Occasionally, one will roam random websites and find the weirdest stuff. A recent roaming adventure led to this piece
on Futurism.com which proclaimed the death of giant robots and mecha as
a viable weapons platform of the future. My naturally contrarian
nature was not impressed with their conclusions. In point of fact, the
author seemed more interested in declaring the idea to be dead rather
than thinking seriously about how it could be made to work. So, let's
hear the opposite view, that there is not merely a possible future for
mecha, but a plausible one.
The first constraint is readily identified in the Futurism piece as power. Right now, the crude mecha that are being built by amateurs and defense contractors alike are constrained either by direct electrical feed (shades of Evangelion) or diesel engines (which wouldn't have been out of place in a Gear Krieg-type setting). While the current power concerns are a legitimate stumbling block, there is nothing to support the idea that they will always be a stumbling block. If you want to get a lot of power right now, a pebble bed nuclear reactor could probably do the job nicely. Sure, it'd freak out the "no nukes" crowd, but as long as it maintains containment, it's a fairly elegant solution given the constraints. And of course, this assumes that more powerful reactors and energy storage solutions are coming up. If we want to get really crazy, something along the lines of Tesla's "wireless energy" or beamed power relays could conceivably be employed and knock the whole problem of carrying a power supply on its head.
The author of the Futurism article, Roey Tzezana, then addresses the problem of fabrication, or rather didn't address it so much as spout off about it without actually considering the larger implications. His dismissive description of a mech made at the 2015 Maker Faire made it seem like the whole concept was doomed to wallow in the crudity of plate steel and hammer forged iron forever. I contend that the Maker Faire, as a whole, is more about showing off "proof of concept" and coming up with cool shit than developing a viable weapons system that could undergo a Pentagon procurement process. Sure, it was crude. Sure, it used caterpillar treads as a means of locomotion. Tanks aren't the only large vehicles that do that. Otherwise, Caterpillar would be forced to label its earthmovers as "non-combat geographic engineering vehicles" or some other asinine phrase that correctly describes a backhoe without actually saying it.
First, consider the wildly advancing frontiers of materials science. Between nanotechnology, atomic-level doping, and the increasingly incredible ideas being cooked up around carbon nanotubes, the armor materials of today are considerably more impressive than they were thirty years ago. And, again, this assumes that more amazing stuff will eventually be developed as time goes on. If I can get greater protection from an equivalent thickness of composite than steel, and get the weight savings factored in, I'd say that it's probably a big step towards the idea of creating a viable mecha weapons system. Also consider the non-armor components, the "skeleton" and "muscles" of a mecha. Right now, we're still dicking around with servos, gears, and hydraulics. The mecha of the future might not have to deal with those quite as much. Finally, consider for a moment the difference that a tracked vehicle has when moving across certain terrain that a bipedal vehicle (or just a regular person) would. While it's true that tracked vehicles are faster over flat ground and have the power to pull through some forms of rough terrain, they are constrained by the fact that they can't ascend slopes past a certain angle. A bipedal design can go up effectively sheer faces, assuming it can haul itself up using its arms and digging in with its toes. Moreover, from a training perspective, it would be easier to train a human to pilot a bipedal mecha than it would a tank for the simple fact that we already know how to walk. We'd simply be learning to translate our ability to walk through what would be essentially a very large prosthesis. The weapons systems, ECM, and flight capabilities if any would be the harder part.
It's towards the end that the writer covers what has to be a shocking degree of ignorance when it comes to military matters by pointing out the obvious: mecha are big targets and thus are easier to get hit. Yes, they are. Nobody's saying they aren't. However, when dealing with any kind of vehicle going into a combat situation, a competent designer and a competent general both know the truth: you are going to get hit no matter what. Ramses and Ashurbanipal knew that when they were running around the Fertile Crescent in chariots. Aircraft carriers of today are referred to as "bomb magnets," yet that doesn't stop countries with large navies from building them or deploying them, because the firepower and command-and-control functions outweigh the risks. "Not getting hit" is more a function of bad training or even bad luck on the part of the opponent, and it's not something you can magically engineer into a vehicle. The best anybody can do is build the toughest vehicle they can with the highest mobility possible for the power plant and propulsion systems in place, and then hope to whatever deity they believe in that the other guy is a lousy shot. Even then, relative combat strength is going to come into play. While it's possible that an infantryman might hit a mecha with a golden BB that takes it completely out of the picture, the odds are pretty slim.
If we're going to be seriously designing a mecha, we have to think about the situations and environments that they would be deployed in. In a planetary environment like Earth, yes, they'd be big targets. But by the same token, they would have a much better direct view of the battlefield, and could provide command-and-control functions that would enhance traditional infantry and armor units. Additionally, their utility as mobile artillery platforms is another area which could be exploited, particularly since there are some slopes even artillery batteries can't climb which might be scalable by a mecha. In an extraplanetary environment, basically deep space, mecha would also have a number of advantages. All of the functionality of a space suit but with the power of a large vehicle. And since hard vacuum has no atmosphere, aerodynamics are completed mooted. Combine that with the fact that mecha would be, on the scale of things, a very small target, and space warfare might be just as wild as the Gundam series would have us believe, if not wilder. Picture trying to pick out mecha patrolling a section of the Asteroid Belt. There are so many large masses of metal out there, one more isn't going to necessarily show up on sensors unless you're scanning for power systems or electronics emissions.
As perverse as it may sound, mecha might well bring about the closest thing to "humane" battle scenarios we've ever seen as a species. Consider the First Gulf War. The U.S. dropped leaflets all over a part of Iraq with a large number of Iraqi Army units with a message in Arabic telling people to evacuate the area. If they didn't evacuate before a certain time the next day, they'd be caught in the blast of a fuel-air bomb, a weapon which had destructive capabilities close to that of a nuclear weapon but without any of the radiation. Naturally, the Iraqi Army ignored the warning. Such a weapon couldn't exist. The next day, right on the tick, the U.S. dropped a fuel air bomb on the spot. The Iraqi units were annihilated. A little while later, the U.S. dropped similar leaflets over another part of Iraq with a large number of Iraqi Army units in it, making the same warning as the last one. The operative point here is that psychological elements of the battle, as well as morale of troops and civilian populations, are as much a factor to consider as fuel, food, and bullets. If a Gundam-type mecha calmly walked over the horizon, broadcasting a warning that people needed to evacuate before the mecha opened fire and leveled a few dozen city blocks, it'd be a lot harder to ignore than simple leaflets. I have no doubt there would be some people stupid enough, stubborn enough, or fearful enough of their political and military leadership not to evacuate, but I have to imagine most people would take one look at the giant robot on the horizon and decide that it wouldn't have come all that way just to bluff.
I will be the first to say that the idea of mecha is cool as hell. It's a geek dream technology, much like warp travel, teleportation, and other incredible ideas. They may never be the "god weapon" that some people might believe them to be. They might never change the face of warfare such that one-on-one mech duels become the norm. But they can be viable, and ultimately come to pass, if we think about them with the mindset of "Let's make it happen!"
No comments:
Post a Comment