| |
In lugnet.off-topic.geek, David Rabadan wrote:
| |
As a power armor fan myself I believe that they can replace tanks and do a
better job than mechanized armor. They can carry a diversity of weapons;
they are a bipedal weapons platform system. They can access areas that tanks
may not. They can perform “surgical” strikes and with less collateral
damage. What do you think?
|
Another thought is maintainability and cost. Consider that WWII Germany was
able to produce several tank destroyers for the cost of a single tank, simply
because the expense of the turret went away. As the end of WWII approached and
money became exceedingly tight, production of full tanks dropped off and that of
tank destoyers climbed. It follows that for a comparable armament, a less
specialized platform (i.e. tank) will be much cheaper.
I’d also much rather be the bloke in charge of replacing treads on a tank or
overhauling a tank transmission, as opposed to the one who has the sorry job of
fiddling with a couple dozen high-precision symbiotically-actuated
hydroelectronic pneumatically controlled joints. If dust is rough on a
modern-day tank, picture it on wreaking havoc on every point of power suit
articulation.
Technological hurdles aside, I can’t imagine power suits ever entirely replacing
tanks - at least, not as long as bean counters are involved.
-s
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Tanks or Power Armor
|
| Hello everyone. I was checking out (URL) Ryan Wood's Jade Empire Hong Hovertank post> and he mentions that we have seen little in ground combat vehicles other than (URL) power suit>. That got me thinking, when you have Power Suits available, should (...) (20 years ago, 24-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek, lugnet.build.mecha, lugnet.space, FTX)
|
50 Messages in This Thread:
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
