Realistically, how strong would these things be? assume they are STINGER immune
Realistically, how strong would these things be? assume they are STINGER immune
This phonograph "reads" a rock’s rough surface and transforms it into beautiful ambient music pic.twitter.com/PYDzYsWWf8— Surreal Videos (@SurrealVideos) March 3, 2023
Cannon fodder for tank rounds, RPG and ATGMs.
>Cannon fodder for tank rounds, RPG and ATGMs.
I imagine with REX sensors they would detect any tanks or human nearby no?
I mean even if it could detect tanks could it take an entire tank battalion? I doubt it.
literally depends on what its filled with, if its filled with top secret ass ceramics and composites it can be fucking indestructible by conventional weaponry, but if its just made of steel its just asking to be fucked.
the US military currently has almost 40 year old abrahms that they refused to replace simply because the lining is so fucking effective it hasnt been defeated, for the first time ever they turned town money because of the sheer pointlessness of making new tanks
>the US military currently has almost 40 year old abrahms that they refused to replace simply because the lining is so fucking effective it hasnt been defeated, for the first time ever they turned town money because of the sheer pointlessness of making new tanks
I'm also guessing that general MBT design doesn't need to be changed, it's the electronic systems that you advance. So sights, radar, etc. There's spooky high end top secret systems in them which is why they need to be stripped out before they can donate them to Ukraine. And MBT still serve their role, but they are being countered heavily. Focus is elsewhere like UAV's.
Being reasonable, that would be an advantage of the material DESPITE the design. If they just used that Gundarium Alloy shit to build a fleet of normal tanks they would be unstoppable.
It's more that tanks are outdated as a concept and don't need to be updated when you haven't had to fight a real country directly in 80 years.
okay retard, you can literally win a war by just dumping tanks until they run out of fucking effective anti tank measures, its a diesel powered killing machine immune to anything short of fucking stationary fired missiles
>bottle of napalm
Most modern tanks are sealed against that sort of thing and would not be that badly affected. You might take out some optics though and force a guy out into the open to act as a spotter.
That's how Russia is losing thousands of tanks. They cost millions and the anti-tank weapons cost a fraction of that. Zerg rushing tanks is a recipe for losing.
MBT are very effective but they need to be carefully integrated into your forces.
Also holy shit imagine spending decades to develop and tens of millions per tank, and then just throwing these sophisticated weapons away.
>Russia is losing thousands of tanks
Visual confirmation is done by third parties and it's brutal. You can literally watch new tank death videos every single day if you want to.
The videos are frustrating since they are so badly trained and organized they just throw APCs, IFV, and Tanks, away.
>In the first 12 months of fighting, the Ukrainians destroyed or captured nearly 1,200 T-72s or likely T-72s that Oryx could confirm. Since there undoubtedly have been tank losses that didn’t leave video or photographic evidence, the Oryx count is an undercount. If Oryx confirmed 80 percent of losses, then the Russians actually have written off 1,500 T-72s.
Gonna be honest with you, you can't trust a lick of info that comes out from anyone. It's all propaganda no matter which side or source it comes from.
It's literally visual confirmations. Every single hit is based on actual video or photos. They get published every single day.
The same ones that were exposed for counting twice from photos taken from different angles as well as tanks with the ukrainian insignia shopped out?
Yeah, quality journalism.
>you can't trust a lick of info that comes out from anyone. It's all propaganda no matter which side or source it comes from.
This is exactly what Russian propagandists want people to believe, unironically. Confusion is almost as effective to them as delusion
Make no mistake, even if you couldn't trust any info, it is a very safe assumption that Russia is losing a shitload of tanks. Because if they weren't, they would have captured all of Ukraine by now.
You do realize that Russia doesn't want to take over Ukraine right? They just want them to be buffer between them and NAFO
They don't fucking need a buffer. They are a nuclear armed state.
Shut the fuck up glowie. You are just as bad as them. Don't fucking put words in my mouth. You lie, they lie, all you fucking government dogs lie. None of you have our, the people's interests at heart, you just want an excuse to throw young men into the meat grinder for your own interests. Fuck off.
>Russia is losing thousands of tanks
>here's an unconfirmed source listing slightly over a thousand tanks
Reminder the soviet union was losing an average of over 60,000 tanks a year against an actually competent enemy and still won WWII.
The USSR was comprised of many countries including both Russia and Ukraine, and it was receiving military aid in massive amounts from the UK and US (something like 40% of the Soviets' ammunition, vehicles and supplies were provided through Lend-Lease). It was also in a state of total defensive war for survival that mobilized the entire nation, unlike Putin's """"special military operation""".
Ukraine is also receiving military aid in massive amounts from the UK and US and elsewhere. It is also in a state of total defensive war for survival that mobilized the entire nation, and yet it can't kill more than 1500-odd in a whole year.
>Ukraine is also receiving military aid in massive amounts from the UK and US and elsewhere
No disagreement. My point was that the USSR was in a much better situation to win a war while throwing away tanks like retards than Russia is when doing the same thing.
>and yet it can't kill more than 1500-odd in a whole year
It can only kill as many as Russia can actually find surviving trained tank crews and functional tanks to work with.
If Russia's tanks that they actually get to the frontline weren't all being destroyed then that means they would be achieving their objectives and Ukraine would have lost the war by now.
I'd say several hundred thousand dead ukies by western estimation is a pretty good achievement of objectives. After all, ukraine is a far less competent foe than Germany ever was, and they can only kill as many as they dare enter bakhmut to get when they aren't busy being shelled to hell on the way there.
