Giant suit of Battledress: 6 meters tall!

[Tom Kalbfus]

Suppose someone built a suit of battledress that was 6 meters tall for a medium sized human occupant. The human fits within the chest cavity of the suit of battle dress, the Suit itself, using the cubed law weighs 3 metric tons, it comes equipped with a power plant, and a scaled up laser rifle, and can lift cargo proportional to its size that a medium sized human could lift and carry proportioned to his body size, Basically that means the robot's encumbrance is 27 times the weight that an average human with a strength of 7 could carry around. the fact that the robot isn't flesh and bones, and used hydraulic pistons instead of muscles to move its limbs and carry armor mounted on its body to protect itself and the human inside its chest cavity.

Technically, I guess this suit of powered armor would be considered a vehicle with two legs and two arms. Now given realistic MGTraveler rules, how effective do you think this thing would be in combat? Would it make the person inside harder to kill? There are disadvantages to 6 meter tall humiform robots, for one this, its a bigger target. But it can also carry a bigger laser rifle with about 27 times the mass of the standard Traveller Laser Rifle. Now how would this giant manned robot fair against more conventional military vehicles?

 

[JBRocky]

Might be a good idea for some but I am more of a "Meh." If you have something that big its just a big target, so might as well go with a Grav Tank. A Tank while more massive would not be as tall, could carry a bigger gun and on a turret, more armor and more expensive. I have always been under the impression even regular Battle Dress is a bit bulky and can have some problems so why make it worse.

But then again I am a big fan of Giant Robots.

 

[alex_greene]

The tank answer is also the answer to normal sized Battle Dress. Why have infantry at all, when you can just flood the battlefield with tanks and guided drones?

Answer: Something in the environment plays merry merry hob with grav. If you want to fight in that playing field, you have to walk in or roll in. And if the ground's too soft for wheeled tanks, break out the Battle Dress.

 

[Tom Kalbfus]

The tank answer is also the answer to normal sized Battle Dress. Why have infantry at all, when you can just flood the battlefield with tanks and guided drones?

Answer: Something in the environment plays merry merry hob with grav. If you want to fight in that playing field, you have to walk in or roll in. And if the ground's too soft for wheeled tanks, break out the Battle Dress.

One thing a grav tank can't do is pick things up with its hands. Grav tanks aren't very good at using improvised weapons, like tree trunks. A grav tank only has the weapons that are built into it. Another use for such robots would be in sporting events, such as a game of American football. Imagine a football field that was 300 meters by 150 meters with two teams of piloted robots contending for a meter long foot ball, trying to get it across their opponent's goal line. Robots crashing into each other as the spectators watch from the stands. There might be a demand for that!

 

[simonh]

Answer: Something in the environment plays merry merry hob with grav. If you want to fight in that playing field, you have to walk in or roll in. And if the ground's too soft for wheeled tanks, break out the Battle Dress.

If the ground is too soft for wheeled tanks, how is 3 tons pressing down on two metal feet going to help? That's going to be a heck of a large set of flippers on that thing.

Avatar did a good job visualising a vehicle like this. As a ground vehicle it's main advantage is goign to be all-terrain capability. It can step over rocks, fallen logs and other debris that might obstruct a tank. I think that's a bit of a stretch though. In Avatar it kidn of works because the humans need some way to compensate for their small size compared to much of the Pandoran fauna and they don't need to worry about technologicaly advanced opponents with anti-vehicular weapons.

I'm having trouble imagining a system that would screw up gravity enough to affect grav vehicles without also causing severe problems for infantry and even ground vehicles.

Simon Hibbs

 

[Tom Kalbfus]

Answer: Something in the environment plays merry merry hob with grav. If you want to fight in that playing field, you have to walk in or roll in. And if the ground's too soft for wheeled tanks, break out the Battle Dress.

If the ground is too soft for wheeled tanks, how is 3 tons pressing down on two metal feet going to help? That's going to be a heck of a large set of flippers on that thing.

Avatar did a good job visualising a vehicle like this. As a ground vehicle it's main advantage is goign to be all-terrain capability. It can step over rocks, fallen logs and other debris that might obstruct a tank. I think that's a bit of a stretch though. In Avatar it kidn of works because the humans need some way to compensate for their small size compared to much of the Pandoran fauna and they don't need to worry about technologicaly advanced opponents with anti-vehicular weapons.

I'm having trouble imagining a system that would screw up gravity enough to affect grav vehicles without also causing severe problems for infantry and even ground vehicles.

Simon Hibbs

A two-legged robot can jump straight up from a standing position, wheeled vehicles require a ramp and a running start. It can also hop over objects and out of quagmires.

 

[wbnc]

Several walker type vehicles do exist in Various Traveller sources...In Traveller 2300 I remember their were several countries who deployed combat walkers...however as a general rule Big robots and humanoid vehicles were never a big thing in a Traveller game I can remember.

