Mecha Pants

I do, but what I'm getting at is that there seems to be a trend of assuming that mechs will drop unannounced and unexpected into modern combat scenarios, instead of dropping into a world where tanks and other conventional systems have had the same amount of additional development time to grow and adapt to whatever threat mechs might produce. I'm only saying it won't be as simple as "mech encounters tank, is better by default, and thus wins"

If a mech only needed to input energy to flex the joints in its legs to move, then yes it might be more efficient than wheeled movement. This isn't the case. With every step it needs to lift the mass of one leg while at the same time stiffening the joints in the other to keep it from collapsing under the mass of the body. Additionally, at the end of every step the legs lose energy to the impact of the foot against the ground. In modern robotics, wheels considered the most efficient mode of movement over flat ground because they actually need very little energy to gain and maintain velocity. I also feel the need to point out that even today, The 120mm cannon in the Abrams tank using its standard kinetic penetrator cannot defeat the front or side armor of an Abrams tank even at absurdly close ranges. Also, it carries countermeasures against ATGMs in the form of the AN/VLQ-6 Missile Countermeasure Device which uses a massive directed infrared signal to disrupt the guidance systems of incoming missiles. Hell, the Russian Arena Active Protection System can automatically detect and actively destroy any incoming projectile moving between 70 and 700m/s, with a 0.05s reaction speed. Germany has an active defense system that responds in microseconds. Both protect against guided and unguided projectiles, making RPGs ineffective. What I guess I'm trying to say, is that killing tanks with missiles is going to be even harder in the age of mechs than you might expect, as they are going to advance just as fast technologically. If your mech is a one-man unit because of the advanced neurohelmet tech, who's to say that the tank it faces isn't as well?

I'd point out Silent Storm as a good old Squad command turn based strategy.. It's set in a WWII with a sci-fi twist, so eventually you fight/have WWII tech iron man suits. It is old, and frustrating at times, but it's only 10$ on GoG.com

The orion drive system would actually buffer most of the pulses into one long continuous push, by way of a mechanical recoil absorption system.Only the pushplate and associated recoil pistons would actually feel the hard shocks of detonation. Throttle control would be managed by shots per minute, and could be dialed to whatever rating the mission needs. it could be .5 or 1 or 20 or anything in between. What it's actually good for is payload to orbit, if you discount the whole radiation and nuclear detonation side effects of launch. In space it's simply okay, not spectacular, when compared to other "blue sky" unlimited budget space systems. The only real benefit it has, is that it doesn't really use anything "new". All the individual pieces are old tech (even older now, seeing as it was proposed in the late 40s, with initial development in the 50s) , with only the full scale construction and testing techniques needed.

If it hasn't been pointed out already, this could probably be done with 1960's era tech. Look at the "Super Orion" 8,000,000t space city/battleship/nightmare machine. It would have been pushed along by the explosions of small atomic shaped-charges, and could have managed 20g acceleration unmanned, or a more reasonable 2-4g with bodies on board. All while potentially bringing a small country worth of stuff along for the ride... The Super Orion's pushplate would have also been made of a transuranic element, so that once you arrived, you could break it down and enrich it into fuel for a nuclear power station. Now if only it wouldn't, y'know, need to detonate nuclear devices in the atmosphere to get into space, or violate major international treaties about nuclear weapons in space, or cost all the money. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Orion_%28nuclear_propulsion%29 or http://projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/enginelist.php#id--Pulse--Orion