>is a pretty good achievement of objectives.
What exactly was Russia's objective again?
Capture Kyiv at the start of the war? Failed.
Prevent Ukraine from going to Western influence? Reduce the spread of NATO (stupid goal anyway as Russia is a nuclear state and has no reason to fear invasion)? Failed hard, now NATO is expanding even more than it would have.
Wipe out the majority of their young male population, compounding their demographic issues that are already some of the worst in Europe, and probably dooming their future? Succeeded.
Get themselves sanctioned by the majority of countries in the world, including their biggest gas/oil customers who provide a big part of their GDP? Succeeded.
Russia have easily taken at least 3x more casualties than Ukraine if not more. In no way is anything about this war a success for Russia. They incorrectly thought they could pop into Kyiv and decapitate the government and the whole country would roll over instantly to be their pet vassal state like Belarus.
oh you mean those tanks that are so fucking shitty they can just be dumped if they get stuck in mud, russia has millions of tanks left over from the cold war
"LOL LOOK RUSSIA IS SO BAD THEY LEFT TANKS" how does nobody understand the difference in fucking total warfare and a ground war going on now, every video posted by some ptsd retard who volunteered is just them trying not to have a panic attack while sweeping 45 population villages with 3rd world optics and steel case ammo
anyone supporting ukraine is a harry potter adult
>le russia is like VOLDEMORT
>ukraine is le good guys! thats why we are paying their pensions!
>russia will not divide us!
>Russia is the bad guys because they won't let trans soldiers fight their war
>destroying your (secondary) geopolitical rival's capabilities to wage war for pennies on the dollar is le harry potter
the ukraine war has been an absolute godsend for us foreign pol and you are mentally retarded if you don't see that
>a war funded because hunter biden loves camgirls is a godsend
are you fucking retarded, no really what the fuck do you do for work i pray to god you arent in charge of other people
>destroying a historic geopolitical rival, unifying your defensive alliance allowing more resources to spent on the asia pacific is..... le bad because hunter biden is a crack addict
not him but you just ousted yourself as leftoid moron. so YOU don't breed please.
>if you hate russia, you are a leftoid
tell me more about the leftist values of militarism that anon mentioned
not him btw but kys
cope and seethe chud
sorry not commie antifamoron go vote for beijing biden next year.
Russian shill gets on tankie left wing Reddit/Russian website
>"Hey let's join glorious Comrade Putin and invade Ukraine, starting a brother war in Europe and importing Muslim soldiers from Chechnya to destroy the ebul NAZI Azov Battalion!! Putin is fighting the Nazis just like the epic Soviets of old amirite???"
The shill closes his Russian website and opens up Ganker to begin shilling there
>Anyone who disagrees with the invasion of Ukraine is a leftist! Ukraine are clearly the agents of globohomo!!!
Nice fucking try you transparent second world shitter
>pushing russia towards commie chink relations is good because.. it just is alright
russia is fucking based as shit, positive US RU relations would help them both dominate the global economy and help stunt shit ass asian "people" from turning the world into a fucking parking lot. russia has oil, manufacturing, and most importantly white people.
by destroying US/RU relations its just created another fucking opportunity for the garden gnomes to advance the one race consumer slave agenda
Do you even know how the world works retard?
white people: create society
garden gnomes: subvert society
oh sorry i forgot to elaborate more
blacks: pawn for garden gnomes
asians: rape earth and when possible, people
too late, sweaty
american website, go post on a russian owned website
While I don't buy into America giving $$ and weapons to Ukraine out of the bottom of their hearts, but blaming it on Hunter Biden just shows how deluded you are and desperate to blame everything bad on the left.
but he is right xiden and pedo club used ukraine the global kid dwidling playground for the elites.
Who is xiden? Is that your fanfic Kingdom Hearts character? The only pedo club is the catholic church. But hey, keep your conspiracies going, you're def not embarassing yourself at all and we are definitely not laughing at you.
>The only pedo club is the catholic church.
>Falling for atheist/garden gnome/Protestant memes
Did you know that incidents within the church are reported 50x more than incidents within public schools?
Or they just don't like children being killed and hospitals being bombed for...what? Stopping Nazis or preventing NATO expansion, I don't think Ivan has quite figured out which one it is yet.
if they don't like getting civilians killed then they shouldn't use them as literal human shields.
Maybe Russia shouldn't have been the aggressor in the first place...also
Ukraine should have took care of the nazism problem then but its sadly engraved into them as their nationhood they just gave russia more casus belli due to it.
also NAFO spreading aids.
So considering America has a Nazi problem as well, we should be invaded and our hospitals should be bombed along with our children being killed?
>they just gave russia more casus belli due to it.
No matter what the voices in your head tell you it really doesn't. What war crimes is the azov battalion accused of committing? Why would that justify hospitals being bombed and children killed?
Schizoid Russian shills
>Ukraine is bad because they are Nazi
>Ukraine is bad because they are leftist
Truth is Ukraine is nothing but a slightly more Westernised, white, somewhat less shitty version of Russia. And that pisses off Putin no end
>someone distrupting my NPC settings means it must be russian!!
Nice try vatmoron, we can smell you from here. Your attempts to reconcile the two completely contradictory types of propaganda that Russia uses will fool nobody with a functional brain. Go back to your krokodil
Fuck off Russian shill, don't you have dying to be doing in a trench in Bakhmut?
