Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I can see a walker tank underwater.

Thanks for the correct Lord lol. I lived like two barracks over from them to back in the day lol

Underwater? Oh, that'd be cool. How about a walker that shoots torpedoes at submarines ABOVE it? Neat. Although a lot of anti-sub warfare guys would be pretty miffed...

Samus_aran115 wrote:

Howard A Treesong wrote:

Samus_aran115 wrote:
Who would operate them anyway? Special Operations people? Or would it be more like helicopters, where a warrant officer is the only person who can pilot it? I just can't imagine how militaries would fit them in, even if they did have one that was battle-ready.

Well they probably wouldn't have a pilot, they would be controlled remotely, as seems to be the way things are going.

That's true. You can fit a little computer in there no problem. With the space you save on human pilots, you can fit more guns on it!

Why would you need a bipedal walking platform if a human isn't in it? Bipedal movement is awful.

Flexibility...well depending on how well the form is...and where the weapons are mounted..

Well, yeah. We have Apache helicopters for dakka. Hmm. Seems there really is no place for walkers.

Sentinels are useful because they're fast and can keep up with armor while providing significant firepower, as well as serving as scouts for a large group of guardsmen. I don't think we've reached the point where bipedal; movement can do what sentinels are capable of. Not to mention we don't have anything as powerful a s a lascannon or Plasma cannon.

Samus_aran115 wrote:Well, yeah. We have Apache helicopters for dakka. Hmm. Seems there really is no place for walkers.

Sentinels are useful because they're fast and can keep up with armor while providing significant firepower, as well as serving as scouts for a large group of guardsmen. I don't think we've reached the point where bipedal; movement can do what sentinels are capable of. Not to mention we don't have anything as powerful a s a lascannon or Plasma cannon.

A guy on a motorcycle/jeep or a flying drone would still be better than a sentinel.

MATV can mount more weapon systems then a Sentinal....well..unless we go by the rule books..

Jihadin wrote:MATV can mount more weapon systems then a Sentinal....well..unless we go by the rule books..

Hell TBone mounts more weapons than a sentinel: atomic breath from the front and land mine launcher from the rear...

Should think more Gear (Heavy Gear) than Battlemech. The advantage of a walker is that it can cover rougher terrain than a tank can (or any tracked/wheeled vehicle), and can carry heavier armament than an infantryman.

As for the issues of it becoming a fire magnet... No more so than any other vehicle would.

I think a walker would best be used in the light recon role, as a legged version of the CVR(T)s we have used in Britain for quite a while. As far as I'm aware though US doctrine for recon is different and thus there is no vehicle equivalent to the Scimitar in US service. Correct me if I'm wrong though.

Should think more Gear (Heavy Gear) than Battlemech. The advantage of a walker is that it can cover rougher terrain than a tank can (or any tracked/wheeled vehicle), and can carry heavier armament than an infantryman

Walkers can not cover rougher terrain than tanks. They have never been shown to do that outside of the natural world and on a small scale (a tank can cover more terrain then an elephant). Either way a helicopter does both of those things better.

As for the issues of it becoming a fire magnet... No more so than any other vehicle would.

Other vehicles would have significantly more armor and component redundancy. They'd also be faster and be able to fire heavier weapons. Cheaper too.

I think a walker would best be used in the light recon role, as a legged version of the CVR(T)s we have used in Britain for quite a while. As far as I'm aware though US doctrine for recon is different and thus there is no vehicle equivalent to the Scimitar in US service. Correct me if I'm wrong though.

Why would you send something so slow to do that?

No, wheels use energy much more efficiently. And with modern weapons an acquisition usually equals a kill. No one is going to spend money on complicated, over-engineered slow walking machines that make no use of momentum the way that rolling vehicles do only to have them easily destroyed by hits of fairly inexpensive and ubiquitous weapons carried by even the poorest armies and insurgent groups in the world. "Mechs", "Titans", and other walking tanks are purely science fantasy, cool to look at and totally impractical. Wheeled vehicles can be engineered with heavy armor and so that they can keep moving even after limited amounts of damage, a walking vehicle by necessity would have legs that are easily damaged and one damaged leg means you're not going anywhere. They are not going to be like in the cartoons or movies where they take enormous hits and keep going like Godzilla, you can't armor them heavily like an Abrams or Challenger tank or they won't be able to move and with lighter armor it's one hit and you're done.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Should think more Gear (Heavy Gear) than Battlemech. The advantage of a walker is that it can cover rougher terrain than a tank can (or any tracked/wheeled vehicle), and can carry heavier armament than an infantryman

Walkers can not cover rougher terrain than tanks. They have never been shown to do that outside of the natural world and on a small scale (a tank can cover more terrain then an elephant). Either way a helicopter does both of those things better.