Then again the game predates Mecha/big robot theme by a few years.

At three tons a biped vehicle would be no heavier than many large dinosaurs so it would not be overly encumbered by it's weight. A typical T-Rex was more than 6-8 tons, and African elephants are almost as big.
Both could manage softer soils and would not break the typical modern roadway. However at that size the walker would be a suitable target for tanks to engage, or aircraft/infantry to hit with anti-tank weapons.

Murphy's laws of war 13..Bullets are attracted to oddly shaped, interesting looking objects....

The general flexibility of a humanoid form might make up for the general tendency to attract heavy weapons fire. But the complexity and cost of the machine would require some very clever salesmanship by the designer.

There is also a good bit of psychological impact in the sight of an armored giant spitting fire, and death as it stalks toward you

 

[GypsyComet]

Several walker type vehicles do exist in Various Traveller sources...In Traveller 2300 I remember their were several countries who deployed combat walkers...however as a general rule Big robots and humanoid vehicles were never a big thing in a Traveller game I can remember.

Then again the game predates Mecha/big robot theme by a few years.

Only sort of. The "monster of the week" giant robot shows, started pretty early. The first of them, known later in the US as Gigantor, dates to 1956 as a comic, though it wouldn't hit the US until after becoming a show in 1963. Raideen, the first transforming robot, was hitting the US about the same time as Traveller.

What came later was the giant robot as military hardware, starting with Mobile Suit Gundam (1979) and later hitting the US most notably with the three shows that would be fused into Robotech (Macross, 1982; Southern Cross, 1984; Mospeada, 1983), as well as the several sources for Battletech (Macross; Fang of the Sun Dougram, 1981; and Crusher Joe, 1983).

The "giant robots" that make the most sense in a Traveller context would probably be the VOTOMS (Armored Trooper Votoms, 1983) which are only about 4m tall.

There is also a good bit of psychological impact in the sight of an armored giant spitting fire, and death as it stalks toward you

To pass along a quote from Mekton Zeta: 'These mechanical giants were shaped like men ... Shaped like men so that the alien blasphemers would know that it was Man who defeated them."

 

[Tom Kalbfus]

Several walker type vehicles do exist in Various Traveller sources...In Traveller 2300 I remember their were several countries who deployed combat walkers...however as a general rule Big robots and humanoid vehicles were never a big thing in a Traveller game I can remember.

Then again the game predates Mecha/big robot theme by a few years.

Only sort of. The "monster of the week" giant robot shows, started pretty early. The first of them, known later in the US as Gigantor, dates to 1956 as a comic, though it wouldn't hit the US until after becoming a show in 1963. Raideen, the first transforming robot, was hitting the US about the same time as Traveller.

What came later was the giant robot as military hardware, starting with Mobile Suit Gundam (1979) and later hitting the US most notably with the three shows that would be fused into Robotech (Macross, 1982; Southern Cross, 1984; Mospeada, 1983), as well as the several sources for Battletech (Macross; Fang of the Sun Dougram, 1981; and Crusher Joe, 1983).

The "giant robots" that make the most sense in a Traveller context would probably be the VOTOMS (Armored Trooper Votoms, 1983) which are only about 4m tall.

There is also a good bit of psychological impact in the sight of an armored giant spitting fire, and death as it stalks toward you

To pass along a quote from Mekton Zeta: 'These mechanical giants were shaped like men ... Shaped like men so that the alien blasphemers would know that it was Man who defeated them."

Easier for a human pilot to control the 4 limbs of a human-shaped robot, than the eight legs of a spider-shaped robot, that is one reason.

 

[dragoner]

Yeah, big stompy robots aren't realistic from an engineering perspective, materials would have a big catch-up to do, not to mention all the moving parts. But hey, give it ACV and then it can fly!

 

[Tom Kalbfus]

Yeah, big stompy robots aren't realistic from an engineering perspective, materials would have a big catch-up to do, not to mention all the moving parts. But hey, give it ACV and then it can fly!

Depends on how big, if you wan it Godzilla big, then I'd have to say your right, but 6 meters isn't all that big, and there are plenty of artificial materials harder than bone and stronger than muscle from which to build.

 

[Reynard]

One thing to remember is war machines aren't just tons of armor. They are also designed to give as little profile as possible and being as fast and maneuverable as possible on a battlefield whether a ground or a grav version. Aircraft are the snipers of war machines, fast and far. Compared to a machine that needs to put a LOT of money and material to make it operate, non-walkers are going to be cheap armored firepower. Remember that grav vehicles can go where no walker can.

A walker might look menacing but it rises above the landscape providing a tall, wide target unless they are build more like 4 or more legged animals. If you can see it, you can hit it. Pacific Rim and a few other shows have pilots control the machine one to one but I'd say they actually drive a very smart vehicle that knows how to move on its motive structure. I picture six leggers for stability with a driver and at least one gunner. Six leggers could have a hull down function for firing and defense. Still expensive and no real advantage to a grav.

