronouns are they/them.
Winnah wrote:No, No. 'Prak' is actually a Thri Kreen impersonating a human and roleplaying himself as a D&D character. All hail our hidden insect overlords.
FrankTrollman wrote:In Soviet Russia, cosmic horror is the default state.

You should gain sanity for finding out that the problems of a region are because there are fucking monsters there.
User avatar
tussock
Prince
Posts: 2950
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2009 4:28 am
Location: Online
Contact:

Post by tussock »

Come on people, there is only one Mecha that counts. Battletech. TRO 3050.

Slow riot-control variants of light mechs exist to be impermeable to typical rioters and their limited barricades. Smoke grenades, stunners, noise-makers, tear gas, ....

[*]Military-grade light mechs of 20 ton or more are single-man patrol units with strong anti-infantry capabilities and speeds over 60-90k on any terrain (easily over 100k on roads). Typical armour can often withstand sustained HMG fire and repeated strikes by light anti-armour weapons.
They're used to keep the edges of military bases and supply stations being stealth-killed by light-infantry mortars and rocketry, especially at night in unfriendly nations. Also suited to running ahead of vehicle patrols, when covered in sensors.

[*]Medium mechs of 40 ton or more are highly mobile support platforms for variable terrain operations where bombardment is impractical. Speeds of 40-60k are sustainable in all conditions, often with limited flight capacity to handle sheer cliffs.
Primary roles are anti-air, anti-armour, and anti-fortification duties as infantry support, usually at long to extreme range. High-mounted weapons allow clear lines of fire, with the bipeds capable of quick action to take cover from any return.

[*]Heavy mechs of 60 ton or more are set up for sustained firefights at all ranges in all conditions. They manage the same speed as Mediums, but without the jumping due to extra armour and weapons.
Often air-dropped near combat in support of engaged formations, they can move quickly to clear disabled vehicles while providing constant suppression fire. Often stationed at remote airfields and supply bases they can see above camp walls and provide highly mobile direct-fire heavy weapons to repel any serious aggression from the locals.

[*]Assault mechs of 80 ton or more are limited to 30-40k in rough terrain, or a bit faster with some risk. They are simply designed to carry weapons capable of one-shot killing all hostile vehicles and mechs of lesser weight out to extreme range, while being highly resistant to any returns.
Widely considered impractical to deploy by field officers, high command continues to replace any lost, seeing them as symbols of divisional integrity.
PC, SJW, anti-fascist, not being a dick, or working on it, he/him.
Post Reply