Taarkin Posted March 31, 2002 Share Posted March 31, 2002 I think lasers are outlawed by the Geneva convention. Some BS about causing blindness. Because it's ok to stab a guy in the gut with a bayonet and run past him as he spends the last agonizing moments of his life trying to scoop his entrails back in, but you can't shine a light in his eyes. Come to think of it, the GenCon also regulates what body parts yo uare allowed to strike with a rifle butt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nute Gunray Posted April 1, 2002 Author Share Posted April 1, 2002 Energy weapons aren't covered by the Geneva Conventions. There may be treaties against energy weapons in the future. I'm surprised there isn't already considering we have treaties against space based weaponry and the use of natural disasters as a weapon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K_Kinnison Posted April 1, 2002 Share Posted April 1, 2002 actaully, they have develpoed a Bipedal robot that has the ability to walk up and down stairs, sit, and do almsot everything a human can do with 2 legs except run and jump only prob is it's batteries only last about 20 minutes And actaulyl i think the anti air laser was installed on smaller airliner. It isn't the size of the laser that is the prob, it is the cooling units and batteries that power it. The main prob with the laser is it's limited range in atmosphere, and how sceptable it is to any weather other then a clear sky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jem Posted April 1, 2002 Share Posted April 1, 2002 Originally posted by K_Kinnison actaully, they have develpoed a Bipedal robot that has the ability to walk up and down stairs, sit, and do almsot everything a human can do with 2 legs except run and jump You mean the Honda Corporation's humanoid robot P3 : Anyone else seen this baby in action? it's fascinating. More details here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zargon Posted April 2, 2002 Share Posted April 2, 2002 Originally posted by Commander 598 How bout a CH-47? Don;t ask me, ask the AIr Force, this is what they said in the program, that the 747 was most suitable for them. When was the last time you saw one(bipedal)? EXACTLY, if it was that cool and important and better, the US Military would codename it some cool name (like Trinity Project or Project Manhattan) and hush it up and rush it out, well, theythought of that crap ages ago and lo and behold NOTHING, so it sucks, the military knows it and people just need to let go of battletech/gundam fantasies......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoom Rabbit Posted April 3, 2002 Share Posted April 3, 2002 The renovation of the Statue of Liberty was a highly classified operation where they actually turned it into a giant battlemech... The new 'torch?' The latest version of the CH-47. They tried to fire the thing up on 9-11, but no one had enough quarters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander 598 Posted April 3, 2002 Share Posted April 3, 2002 Zoom doesn't know what a CH-47 is... ------------------------------------------------------- Maximum Weight=100 Tons Tell me something with treads that could defeat that. I believe its about...40-60ft high. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nute Gunray Posted April 3, 2002 Author Share Posted April 3, 2002 1) travel to Fort Eustis, Virginia to see the Army Transportation Museum 2) Ask to see "Cybernetic Walking Machine" 3) Observe cybernetic walking machine 4) Understand why they don't have walking combat machines Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jem Posted April 3, 2002 Share Posted April 3, 2002 I'd go for a TimberWolf anytime: *sigh*, If only they existed... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K_Kinnison Posted April 3, 2002 Share Posted April 3, 2002 CH-47 "Chinook" was a twin blade helecopter used a lot in the vietnam war. The thing had a lifting capacity of over 25,000 pounds. Which means it could lift antoher CH-47 if the need arose, and It could land on water (if you rmembered to put the plugs in) My dad was a flight engineer on one... he loves the "Chin-hook" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zargon Posted April 4, 2002 Share Posted April 4, 2002 Originally posted by Commander 598 Zoom doesn't know what a CH-47 is... ------------------------------------------------------- Maximum Weight=100 Tons Tell me something with treads that could defeat that. I believe its about...40-60ft high. I am sure I could make up something as feasible as that rediculous contraption that has treads that could win............I could a battle ship on treads as feasibly as that thing existing, and then that would lose after one broadside from the 16 inchers, so THERE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K_Kinnison Posted April 4, 2002 Share Posted April 4, 2002 "Stompers" liek the Mechs have a big flaw Moterized mostion is not efficiant since humwans walk using a pendulum motion. it takes balance, coordiantion, and lots of mortors for a Mechanoid to "walk" smoothly and effciantly Then, you ahve to make it big so it can go faster then a thing with treads or wheels. I think a Good example is by watching Battle bots. in the lower weight divisions, speed is survival, hence msot of them are on wheels, and not "stompers" or treads. Stompers almsot alwlays get creamed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander 598 Posted April 5, 2002 Share Posted April 5, 2002 Well seeing as how most of them I see have the inability to turn or are just a frame... I could a battle ship on treads as feasibly as that thing existing, and then that would lose after one broadside from the 16 inchers, so THERE If you could hit it because its max speed is about 50 kph and those guns aren't exactly made for close-range fire allowing for the Daishi at a distance to fire volleys of LRMs(Long-Range Missiles) or ER(Extended Range) Large Lasers while on the move with its twisting torso. I met two battleships in MW4 and they had Missiles so I had to keep moving and hide behind hills to keep from getting hit. Had they had big ass cannons like a normal ship I probably could have had a much easier time. Those two ships moved kinda fast for a Battleship to... Anyway the Daishi was one of the strongest Mechs in the game. I would recount an urban mission in which there were several enemy Daishis and Atlases but this post is to long as it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cmdr. Cracken Posted April 5, 2002 Share Posted April 5, 2002 Air craft are, and will be, for a VERY LONG TIME, one of the best munitions delivery sytems for many years. Fast, menuverable (most of them) and sleek, these are the current killers of today. That, and Long Range Nuclear Missles or ICBM's, or the famose CRUISE MISSLE. Launchers sold seperatly, see store for details. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nute Gunray Posted April 5, 2002 Author Share Posted April 5, 2002 A pulsejet driven, ZPF abusing, deathray toting flying wing will be <b>the</b> weapon system. And to think, they're working on just such a thing. Go America. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taarkin Posted April 5, 2002 Share Posted April 5, 2002 I'm partial to Starcraft/Exo Squad-style power suits. Too bad the thing would be damn hard to keep powered unless we can mae backpack-sized nuclear reactors that don't explode or meltdown when damaged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zargon Posted April 5, 2002 Share Posted April 5, 2002 fine, put a new aegis cruiser on wheels and you will tomahawk'd to death from 100 miles away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander 598 Posted April 6, 2002 Share Posted April 6, 2002 Supposing that: [*]I don't move(Ever wonder why they don't use cruise missiles to take out tank platoons?) [*]It could hit such a small target [*]When it came into view it wasn't destroyed with lasers(They hit almost instantly) [/list=a] I am predicting either your gonna quit or an ego bust. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander 598 Posted April 6, 2002 Share Posted April 6, 2002 Also, in the case of nuclear warhead B applies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nute Gunray Posted April 6, 2002 Author Share Posted April 6, 2002 Dude, just give it up. Mechanized bidpedal machines are not a good weapon system. I've <b>seen</b> what 1970s era robotic produced for the military and it sucked. Sucked a lot. It may have been 30 years old, but biped robots haven't come far since. Also: <img src="http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/smart/calcm2.jpg"> I think your silly little robot is <i>quite</i> vulnerable to cruise missile attacks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoom Rabbit Posted April 6, 2002 Share Posted April 6, 2002 And even the 'advanced' battle droids in Battle for Naboo are vulnerable to laserfire, missiles, bombs, lawsuits, name-calling or a well-thrown rock. Rocks? Snowballs, even. 'Rogerroger!' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander 598 Posted April 6, 2002 Share Posted April 6, 2002 Nute: That was a stationary target. it had no weapons for defense.*Takes out #B* Also in my last post the "B" should be "C". Zoom:Us Commanders stay well away from unintelligent creatures. We leave that for the mindless mechanical slaves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nute Gunray Posted April 7, 2002 Author Share Posted April 7, 2002 It's not a matter of stationary. That missile can nail something a FOOT across. You take a 36 foot tall robot and shoot a missile at the center of it's mass. If the robot moves less than 30 feet in any direction, it WILL get hit. Also, missiles can TRACK THINGS!!@! Oh nos. That's why SHIPS traveling at 40 knots can get hit by missiles. And they're loaded with weapons (such as the Mk-2 Phalanx and the SM-2ER) that are designed to shoot down missiles. Also, that's a weapon designed to hit a BUILDING. It doesn't need to be ultra-accurate because buildings tend to be LARGE. They DO have even more accurate cruise missiles that are intended to hunt down things like tanks, which tend to be extremely fast and manueverable compared to a building. If ROBOTS were a valid weapon, then we'd have them. It's that simple. Robots aren't a new idea either, so it's not like "WE JUST HAVEN'T DISCOVERED THEM YET." They're not even working on them for military applications. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoom Rabbit Posted April 7, 2002 Share Posted April 7, 2002 It wouldn't be that difficult to build a small rover with today's AI, strap a small thermonuclear device (available at any Russian flea market) onto it and turn it loose in the sewers several miles away from your intended target. Such a device would be an effective robot weapon indeed... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander 598 Posted April 7, 2002 Share Posted April 7, 2002 Originally posted by Nute Gunray It's not a matter of stationary. That missile can nail something a FOOT across. You take a 36 foot tall robot and shoot a missile at the center of it's mass. If the robot moves less than 30 feet in any direction, it WILL get hit. Also, missiles can TRACK THINGS!!@! Oh nos. That's why SHIPS traveling at 40 knots can get hit by missiles. And they're loaded with weapons (such as the Mk-2 Phalanx and the SM-2ER) that are designed to shoot down missiles. Also, that's a weapon designed to hit a BUILDING. It doesn't need to be ultra-accurate because buildings tend to be LARGE. They DO have even more accurate cruise missiles that are intended to hunt down things like tanks, which tend to be extremely fast and manueverable compared to a building. If ROBOTS were a valid weapon, then we'd have them. It's that simple. Robots aren't a new idea either, so it's not like "WE JUST HAVEN'T DISCOVERED THEM YET." They're not even working on them for military applications. How is a 40ft tall 100 ton Mech comparable to a 400 ton 100ft Battleship? Anti-Missile rockets do not hit instantly they take time to leave the tube then track the missile then adjust its course several times before it can come close and in that time the cruise missile would possibly get by unscathed on its original beeline course given top or almost top speed. And by the time it may appear on the radar it may be moving so fast that it leaves sight from the naked eye and or the radar screen. Anti-missile systems are still a bit foggy. Now a cruise missile has to make several course adjustments when approaching the target or mountain ranges. Give then the slowdown in speed or complete loss of fuel* it could be taken out by instant hitting lasers or dammaged beyond flight capability. Also given the Daishi's strong armor it could possibly get hit or more likely hit indirectly it could survive. Zoom: I like that idea. It makes me want to plug any sewer entrances near me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.