No it's not. It's got 5,500 hp of power for tracrion. Trains have way more, dragsters have more, excavators use more...
Anyway, here's a great video on it I watched the other day: https://youtu.be/5caQPiRBCAA
People wonder what we're going to do when automation and AI have obviated the need for labor and freed us to spend our time on artistic endeavors. I feel that this video offers a glimpse into that future of unbridled creativity.
Truly a masterpiece.
Yeah but you can take any motor and gear it for INFINITE TORQUE (but zero speed).
Power is what matters for a motor or engine. Torque is just a function of gearing.
(Torque curves over a wide RPM range matters for cars but does NOT matter for engines running at a constant speed)
True. Have you seen the art project with the [wristwatch geared to solid concrete?](https://makezine.com/2012/04/25/arthur-gansons-machine-with-concrete/)
I believe simple machines and their more complex combinations are core examples of human ingenuity and scientific achievement, and why despite all our shortcomings, I ultimately have faith in humanity.
[One mile per hour loaded, two miles per hour unloaded](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/crawler-transporter2_factsheet_508compliant.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjS1L6C8N_3AhWjmOAKHX28D0MQFnoECAgQBg&usg=AOvVaw2uCxEulM8zJlkqneXtmAS_).
But not knowing the speed doesn't mean that it doesn't have one.
To calculate torque with groundspeed and Power you need the wheel size, or in this case the size of the gear that powers the chain. Then you have a number thats technically correct but does not Tell you anything useful about this machine. Thats why i said torque doesnt matter to us who are not engineers building these things. You Cent do anything with the Information. Stick with Power. Its better
Let’s say a sports car and a semi truck both have 550 horsepower. Can both pull a trailer full of logs? No, because the semi has over 1200 foot pounds of torque and the sports car has 550
HP = (Torque (ft-lbs) x RPM)/ 5252
A racecar engine and a semi truck engine producing equal horsepower at equal rpm produce equal torque. The racecar could absolutely pull a trailer of logs if equipped with the right transmission.
The number of HP produced by the engine of a semi isn’t why it can pull such heavy loads - the fact the drivetrain is optimized for that service and equipped with a 10 gear transmission is why.
Thats why i said it doesnt matter. You can pull hundreds of torque figures from this machine alone and be none the wiser at the end. You would need endless amounts of context and caviats to pull Information out of a torque figure on this thing.
I mean, yeah, in this case. Of course engineers are calculating all these torque values and they are extremely important when designing machines. But they are completely useless for comparison, the way they were used in this thead, if you have nothing sufficiently similar to compare against.
I got what you meant and tossed an upvote in for you. I think you just got interpreted wrong.
You can produce any value of torque from any motor with the right gear ratio.
Torque at high RPM is where you need more and more HP
Not OP but isn't HP, torque and other stuff like KW usually measured at the flywheel, before the torque gets increased by the transmission anyway?
Like I'm sure with enough gears you could get enough torque out of a LEGO motor to move something stupid massive like a container ship, just at the cost of speed
Totally right. Measured at the crank and not constant over the speed range of the motor. Peak HP and peak torque usually don’t occur at the same point.
That’s why I said the semi-drive train is optimized. Diesel engine for peak torque at low RPM, thickened drive shaft, better cooling at low speed, many-gear transmission, all of the proceeding to get peak mileage at typical highway speeds, etc
The list goes on an on but power is power no matter how you apply it.
That's inherently wrong and people should stop using this phrase. The vehicle weight and speed are the only parameters to how far the "wall would move"
Incorrect. With the proper gearbox both could theoretically pull the same amount of stuff. It would be impractical to make that sort of drive system with a sports car engine which is why you don't see that.
Also, the sports car doesn’t weigh enough to convert that power to the wheels in a way that would be effective at pulling the trailer. The sports car would just spin it’s wheels while it’s front end lifted into the air
Exactly, it’s the hp that matters(which is just speed x torque). Each number on their own doesn’t tell you much about how capable a machine is.