Damn I can't believe Russia has lost 6 million tanks. Ukraine is going to win any way now!
Ukraine already won. The humiliation to Russia at this point is not recoverable
>ukraine has already won
yeah they won one way ticket to hell
>destroys your country and takes your land
>"yeah, but it took you a while....heh, how humiliating for you"
So you're telling me the Command & Conquer meta of rockets absolutely wiping the floor with tanks making them unviable was actually realism all along
always has been
C&C mentioned, opinion accepted.
Tanks are absolutely still viable. Nothing else packs the combination of invulnerability to small arms, enormous mobile firepower, and mobility for troops. You almost can't do a modern assault without one. Good luck running infantry into machine gun emplacements without tanks.
They just need to be supported with an infantry screen (who dismount from the tank at possible ambush locations and scout ahead) and air support to spot and remove threats, and you're set.
>Tanks are still viable
Ukraine has shown that Tanks are nothing more than $3 million mobile coffins
Russian tanks were never good. Made as cheap as possible by corruption from top to bottom. Then when the production run was complete, the generals would sell parts off of the tanks to like their pockets.
they were quite good interwar and top of the line in early-mid cold war
Russia has left the bulk of its tanks outside in the snow since the 1980s, a lot of the fuel was sold off and maintenance not done due to corruption which led to stuff like the 40km stalled convoy leaving tanks as sitting ducks for artillery; infantry are not properly trained in Russia to dismount tanks and spread out to provide screening forces against anti-armour weapons. Russia basically has no competent airforce to speak of either, so no air support to take down Ukrainian Stugna-Ps lying in ambush in fields. And Ukraine also has a hell of a lot of great anti-armour weapons provided from everyone, while Russia's tank arsenal is largely outdated with armour a gen or so behind what it should be.
And, finally, a lot of tanks are just outright abandoned, getting captured or blown up without a fight because Russia's morale is in the shitter.
>Ukraine has shown that Tanks are nothing more than $3 million mobile coffins
Which is why Ukraine is begging the west for modern tanks. Use your brain anon. Tanks are vital for offensives and counter offensives, especially if they want break past Russian lines and fight maneuver battles instead of this grinding state of attrition that the war is currently in
Then what do you propose to replace the tank?
That's right, fucking nothing
Just because at the moment you can exange relatively cheap munitions for destroying a tank doesn't mean you have replaced the role tanks have. Next thing will be a new defensive system and retards claiming shoulder mounted missile systems are over and done because of it
>effective anti tank measures
You mean like aircraft? Reminder that the last real war between real countries was WW2.
oh you mean that thing that can be shot down by retarded guineas with 9mm in ww2, that thing where pilots are so afraid to engage eachother they just threaten the other pilot then return to base
Yes. In WW2. Which is why tanks were effective. Good luck shooting down modern ones with your pistol. Good job proving my point.
> replace simply because the lining is so fucking effective it hasnt been defeated,
what do you mean? in some clinical test environment vs the frontal armor? they can be killed with 60 year old RPG rounds which is what happened in iraq
and in modern warfare tanks are ineffective because the battlefield is dominated by drones and loitering munitions, building a 5 million dollar tank that gets taken out by a 20k dollar mini-cruise missile is a waste of resources
it means exactly what it means, the military was offered a budget to replace abrahms and declined simply because the effectiveness of it. Yes it can be disabled but the composites and ceramics of its armor are still "firing squad" tier classified.
Essentially a more effective tank cannot be actively created. On the other end when given the option to replace the F-16 which is an undefeated fighter capable of even engaging in fucking orbit, they took the money and made the fucking F-22, and then when given the opportunity again they made the fucking F-35 because airplane nerds are fucking retarded and they made a jet thats killed more pilots than its won engagements
as it stands now an abrahms can survive multiple high explosives, be engulfed in diesel flames, and submerged almost fully and retain a degree of functionality and not suffer crew fatalities. It is the fucking crocodile of ground war, a killing machine perfected by evolution
That's actually a plot point. Modern weaponry can't harm its armor. Only the raydome and the interior of the pilot seat.
>the US military currently has almost 40 year old abrahms that they refused to replace simply because the lining is so fucking effective it hasnt been defeated, for the first time ever they turned town money because of the sheer pointlessness of making new tanks
holy shit, and ukraine is getting them
They would be poor as both a tank and as a means of nuclear deployment (and frankly there's no real crossover between those two roles). Surprisingly, the game with the fourth-wall breaking psychic and whatever dominant/recessive gene nonsense was going on with Solid and Liquid preferred to be cool instead of realistic.
>a means of nuclear deployment
Wait until Kojima finds out that aircraft carriers exist.
Very weak and cost ineffective. Modern military tech leans towards the most cost effective, small and mobile solution to the field tasks. There is zero justification to have a walking platform that just carries a couple of big guns and a nuke. You cannot cheaply support it, you cannot quickly fix it during the fight and a sandmoron with a bomb will cause immense damage.
I'm sure it has it's own problems that would make it not that useful in reality, but the Shagohod always seemed far more plausible to me. It does basically the same job, but instead of a big stupid mecha it's essentially just a tank that goes fast.
You dont need to be a fast tank if your main purpose is to nuke another continent.
The point was to avoid detection until the nuke was already in flight, so its harder to intercept and trace back.
metal gear nukes are undetectable
In the fiction of Metal Gear, yes, they can have whatever traits Kojima wants them to. But this would not work in the real world.
No, that was not what the plot point in the game was.
