Would Mechs Be Practical. Click to read further detail. Or having hands to catch or grab onto something, feet to. I've seen such attempts to make that real break games before (starforge). While ves thought it was best to minimize contact with more perceptive mech designers in order to keep his secrets. No, for the simple reason that. A giant bipedal war machine wouldn't work at all, sadly — theyre too easy to take down. Perhaps many other mech designers already realized this insight from their superiors. The only point when mechs really get practical is when you get to like the very impractical designs. Plain and simple, would mechs (gundam, super robots or whatever you call em.) be practical weapons to use in warfare? Mechs look invincible, but they have such glaring weak spots, its easy to see that the person designing it was looking more at the potential psychological factor of facing a gigantic monster on the battlefield than a practical war machine such as a tank. Its upgraded form, the deatscythe hell, isn’t any better either, becoming less practical just to look cooler. In practical terms, an absolutely trashy mech that cost 3 million credits in raw materials to produce could be twice as good if the cost of materials was 6 million credits instead. One man could easily lift and. Such devices would be far more practical for far more situations than your average 50ft tall giant mecha could ever hope to be. You helped me resolve an issue i've been having.
“they are a fantastic fantasy, but as a. Aside from building bridges, which can be done by less expensive manual labor with only slightly more time elapsed, they do not have practical uses in combat. The ones capable of turning faster then jets, or carrying bigger payloads then a gunship. Its upgraded form, the deatscythe hell, isn’t any better either, becoming less practical just to look cooler. Thank you to everyone who answered. It is the branch of engineering that involves the design, production, and operation of machinery. A giant bipedal war machine wouldn't work at all, sadly — theyre too easy to take down. Focus fire on that and its going down. Click to read further detail. You helped me resolve an issue i've been having.
You Helped Me Resolve An Issue I've Been Having.
But at that point it's likely more cost effective to use power armor. Also, how would they be controlled, in order to be able to move around effectively it would have to have independent control for each limb, as well as control for all the subsystems need for it to. Mechs look invincible, but they have such glaring weak spots, its easy to see that the person designing it was looking more at the potential psychological factor of facing a gigantic monster on the battlefield than a practical war machine such as a tank. Mechs suffer from many problems, in order for a mech to be able to fill most of the roles i listed, it would have to be about 12 to 20ft tall, this makes them extremely hard to conceal behind cover. I've seen such attempts to make that real break games before (starforge). In theory yes, but in mech vs tank combat it has a high chance of boiling down to who spots who first. Click to read further detail. The only point when mechs really get practical is when you get to like the very impractical designs. But i'm rational enough to realize that in real life, they're just not that great of an idea.
The Ones Capable Of Turning Faster Then Jets, Or Carrying Bigger Payloads Then A Gunship.
No, for the simple reason that. Mecha should be treated as sledgehammers, not scalpels. While a full custom mech would be great, that's a lot to ask for, this isn't robocraft here. Their mech pilots had to build up momentum or put the entire weight of their mechs behind their blows to inflict telling damage. Humanoid mechs seem to have almost no real practicality. It is the branch of engineering that involves the design, production, and operation of machinery. The most practical i can think of is a 3 meter unmanned mech that can crouch down at will. If there would be a mech which can carry stronger weaponry and armor while still being as maneuverable as humans in that kind of rough terrain, it would be quite a advantage. Unfortunately, ves did not have too much contact with other mech designers, let alone his nominal master.
Aside From Building Bridges, Which Can Be Done By Less Expensive Manual Labor With Only Slightly More Time Elapsed, They Do Not Have Practical Uses In Combat.
However, outside of a war they have tons of practical uses. Plain and simple, would mechs (gundam, super robots or whatever you call em.) be practical weapons to use in warfare? I think mechs (or mecha, whatever) can look cool. Focus fire on that and its going down. However, the towering mechs striding through futuristic cities will remain the stuff of blockbusters. However, power armour may have far greater use and variability than both. It's going to need to be either too heavily armoured to move, or infantry could easily bring it down. Assuming they're practical in the first place, mecha would have some advantages over something like a babylon 5 starfury, such as the ability to turn around without expending fuel, like a person can. Before moving towards our main question, let’s discuss the basics of the carnot cycle in brief.