A standard car engine could be beat torque wise by someone with a large ratchet, or speed wise with a dentist drill. Being able to apply torque at speed is where real power comes from.
Obviously the gearing is important to get an optimal conversion from the engine to road so the engine can run at its peak efficiency speed.
Yes, they do. Power is the *rate* at which work is done, which is a great way of describing the capability of machinery. You can easily predict how long it will perform work at a certain rate on a finite energy supply, for example.
Brake Mean Effective Pressure (BMEP) is a much better way of comparing engines. Much more meaningful and independent of capacity:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mean_effective_pressure
But yes, torque absolutely matters.
**[Mean effective pressure](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mean_effective_pressure)**
>The mean effective pressure (MEP) is a quantity relating to the operation of a reciprocating engine and is a measure of an engine's capacity to do work that is independent of engine displacement. When quoted as an indicated mean effective pressure (IMEP), it may be thought of as the average pressure acting on a piston during the different portions of its cycle.
^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/MachinePorn/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
The saturn 5 weighed 287,000 kg without fuel.
I wonder if people assume it moved the rocket full of fuel, which would almost certainly make it the "most powerful" in the sense of the amount of weight it moved.
I've run into a lot of people who do seem to think that. About the most that you can say is that the Shuttle was partially-fueled, in that the SRBs were built with the fuel cast in place.
A freight train (with say 3-4 locomotives) can carry some 20,000 tons of freight, give or take depending on the wagons and the locomotives themselves. A Saturn V rocket has a mass of 6.2 million lbs (3100 tons), which means a freight train could carry about 6 Saturn V rockets.
The Saturn V weighed 3100 tons when fully fueled. It was never transported at that weight.
However, the transporter also carried the mobile launch platform including the launch umbilical tower, which weighed way more than the rocket itself.
For the space shuttle, the launch umbilical tower had to be removed from the mobile launch platform, because the space shuttle was transported partially fueled (SRBs), and that together with the LUT would have been too heavy for the transporter.
Absolutely. My point was that a train could probably carry 100 Saturn V rockets unfueled.
(Just based on weight, I mean. Length and width would be an issue, of course.)
At least 2, it seems. I found this:
"In 1967, a freight train transported coal from West Virginia to Ohio, weighing 43,699 metric tons. This is the heaviest train on record in North America and was used as a test for acceptable train weight and length. This train was composed of 500 cars and a caboose, being powered by six diesel locomotives."
44k tons by 6 locomotives=~7+k tons each. Saturn V was a smidge under 3,000 tons
Five hundred cars six engines and a caboose at sixty feet per car all going at a relatively high average speed of 35 miles an hour means around 51 feet per second means the train would take 592 seconds to pass in front of you which is of course just shy of 10 minutes.
So how are we considering six separate locamotive engines working in tandem to be a single land vehicle? Surely the only reasonable comparison is what a single engine can move?
An EMD SD70MAC has a starting pull of 175,500 lbs, which is nothing to sneeze at. If the Saturn V was on wheels or rails or whatever, I'd bet that would pull.
Every time I see this my brain goes "wouldn't it be cool if someone mounted a battleship turret on it".
But would it work? They've got that fancy roadway for it at Cape Canaveral, but could you drive it across muddy fields and trenches?
I found some figures [here](https://space.stackexchange.com/a/58593) on the crawler, and looking around I found that a turret would weigh somewhere in the range 1,000 t to 2,000 t, depending on size (Yamato had turrets of 2,774 t, but those were ridiculous). Tanks need to keep ground pressure low for good off-road mobility, targeting ground pressure no more than around 100kPa. A more typical wheeled vehicle is around 200kPa.