The point was that by launching via a railgun, you delay the detection to the first point where the rocket has to fire its propellant to actually hit its target.
That still leaves a visible trajectory to satellites once the propellant is starting to do its job, which means tracking is possible.
The point isn't to make a ICBM undetectable, its to make it so that if you fire off one from Poland you can have it cruise on momentum until it reaches close enough to Moscow to bypass the time it takes to start a MAD retaliation.
If you could find a classified document, you could get a YES or NO or MAYBE answer to that question.
Sadly leaking classified documents remains there only for War Thunder players
The Shagohod did need to be fast though. The point was to accelerate it down a runway to mimic the initial launch stage of a standard ICBM and make it harder to detect.
>The point was to accelerate it down a runway to mimic the initial launch stage of a standard ICBM
>and make it harder to detect.
That's not how ICBMs work. Firing the missile at speed like that wouldn't replicate the first stage. There's also the fact satellites can pick up a three mile long runway.
shagohod was in the 60s silly buns, its clown shoes now of course the danger was in the period not the future
but yes it was a retarded plot device simply because the game opens up with fucking davy crocketts, its not a think piece tho its just a bond movie
It's a great looking vehicle, there was just no need for the rocket booster autism. If it had been an armoured nuke launcher that can survive a first strike, then it would've worked as the game wanted. Mobile nuke launchers require a lot of security and can be taken out very easily (They're just silos on large trucks). An armed, armoured model that doesn't require a company to defend it and can survive a near-miss would be very useful in the game's time period.
MiGs are more powerful than shagohod, considering that was the cleanup crew at the end of mgs3, but again it was just a bond movie game there wasnt really any thought technically a one eyed retard who believes in santa claus riding in the side car of a motorcycle is more powerful than shagohod too
They only bombed the field you fight the Boss in. She destroyed the Shagohod and the fortress with the other Davy Crockett.
i need to replay it, whats best way nowadays last time i tried the framerate on psxe2 was fucked up and it couldn't render weird shit like the codec filters
Get a cheap PS3 and the MGS HD collection. I haven't played mine in ages but I still it.
They wouldn't be able to move from being stuck in the mud for one. Gravity and weight distribution is a thing mecha fags always like to ignore.
Correct. Real world tanks have trouble with mud and unpaved roads - how the hell is a mech gonna work? That's why upright human shape would only work for something human sized. And even then I'm not sure.
just give it a jetpack
>They wouldn't be able to move from being stuck in the mud for one.
Well the same applies to you, but we don’t make fun of you for it
retarded idea made by a cuck
Invincible weapon of war. Yeah sure, you cold rush it with tanks, but killing a Metal Gear won't un-launch a nuke, so fuck off unless you want a second sun nearby.
It's just a shitty tank. The basic idea of the metal gear, using railgun to launch nuclear warheads whos origin can't be tracked like ICBMs, is actually strategically valid and terrifying, but the metal gear mechs themselves are and have always been completely fucking retarded.
>metal gear mechs themselves are and have always been completely fucking retarded.
Walking IMPROVED tank with high altitude, capable of climbing mountains, jumping, extremely advanced sensors and a laser that can cut through everything? idk seems op
Like, I know in-game they have effectively magical and physics defying properties. But real world physics and engineering disagree. And having a very high profile upright walking tank = big target. And regardless what the game might say about Rex's armor, an artillery barrage would completely destroy it. The armor looks good enough to shrug off simple RPG hits, but that's about it.
I remeber one part of MGS4 where a MG Ray is attacking that WW2 era battleship. It gets right on top of the ship and takes a direct point blank blast by one of its cannons. I don't care what kind of magical alien tech runs those things, a direct shot would tear it apart! That's the kind of lack of real world physics that anime, video games, and sci-fi tends to ignore.
>I remeber one part of MGS4 where a MG Ray is attacking that WW2 era battleship
I just head canon it as metal gears having some sort of active kinetic shield that only deployed when it sense high yield kinetic impact. Like those shield from war of the world tripods.
If you want an armored vehicle that can traverse terrain even a tank can't handle, they actually solved that problem in WWII, it's called a fucking helicopter. Plus, clumsily dragging a fucking mecha across the mountainside defeats the entire purpose the metal gear, which was to fire untrackable nuclear strikes from random locations.
>which was to fire untrackable nuclear strikes from random locations.
Which nuclear subs literally do. That's their main purpose. So that even if the enemy completely wipes out the entire nation, and all ability to counter attack, there will be these random subs firing nukes so there will always be a counter.
True. But even with a submarine, the missile could still theoretically be intercepted, where as a nuke fired from a metal gear would almost certainly not even be detected until it reached its target. Of course, you can't actually fire a nuclear warhead out of a railgun for several engineering reasons, but I'm much more willing to forgive unrealistic technology than retarded implementation of that technology.
what you're describing seems more like technology inside of the nuke to be undetectable rather than the metal gear
No a nuclear submarine missile could not be intercepted. Interception window for ICBMs and SLBMs is unbelievably tiny, if you don't hit that sucker in the first minute of launch your chances of hitting it are basically nothing, but you might get a very lucky shot in if you throw a ton of interceptors at it in the 5 minute window. After the 5 minute window, all missile shields are effectively useless.