As for the issues of it becoming a fire magnet... No more so than any other vehicle would.

Other vehicles would have significantly more armor and component redundancy. They'd also be faster and be able to fire heavier weapons. Cheaper too.

I think a walker would best be used in the light recon role, as a legged version of the CVR(T)s we have used in Britain for quite a while. As far as I'm aware though US doctrine for recon is different and thus there is no vehicle equivalent to the Scimitar in US service. Correct me if I'm wrong though.

Why would you send something so slow to do that?

First point - I didn't think we were talking about modern walkers as they're still all prototypes. I'm talking about what possible roles/applications a walker would have. The thing about a helicopter though is that it's a much more noticeable target than something land based, while I'd invite you to take a tank up into the Himalayas.

Second point - Again, check the Scimitar, it's got aluminium armour and can barely stop 7.62 through the side. As for speed, looking again at the Gear that has a system which allows it to hunch down into a tread or wheel-based system (depending on the Gear) for long range movement. And once again, one would assume that a perfected technology is cheaper than a prototype? Although I agree it would be more expensive than wheel or tread based systems, it would have capabilities that an infanteer and current vehicles just don't have.

Third point - Again, Gears can hunch down for faster long range movement.

Whether or not walkers are produced, there certainly seems to be interest in them within military circles, and I don't think they can be dismissed entirely since they have inherent capabilities that existing vehicles don't. Whether those capabilities are worth it or not time will tell. But it's going to be quite a while until a sufficiently mobile one is produced anyway. Maybe we'll see a gradual scaling up of the current exo-skeletons that various groups are working on.

One RPG hit to walker knee or ankle will pretty much reduce its tactical foot print....one AT mine will also do the trick..

edit
The only environment I can think of where it might be feasible is a water environment. Then its limited to area of operations thats above its crushing depth

First point - I didn't think we were talking about modern walkers as they're still all prototypes. I'm talking about what possible roles/applications a walker would have. The thing about a helicopter though is that it's a much more noticeable target than something land based, while I'd invite you to take a tank up into the Himalayas.

I'd invite you to take a walker up them too. The himalayas are barely traverseable by humans with climbing gear, let alone a giant robot. Any sort of aerial surveilance is clearly superior. As for being noticeable, the walker is inferior to a human on foot or a light tracked vehicle for scouting and is only less noticeable when small. Something that makes it slow and ill suited to recon. Your'e inventing a role that doesn't exist.

Second point - Again, check the Scimitar, it's got aluminium armour and can barely stop 7.62 through the side. As for speed, looking again at the Gear that has a system which allows it to hunch down into a tread or wheel-based system (depending on the Gear) for long range movement. And once again, one would assume that a perfected technology is cheaper than a prototype? Although I agree it would be more expensive than wheel or tread based systems, it would have capabilities that an infanteer and current vehicles just don't have.

The ability to get into tracked vehicles? Whats superior about how humans move? They can lie down? When does this thing become superior to something else in an actual role?

Third point - Again, Gears can hunch down for faster long range movement.

Again, gears are fanciful magic technology and don't make sense. Most of them don't even have functioning knee or hip joints. Gears are really stupid and that games art is drawn by bad artists.

Whether or not walkers are produced, there certainly seems to be interest in them within military circles, and I don't think they can be dismissed entirely since they have inherent capabilities that existing vehicles don't.

The military is interested in power armor, not mechs. Thats where the money is. Your sources are bad.

Inprocess....I laughed at 120lbs up a mountain

Jihadin wrote:One RPG hit to walker knee or ankle will pretty much reduce its tactical foot print....one AT mine will also do the trick..

edit
The only environment I can think of where it might be feasible is a water environment. Then its limited to area of operations thats above its crushing depth

Given how lightly armored a small scale bipedal machine would have to be be its likely an AK47 would be able to down one quickly.

Jihadin wrote:One RPG hit to walker knee or ankle will pretty much reduce its tactical foot print....one AT mine will also do the trick..

edit
The only environment I can think of where it might be feasible is a water environment. Then its limited to area of operations thats above its crushing depth

I'd be worried about regular old rifle fire more than RPGs, unless we come up with some fantastic new metal in the near future. Tanks have ceramic plating sandwiched between metal plating (I think?) No way you could do that with a walker.

I could see them used as anti-ship warfare in naval battles, but why bother? We have missiles that can blow up entire cities. We're pretty much set on sea warfare.

the only way i believe a walker could enter active service is if it was large & armoured enough to make enemies crap their pants at the site of it kinda like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wlQvZ6TFq1s

Walkers would be viable in things like cityfighting, jungle warfare, search and rescue, construction and firefighting.