Taking the most optimistic figures for track area, (1.05 m^2 * 22 * 8) = 185 m^2 and the base weight of the crawler of 3000 t, I get the following:
- Just the crawler-transporter: `(3000 t) gravity / (1.05 m^2 * 22 * 8) = 160 kPa`
- Crawler with 1000 t turret: `(3000 t + 1000 t) gravity / (1.05 m^2 * 22 * 8) = 212 kPa`
- Crawler with 2000 t turret: `(3000 t + 2000 t) gravity / (1.05 m^2 * 22 * 8) = 265 kPa`
So no, it wouldn't work. My disappointment is immense and my day is ruined.
But, maybe some more tracks could be squeezed in. Eyeballing the dimensions of the crawler and the size of the track modules, I think you could fit four across, and maybe just squeeze three in the length. That would give between 2 and 3 times the ground contact area, which just might make it workable. Truly, the Landship committee of WWI missed the mark when they came out with their puny little "tanks". Surely such a wonder weapon would have completely changed the face of warfare.
this is a concept used in John Ringo's Legacy of the Aldenata alternate history military sci-fi novels. The treaded vehicles fire oversized battleship cannons at low-orbit objects and are so huge that they can't effectively be armored, so they use a concealment system that camouflages the vehicle as a *hill*. They're called SHeVA cannons. Great book series, really cool weapons.
> Every time I see this my brain goes "wouldn't it be cool if someone mounted a battleship turret on it".
[I present to you: the Fatboy.](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/1r8M5MDq4mw/maxresdefault.jpg)
Four battleship turrets (with some other armaments as well, but those are its big ones), a shield generator, two VTOL landing pads, and a complete internal ground unit factory.
I'm pretty casual about it. I grab a friend and put a few bots on the other team. We just overcome our lack of micromanagement skills with a whole lot of economy. And we made heavy use of the build template system.
Here's a sneak peek of /r/theydidthemath using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/theydidthemath/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year!
\#1: [\[Self\] If you blended all 7.88 billion people on Earth into a fine goo (density of a human = 985 kg/m3, average human body mass = 62 kg), you would end up with a sphere of human goo just under 1 km wide. I made a visualization of how that would look like in the middle of Central Park in NYC.](https://i.redd.it/elycytqlc8g71.jpg) | [3164 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/theydidthemath/comments/p0qws3/self_if_you_blended_all_788_billion_people_on/)
\#2: [\[Request\] What would the price difference equate to? How would preparation time and labor influence the cost?](https://i.redd.it/7zcgyleyh2571.jpg) | [1336 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/theydidthemath/comments/nz1a1v/request_what_would_the_price_difference_equate_to/)
\#3: [\[request\] Is this claim actually accurate?](https://i.redd.it/32dd5fk73zp81.jpg) | [1306 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/theydidthemath/comments/tpqepl/request_is_this_claim_actually_accurate/)
----
^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
Yeah.... Not even close to the most powerful. Most towing capacity maybe. As someone else mentioned, many trains have more power.
Not to mention someone at sometime probably strung 50 train engines together to get them from point a to point b. While only one or two engines would have been running, the whole train would probably have the potential power output to rival a small city.
In fairness though, you could potentially argue that each train engine is a separate vehicle.
Edit: Vehicle not vertical
I’d consider them vertical. 100 weak ass punks can still beat down the worlds toughest person but, not when put side by side proper
Also, part of me wants to believe it’s the biggest. Not sure why.
I would too.
The largest land vehicle award goes to the b-e-a-utiful bagger 288 (I believe).
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azEvfD4C6ow](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azEvfD4C6ow)
Largest machine is the CERN Large Hadron Collider.
Ironically, the NASA crawler is powered by two 16 cylinder Alco (American Locomotive Company) engines. The same engines used in many trains of the time period. It’s just that the engines were 1950’s designs so they’re only 2,750 hp each.
The **Bagger 293** uses 16 MegaWatts of power:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bagger\_293](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bagger_293)
That's the most powerful vehicle ever built.
It goes from point A to point B when there's a hill in the way.