All a nuclear submarine has to do is deploy outside the 5 minute window of any interceptors, which is piss easy.
nuclear capable submarines are fan fiction tier, they are fucking massive obvious signatures a nuclear submarine would never get anywhere near being too close to intercept before getting sank
do you know how submarine radar works? its a burst of sound so fucking loud it kills anything around it, unless you had some coked out puerto rican eyeballing the shit out of piloting a fucking sub it wouldnt get near close enough
>do you know how submarine radar works?
I don't know if this is trolling, but there's active and passive sonar (not radar). Yes, you can't broadcast your active sonar because that's just announcing where you are.
In the case of a nuclear strike, unless you got an attack group that could take up the submarine before it surfaces, it's basically over, the sub getting sank after launching its payload doesnt matter in this scenario.
moron a submarine can be domed the fuck out by MiG's you dont think an f22 can scramble to dunk a nuclear sub
passive sonar is so the retard captain doesnt wheelie a submarie onto the shores of cape cod
material is literally everything, the reason why 3rd world countries can't fuck for shit on western forces is because plate carriers that dont spall into eyes and faces. If we had modern body armor in vietnam hob dob gum morons would be revering the american man as a god blessed killing machine
pretty much the only time they score kills in the sandbox is by suicide bombing, handing children hand grenades, or hiding shit in the sand and hoping the retard doing sweeps is too hungover to find it
>you dont think an f22 can scramble to dunk a nuclear sub
Probably not faster than the sub can scramble a nuke to dunk your city, retard.
yeah bitch, those giant fucking bathtub toys full of gay men masturbating moving 35 mph can sneak up on a fucking world super power
Fixed position nuclear warheads can't even be intercepted in almost any scenario, you think the one 200 miles off the coast is going to fare worse?
North Korea has fixed silos that are fixed far enough from the border that interceptors based in South Korea have no possible chance to intercept them. You have no idea how missiles work
>implying you couldn't even do it in a shitty old diesel sub
> If we had modern body armor in vietnam hob dob gum morons would be revering the american man as a god blessed killing machine
you don't know crap about warfare, the north vietnamese already suffered 1.7 million casualties, 850,000 being killed while the US suffered 361,000 casualties with 47,000 being combat deaths. US was already stomping the Vietnamese as far as k/d ratio goes, but war isnt Call of Duty. Killing them at a better ratio wouldn't have won a war where the US wasn't allowed to move north
COIN just means you need to out-last the enemy, and most of the Vietnam conflict was COIN. Either leave, or invade the north. But fears of escalation and Chinese involvement meant they couldn't invade. Which meant they tried to win the war without escalating, making it impossible to do so.
now include arvn casualties
>If we had modern body armor in vietnam hob dob gum morons would be revering the american man as a god blessed killing machine
>America already was killing them at a higher rate
>NOOO INCLUDE THE moronS
modern body armor in vietnam would have hilarious results, literally like 8000 casualties most of which are from retards on heroin falling into tiger traps
Still wouldn't have won the war though
>americans: high as hell, left hand full of pussy, right hand full of slant bodies
>vietnam: mcdonalds in hanoi square, rice fields full of explosives, half white children everywhere
yea who really lost that one retard
Ho Chi Mihn didn't even want to fight America, he was an insane yankeeboo and even portrayed himself like the founding fathers of America fighting for liberty. Vietnamese have no hard feelings towards America. It was a stupid french colonial war America got involved in.
America's war goals were to secure South Vietnamese sovereignty, which failed miserably and the south vietnamese didn't even want it. Its was a stupid war, America got its war goals accomplished when it pulled out in 1973 but didn't come but in the continuation war in 1975 and the South collapsed. So it's vague af as to any real winner or loser, but America did fail at securing South Vietnam
>resettlements increased from 9,000 per month in early 1979 to 25,000 per month, the majority of the Vietnamese going to the United States, France, Australia, and Canada.
>Half-American children in Vietnam, descendants of servicemen, were also allowed to immigrate along with their mothers or foster parents.
>Most of these half-American children were born of American soldiers and prostitutes.
>In 1988, U.S. Congress passed the American Homecoming Act, aiming to grant citizenship to Vietnamese Amerasians born between 1962 and 1975, which led to 23,000 Amerasians and 67,000 of their relatives immigrating to the U.S.
lol they deported all the whores and whoresons to the US. your citizens now.
Anon, sonar has existed since world war II. It didn't stop the atlantic from being an absolute turkey shoot.
Sprint could do it, 0 to mach 10 in 5 seconds baby
All US ICBM missile shield testing for interception have been dismal failures after the 5 minute window, even the best case scenarios with them knowing the exact trajectory and speed of the missiles where they're just trying to show off the technology for pentagon funding have had an unacceptable failure rate. I believe, off the top my head, the best test ever conducted, with the interceptors having all the cheats unlocked to show off, had a success rate under 20%, which frankly with the reality of MIRVs is not even close to effective enough to stop a strike.
Reminds me of when Reagan went to NORAD and they showed him all the advanced missile detection systems and he asked how useful they'd be in an actual scenario and they told him absolutely not at all, they just get to watch the nuclear warheads they couldn't do anything about them.
It is all about cost and utility. A single missile with kinetic energy can obliterate any Metal Gear unless its covered by a missile defense system, so the whole "mobility" of the payload is worthless, the only cool metal gear would be a RAY model equipped with warheads, which could be a supermobile unmanned nuclear submarine. Terrifying
>railgun to launch nuclear warheads whos origin can't be tracked like ICBMs
Real railguns make huge fireballs (its not powder, its metal rails melt) when they fire, so its highly unrealistic.
