Power Armor?

TerraN_EmpirE said:

You mean the sound of the motor and hydraulics. well were still in early generations as we move ahead hard suits will probably always have a noise factor but it's likely to get quieter and in the case of Hulc they could be slung.
a soft suit is likely to be very quiet, no louder then a pair of corduroys after all it's just fabrics and a small motor system.

Click to expand...

True, but I'm concern about professional enemy trackers. What kind of smell and fluid does this exoskeleton leaves behind? If this leaks fluid or leave a trace of smell, it can possibly be detected by enemy trackers that can either alert nearby units or stealthy hunt the unit. Trust me, any special forces type guys are good at tracking and analyzing the terrain and can dictate the difference between human and animal activities.

Once again depends on the type. a soft Exosuit it's a harness with a electromotor.
a Hard exoskeleton depends on how it's built I am guessing that given the nature and size your not going to have a huge amount of fluids. Lockheed Martin's data sheet on HULC says it uses standard Hydraulic fluid in a high efficiency low flow, high pressure system so probubly more fluid then 12 oz less then a liter.

TerraN_EmpirE said:

Wlth your entire statement is Bogus!
Harvard's warrior web, Lockheed Martin's Hulc have both been tested on treadmills running across a verity of desert, rocky and urban terrain sets. Many can be stowed or dropped easily.
[video=youtube_share;EdK2y3lphmE]http://youtu.be/EdK2y3lphmE[/video]

The limiter today is power. the Battery technologies as they stand today.

Click to expand...

Have you even looked at the video? Try taking off bootstraps and leg straps etc while the bullets are flying.

Fighting with the exoskeleton on isn't an option either, given that the whole purpose of it is to carry more weight, and when you have 50 kgs of stuff on the exoskeleton, and try to crawl or fall down or to climb over an obstacle, or even raise or kick a leg then.

These exoskeletons do not magically make the loads lighter. They only provide support to much of the weight for you if the the centre of gravity of the weight falls within the working envelope of the supporting structure, which basically means in a general stand-up/running pose, with the weight above the leg supports. It basically works like a shopping trolley attached to your body, with leg supports instead of wheels. As soon as you wiggle about, and start to fall, or crawl, the exoskeleton no longer functions, and your body will then have to bear the full weight of the load and the weight of the exoskeleton. And when jumping or climbing, you will have to lift the weight of both the load and the exoskeleton.

You cannot bend laws of physics.

As others have already identified, the most fundamental Achellies Heel of current powered frames, be it hard or soft, is the issue of power supply, specifically, power supply size/weight to endurance ratios.

Personally, other than maybe some logistical handling applications at bases, on ships and maybe large cargo planes, I just cannot see any of the current conceptual powered frames being adapted unless there is a quantum leap in portable power supply and storage technology.

Maybe the tech insiders know something I don't, which is probably extremely likely tbh, but ruling out such a fundamental breakthrough, all the current conceptual designs are pretty much all dead ends at the conceptual level as far as frontline combat operations are concerned.

Rather than present the customer(militarise and maybe PMCs) with a produce that is useful, they are presenting them with the best the can manage at an idealised fantasy system that simply cannot be made with current or even medium term technology.

It would be like LockMart going to the USAF with a space fighter proposal and a sales pitch ripped off of a Hollywood script without engines able to get the thing into space anywhere on the horrizon.

Ultimately, in 30 or 40 years, once all the key component parts have been developed, these designs may find an application, but with current technology, it just isn't going to work or be worth while when you consider the cost to performance ratios.

Governments will continue to fund such programmes as almost a tax to stay in the game, but don't expect any to be fielded in meaningful numbers without the aforementioned power supply break through.

If I was to present a pitch for a system that might be front line operationally fieldable within the next 10-15 years, instead of trying to develop a man sized independent system, I would cheat and relax the requirement a little.

My proposal would be the a Centaur design. I would take the robotic maul design currently being field tested by the US marines and mate that with a powered hardshell exo armour to update cavalry to the battlefield of the 21st century.

The robotic maul would provide enough internal volume to mount a big enough power source to allow for realistic operational endurance.

Removing the requirement to be man shaped and sized, the legs of the maul could be designed to offer far higher speeds than a humanoid frame could reasonably manage, all without unduly taxing the wearer. In that regard, you can go from the bipedal design of the ostrich, to the more conventional 4 legged mammalian chassis, all the way to the 8 legged arachnid frame. Basically whatever suits your need.

The mauls could be used by themselves as is for special forces to move rapidly in terrain unsuitable to even the most robust of wheeled and trackedh vehicles, but I would exploit the enhanced carrying capacity to mount a human in a powered, fully or partially enclosed armoured suit.

The suit would normally be plugged into the maul and rely on that as its primary power supply, so does not need to be able to last days out in the field under its own power, making it far more attainable with current or near current level of technology.

Asside from the significant additional protection it offers over conventional plate and Kevlar armour, it will also allow the user to carry and wield significantly heavier and powerful weapons than even the strongest human could realistically carry and use unaided.

The protection level, firepower and endurance of the suit could all be augmented by the maul, so you can mount a heavy ballistic shield on the maul in front of the rider that can stand up to direct and repeated hits from 50 cal or even 20mm rounds so the suit itself does not need that level of protection to reduce the weight of the suit. You can also have easy to detach mounts on the maul so the heavy weapons of the suit would normally only need to be swung around to be aimed and fired rather be wielded like a conventional rifle, reducing the power consumption even in combat.

The suits would be easily detachable form the mauls as easily as a rider might dismount from a horse (or even easier as the maul can be specially designed for rapid dismount) so the rider has the option to move out on foot from tight spaces or stealth or any other reason.