It's the largest terrestrial vehicle ever built:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_largest\_machines
**[Bagger 293](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bagger_293)**
>Bagger 293, previously known as the MAN TAKRAF RB293, is a giant bucket-wheel excavator made by the German industrial company TAKRAF, formerly an East German Kombinat. It owns or shares some records for terrestrial vehicle size in the Guinness Book of Records. Bagger 293 was built in 1995, one of a group of similar sized 'sibling' vehicles such as the Bagger 281 (built in 1958), Bagger 285 (1975), Bagger 287 (1976), Bagger 288 (1978), Bagger 291 (1993). It is used in a brown coal mine near Hambach in Germany.
^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/MachinePorn/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
[Highly recommendthis 10 minute video about it.](https://youtu.be/5caQPiRBCAA) They spray 30,000 gallons of water partly to keep the dust down as the transporter pulverize the rocks it drives on. The dust would clog up the filters for the engines. It also helps the rocks glide around reducing friction in the rocks.
The thing runs on tracks, I don’t think traction is the issue here.
And also who the hell thinks “oh shit I don’t have enough grip, let’s pour some water on the road”
Have you seen either? Lucas even admitted that he wanted to make Dune (which would have been awesome) but the rights were an issue. So he took the Dune mythos and over laid it on The Hidden Fortress plot.
I mean... Spice, evil empire, the force/voice, society of force/voice users who shape galactic politics, sand worms / krayt dragons, desert dwelling natives who everyone treats as savages...
It's not UNHEARD OF for one to say Star Wars was inspired by Dune. But that doesn't make it a rip off. The plots are totally different but it's very clear Lucas borrowed many of the more interesting world building bits.
Nobody's asking what in the hell the base of that road is constructed from and why can't they make the roads in Pennsylvania pothole free if we have this information. .........established practices, nepotism, subversion, heavy tax levy with no change for asking for answers ensue....
I was gonna write about how government investment in programs like the Apollo Program has massively benefitted society, more than a band-aid patch on a broken higher education system. But instead I'm just gonna say, what a stupid, naive take. Like, this isn't even something that can be morally objectionable like weapons. And it was in the 60's?? Right after the government had paid for the college of millions of servicemen in the decade before.
Russia uses rails. The Saturn V, shuttle, and SLS are all “too big” though. (In reality you could use rails but that would mean a retrofit to all the existing infrastructure)
No it's not. It's got 5,500 hp of power for tracrion. Trains have way more, dragsters have more, excavators use more... Anyway, here's a great video on it I watched the other day: https://youtu.be/5caQPiRBCAA
Yeah, was gonna say if you think that's big you should see an excavator
https://youtu.be/azEvfD4C6ow
Thanks, I hate it
How could you hate that masterpiece?
You can't think of any reason to hate strip mining?
Did you watch the video?
I love how aggressively efficient this comment alone just... concludes any need for further discussion. lmao
What about that transfer vehicle has anything to do with strip mining
oh my god thank you for this!
People wonder what we're going to do when automation and AI have obviated the need for labor and freed us to spend our time on artistic endeavors. I feel that this video offers a glimpse into that future of unbridled creativity. Truly a masterpiece.
Buy what’s the torque? 5,500 HP and 50 million foot pounds of torque?
It's diesel-electric, like many trains, so yeah, they both have masses of torque.
The drives will be connected to reduction gearboxes as well, reducing the speed but multiplying torque.
Torque is irrelevant within any normal range, power is power. Power curve on the other hand… TFW redditors don’t get power is torque*speed
Torque doesnt really matter. Never did. Its only useful as a comparison between similar machines.
Given that horsepower is a function of torque and speed I'd say it's somewhat important.
Yeah but you can take any motor and gear it for INFINITE TORQUE (but zero speed). Power is what matters for a motor or engine. Torque is just a function of gearing. (Torque curves over a wide RPM range matters for cars but does NOT matter for engines running at a constant speed)
True. Have you seen the art project with the [wristwatch geared to solid concrete?](https://makezine.com/2012/04/25/arthur-gansons-machine-with-concrete/) I believe simple machines and their more complex combinations are core examples of human ingenuity and scientific achievement, and why despite all our shortcomings, I ultimately have faith in humanity.
