|
|
 | | Re: Tanks or Power Armor
|
| (...) A mecha would have a very hard time getting close enough to make hand-to-hand relevant. A M1A1's turret can do a 360 and stop on a dime from a dead start in 1 second. It's not the most comfortable thing to do for the crew inside but it does (...) (20 years ago, 28-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek, lugnet.build.mecha, lugnet.space, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Tanks or Power Armor
|
| (...) They do. It's called AAAV-7. Done with a AFV already. Not Hover, but SES on the water, tracks on land. (...) I'd suggest reading "Hammers Slammers" by David Drake. He's ex armor, has lots of neat ideas and cool fighting scenes. Imagine hover (...) (20 years ago, 28-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek, lugnet.build.mecha, lugnet.space, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Tanks or Power Armor
|
| (...) If military history has shown us anything, it's that nothing is immune to landmines if it moves. It's just a matter of developing a landmine that's capable of being triggered by a hover tank (and trust me, if hover tanks happen, someone will (...) (20 years ago, 28-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek, lugnet.build.mecha, lugnet.space, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Tanks or Power Armor
|
| (...) Humans will always have a place on the battlefield, if for only two reasons. Aircraft have proven capable of instigating conflict and presenting a solid first wave of defense, but the only way to hold territory is to maintain pressence there. (...) (20 years ago, 28-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek, lugnet.build.mecha, lugnet.space, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Tanks or Power Armor
|
| (...) I think this would depend on the efficacy of the hover mechanism. Depending on the technology involved, it could be faster then a tank with treads running on the same sort of power source would be (there's alot of mass in tank treads, and (...) (20 years ago, 28-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek, lugnet.build.mecha, lugnet.space, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Tanks or Power Armor
|
| (...) I agree with this part... (...) I am assuming that a tank would not go from its rear area yard/base (on another continent) to the combat zone under its own power, even a hovertank. So I guess I don't see why tanks need to hover. As someone (...) (20 years ago, 27-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek, lugnet.build.mecha, lugnet.space, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Tanks or Power Armor
|
| I'm supprised about this too, but from a little different standingpoint: I don't think humans have any future on the battlefield, because everything will happen so much faster than today: Why should you use something as demanding and confused as a (...) (20 years ago, 27-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek, lugnet.build.mecha, lugnet.space, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Tanks or Power Armor
|
| While the cost of precision guided munitions is indeed going down (wittness the the USN's new "Tactical Tomahawk" with a price tag of around $575,000, about half the cost of current Toms) using cost efficiency to justify the use of PGM as a tank (...) (20 years ago, 27-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek, lugnet.build.mecha, lugnet.space, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Tanks or Power Armor
|
| (...) Possibly. Or we could even develop energy-based weapons. We might also find that even if we can develop the technology required to make hovertanks a feasible concept that it's still more economic and reliable to go with the more mundane (...) (20 years ago, 27-Aug-04, to lugnet.build.mecha, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Tanks or Power Armor
|
| I'm surprised no one so far has answered the "tanks or power armor" question by saying, "missiles!" As information, positioning, sensor, and guidance technology continues to improve, it gets easier and easier to hit a ground-based target from long (...) (20 years ago, 27-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek, lugnet.build.mecha, lugnet.space, FTX)
|
|