For reliability, you can use an old calvaryman's trick of taking more mounts than riders. Since the mauls would be doing the lion share of the running, they would be the most likely to fail. If one breaks down, the rider can simply ditch it and hop onto a spare.

Those spares could normally be used to carry food, water, ammo and other supplies and equipment, which are either used up during the course of the mission, or could be re-distributed amongst the remaining mauls or even ditched in the event of mount failure. Hell, you can even use one to carry a spare powered suit to give you redundancy there as well if you want.

In combat, the spare mauls can just stay hidden, or even be used as remote controlled or semi-autominous armed drones to help with the attack.

The riders can use their mauls like traditional cavalry from high and run attacks of light cavalry, to the line breakers of heavy cavalry or they can dismount and fight like foot infantry, only with far better protection and firepower.

wtlh said:

Have you even looked at the video? Try taking off bootstraps and leg straps etc while the bullets are flying.

Fighting with the exoskeleton on isn't an option either, given that the whole purpose of it is to carry more weight, and when you have 50 kgs of stuff on the exoskeleton, and try to crawl or fall down or to climb over an obstacle, or even raise or kick a leg then.

These exoskeletons do not magically make the loads lighter. They only provide support to much of the weight for you if the the centre of gravity of the weight falls within the working envelope of the supporting structure, which basically means in a general stand-up/running pose, with the weight above the leg supports. It basically works like a shopping trolley attached to your body, with leg supports instead of wheels. As soon as you wiggle about, and start to fall, or crawl, the exoskeleton no longer functions, and your body will then have to bear the full weight of the load and the weight of the exoskeleton. And when jumping or climbing, you will have to lift the weight of both the load and the exoskeleton.

You cannot bend laws of physics.

Click to expand...

You don't have to bend the laws of Physics. Watch the video what do you see, them running, them maneuvering. As seen in the Video, the Guy can drop his pack and move.
as for movement
[video=youtube_share;QcIH4eGJHXU]http://youtu.be/QcIH4eGJHXU[/video]
They are designed to allow the full range of human motion. and follow the human range of motion. In other words the only way the system is thrown of if if the movement is already beyond the Human range. Now as to ditching it? well That video proved you could ditch your pack in which is what infantry already do but why ditch the suit if it's still functional? there are some reasons to keep it.
M240B weight 27 pounds, M240L 22.3 pounds Barrett shaves it to 21 pounds. thats with out ammo. so?
[video=youtube_share;KU95h6YCUuM]http://youtu.be/KU95h6YCUuM[/video]
moves the weight off the shooter and shifts it to the skeleton. this absorbs recoil, stabilizes the weapon meaning more accurate aiming and shooting. add a system like the Tyr tactical Huron Mico high capacity linked ammo carrier and your squad MG Gunner can pack more ammo per load, lay said fire closer to the Opfor and still maneuver.
now then the heavy loads? out side of the pack there is more body armor, more sensors, more communications gear and more batteries and that's with out the stuff in the Ruck sack.

LI batteries are making substantial improvements particularly thanks to electric vehicle development. a exoskeleton uses a fraction of the power of a electric car, as we have already begun seeing massive range extensions there. it's not going to be infinite but a few days of operation I think is realistic by 2025-2030.
A Centaur form, being a Sagittarius I probably should not bad mouth it too much but here is the issues I see, first it's unnatural and this is going to cause the wearers some issues. second there are limits to the top speeds available to make up for that your going to want to be able to use more efficient transports like trucks fitting a Centaur into a Hummer is impossible same for most tactical choppers larger choppers like the V22, Y8, Ch53, Ch47, Puma and NH90 sure but not anything smaller and don't even ask about armored vehicles. there is also moving across amphibious or airborne drops.

For support weapons, I agree the exoskeletons would be useful.

For normal infantry men, however, it still looks a bit too cumbersome. If you look at the video, the backpack isn't going off the exoskeleton that easily; the guy actually needed some help. I think the reason is that the loads must be attached to the exoskeleton rather than the human body, in the sense that the bag has to be relatively securely attached to the exoskeleton at some point. In the video's case, the bag sits on the rack. This means taking off the bag isn't as simple as dropping it as normally one would do. HOWEVER, I do think that with a good design for a quick release mechanism, the thing could work.

mounting the pack to the rack on the back is actually pretty smart and common. most military packs use a hard frame already, and operations in Iraq and Afghanistan have infantry using body armor more frames that mounted to armor . so a intermediary mounting between the pack and body is more and more common already. the quick release may not be as quick as you would like but that's more a issue with the pack.

Maybe first use exoskeleton for selected grunts in the squad, like those carrying machine gun/portable missiles. The detriment to maneuverability is probably no more than they otherwise would face carrying larger than normal loads.

right now it seems the first users are likley SF teams. given USSOCOM TALOS program

TerraN_EmpirE said:

right now it seems the first users are likley SF teams. given USSOCOM TALOS program

Click to expand...

Doubt it, the SF wants to remain mobile so they would not want to take much extra weight that may slow them down.
They also would not want anything that is not reliable. So they would probably not use anything that had not been tested in battle conditions.

The new gets old and the old sometimes becomes new.
On the battle field it was always the infantry first until they can get the heavier equipment mobilized that was not able to be carried by hand. Exoskeletons are both mobile and able to carry "heavier equipments" without the mechanized equipments that are heavier still.
In the middle age before the cavalry moved-in there was the heavy infantry that went into the battlefield which was less mobile but had more power and more survivable then line and/or light infantry.

In symmetric warfare at the end it's all about logistics and how much one-side can ship to the front line at how much speed matched with mobility at the battlefield. Shipping one MBT was never the preferred choice if the opponent had something some what less fire power but had more in quantity and mobility.