The Walking Tank

Which is it? That they don't work or that they do? He's said both and both cannot be true at the same time.

So, which is it?

How should I know? I'm not the author. I'm only repeating what he said, and offering a solution that fits both statements: They're devices that, while impractical, could conceivably have a bit of luck. Especially since he could've easily just made sure the timeline kept a bit of a "cool" factor.

I don't understand why you're so bitter about people on this site. Yes, Pkmatrix made a few wrong statements earlier in this thread. So what? He's been corrected, and has adjusted his views accordingly. That is commendable.

Are you just bitter because you've been banned under your initial account, Bill? Are you just bitter because you're not wanted at this site?
 
Um, it occurs to me that much of this debate could be avoided if this thread were to be moved to ASB&OM, where engineering concerns can be handwaved, if necessary. Also, I would like to remind you that hijacking someone else's thread for the purpose of an argument attacking one of the basic premises of the tread is to say the least, rude. Simply suggesting that the thread be moved is much easier on everyone. so, if you, Solomaxell, and you, Don Lardo, and anyone else involved in this pointless "debate" wish to continue it, I ask, as a fellow member, that you remove it to some other place. Have fun, just, please, take it somewhere else.:D
 
Last edited:
It's near ASB but not quite.

I can see using TODAY's technology creating a spider- or doglike vehicle (I really don't think a bipedal vehicle would be workable due to both balance and groundpressure issues) that is reasonably well-armored and armed, that is either completely robotic or with a crew of up to two.

It won't replace MBTs by any stretch, and would require air superiority, but it would have a certain niche in mountainous fighting.
 
As was I.

Once again, you continue your MO of just ignoring whatever bit of your opponent's argument is inconvenient. It becomes impossible to teach you anything because hey, if there's evidence you're wrong, clearly it should be ignored, right? If you had actually read my whole post, you would've noted that I responded to both things OP said, giving an actual account of how they can square together: he realizes they wouldn't work in practical situations, but wants to maintain some measure of "coolness factor" by having a few lucky victories. Your responses ignore all mention of OP saying that he realizes they're impractical and wouldn't see use. Of course, I'm sure you won't respond to the bulk of my response here, since, once again, it'd be inconvenient for you to do so.

Um, it occurs to me that much of this debate could be avoided if this thread were to be moved to ASB&OM, where engineering concerns can be handwaved, if necessary.

If it's moved to ASB, it loses most of the point of the thread, which is discussing the real life viability of walking tanks/mechs/whatever.

so, if you, Solomaxell,

I'd appreciate it if you edit your post to remove your mention of me. After all, all I'm doing is defending the OP and trying to stop Bill Cameron's baseless attacks on him. This is not something Bill Cameron has done in just this one thread, it's something that he keeps doing. Any why do I keep calling him Bill Cameron? Because Don Lardo is a sock puppet of a banned member.

It won't replace MBTs by any stretch, and would require air superiority, but it would have a certain niche in mountainous fighting.

Their best use is actually urban fighting. When you're dealing with manufactured surfaces of different altitude (usually stairs), legs work better than treads. As long as you're just using something small, ground pressure isn't even a big issue (because of the square-cube law). So they'd actually work fairly well for things like hostage negotiation robots, or little scouting robots. The big problem here is something I've mentioned earlier in this thread: it's possible to build treads that function as pseudo-legs and have the best of both worlds.
 
Their best use is actually urban fighting. When you're dealing with manufactured surfaces of different altitude (usually stairs), legs work better than treads. As long as you're just using something small, ground pressure isn't even a big issue (because of the square-cube law). So they'd actually work fairly well for things like hostage negotiation robots, or little scouting robots. The big problem here is something I've mentioned earlier in this thread: it's possible to build treads that function as pseudo-legs and have the best of both worlds.

Don't existing robots have threads? I mean de-mining robots and such. Though they have some special threads where wheels (or whatever you call them) can swing up or down more than on tank.

Of course this could be just the case of taking existing tech that works and adapting it to different environment instead of developing new tech that might be better but will take time to develop rather than some inherent superiority of tracks.
 
Don't existing robots have threads?

Yes they do.

Of course this could be just the case of taking existing tech that works and adapting it to different environment instead of developing new tech that might be better but will take time to develop rather than some inherent superiority of tracks.

No. There are definite engineering reasons why pseudo-leg treads are better... Primarily durability and programming issues.
 

