| |
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 human, when
inserting intelligence in military units? AI are much better: It doesn’t demand
space, lifesupport or rest, is way faster and smaller, and do what it’s told to
without moral considerations...
Rockets are fine and is here to stay, but drones are the future. Still, you need
humans for humane stuff like peacekeeping and heart & mind missions, but they’ll
need heavy space, air and drone-support.
What about tanks and powerarmor then? Well the infantry’s gotta get around
relatively protected in hover-APC’s, and they may need some light hovertanks for
support, but unless some serious cloaking technology becomes availible that can
protect them against rockets, the main offensive weapons will stay airborne or
spacebased (orbital bombardment).
A lot of people has been questioning why
tanks need to hover for various reasons, but in my opinion, hovering is needed
to be able to respond on a global scale, and infantry, (tracked) tanks, PA, mecs
(and whatever you call them) isn’t any good if the beachead is on the OTHER side
of the planet!
Historically, the reason why D-day succeded were because most of
the German material were too far away on the eastfront...
Tecnically there’s a
maximum limit of how fast wheeled or tracked vehicles can move - they just
barely managed to reach mach 1 recently in one of the flattest areas in the
world: I wouldn’t like to drive a MBT through rugged terrain at that speed (or
higher)!
When you add oceans and mountain to the equation as well as the need to avoid
enemy smartbombs by moving around or dodging, I think that that pretty much sums
up why tanks need to hover (and with beamweapons or rockets, recoil wouldn’t be
a problem).
Concerning the powerarmor (or mech), many has already pointed out the many
problems caused by the complexity and stature of such a machine (and I don’t
believe that it’ll be more energy efficient than wheels or tracks), and if the
| |
incredibly powerful and small power source
|
that Bruce Schlickbernd mentioned, came into being, there would be no reason not
to put it into a tank with a 10 times better result.
I don’t think that PA’s would have any use at all: The standard protection would
always be the simplest possible spacesuit with addition of armor or zero-g
propulsion after the circumstances, perhaps an exoskeleton for planets with high
gravity (but why would you whish to invade such a place?): If you whish to
invade a planet and hold it you need milions of soldiers with the cheapest
equipment possible (but after Iraq you might consider if diplomacy, scorched
earth politics or Tarkin Doctrine wasn’t a better sollution).
But most of the time a swarm of drones would be preferred to infantry,
ESPECIALLY when fighting in confined spaces like bunkers, spaceships and urban
warfare; where humans is totally unfit, wearing PA might help a bit, but
considering the PA’s seen around here, that would be countered by their sheer
size that makes them too easy to hit and unable to get around: Think of clearing
houses with a giant three times (+) human size!
All in all I think that instead of a weapons/armour-race, we will se a
accuracy/size,speed&maneuverability-race and here drones take the place of
humans - and we haven’t even discussed nanoscale warfare yet!
-NB
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | 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)
|
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
|
|
|
|
