NationStates Jolt Archive

Alright i made this thread so those of us that use Mobile suits can design better ones

*bump*

Explain to me how this:

http://gunpla-web.hp.infoseek.co.jp/image/degecame/mg/mg-freedom1.jpg

Is more aerodynamic than this:

http://www.aerofiles.com/lock-f22a.jpg

Magic.

Magic.


lol

ya as much as I LOVE Gundam I relly think they would not be that practical in real life

its simple the Freedom use's a Hi-MAT system for increased menuvability. The number of thrusters it has allows it to move faster then any fighter

Number of thrusters is irrelevant, especially when one considers that they're all FAR smaller than the single one found in any fighter. Add in the fact that its drag is horrifying, and it's a wonder it doesn't melt when it tries to fly.

not really the Freedom is nuke powered so power supply is not a problem and add in the heat sinks and ya it can fly, also if you accully do some research the freedom has no flat areas there all rounded even at the smallest bit and some points

So? Still plenty o' drag. It doesn't matter that it's rounded, it matters that there's miles o' surface area here, along with numerous traps for all that incoming air.

As for nuke powered, a fighter could be as well. With a bigger genny. Bigger genny = more power. More power = more thrust. More thrust + less drag = runs circles around mech.

ya as much as I LOVE Gundam I relly think they would not be that practical in real life

OOC: If it was practical in the real world, it would *be* in the real world. Planes work, Gundams don't. Simple.

OOC: If it was practical in the real world, it would *be* in the real world. Planes work, Gundams don't. Simple.
no need for ooc chat here its a discussion here. but any way Mobile suits were built for space combat the land models would not work 100% well of course computer solve alot of the problems

no there is no way something like that could fly, no matter how many thrusters you stick on it you wont get it to fly(or atleast in a strait line). Theres no way it could get into space either, unless it was hauled up by a ship or rocket or something. Its just not practical.

no need for ooc chat here its a discussion here. but any way Mobile suits were built for space combat the land models would not work 100% well of course computer solve alot of the problems

Computers solve no problems. Your problems are as follows:


Overly complex, leading to logistical nightmares
Extremely high surface area to volume ration, leading to massive amounts of armor required
Extremely low amounts of contiguous volume, leading to smaller components (such as generators) than a standard fighter
Horrid aerodynamics
Absurdly top-heavy, making disabling one as simple as shooting it in the leg
Smaller weapons due to inability to handle recoil stress/power issues/simple size or weight issues

None of the above can be handled by computers. Hell, most of them aren't even solvable, besides by switching over to a fighter chassis.

considering mobile suits are FT most likly there is some super light weight ultra strong metal that they use for the armor

also the freedom uses a ultracompact nuclear fission reactor, power output rated at 8826 kW so its got power for extemly high trust

And you could fit more of said ultralight weight superstrong armor on a fighter. As well as a bigger generator for more thrust than the Gundam. I believe I've said this before...

also the Freedom has Phase Shift (PS) armor which absobes most attacks since a nuclear reactor powers that armor it wont run out of power, also the reaction time a a mobile suit compared to a fighter is much higher

Why is the reaction time much higher? More complicated systems = more system lag, which equals slower reaction times. As for the phase shift armor, throw it on a fighter. Not that hard.

You also seem to be operating under the assumption that nuke gennies don't run out of power. Unfortunately, they do. And relatively quickly, at that, at least when you're running them at the load needed for standard spacedy combat. Anyway, battery life is not the issue here, power output is. The bigger the reactor, the more watts you put out. And since the Mech has a low amount of space to put said reactor in compared to a fighter, the fighter has a much higher wattage, meaning much higher weapon yields, acceleration figures, etc.

um how are you going to get a huge ass gen on to a fighter while still making it ale to fly let alone not fall apart

Simple. The same way you somehow managed to put a nuke gen in a mech. After all, yours has to deal with far greater stresses, what with the massive weight bearing down on the woefully weak hip joints, just waiting to snap them like toothpicks. Anyway, I thought we were talking about space here for the most part?

Simple answer is that gravity doesn't matter overly much here, so I don't have to try to pull up against that, meaning that lift and such doesn't matter. Hell, my fighter can be a flying brick (actually, Otagian spacedy fighters are flying toilet paper rolls, but the point is the same) and still get around just fine. And the best part, it still has higher contiguous volume and lower surface area ratios than a mecha, meaning greater internal space, meaning greater amounts of room for generators for the same overall mass, meaning greater power output in wattage, meaning greater acceleration, meaning the damn thing STILL runs circles around a Gundam.

um the weight problem is solved because mobile suits are for space combat

How I see it, it's much better to have a mech, and a dedicated fighter, than to try to put both into one machine. As Otagia has been saying, it just doesn't work very well.