Rockets also make huge fireballs, the real problem is that such powerful magnetic fields would fuck the shit out of any nuclear warhead, but that's an engineering problem, not a strategic one.
The problem is detection of fireballs, there isnt any problem with magnetic fields and nuclear warheads - remember, early atomic bombs were completely mechanical.
dumb retard, it can't be tracked once its shot out, the launch location doesn't matter
>fire nuke into orbit with big ass railgun/mass drive
>nuke can be traced when shot but it can remain in orbit for a while without knowing when or where it will enter the atmosphere
>since it's a small payload without a big ass rocket, it is harder to keep track, specially when idle
>whos origin can't be tracked like ICBMs
why not? does mgs1 ever say why or are you just supposed to assume it's because of no boost phase or something, it's been a long time since i played the first game in full so i dont recall
>or are you just supposed to assume it's because of no boost phase or something,
They actually tell you that's the reason. Also stealth camo and radar cammo so it can't be detected on radar or be visually seen.
funny, a stealth coating that good would be a way, way bigger deal than anything else on rex realistically
This to be tbh.
Why not just put that stealth kit on a bomber and nuke them directly?
A lot faster and cheaper than METAL GEAR
yeah but fighting your clone brother on top of a pallet of JASSM-ERs is way less cool
>what if we fistfought
>on top of the nuclear stockpile
If you do CODEC calls in the Rex hanger, and especially after hearing the convos, you get this big breakdown of how dangerous the rex missile is. I can't find it right now but if you sift through the CODEC calls on youtube you'll find it.
It's just Kojima-san throwing everything that was cuttding edge 90's into one thing and slapping it to a mech for cool points. He's just a dumb nerd not some sci-fi genius. I'd probably make the same shit.
Let me tell you all about HGVs, fren
Get a real mech and tank rounds won't be an issue, these things are pretty fast
Ok but what about RAY?
It's amphibious and can cut through anything in its way
Realism and mecha don't go in the same sentence and for that reason fun and realism don't either. Mecha and fun do however.
I get the same anal autism over Muv Luv as well.
The series is a treasure but there's no reason a tank firing a large calibre tungsten sabot from just over the horizon couldn't end those laser fuckers too other than muh melee mech combat.
That's justified in universe by the laser class melting tanks due to their poor mobility since they can bend the lasers over the horizon or just shooting down any long range bombardment that doesn't go total saturation. The mecha are less a tank alternative and more a fighter jet one anyway. One of the shitty gacha games actually had them invade a modern day earth and the BETA got their ass beat though.
Nah I ran the numbers. Artillery firing from the 8km mark to be just below LOS would launch a tungsten carbide spike both massive and fast enough that the amount of energy required to vaporize it with a laser before impact (even melting it to slag retains the kinetic energy) would be the equivalent of a nuclear flash and would literally ignite the atmosphere in the process.
Realism is fun
Crazy how this is still one of the coolest looking mecha ever made in fiction.
The dick gun is too small. Make that bigger and it would be perfect.
you should look into tank development in cold war
tall tank height was considered detrimental, and led to coldwar soviet pancake tier tanks, or big headed western tanks that can reliably perform hull down
these things are big targets, even if they are immune to missiles, anti tank rounds, artillery would fuck them up since you wont expect them to run very fast anyway
the whole entire point of a metal gear is a self propelled nuke launcher.
>the whole entire point of a metal gear is a self propelled nuke launcher.
you mean submarines then
I'm no engineer but I imagine one well-placed RPG round in one of the leg drive joints would cripple it severely.
i guess that is implying the infinite ammo 40mm cannons dont decimate everything without active camo
Metal Gears (at least the REX original model) were designed and meant primarily to be a launch platform for the railgun firing tactical nuclear projectiles over extreme ranges
or use the railgun as defensive role to shoot down enemy nukes
Metal gears were always meant to be high mobility support weapons and offensive / defensve deterrents related to nuclear long range tactical warfare
the other weapons its got are merely for backup should one of them get caught out
but in open field all out conventional battle scenario they would be close to useless
too big profile too cumbersome and easy to hit
they would never replace conventional main battle tanks as anti armor role
of course of them them can overpower a certain amount of infantry or a couple of tanks in a pinch, but its not what they were built for at all and Otakon said it himself
the railgun prototype it carries on the right arm was supposed to be a defensive deterrent against conventional nuclear missiles mounted of a high mobility chassis it would render conventional anti nuclear missile platforms obsolete
also forgot to mention the obscene cost REX Metal Gears would have
most likely for the price you can buy one of those you prob get 20 Abrahms main battle tanks so commissioning REX units to fight on the front line considering how expensive they are would be stupid
you always gotta think of the economic factor vs the advantage a certain weapon system gives you
so in my opinion REX units even if they were real or will be in the future they would never replace MBTs as frontline armored units most likely
>our new weapon
>definetly worth of all tax money that get snach... i-i ment spended on it! fully automated!
>actually gets "piloted" by shitty lada car engine and will of poor poor private sergei
>don't even mention missles
Needs boosters, gundam head, and a laser sword before it's worth anything.
there is a reason we don't make tanks giant like that, they are just big targets for massive firepower
>sneak around the back in an inconHispanicuous tuk-tuk
>pop it in the ass with a carlgustav
Not too much. Too big as a target by itself.
Unironically, at best a metal gear would be useful as just a glorified walking bomber, at least for a stealth operation. But as a walking weapon in the battlefield it won't be good use unless mass produced. Unironically the small versions that make cow noises would be way more effective in a war.
