ASTA said
Once again, you've ignored the existence of the composite materials incorporated into the chassis of the machine. Even if it was 4,000kg of Aerogel (which it wouldn't be), you're attributing that total weight to a material that is approximately 7.5 times lighter than air. You also don't know aerogel has been installed into the mech, so your numerical values seem more akin to arbitrary numbers than actual facts brought forth using concrete calculations.It's folly to assume the vehicle incorporates an ungodly amount of aerogel in its protective covering, since you must also factor in the existence of other types of materials in the general armor system (like the various aluminium metals and alloys). In short, if you're going to assault the weight of a vehicle, don't go after the lightest material on it.
It's not the weight of the materials, it's the lack of it. Using lighter materials means that you need more of them to reach your 45 tons. using more materials increases the size. Your stats make it seem like you're trying to fit the amount of material of a brick into a teacup.
as far as calculations go, let's use 4000kg of aerogel, that's less than a tenth of your mechs weight.
4000kg of aerogel would fill an olympic sized swimming pool.
You wanted calculations?
Aerogel has a density of of 160g per cubic meter. The formula to find volume using density and mass is Volume = Mass / Density. Let's put the numbers in and see what we get.
Volume = 4000kg / 160 g/m3
Volume = 25000m3
That's a lot of volume. even just 4kg of aerogel would be larger than your mech.
ASTA said Also, I'm still waiting on your expert evaluation and unnecessary criticism of the other mechs present in the RP. You also haven't answered my previous question, which asked what you're exactly asshurt over. Let's hear it.
As far as weight for size, they make sense. They're large enough for the weight to make sense.
ASTA said Now, about your helicopter. Doing away with the troop transport capability of your aircraft and replacing them with more weapons still constitutes more weight being added to your vehicle. The Apache weighs around five and a half tons, while your piece weighs 12. That's more than twice the weight of an aircraft that possesses a 2.45 to 3 hour long flight endurance capacity. How, exactly, is your helicopter flying for 3 straight hours while lugging around 12 tons of (loaded) weight?
I'm not replacing the troop volume with weapons, but the weight. empty the Hind weighs 8.5 tons, carries 2.5 tons of weapons and can carry 4 tons of cargo and fuel. Bump me up to 4 tons of weapons and I could easily have 2.5 tons of batteries. If anything i should have an even long of a flight time.
ASTA said I don't see how this is relevant. This just fuels my argument that a 2.6 meter-tall mech weighing 45 tons is perfectly reasonable, and does not warrant whatever it is...you're trying to do here right now. I'm still trying to figure out why a 8.5 foot tall machine complete with wide feet and with a weight crawling up to that of a T-62's is making you froth at the mouth or whatever.
They're not 8.5 feet tall, they're more along the lines of 8.5 meters. That's three times the size of your mech but weighing the same.
ASTA said
Tried going with this approach in the beginning, like when I conceded with the whole 'tank' and 'terrain' thing, or when I basically dropped the whole height/weight thing. I mean, it's a roleplay featuring giant robots (of all things) that takes place on a continent-sized landfill filled with an unusually high amount of wrecked vehicles.As you can clearly see, that approach bombed.
All I want is to keep some sort of logic to our mech weights and sizes. Yours is the smallest but weighs as much as one twice its size. you have it weigh as much as a MBT and be about the same size but then talk about superlight materials. I don't have a problem with the weight, but with your applying faulty logic to support your arguments.
But sure, let's go over to IC.