If no one minds walking away from completely mechanical systems, I would put up Metal gear solid 4's Gekko units as an "optimal" mech unit. They have conventionally designed and armored weapons platforms (containing the control and life support systems, weapons, and power plant) and armored mechanical upper legs with vat-grown biological lower leg assemblies. The upsides are plentiful, the biological lower legs require less electrical power than a mechanical equivalent, heal minor injuries on their own, and in the event of catastrophic damage, can be replaced as any other part. They are more flexible and operate with a greater combination of speed, strength, and fine control than is possible with servos and purely mechanical systems. They can also self-report damage through pain receptors and severed control nerve endings. The downsides come from needing to carry nutrient paste and life support systems, along with waste disposal systems, to keeps the legs from getting sick and/or dieing. The biological legs would require special considerations in storage and handling at any resupply depot, needing life support at ALL TIMES, even when in storage, for the same reasons. Units would need special considerations in food, fuel, and power supply logistics because now your combat armor can starve, and if the fuel goes out their legs die. In a lot of ways, it becomes taking care of a car, a horse, and person in a coma all at once.

I'll lead in by saying that I am a fan of Battletech, and Mecha science fiction in general. Something about the knight in armor taken to its technological extreme... I dunno, giant combat robots are just cool. I'm also the first to admit that the combat utility of such vehicles is marginal in the very best of circumstances. Even in tabletop battletech, mechs are only really useful because the rules favor them very heavily in terms of maneuverability, critical damage effects, and they have more numerous potential hit locations to spread damage around. WARNING: longish tabletop rules explanation ahead For example: I have a mech, and my opponent has a tank, they have the same weapons, lets say a 5-class autocannon, (5 points of damage, medium range) and the same overall armor tonnage. Protection wise, he has more armor per hit location because he doesn't have as many (front, left, right, back, and turret for most tank-like vehicles) while I have less armor per location, but spread across a few extra (head, left torso, center torso, right torso, left arm, right arm, left leg, right leg, rear left torso, rear center torso, rear right torso). Odds are good that my shots will land in the same areas more often, and his will be more spread out, so I have more time before any one area takes enough damage to be destroyed. Additionally, Some of my hit locations are disposable so if I lose them, I'm not out of the fight yet (arms, side torsos, losing a leg only keeps me from moving). He does not have that same luxury, if any of his hit locations run out of internal structure he's out of the fight. Advantage Mech. Offensively we're the same, unless I close to close combat, (one map hex away, or same map hex) then I have melee attacks as well. Advantage Mech, sort of. In terms of mobility, in all likelihood, I will move faster. Additionally, I can enter some terrain that he cannot (woods). If I have jump jets, then I can even ignore some terrain altogether. Advantage Mech. Critical damage effects are generally worse for vehicles as well, usually resulting in complete destruction of some aspect of the unit (broken axle means you can't move, locked turret means you can only fire out of the facing last used for that turret) while mechs tend to favor penalties (-2 on pilot checks, -2 movement points, etc..). Advantage Mech. For all this, the only thing the vehicle has on the mech is heat management, which vehicles don't worry about at all. end of rules explanation Without advantages like those built into the very fabric of the universe, mechs will never win out against conventional armor.

Ship Name: Carrack HRC (Heavy Recovery Craft) Company: IOSS (Ios Orbital Survey and Salvage) Bio IOSS specializes in the location and recovery of damaged spacecraft and stranded crews all through the Kerbol system. Our designers favor ruggedly built, asymmetric designs. While we are a private venture, and operate our recovery efforts mostly under our own initiative, our recovery and transport services are for hire at very reasonable rates. On operations taken under our own initiative we provide our own small security detail, as our recovery and rescue craft are almost entirely unarmed. During sanctioned joint operations the hiring party is required to provide additional support. Allegiance: Officially, Unaligned. Unofficially, Spiritwolf gets better recovery and transport rates and more enthusiastic crews. Parts: 286 (with the station still on board) Craft file HERE Operations manual forthcoming, as are more detailed flight pictures. This is a large civilian recovery vessel pictured carrying a small crew rest station. mechjeb calculates on-orbit Dv to be just over 5000 with the included cargo, allowing for deployment to all but the most extreme locations. IOSS places high value on its HRCs, any other craft present will do everything in their power to buy time for them to escape should danger present itself. As an added bonus, the root part is in the cargo, allowing the lifter and recovery craft to be saved as a 400-ish part subassembly and stuck to any similarly sized object.