Pkmatrix

Monthly Donor
All right, here's another update: up to 1994 now. It might sound like an ending, but the timeline isn't over yet (though I suspect you may be able to guess where I'm going with it now). Also, I want to thank everyone for your responses/comments/criticisms: with your help, I've come up with a new (and IMO, better) ending for all of this. When I finally get to 2011, I'll explain what I've changed. ^_^

For now, here's the whole thing again. I've reformatted it to, hopefully, make it easier to read (it was quickly turning into a wall of text, and give me googly-eyes! @_@):

- - -

The Walking Tank

Early Attempts: Hs-281 Spazierengehen Panzerkampfwagen

Late 1940

As plans for Operation Barbarossa were being drafted by Nazi Germany, the German military considered the possibility of the invasion extending beyond Moscow all the way to the Urals. If that occurred, some planners argued that German tanks would be rendered useless by the unforgiving mountain terrain. To prevent such a catastrophe, the German Army requested that manufacturer Henschel & Son develop a vehicle that could overcome this problem. Henschel's solution was the Hs-281 "Spazierengehen Panzerkampfwagen", or "Walking Tank" (literally, "Walking Armored Combat Car") - a four-legged vehicle that amounted to an engine, a lightly armored platform, and a lightweight 75mm gun. Afterwards, the Hs-281 project was suspended and the design shelved as German military leaders decided it would not be necessary.

October 1941

With German forces bearing down on Moscow and after facing serious resistance from the Soviets, interest was renewed in the Spazierengehen Panzerkampfwagen project as some in the German High Command once again worried about the performance of the Tank Corps when German forces pushed into the Urals. Henschel & Son was commissioned to build a working proof-of-concept prototype of the Spazierengehen Panzerkampfwagen for the German Army.

August 1943

A single Hs-281 prototype was completed at Henschel & Son's factory in Kassel and demonstrated for senior military officials. Impressed, they commissioned a combat-ready prototype. Henschel & Son designated the new unit Hs-281B. Unfortunately, as the war had turned against Germany, the project saw its funding cut in favor of increased traditional tank production.

April 1945

The city of Kassel, including Henschel & Son's factories, was captured by the US Army. Among other things, the Hs-281A and the incomplete Hs-281B prototypes fell into the hands of the United States military. After the war in Europe ended, all materials related to the project were shipped to Newark Army Air Field and, eventually, to the Tank Automotive Research, Development and Engineering Center in Warren, Michigan. Deemed of "low priority interest", all materials were put in storage.

January 1946

Dr. Eberhard von Maur, the chief engineer on the Spazierengehen Panzerkampfwagen project, resurfaced at the Soviet OKB-520 design bureau, where he participated in the development of the T-54 and T-55 main battle tanks.

Soviet Walking Tanks: Object 169 and the W-83

December 1967

Dr. von Maur, now a senior engineer at OKB-520, capitalized on renewed Soviet interest in robotics to propose an updated Soviet version of the Walking Tank concept. Among the improvements von Maur suggested were using a modern engine and gun, an enclosed crew compartment inside a turret, and the addition of two more legs to better manage rough terrain. The project was approved under the codename "Object 169", but was given low priority next to other projects, with many engineers doing double duty on the development of the T-72 main battle tank.

June 1971

US intelligence obtained documents detailing Object 169 and Dr. von Maur's work. In response, the Defense Advanced Research Project Agency (DARPA) was asked to conduct a study on whether or not the concept was at all feasible.

May 1972

DARPA completed its study on the walking tank concept, determining that "while interesting, was too fallible and easily countered to be useful in a realistic combat setting". Ultimately, the Soviet design was too-lightly armored to provide adequate crew protection, was using an engine that would burn too much fuel while not providing enough energy to move except in very short bursts, and that in softer terrain would likely bog down quickly due to weight issues. Although tabs were kept on the Soviet walking tank's development, it was considered a dead-end and likely waste of Soviet resources.

February 1974

Dr. von Maur died of lung cancer. Shortly afterward, Object 169's development was cancelled and its team dispersed throughout OKB-520, with the Object 169 prototype about 70% complete. The CIA ceased surveillance of Object 169, concluding the project had been a failure.

December 1979

The Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan. Opposing them was the mujahideen, supported and supplied by the CIA. The resulting conflict proved difficult on Soviet forces, who were unprepared for the level of guerilla warfare they faced.