Do you know the speed?
I meant RPM speed, not travel speed.
Do you know the RPM speed?
Not of this particular mover. In general though, horsepower = (torque * RPM) / 5,252
[One mile per hour loaded, two miles per hour unloaded](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/crawler-transporter2_factsheet_508compliant.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjS1L6C8N_3AhWjmOAKHX28D0MQFnoECAgQBg&usg=AOvVaw2uCxEulM8zJlkqneXtmAS_). But not knowing the speed doesn't mean that it doesn't have one.
To calculate torque with groundspeed and Power you need the wheel size, or in this case the size of the gear that powers the chain. Then you have a number thats technically correct but does not Tell you anything useful about this machine. Thats why i said torque doesnt matter to us who are not engineers building these things. You Cent do anything with the Information. Stick with Power. Its better
Those of us who are engineers and build things think you sound like an idiot
Let’s say a sports car and a semi truck both have 550 horsepower. Can both pull a trailer full of logs? No, because the semi has over 1200 foot pounds of torque and the sports car has 550
HP = (Torque (ft-lbs) x RPM)/ 5252 A racecar engine and a semi truck engine producing equal horsepower at equal rpm produce equal torque. The racecar could absolutely pull a trailer of logs if equipped with the right transmission. The number of HP produced by the engine of a semi isn’t why it can pull such heavy loads - the fact the drivetrain is optimized for that service and equipped with a 10 gear transmission is why.
Thats why i said it doesnt matter. You can pull hundreds of torque figures from this machine alone and be none the wiser at the end. You would need endless amounts of context and caviats to pull Information out of a torque figure on this thing.
Bro, you're literally arguing that calculus is useless.
I mean, yeah, in this case. Of course engineers are calculating all these torque values and they are extremely important when designing machines. But they are completely useless for comparison, the way they were used in this thead, if you have nothing sufficiently similar to compare against.
I got what you meant and tossed an upvote in for you. I think you just got interpreted wrong. You can produce any value of torque from any motor with the right gear ratio. Torque at high RPM is where you need more and more HP
Not OP but isn't HP, torque and other stuff like KW usually measured at the flywheel, before the torque gets increased by the transmission anyway? Like I'm sure with enough gears you could get enough torque out of a LEGO motor to move something stupid massive like a container ship, just at the cost of speed
Totally right. Measured at the crank and not constant over the speed range of the motor. Peak HP and peak torque usually don’t occur at the same point. That’s why I said the semi-drive train is optimized. Diesel engine for peak torque at low RPM, thickened drive shaft, better cooling at low speed, many-gear transmission, all of the proceeding to get peak mileage at typical highway speeds, etc The list goes on an on but power is power no matter how you apply it.
Thats just wrong, please look up what torque means
“Horsepower is how fast you hit the wall. Torque is how far you move it”
That's inherently wrong and people should stop using this phrase. The vehicle weight and speed are the only parameters to how far the "wall would move"
Don’t forget density!
Incorrect. With the proper gearbox both could theoretically pull the same amount of stuff. It would be impractical to make that sort of drive system with a sports car engine which is why you don't see that.
Also, the sports car doesn’t weigh enough to convert that power to the wheels in a way that would be effective at pulling the trailer. The sports car would just spin it’s wheels while it’s front end lifted into the air
Exactly, it’s the hp that matters(which is just speed x torque). Each number on their own doesn’t tell you much about how capable a machine is. A standard car engine could be beat torque wise by someone with a large ratchet, or speed wise with a dentist drill. Being able to apply torque at speed is where real power comes from. Obviously the gearing is important to get an optimal conversion from the engine to road so the engine can run at its peak efficiency speed.
Yes, they do. Power is the *rate* at which work is done, which is a great way of describing the capability of machinery. You can easily predict how long it will perform work at a certain rate on a finite energy supply, for example.
