Blog

More Mobility Concepts – Legs

Following on from our recent discussion vehicle mobility this is a video mini-series looking at how vehicle designers approach the need for mobility. The need for extreme mobility in adverse conditions has delivered some extremely interesting solutions that go beyond the traditional wheels v tracks debate.

It is generally accepted that for serious mobility, especially where low surface compaction or high tractive force is needed, tracks are superior to wheels. Another generally accepted fact is that tracks have higher running costs, create more vibration, are noisier and have higher fuel consumption.

Various FRES studies seemed to draw the same conclusions and there are some interesting (although quite old) research papers on the web;

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/docs/2wheels98.pdf

http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=AD0744222

http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$department/deptdocs.nsf/all/eng8171

But, there are a number of technologies and designs that have and are chipping away at these assumptions, wheels and track technology does not stand still.

We all know about the Supacat ATMP and BAE BVs10 Viking but these are the more unusual and mostly civilian solutions.

If these don’t wet your appetite then head over to Unusual Locomotion

Legs

Plustech/Timberjack Walker

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wNp7Slxt20

 

Big Dog

httpv://www.bostondynamics.com/robot_bigdog.html

 

 

Tags:

Think Defence

Think Defence hopes to start sensible conversations about UK defence issues, no agenda or no campaign but there might be one or two posts on containers, bridges and mexeflotes!

This Post Has 14 Comments

  1. x February 15, 2012

    Though I am a big fan of Big Dog they should have gone with six legs not four.

  2. Alan February 16, 2012

    Does this mean that we may one day have an AT-AT? ;-)

  3. R L-C February 16, 2012

    Spider-Dog, Spider-dog. [Homer, spider-pig]
    meant to be more economical and energy efficient then 4 or 2 legs
    @Alan dum-dum-dum-DUM-Da-Dum, would be fun. But not as tall, or be hit easily it will.

  4. Alan February 17, 2012

    Sorry, couldn’t resist.

  5. x February 17, 2012

    @ Alan

    We do have a version of the Weaponised Phil Platfrom with legs. Well once I have the mock-up done and put on the website. Oh! That will be £50million please.

    @ RLC

    See what you did I there. :)

  6. Phil February 17, 2012

    @x

    I prescribe fresh air.

  7. Alan February 17, 2012

    @x

    A weaponised Phil with legs for £50m…if you throw in weaponised dyslexia and gobbledigook counter measures we’ll go to £120m for the first tranche.
    ;-)

  8. Observer February 17, 2012

    Trache 2 is when they reduce the number of legs to 2? And he becomes capable of bombing runs?

  9. x February 17, 2012

    @ Phil

    I had already been outside for 4 hours when I posted that. Miserable little bear aren’t we today?

  10. Phil February 17, 2012

    Maybe someone pissed in my cornflakes.

  11. Observer February 17, 2012

    Bears eat cornflakes?

  12. Ace Rimmer February 20, 2012

    Alan, re: AT-AT, I preferred the look of the smaller ‘chicken’ version they had in the forest. A quick Google search and Wikipedia assures me its called an AT-ST (All Terrain Scout Transport).

    As for robot legs on the battlefield, I’m wondering why we haven’t already trialled a combat version of Asimo. Not the cheapest version of recce using a real-time camera feed, but the humanoid shape could force an enemy to reveal his position with minimum risk of casualties.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asimo

  13. Dangerous Dave February 28, 2012

    (To paraphrase HG): No one would have beleived, in the first years of the 21st Century, that any intelligent life existed on Mars . . .

    da-da-da-DUMMMMM, de-dede-de-dede . . .

    uuuulaaaa! uuuulaaa! etc. etc.

    X-D

Leave a Reply