Also because if you want to conquer a country, nuking it would be the last thing you want to do, literally Sun Tzu 's basic rules in "the art of war"
why not high altitude airburst a nuke in the path of the opposing nuke to detonate them all mid air?
Other anons put it best - it was meant as a mobile missile platform. Everything else given the smaller missiles and vulcans was more so that it would be able to defend itself, and shit like the penis laser and the RADOME was probably just Otacon flexing and trying to make it into a cool robot because he likes muh japanese animes.
And while it's obvious that since HEAT missiles penetrate its armor that it would be useless against tanks, I think that with the software upgrade it gets in MGS4 (especially if we were to repair it back to a 100%, lets remember that the REX in 4 is half-destroyed) it could feasibly give any large force a run for its money. The mobility is there after all.
But if we're talking about military application, I think a RAY would be great as an amphibious attack vehicle, disregarding the retarded inefficiency that its fuel costs would probably bring.
This. Ray would be more effective as coastline combat since it can go in and out of water relatively quickly, but the deeper it goes inland the more vulnerable it'll be to long range shelling and fighter jet assaults.
>And while it's obvious that since HEAT missiles penetrate its armor that it would be useless against tanks
eh, not really though, you only beat REX thanks to GrayFox using a plasma canon on the RADOME forcing Liquid to open its hatch
Well, yeah. HEAT missile =/= a stinger missile, HEAT missiles are bigger and are used in tanks. If a HEAT could penetrate the armor (which it could because Otacon admits it), a tank hitting it once would probably make it fucked if it was a lucky shot.
>Well, yeah. HEAT missile =/= a stinger missile, HEAT missiles are bigger and are used in tanks.
oh nvm then, mb
>fuel costs would probably bring.
thats the thing with most sci fi future tech and their keystone to atleast, the fictional viability is a reliable powersource
I don't think you guys realize how powerful Javelins are. The Abrams' armor is really fucking strong. Javelin is just stronger because it's a technological marvel. It literally explodes twice in quick succession and the missile acts more like a literal Roman javelin which penetrates the armor and uses the kinetic force of its explosion to launch a second explosion that goes off inside the target.
And they're not that expensive to make. Your mech can have billions of dollars worth of anti-missile lasers on it. Soldiers will just fire another $200k javelin missile again, and again, and again.
REX is also made with like 1998 technology that we're told is supposed to be in 2005. If a similar project were to be made today, I bet Kojimbo and Fukushima would design it to be even more retarded and OP. If it's a black project and funding is not an issue then I bet you could make it stronger.
Any Ganker bros here that have an idea on how to upgrade on it?
>inb4 just strip it of half its armor and make MG ZEKE again
It's a retarded idea overall. It's a glorified artillery platform. Railguns have huge issues IRL with energy generation and the rails wearing out. A railgun also isn't undetectable like the game says. Even if the warhead was fitted with stealth composites, it's still flying through the air at tremendous speeds, and launch warning systems would pick up the initial shot. Honestly, if they really wanted to go with the railgun concept, then threads would've been better.
The series has literally joked about how inefficient metal gears would actually be in real life several times. IRL it would just be needlessly complex and probably do a shittier job than just a regular tank in 9/10 situations.
Wouldn't their nonstandard proportions and height generally make them a bitch to transport to any battlefield?
Giant metal coffin.
the armor would probably be insufficient vs. the most common battlefield AT missiles considering they showed a few medium choppers air lifting it out of mother base
why do mutts go full retard the moment they're reminded about vietnam
enders game reflex
bloo bloo poor bugmen
Nobody can accept we were in the wrong not supporting Uncle Ho in letting him achieve independence from the French and instead waged a war of aggression against a nation wanting sovereignty
Pretty jarring to realize we were actually the bad guys after World War 2
aint no good or bad guys friendo
theres only winners and losers
didnt want to get fucked on by the khanate? should have invested in fucking recurve bows and cavalry
didnt want to get dunked on by white people, should have created a fucking functional society and firearms
didnt wanna get your fucking reich stunted on should have worked on the nuke
every loser has lost for a reason
On 2 legs? Dead on arrival. The metal gear would be beaten by rocks thrown by Palestinian kids.
How about the enormous metal gears, like excelsus and arsenal? Would they be strong at all or a complete joke and waste of resources in the real world?
Arsenal was essentially a big-ass aircraft carrier, and we all know how strong they can be.
Excelsus was… I'm not sure what the point of it was, actually. Perhaps I didn't pay enough attention to MGR's CODECs.
Me neither now that I think about it. I don't even remember Excelsus being built up to that much it just kind of happens, it also like fucking digs out of the ground somehow iirc? Was that it's ability?
The bigger a thing is the bigger a target it is for muntions which will destroy or at least disable it. No matter how thick the armor there isn't really anything that can survive direct hits from higher caliber artillery, to say nothing of high altitude bombers that can just drop death from the stratosphere.