 

[Tom Kalbfus]

One thing to remember is war machines aren't just tons of armor. They are also designed to give as little profile as possible and being as fast and maneuverable as possible on a battlefield whether a ground or a grav version. Aircraft are the snipers of war machines, fast and far. Compared to a machine that needs to put a LOT of money and material to make it operate, non-walkers are going to be cheap armored firepower. Remember that grav vehicles can go where no walker can.

A walker might look menacing but it rises above the landscape providing a tall, wide target unless they are build more like 4 or more legged animals. If you can see it, you can hit it. Pacific Rim and a few other shows have pilots control the machine one to one but I'd say they actually drive a very smart vehicle that knows how to move on its motive structure. I picture six leggers for stability with a driver and at least one gunner. Six leggers could have a hull down function for firing and defense. Still expensive and no real advantage to a grav.

But you see, grav does not exist, it is fiction. Also a hovering vehicle needs to expend energy just to hover, a walking vehicle doesn't do that just to stand.

 

[Old timer]

But Tom, this is a science fiction forum and in Traveller grav vehicles do exist. That means in the Traveller Third imperium setting, grav is the propulsion of choice for a AFV. In other settings if grav technology does not exist, then walkers might be a more viable option.

 

[Reynard]

"But you see, grav does not exist, it is fiction. Also a hovering vehicle needs to expend energy just to hover, a walking vehicle doesn't do that just to stand."

Wait, you're describing six meter tall bipedal war machines on the Traveller forum and telling me that grav vehicles don't exist. Are we on the same topic? According to the Vehicle Handbook both exist and even there it states walkers are rare and purpose built. They do have some examples and it would be interesting who uses them and do the pilots have to publically broadcast every maneuver they are about to do.

You describe this as Battledress. Since this is Mongoose Traveller, the canon is Battledress is man-sized powered armor up to .25 dtons but still not a vehicle. Battledress and walkers serve different military functions and units of BD soldiers will be more common than walkers, in general.

 

[dragoner]

But you see, grav does not exist, it is fiction. Also a hovering vehicle needs to expend energy just to hover, a walking vehicle doesn't do that just to stand.

Anti-gravity is science fiction, but there is nothing in physics to say it can't exist. But for giant robots, no; for twice the size, you get 100 times the weight at only 10 times the strength, then ultimately running into the square-cube law limit. Engineering principles, and the cost benefit analysis, mean it wouldn't be done.

 

[alex_greene]

But you see, grav does not exist, it is fiction. Also a hovering vehicle needs to expend energy just to hover, a walking vehicle doesn't do that just to stand.

Anti-gravity is science fiction, but there is nothing in physics to say it can't exist. But for giant robots, no; for twice the size, you get 100 times the weight at only 10 times the strength, then ultimately running into the square-cube law limit. Engineering principles, and the cost benefit analysis, mean it wouldn't be done.

Ditto for grav ...

 

[Tom Kalbfus]

But you see, grav does not exist, it is fiction. Also a hovering vehicle needs to expend energy just to hover, a walking vehicle doesn't do that just to stand.

Anti-gravity is science fiction, but there is nothing in physics to say it can't exist. But for giant robots, no; for twice the size, you get 100 times the weight at only 10 times the strength, then ultimately running into the square-cube law limit. Engineering principles, and the cost benefit analysis, mean it wouldn't be done.

Ditto for grav ...

Yes, but were only talking 6 meters here, their were dinosaurs that were larger and they were made of flesh and bone, robots can be made of stronger materials, steel, carbon composites etc. Using better materials than flesh and bone makes up for some square-cube law limit. We're not talking about Godzilla sized robots after all!

 

[dragoner]

But you see, grav does not exist, it is fiction. Also a hovering vehicle needs to expend energy just to hover, a walking vehicle doesn't do that just to stand.

Anti-gravity is science fiction, but there is nothing in physics to say it can't exist. But for giant robots, no; for twice the size, you get 100 times the weight at only 10 times the strength, then ultimately running into the square-cube law limit. Engineering principles, and the cost benefit analysis, mean it wouldn't be done.

Ditto for grav ...

:?:

Gravity is an unknown, current theory I that it is a quantum field, and its interaction may have something to do with other universes. Newton eliminated unknown variables when working out a lot of his laws, but even he said that he didn't think the earth was just spinning in nothing. Which many physicists think the same in that space is filled with quantum fields, and probably vast amounts of energy.

 

[Rick]

I would say that you wouldn't need to mess with gravity to have an environment where walkers are better than, say, grav tanks. Take somewhere like Endor from Star Wars; heavily forested with undulating terrain - difficult for a grav tank to get to ground level and, if they fly over the forests, are vulnerable to ground fire hitting the underside armour whilst there is a big area of dead ground under the tank where the turret guns cannot reach. In a situation like that, walkers may be ideally suited, being able to move around between the trees.