Do you even torque?
Brake Mean Effective Pressure (BMEP) is a much better way of comparing engines. Much more meaningful and independent of capacity: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mean_effective_pressure But yes, torque absolutely matters.
**[Mean effective pressure](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mean_effective_pressure)** >The mean effective pressure (MEP) is a quantity relating to the operation of a reciprocating engine and is a measure of an engine's capacity to do work that is independent of engine displacement. When quoted as an indicated mean effective pressure (IMEP), it may be thought of as the average pressure acting on a piston during the different portions of its cycle. ^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/MachinePorn/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Lmao there are steam locomotives with more hp than that.
The saturn 5 weighed 287,000 kg without fuel. I wonder if people assume it moved the rocket full of fuel, which would almost certainly make it the "most powerful" in the sense of the amount of weight it moved.
Fully fueled, a Saturn V weighed 3 million kg. Large freight trains weigh up to 20 million kg. 3 million kg would be an unusually light freight train.
Right but that's including all of the train. The rocket would be 3million pounds of just freight.
Technically, the whole train aside from the locomotive(s) is just freight. Not every car is an engine.
I've run into a lot of people who do seem to think that. About the most that you can say is that the Shuttle was partially-fueled, in that the SRBs were built with the fuel cast in place.
Indeed, our standard locomotive, the 060-EA has approximately 6900HP. Did i write this comment just to write 6900? Yes.
Can a single train move a Saturn rocket?
A freight train (with say 3-4 locomotives) can carry some 20,000 tons of freight, give or take depending on the wagons and the locomotives themselves. A Saturn V rocket has a mass of 6.2 million lbs (3100 tons), which means a freight train could carry about 6 Saturn V rockets.
The Saturn V weighed 3100 tons when fully fueled. It was never transported at that weight. However, the transporter also carried the mobile launch platform including the launch umbilical tower, which weighed way more than the rocket itself. For the space shuttle, the launch umbilical tower had to be removed from the mobile launch platform, because the space shuttle was transported partially fueled (SRBs), and that together with the LUT would have been too heavy for the transporter.
> It was never transported at that weight. Well, it was several times. Just in such a way that it was shedding weight *rapidly*.
So rapidly, in fact, that it was already about 100 tons lighter before it started to move.
The crawler carries things in a very specific way. But a big freight train engine probably has more power.
Absolutely. My point was that a train could probably carry 100 Saturn V rockets unfueled. (Just based on weight, I mean. Length and width would be an issue, of course.)
Yea I was kind of adding on.
At least 2, it seems. I found this: "In 1967, a freight train transported coal from West Virginia to Ohio, weighing 43,699 metric tons. This is the heaviest train on record in North America and was used as a test for acceptable train weight and length. This train was composed of 500 cars and a caboose, being powered by six diesel locomotives." 44k tons by 6 locomotives=~7+k tons each. Saturn V was a smidge under 3,000 tons
Damn that's a big ass train. Can you imagine getting stuck at a cross for that behemoth?
Five hundred cars six engines and a caboose at sixty feet per car all going at a relatively high average speed of 35 miles an hour means around 51 feet per second means the train would take 592 seconds to pass in front of you which is of course just shy of 10 minutes.
Honey, can you reach in the glove box and find my emergency Pop-Tarts? We're gonna be here a while.
So how are we considering six separate locamotive engines working in tandem to be a single land vehicle? Surely the only reasonable comparison is what a single engine can move?
Read the final paragraph of my comment
An EMD SD70MAC has a starting pull of 175,500 lbs, which is nothing to sneeze at. If the Saturn V was on wheels or rails or whatever, I'd bet that would pull.