Most people seem to think that it will require AI level computing power too, but there's numerous simpler alternatives. You could infact create a viable entirely mechanical system if you wanted.

A humanoid walker with antitank capabilites would do pretty well in a built-up urban envoronment. Just get behind a building, stick the weapon around the corner, and shoot. You wouldn't even need to stick a 'head' out to see, a targeting sensor can be put on top of the weapon mount easy enough.

Any sort of open field, though, and the advantages all go to the tank/attack chopper.

Vulcan wrote:A humanoid walker with antitank capabilites would do pretty well in a built-up urban envoronment. Just get behind a building, stick the weapon around the corner, and shoot. You wouldn't even need to stick a 'head' out to see, a targeting sensor can be put on top of the weapon mount easy enough.

You mean sort of like what tanks do?

No it wouldn't be better in any military capacity. Not even in non-military capacities. The one thing a walker will never get around is the legs. It's not efficient, cost effective, or beneficial in any way over a traditional vehicle chassis.

Any sort of open field, though, and the advantages all go to the tank/attack chopper.

Even in jungles, mountains, and urban areas, tanks will be better than walkers. Mechanical legs will never turn as fast as tracks, the weight distribution will be horrible, and the target will be slower and more easily disabled (not to mention the horrible fuel economy and repair costs).

Walkers survive by the rule of cool and no practical reason

Ovion wrote:Walkers would be viable in things like cityfighting, jungle warfare, search and rescue, construction and firefighting.

Most people seem to think that it will require AI level computing power too, but there's numerous simpler alternatives. You could infact create a viable entirely mechanical system if you wanted.

Yes, and you could make a viable entirely mechanical system instead of your desktop, too. That doesn't mean it's a good idea.

Surprised no one has posted this yep




Watch about one minute into the video

That's what the Empire gets for building something with such a high center of gravity!

LordofHats wrote:That's what the Empire gets for building something with such a high center of gravity!

The Republic designed the AT-AT, actually. They used it as a kind of "walking carrier/field HQ".
AT-ATs carried quite a bit, internally, after all. Two full squads of fully equipped Stormtroopers, with support weapons like E-Webs/deployable missile launchers or sentry guns broken down. The AT-AT also had a garage in the rear behind the troop compartment for 4 Speeder Bikes, with Scout Troopers to man them and act as forward observers/vanguards for the AT-ATs. Hoth was the first time the bikers weren't actually deployed en masse, as the Empire figured that they had the element of surprise for their attacks...and the Snowspeeders were an unforeseen thing, since Hoth was known for being inhospitable to the point where it was a world where noone settled.

That aside, if we're going to see "walkers", they'll likely be exosuits that are fairly small in the grand scheme of things. Something like the Elemental Armors from Battletech or the E-Frames from Exo Squad.

Still doesn't change that they got beat by tow trucks.

Which is funny, because the Rebels were surprised as hell about how well it worked too.

Jihadin wrote:

We have air-droppable tanks already.

3/73rd ABN Armor was disbanded like mid 90's So we don't have air droppable tanks.....wait...the Sherman wasn't considered a tank....

"Concentrate fire over there. Aim for the groin, pilot or vehicle."

In that order

Ever been to combatreform.com?

Laughing Man wrote:

Vulcan wrote:A humanoid walker with antitank capabilites would do pretty well in a built-up urban envoronment. Just get behind a building, stick the weapon around the corner, and shoot. You wouldn't even need to stick a 'head' out to see, a targeting sensor can be put on top of the weapon mount easy enough.

You mean sort of like what tanks do?

Exactly! But in an urban environment, the majority of the cover is organized on vertical lines rather than horiziontal. So a walker could deploy an arm-mounted weapon around a building, only exposing the weapon arm. A tank trying the same thing (around a building) would have to expose a significant amount of the chassis to clear the weapon.

EDIT: As far as the Star Wars thing goes... I've always wondered why the Rebels bothered with the armed speeders, when they already had a good number of starfighters handy.

1) Once they got to Hoth, they had to be adapted to the cold. Starfighters, on the other hand, operate in the far colder extremes of deep space.

2) Starfighters are MUCH more heavily armed than the speeders. The X-Wings had heavy laser cannon, much more powerful than the paired blasters of the speeders. And heaven forbid they chuck a couple of proton torpedoes into a walker...

But then, rebel tactics sucked on Hoth too. Let's see. AT-ATs have all their weapons in the head. So wouldn't it make more sense for the speeders to attack them from behind instead of making repeated head-on passes? Duh!