I think the silence here speaks for itself. That being said, Nova has posted in Lunaran's Wetworks crew tank thread offering code access should they desire to use it. So the wet workshop idea is still moving forward. Link HERE

Granted, but it turns out that machines were self-aware all along and they're all super annoying. I'd like to have non mass-limited telekinetic abilities.

I present my first and last SSTO of .22, it has a relatively reasonable intake to jet ratio, but aside from it's two man crew, it doesn't really offer anything in terms of cargo capacity as of yet.

With .23 and R.A.P.I.E.R engines coming sometime later today, I suspect that separate air-breathing/rocket SSTO builds may be becoming a thing of the past. That said, here's my first real successful SSTO Spaceplane, the Dodo Mk 2c Get it Here Not many pictures I admit, but I'm usually more preoccupied with not crashing. The Dodo does take the whole runway to lift off, and can only pitch up once all three wheels have jumped off the end. Once airborne the Dodo is fairly stable despite the COM/COL positions (the center of lift is in front of, and below the center of mass, and this only worsens as fuel is drained). The Dodo also glides wonderfully, decelerating to a stable 30m/s when pitched up 20 degrees with engines dead. Once R.A.P.I.E.Rs hit us, I plan to put them in place of the turbojets and swap the aerospike for an LV-N.

I flee the scene, but not before knocking over a fuel can and grabbing all the fire extinguishers.

@annihilator: KAS winches don't like to have things that aren't KAS connector ports or hooks attached on the winch node. Try putting a Stack connector between the Beam and your winch, and it should behave. I tend to place anything I want to be moved via a winch on a small docking port, with a radial connector port on one end, and then attaching the winch with an EVA Kerbal.

I don't know why, but switching the IACBMs into hatch mode and back out tightens their connection immediately for me (both between the IACBMs and between them and the module they are attached to), I've seen no effects from use or commenting of the light module. my test rig is a node, with utilities modules attached on one side with IACMBs and stock ports on the other, each one has a 4.5t fuel tank on the outside ends for additional weight. Edit: Test album added, retested commenting out hatch mode module, no effect at all. Must have been idiot error on my end there, sorry.

In using these, I've never launched the workshop contents seperately, not only does it tend to glitch out, it just never made sense. I see no reason to perform a second launch when I can essentially pack all the supply contents into the top section of the stage and perform a marginally heavier launch. I wouldn't try to have any internal rooms or structure pre-installed while fuel is in the tank, I would however have simple tab A into slot B internal fittings preassembled and stacked pancake style in the top. Depending on how much fuel space is sacrificed for equipment, you could easily pack in computers and other assets as well, all in the top portion of the tank. No need for complicated internal structure beyond having one internal wall section reinforced and bolted in to carry the load of the other equipment on top of it. Once in orbit, the internal fuel bladders and fuel lines would need to be removed and packed into some module for deorbiting (perhaps even a lower sub-stage, using the engine of the lifting stage) and some sealing would need to be performed, but you'd be left with a mostly empty cylinder, from there it'd be fairly straightforward to move the internal walls down, one at a time from the top to their intended positions. If the connections for ventilation were already installed in the wall sections it would be just a simple to run accordion-style ducting from section to section.. I feel like I may need to produce some sort of picture.. it's really easy for me to picture in my head. Googling lift-slab construction and looking at that might help, only instead of pouring a slab and then lifting it up and bolting it in for each floor, you'd be lowering preconstructed sections down from the top and bolting them in place..