Was Arsenal Gear able to fly or was it only able to be in the ocean? I forget it's been a while. If it could fly then I feel like it would have to be the strongest metal gear by far considering how it could launch nukes across the whole world by flying around everywhere, not to mention it probably taking ace combat level jets that can carry hundreds of missiles in order to do some decent damage do it
it was just a giant manta ray full of metal gear rays, it was the most powerful metal gear because it housed GW also it was like the size of fucking manhattan its safe to assume it had anti air and whatever the fuck
It was submersible but couldn't fly. It is the most powerful because of the AI, the Rays, and and nuclear weapons it carried (Hydrogen bombs and SLBMs), but it had no conventional weapons. One of the main criticisms of it in MGS2 is that it needs a carrier group to support it. It has no AA weapons, anti-ship weapons, or anything else. The Arsenal ship Ocelot steals (Outer Haven) was a smaller version with conventional weapons, an AI, and Rays but no nuclear weapons. It was probably designed to escort Arsenal Gear. I find it funny that Arsenal Gear is barely mentioned again after MGS2. How bad was the damage to New York? How long did it take to dismantle Arsenal Gear? How did they cover it up? Who dismantled it? Was any of the technology leaked or stolen?
the implication is that society is already built to be manipulated so easily that it didnt matter anyway, the president of the fucking united states ran arsenal gear agroud and then had a sword fight so they probably just said it was training accident or something. im sure theres a codec call in mgs4 about it because kojima plays shit by ear
All it would take is a few hits to whatever it was thats keeping it afloat and stable and the whole thing will come down, but it being able to carry its own defense squadrons would help that a lot, and as long as it says out of range of the BEEEG direct fire guns it would probably be fine, impractical because you could get the same shit cheaper and for less fuel in a sub+carrier but still fine.
if they are as mobile as shown in MGSV then sure, they can fucking skate over mountains and chase individual soldiers in mountain terrain, that alone puts them into a massive tactical advantage
but vs. a modern military, as a rogue state with no air power electronic warfare or intelligence ops? nah, you get your one surprise attack and after that you either hide in a cave or get blown up by a hundred drone strikes and cruise missiles
So.. the premise of Metal Gear REX is to be a frontline armoured combat unit for future combined warfare that would replace tanks... that would also carry a nuclear bomb as a deterrent... so if a terrorist or dictator managed to take down one of these things on the frontline and extract the bomb.. they would have a nuclear weapon...
the premise of metal gear rex is to be the center of the plot of metal gear solid
you can make a nuclear weapon with a GED and a bunch of fucking smoke alarms
If anything what we have seen in the kraine weak vs top attack man portable missiles
One Javelin boi vs one METAL GEAR!?!
just one question
is there a way to take off my pants?
It's worth remembering that each Metal Gear had a specific design purpose
Was scary because it could launch nuclear weapons without a massive missile silo (precursor to ICBM which hadn't been invented yet)
Was made of depleted uranium, theoretically could waltz into your country and blow up as a nuke (never got working without psychic power)
Was a walking ICBM, could hide in mountains / forests / deserts without being detected. The purpose was that it was truly politically neutral, if you launched 1 nuke this thing would guarantee that everyone would die.
Had a rail gun stealth nuclear bomb. You could nuke a country without anyone even realising before it went off
Was an anti metal gear unit. It's designed to appear out of no where and destroy Metal Gears before they could launch the nukes
Could control digital information. It's formidable sure but it's primary purpose was censoring the internet so it could control the world
SQUARE CUBE LAW
ABSURD MAINTAINENCE COST (a fuck fighter jet is so much simpler and yet its maintenance cost can easily bankrupt a typical business)
>think the future will have mechs, exosuits and laser guns
>fast foward to 2023
>meta is cheap drones with grenades ductaped to it and radio guns that counter them
I fucking hate this gay earth
The next meta will be aimbot guns in the cost wars.
Do Metal Gears pretend to be grounded like Heavy Objects or are borderline space magic tier like Mazinger?
No where near as strong as the urbie. The urbie is the most powerful of all a technological powerhouse of warfare. Beyond the destructive potential that is the urbie
But the urbie is so slow! My Atlas is faster!
>waddles behind your atlas
>cores it in one shot with its Ac 20
Nothing personal kerensky
>Atlas moves away while you position
This has never happened all Mech warriors fear the urbie
>arrow iv urbie blows your atlas
Snake could've just climbed this before it was activated and strapped C4 to the delicate railgun to stop it
>shoot missile at it
>it falls down and can't get up
Also realistically it would run out of power just moving around and it's too heavy.
How did Ace Combat succeed in creating threatening superweapons where Metal Gear failed?
jesus i thought that was a plane that was also a nuclear submarine by the picture. thank god i read the wiki just now.
Realistically speaking, a REX would just tip over backwards and fall.
Anon, mechas are complete garbage engineering & combat-wise. It's on the same tier than asking about the realistic flight-worthiness of a witch's broom.
It's fantasy, just enjoy the cool fucking walking robot.
>withstand a shot stronger than nukes
>Waves hands and rewinds time
>turning men to babies and machinery to raw materials
is there anything that can stand up against the Unicorn?
A 7 year old child playing pretend
I think giant robots could have a practical use in the battlefield as a mobile heavy artillery platform instead of a frontline assault vehicle
like something that continuously rains 300mm HE shells from miles away with its giant guns.
strap some decent anti air weaponry and not leave it on its own and you might have something that could be devastating if used correctly.
I bet Liberty Prime could take it no diff
How did they even explain Arsenal Gear to the public? It completely flattened a good chunk of Manhattan. The Patriots surely had the media give some cover story as to where it came from, but what was it?
Freak cruise ship
The problem with mecha is that they're too big to really make sense. I believe that small robots smaller than human beings might be feasible with good enough technology, but once you have to suspend something equivalent to a tank on two legs and walk it off, you are already in the realm of retardedness and waste of energy.
could level a warship from the shoreline
>assume they are STINGER immune
Not a good start.