Same for spacedy fighters. Such as my flying toilet paper rolls. Your point being? You STILL have crappy volume-to-surface-area, you STILL have horridly low amounts of contiguous volume, and you STILL have these weak little hands that should be ripped off by the slightest amount of recoil force. You also still have less power generation than a fighter with equivalent overall volume, by the logic stated above.

Ftagn: Actually, I'm saying that mechs are rubbish, and that one should use tanks or fighters instead. Except for the coolness factor, which is the only reason the Coalition States use the things.

Same for spacedy fighters. Such as my flying toilet paper rolls. Your point being? You STILL have crappy volume-to-surface-area, you STILL have horridly low amounts of contiguous volume, and you STILL have these weak little hands that should be ripped off by the slightest amount of recoil force. You also still have less power generation than a fighter with equivalent overall volume, by the logic stated above.

Ftagn: Actually, I'm saying that mechs are rubbish, and that one should use tanks or fighters instead. Except for the coolness factor, which is the only reason the Coalition States use the things.

Yes. I do think legs would be nice for terrain, but it makes them bigger targets, and more weak points. I do use tanks instead of mechs...

so what each hand is reinforced to handle the recoil. plus they can carry alot of weapons, also taking a combination of mobile suits tanks and fighters and you have a pretty strong force

A fighter can carry more weapons, due to the higher volume (again). After all, more space, more guns.

As for reinforcing the wrists, sure, feel free. It's just that OTHER weapon mounts (say, those like tank turrets, with larger contact points, and thus better reinforcing) can be reinforced even better, meaning even bigger guns can be carried.

Spit, what you're just not getting here is that mecha are crap. Anything a mech can do, you can take the same amount of money and build a dedicated tank/fighter/whatever and it's going to be better than a mech at that role.

Ground combat? Tanks. For the same amount of money you could build something with greater weight dispersion, thicker armor, less surface area, less moving parts, and greater armament.

Air combat? Same thing with fighters.

Space combat? Swarm it to death with cheap automated drones, if not simply kill it with an actual combat starship.

Again, just to make sure the point gets across. Mechs = crap.

any way the Freedom was a prototype

now mass production suit like the GINN

http://www.mahq.net/mecha/gundam/seed/zgmf-1017.jpg
Model number: ZGMF-1017
Code name: GINN
Unit type: mass production general purpose mobile suit
Manufacturer: Asimov Design Bureau
Operator(s): ZAFT (Zodiac Alliance of Freedom Treaty); civilians
First deployment: 3 November C.E. 69
Accommodation: pilot only, in standard cockpit in torso
Dimensions: head height 21.43 meters
Weight: max gross weight 78.5 metric tons
Construction: unknown
Powerplant: ultracompact energy battery, power output rating unknown
Equipment and design features: sensors, range unknown
Fixed armaments: MA-M3 heavy sword, stored on waist, hand-carried in use, MMI-M8A3 76mm heavy assault machine gun, stored on rear waist, hand-carried in use
Optional fixed armaments: 2 x M68 "Pardus" 3-barrel missile launcher, mounted on legs
Optional hand armaments: 2 x M66 "Canus" short range guided missile launcher, two missiles per launcher; M69 "Barrus" heavy ion cannon, 1 x M68 "Cattus" 500mm recoilless rifle

No more arguments? I'm crushed! Whatever shall I do? Anyway, tis far past my bedtime, and I have work in the morning (I really should get around to taking weekends off...), so I'll take this opportunity to say goodnight. I'll check back in in the morning, even though I doubt there's really anything to say that I haven't already covered...

Goodnight!

good night

I find it exceedingly funny that he can't come up with an even half-assed arguement, and simply changes the subject.

not really the Freedom is nuke powered so power supply is not a problem and add in the heat sinks and ya it can fly, also if you accully do some research the freedom has no flat areas there all rounded even at the smallest bit and some points

J'accuse! I have a ZGMF-X10A model kit in the 1/60 AND 1/100 MG, which I should let you know have the highest amounts of detail, respectively. (Not that I'm comparing e-manparts, but that comment's important.) Due to having a lot of detail, they should have these "all rounded" parts, right?

WRONG.

I count at least thirty flat sections on the entirety of the unit, the individual panels on the HiMAT boosters being some of them.

This again?

Mechs, mecha, Gundams, whatever you want to call them, will never be more practical than tanks in ground combat or fighters in space combat; any advance short of physics-screwing devices that happen to only fit on mechs will just make tanks or fighters even better.

There is no realistic way to design a mech to be better than these, you are stuck with either fluffing it because you like the idea of big robots [in which case this thread is pointless] or taking realism and agreeing that mechs will be totally useless unless confined to very specific missions [riot control and paradrops, mainly].

End of line.