September 1982

Unable to use armored vehicles effectively in Afghanistan's rough terrain, interest was renewed in Object 169. The Soviet Army tasked OKB-520 with finishing the prototype, and the project was handed over to Dr. Pavel Demidov, who had originally worked on the design under Dr. von Maur.

March 1983

The Object 169 prototype was demonstrated to a group of senior Soviet officials, impressing them as much as it had their German predecessors forty years earlier. The Soviet Army commissioned the construction of three combat-ready units, now designated the W-83, for field testing in Afghanistan. How well the W-83 team performed in the field would determine whether or not to go forward with further production.

January 1986

The three W-83 test units were completed. The Soviet Army drew personnel from the Tank Corps to be trained as the test operators, with initial field tests conducted in Tajikistan. Word of the bizarre vehicles eventually made its way to CIA operatives, who managed to smuggle photos back to the United States. Analysts were able to connect the W-83 units to the all-but-forgotten Object 169 Project.

July 1987

All three W-83 units, as well as their support team, were deployed to Afghanistan and attached to the 201st Motor Rifle Division. Despite efforts to maintain some level of secrecy, images reached western media outlets and the existence of the W-83 walkers became public knowledge. Many in the West found the vehicles absolutely absurd, repeating many of the criticisms first made by DARPA a decade earlier, and wrote the W-83 off. As a talking point, it was used as an example of how desperate the Soviets had become.

November 1987

Operation Magistral began. Amongst the Soviet forces deployed to Paktia Province was the W-83 Test Unit, which served as mobile artillery amongst the rugged mountain terrain supporting Soviet and Afghani infantry. The W-83s proved surprisingly effective and their intimidating appearance had an impact on Mujahideen morale. Even more impressively, one W-83 unit survived a direct RPG attack to the legs - what many predicted would be a devastating (if not fatal) blow was shrugged off, with the unit managing to right itself within only a few minutes and the heavily armored leg sustaining only moderate damage.

January 1988

Operation Magistral ended in a Soviet victory, and the success of the W-83 units won them respect amongst their allies and enemies. Unfortunately, this was all too little too late: by the end of the year, the Soviet Union began withdrawing from Afghanistan. Regardless, the Soviet Army ordered nine more W-83s.

W-83 Block 2, the August Coup, and the WTX Program

August 1988

Researchers at the United States Army Tank Automotive Research, Development and Engineering Center (TARDEC) in Warren, Michigan restarted research into the walking tank concept after US intelligence passed on what was known about the W-83 and its development. John O. Olsen, head of the project, rediscovered the old Hs-281 prototypes rotting away in a warehouse in the Detroit Arsenal since World War II. Using the Hs-281 as the basis, TARDEC began designing an American walking tank.

January 1989

All three W-83 units withdrew from Afghanistan and returned to their field base in Tajikistan along with the 201st Motor Rifle Division. The first mass-production W-83, designated "W-83 Block 2", was completed in Russia.

July 1989

The first team of mass-production W-83s was delivered to the 14th Tank Division in Novocherkassk. Shortly afterward, the 14th Tank Division was reorganized into the Interior Ministry's 100th Division.

November 1989

TARDEC sent a preliminary report to the Pentagon largely repeating many of the criticisms of the Walking Tank concept that had been voiced by DARPA. While experimenting with the restored Hs-281 prototypes, John Olsen's team found little to suggest any superiority over conventional treaded armored vehicles beyond the additional mobility legs provided. Regardless, Olsen's team presented a set of design recommendations for what the Pentagon should request of manufacturers if they decided to go forward.

February 1990

The second MP W-83 team was delivered to 21st Guards Tank Division of the 35th Army in Belogorsk, in the Russian Far East.

March 1990

John Olsen's report and the US Walking Tank development program came before the House Armed Services' subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land Forces. Despite reservations on the usefulness of such a weapons platform, the committee allowed development to proceed.

June 1990

The Pentagon sent out a memorandum to potential manufacturers outlining the project and what was expected of weapons platform, opening the floor to design proposals. The project was now designated the "WTX (Walking Tank Experimental) Program".

July 1990

A third and final team of MP W-83s was delivered to the 2nd Guards Tamanskaya Motor Rifle Division in Naro-Fominsk, southwest of Moscow.

April 1991

TARDEC released the final version of its Walking Tank study, ultimately reaching the same conclusion DARPA had 19 years earlier: an interesting idea, but not practical. Since the report repeated many of the same design recommendations as the 1989 draft, and given that the Soviets had built and deployed 12 walking tanks, it was largely ignored by Defense officials.

