So why haven't we built one as close to working as we can get it with today's technology?
>>7840212
Because we can't get anywhere even remotely close with today's technology.
And if we could, it wouldn't be worth the dev costs.
>>7840217
I'm sure the military has at least tried to build something close to it
>>7840212
The trouble with anything is power. How do you power it? You can just start jet engine on it. It and the storage unit would be too heavy. And electricity would be too weak, too little etc. Unless we significantly upgrade our battery capacity in the future. Or to draw from SciFi, micro fusion batteries would be perfect for such a thing
>>7840220
There are exoskeletons that can enhance strength, but nothing that can fly and shoot lasers and give super strength and 100 other things. Where would the energy come from? The military knows better than to chase ghosts.
>>7840224
>The military knows better than to chase ghosts.
Didn't they spend a ton of money looking into physics and telekinesis?
>>7840228
They also spent money looking into telepathic powers so they could kill the damned commies from across the planet by just thinking it. That doesn't mean that they don't learn from their mistakes. They won't keep falling for sensational shit for ever you know. But how knows they are stubborn. Try convincing then to build you an iron man suit. Say it's for killing distant warlords. Make sure you mention the warlords are commies
>>7840230
I think we've replaced commies with terrorists now
>>7840231
Oh shit, so we have. I got in the commie mood since iirc Iron Man was inspired by the cold war and was made to fight against commies
>>7840212
>as close to working as we can get it with today's technology?
See:
XOS 2
HULC
HAL suits
>>7840224
>The military knows better than to chase ghosts.
*cough* F35 *cough*
The military doesn't know shit.
>>7840212
We do not have any means for energy storage with the energy density anywhere near what would be required. Nor do we have energy conversion means with the necessary power/volume or power/mass performance.
A modern battle tank clocks in at about 50 tons, guzzles fuel and emits exhaust with enough heat to destroy a nearby car.
You need many breakthroughs on two fields to even get close to the requirements.
It is not a question of cost. It is a question of available technology.
>>7840212
The human would have to be suspended in a vacuum within the suit to not their limbs burst from something hitting the suit.
>>7841045
Also, momentum changes shown in the movie, just from flying would splat stark on the inside. You need inertial dampners
it could use a miniature takomak to power an RF resonant cavity thruster. think about it guys!
>>7840212
The suit isn't even the most advanced technology in the movie, Tony Stark has a completely functioning butler-AI with interactive holograms able to create an assembly line for that very suit.
>>7840230
>They also spent money looking into telepathic powers
Let's not forget super serums
>>7840212
its not gonna be as OP. think MAX suits from planetside instead.
and there are two main bottle necks
1. power supply
our batteries suck. our drones are still using weed eater engines.
2. non shitty linear actuators
human muscle is actually really good mechanically. pain and other safeties over ride alot of its potential. if we could make a 1:1 synthetic analog that we could just turn the safeties off because fuck it, its a part we can replace, we will be in a good spot for what all you nerds want.
>>7840228
>Didn't they spend a ton of money looking into physics and telekinesis?
Finding out whether telekinesis was real was a smart investment.
>>7841604
government plz go
>>7840230
You don't actually think they spend $20,000 on a hammer, $30,000 on a toilet seat, do you?
>>7841618
The military has insane documentation and traceability requirements. So for the hammer they know what miners extracted the ore that ended up for the head of the hammer and the exact location of the tree as well as the suppliers for tending the trees that went into the stick. There will of course be massive auditing all the way to be sure, say, none of the components for the fertilizers came from Iran.
This is not cheap.
>>7841618
Are you retarded?
>>7841659
Not to mention economy of scale. If the government needs something, it will likely be highly specialized, which drives the cost up because it can't be subsidized by bulk manufacturing.
>>7840212
Because we don't have a power source small enough and efficient enough to power a suit comparable to an iron man suit.
Convention. What the fuck is the point of a human shaped mech or exoskeleton when you can more efficiently make something stronger and cheaper?
>>7840224
>Where would the energy come from?
In the movie they use some strange new element to power it, and Tony Stark learns about this element from his dad's model city. I'm sure the military could replicate that atom if they analyzed the movie or something. Maybe they do know what atom is it (my educated guess would be tungsten, because it's used in lightbulbs, and ironman's rector also emits light), but they didn't succeed in making that accelerator thingy, but then they could just ask robert downey jr for the specs. I mean he was on set a lot so he probably knows which wire goes where.
Maybe it's copyrighted by marvel or whoever, but then the us govt could just license it. They're probably playing it cheap thogh and wait ~120 years for the copyright to expire.
>>7841777
It would be specialized for sure. It would be good for some role where the unit can't be much larger than a human and you can't depend on remote control: hostage rescue, capturing HVTs, that kind of thing.
>>7840212
we already built prototypes bro
>>7842479
I was actually planning to build a mask for myself out of hardened cardboard alloy. but I'd need some paint and wood glue, think I'd rather have a pizza than an iron man mask right now
>>7840212
Gimme 50,000USD, access to a local makerspace, and between one and five years; /if it works/ you're looking at 10k~20k per unit in sale with a BOM in the 4~6k range
it won't fly, but will scream, defeat anything below .50BMG SLAP rounds, be capable of protecting choice pieces from even that and 20mm+ AM rounds, weigh between 0.5T~0.75T, and have a loading capacity (including itself and the armor) up to 1T (500lb~750lb for armament and cargo)
it has major potential application in heavy industry, disaster rescue, and most obviously urban shock-assault
don't ask me what the mpg is going to be, I don't know the answer, but it's probably not pretty
>>7842250
>>7843329
I bet you can't do that.
>>7840957
Yeah because a little twat on 4chan has first-hand review of current military affairs and experience of the world. Lol. I love nerds.
>>7843329
>[schizophrenic psychosis intensifies]
>>7840224
>There are exoskeletons that can enhance strength, but nothing that can ... give super strength
Dumb people posting in dumb people thread.
>>7845961
Kek
We can do power armor with today's technology.
It is just going to be bulky, slow, poor endurance, and impractically expensive.
because its a comic book character for kids
>>7846074
>bulky
use kevlar or other synthetics
>slow
ties into bulky
>poor endurance
yeah
>impractically expensive
I can't believe you're saying this on the science board. The more impractical and expensive, the better, faggot
>>7841108
>miniature takomak to power an RF resonant cavity thruster. think about it guys!
Idiot, you forgot the flux-capacitor :-)
>>7846201
>wants to talk about the design of power armor
>doesn't know that it includes the use of servos and batteries