Not being a modder, and lacking any knowledge of the difficulties involved, if I were building a full first person IVA movement mode, I wouldn't allow crew transfer through surface attached docking ports, only those on nodes. Each node would need an ID of some sort, to tie to an IVA entry/exit point. In addition, I'd put internal IVA hatches between rooms (with or without windows), and only simulate "active" rooms. As part of this, I would only show the active control module's (or the last module with crew that was active if the craft is being controlled from a docking port or similar) kerbal portraits while using external views (to limit the number or rendered areas). As far as IVA physics in time warp, I wouldn't put individual interior objects on rails during warp, I would simply pause all the interior spaces until warp ends. kerbals or objects don't float away, don't move at all actually, until you stop time warp. For example: if I were in IVA view in a lander can on the top node of a hitchhiker only the hitchhiker and the lander can would be active. if I were to move into the hitchhiker then it, the lander can, and whatever the "next" compartment happened to be would be rendered. As I continued to move through rooms only my current room and adjacent rooms would be active. If at any point I decided to use time warp while IVA, the only thing that would move would be the view through the window. I could see some issues forming with crew tunnel segments having a hatch at both ends, repetitive opening and closing of doors as you pass down the corridor would get annoying. Maybe something along the lines of a stretchytanks style procedural crew tunnel with a dynamically repeating texture and IVA internal would offer a solution. edit: Also, there could be a configuration flag to skip a module in IVA mode rendering, to account for slim adapters or endcaps.

Hey Carl, Thanks for the craft review. It isn't actually a lander though, it's just a moon orbiter/station service craft. I guess I could have slapped some legs on it somewhere though.

Very nicely done, I could see some cardboard or styrofoam wings, maybe ceiling fan propellers or leaf blower jet engines.. and shopping cart landing gear. y'know, if you decided to get into plane parts.

I haven't seen any spontaneous explosions on my end while building up my current Jool mission, though I have noticed that launch clamps can't seem to hold onto the pushplate assembly no matter how many are used. Edit: I can add that in my experience the engine itself and the magazine arrays are VERY sensitive about parts being clipped inside them. I've had to be very careful designing my mission modules with that in mind to avoid catastrophic unplanned disassembly. I don't really think that's new information though.

I've already said that I'm all for the dart board, but how about this as a compromise for those that don't like it: Leave it in, but don't point any of the default IVA views at it, and put some IVA props between it and most of the crew positions (lab stations, storage cabinets or the like) so that you actually have to look around the internal space from all the seats to find it. This would make it more of an Easter egg than a shining primary feature of the part. As such, people who didn't like it could safely pretend it didn't exist, and those that like it would still have it. Either way, I'm still very impressed with the progress thus far, and I'll certainly use this in all sorts of places.

Just a few small updates to my entry, all as edits to original post. -Added an Imgur album, replacing the Pad screenshot. -Started Demo mission in that album, from launch to rendezvous with low mun orbit station, further album additions will go to a secondary station near minmus, and return. No changes made to Entry craft file, just making things more attractive.

I also throw in my vote for the dart board, that one is too good to pass up. Instead of three floors with the spine running the middle level, I think that it should be laid out with the floors as rings around the spine, with ladder access in the spine going through the center of each level. I'll be super happy either way though.

Craft file HERE My take on the Kerbal X shrinks the mission payload and adds RCS and docking capacity, going away from the orbiter/semi-lander and making it into an orbiter/station service vehicle. Hidden under the structural panel interstage shroud is an LV-909 engine, four small radial RCS tanks, and 4 solar panels. Other features of note include battery based orientation lights on the top and bottom of the orbiter, a spotlight for docking, a self-deorbiting upper stage, and a reaction wheel at the base of the first stage that makes the whole craft much more nimble. EDIT: Now now with 100% more Imgur albums! (Current mission incomplete, crew resting at station in low munar orbit.) Edit 2: Sadly, a deadly reentry related overheat bug/kraken attack sent the crew of "Aerodynamic Mockup II" to an unfortunate fate in low munar orbit when I rejoined the mission. They will be remembered. "Aerodynamic Mockup III" has been launched to continue the mission in their place.

As badly as it might reflect on my observational skills. I hadn't noticed until just now that I was mentioned by name in reference to intended part usage way back in july. Now I have to go back and try to rebuild one or two of those monstrosities in prep for the next parts release.