August 1991

Hardliner members of the Soviet Communist Party opposed to President Gorbachev's reforms attempted to overthrow the government. The Tamanskaya Division was ordered to deploy into Moscow and, as a show of force, the 3rd W-83 Unit is ordered to guard the White House, the Russian SFSR's parliament building. The coup is opposed by Russian SFSR President Boris Yeltsin, who famously climbed one of the Walking Tanks to address a crowd of supporters. The coup was ultimately defeated, but would be a fatal blow to the Soviet Union.

December 1991

The Soviet Union officially dissolved into its constituent states, with the Russian Federation claiming most of the former USSR's military assets, including all existing W-83 units. Despite being stationed in newly independent Tajikistan, the 201st Motor Rifle Division's Russian officers maintained control over the division's equipment while many soldiers - the majority from Tajikistan - deserted.

February 1992

Three companies responded to the US Army's request for proposals, but ultimately the Defense Department selected General Motor's design. The GM walking tank was the only one to distance itself from the Hs-281 and W-83 designs, instead opting for a design closer to a traditional armored vehicle with a set of four retractable legs that ended in traditional treads. This way, the GM design could - on paper, at least - benefit from the advantages of both a treaded and a legged vehicle.

May 1992

Ethnically-charged fighting broke out in Tajikistan between supporters of President Rahmon Nabiyev and reformers made up of democratic liberals and Islamists. Despite the chaos, the 201st Motor Rifle Division declared neutrality in the conflict and awaited orders from Moscow. Ultimately, the government relented and a power-sharing coalition was formed, but this development did not end the unrest.

August 1992

Opposition protesters in Dushanbe captured President Nabiyev and forced him to resign by force. Akbarsho Iskandarov, speaker of Tajikistan's Supreme Soviet, became Acting President. His attempts at negotiating a truce with the opposition were futile.

Fall and Winter 1992

Akbarsho Iskandarov and his government resigned in a final attempt to resolve the conflict. The Supreme Soviet, dominated by hardliners who'd come to power in the Soviet era, remained determined to keep the liberals and Islamists out of power. They formed a new government headed by Parliament speaker Imomali Rahmonov, abolished the office of president, and clamped down on the opposition. Within weeks, many opposition leaders had either been arrested or assassinated. At the behest of the Tajik government, Moscow ordered the 201st Motor Rifle Division (joined by Uzbek forces) to move in and secure Dushanbe under the banner of a CIS peacekeeping mission. The Russians faced resistance from armed opposition members, some of whom were former 201st members, and a fierce battle broke out for control of the city. Much as they had been in Moscow during the August Coup, the W-83 Test Unit was deployed as a show of force and ordered to guard Dushanbe Airport.

February 1993

Dushanbe Airport was attacked by opposition forces consisting of ex-Soviet Army and Islamists from Afghanistan who'd crossed the border to join the fighting. Although the Russians were able to hold the airport, the W-83 Test Unit suffered terrible losses: unable to maneuver quickly enough in the furiously quick fighting, one unit was completely destroyed when a bomb-laden truck rammed it while a second was wrecked beyond repair by RPG fire. Rather than risk the last W-83 being overwhelmed in the future, the Russians decided to pull it from the field and sent it back to the 201st's base.

September 1993

Russian Ground Forces completed a review of the W-83 fleet and their effectiveness following the Battle of Dushanbe, coming to the conclusion that "while a walking tank could have advantages over a traditional tank in an urban combat situation," the W-83 was simply not fast enough, not armored enough, and not advanced enough to do the job. It was recommended that W-83s be limited to mountain warfare from now on and only enter combat situations with a large enough infantry force to protect them from direct enemy attacks. Some critics, however, questioned why the Soviet relics were being kept in active service when the new Ka-50 attack helicopter - unveiled about a year earlier - could potentially do the same job far more effectively.

May 1994

The WTX Program once again came before the Tactical Air and Land Forces subcommittee, where Democratic congressmen grilled the Defense Department on the justifications for developing an American walking tank. Supporters cited intelligence reports on Operation Magistral and the potential advantages of an armored legged vehicle. However, subcommittee members had come armed with reports on the disastrous performance in Dushanbe, the 1972 DARPA study, and 1991 TARDEC study, all of which painted the picture of an impractical vanity project.

July 1994

The House Armed Services committee voted to cut funding for the WTX Program and recommended that the Defense Department cancel the project.
 
Top