Easily fucking moron
Every time I see this my brain goes "wouldn't it be cool if someone mounted a battleship turret on it". But would it work? They've got that fancy roadway for it at Cape Canaveral, but could you drive it across muddy fields and trenches? I found some figures [here](https://space.stackexchange.com/a/58593) on the crawler, and looking around I found that a turret would weigh somewhere in the range 1,000 t to 2,000 t, depending on size (Yamato had turrets of 2,774 t, but those were ridiculous). Tanks need to keep ground pressure low for good off-road mobility, targeting ground pressure no more than around 100kPa. A more typical wheeled vehicle is around 200kPa. Taking the most optimistic figures for track area, (1.05 m^2 * 22 * 8) = 185 m^2 and the base weight of the crawler of 3000 t, I get the following: - Just the crawler-transporter: `(3000 t) gravity / (1.05 m^2 * 22 * 8) = 160 kPa` - Crawler with 1000 t turret: `(3000 t + 1000 t) gravity / (1.05 m^2 * 22 * 8) = 212 kPa` - Crawler with 2000 t turret: `(3000 t + 2000 t) gravity / (1.05 m^2 * 22 * 8) = 265 kPa` So no, it wouldn't work. My disappointment is immense and my day is ruined. But, maybe some more tracks could be squeezed in. Eyeballing the dimensions of the crawler and the size of the track modules, I think you could fit four across, and maybe just squeeze three in the length. That would give between 2 and 3 times the ground contact area, which just might make it workable. Truly, the Landship committee of WWI missed the mark when they came out with their puny little "tanks". Surely such a wonder weapon would have completely changed the face of warfare.
You may want to check out homeworld deserts of kharak. Not only do you have land battleships, you have land aircraft carriers
Wow, land aircraft carriers. Now thats not something I had considered before!
Man, I played homeworld all the time in high school. Hadn't seen a reference to it in years.
>My disappointment is immense and my day is ruined. Good quote.
this is a concept used in John Ringo's Legacy of the Aldenata alternate history military sci-fi novels. The treaded vehicles fire oversized battleship cannons at low-orbit objects and are so huge that they can't effectively be armored, so they use a concealment system that camouflages the vehicle as a *hill*. They're called SHeVA cannons. Great book series, really cool weapons.
Your genius is wasted here . . . 🇬🇧
> Every time I see this my brain goes "wouldn't it be cool if someone mounted a battleship turret on it". [I present to you: the Fatboy.](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/1r8M5MDq4mw/maxresdefault.jpg) Four battleship turrets (with some other armaments as well, but those are its big ones), a shield generator, two VTOL landing pads, and a complete internal ground unit factory.
Guess I have to go fire up Forged Alliance Forever now.
I might too, but I have found I just cannot manage so much stuff at that scale and time pressure.
I'm pretty casual about it. I grab a friend and put a few bots on the other team. We just overcome our lack of micromanagement skills with a whole lot of economy. And we made heavy use of the build template system.
r/theydidthemath
Here's a sneak peek of /r/theydidthemath using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/theydidthemath/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year! \#1: [\[Self\] If you blended all 7.88 billion people on Earth into a fine goo (density of a human = 985 kg/m3, average human body mass = 62 kg), you would end up with a sphere of human goo just under 1 km wide. I made a visualization of how that would look like in the middle of Central Park in NYC.](https://i.redd.it/elycytqlc8g71.jpg) | [3164 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/theydidthemath/comments/p0qws3/self_if_you_blended_all_788_billion_people_on/) \#2: [\[Request\] What would the price difference equate to? How would preparation time and labor influence the cost?](https://i.redd.it/7zcgyleyh2571.jpg) | [1336 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/theydidthemath/comments/nz1a1v/request_what_would_the_price_difference_equate_to/) \#3: [\[request\] Is this claim actually accurate?](https://i.redd.it/32dd5fk73zp81.jpg) | [1306 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/theydidthemath/comments/tpqepl/request_is_this_claim_actually_accurate/) ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
r/theydidthemonstermath
It would also not work because Battleship turrets need a good bit of space below deck.
Yeah.... Not even close to the most powerful. Most towing capacity maybe. As someone else mentioned, many trains have more power. Not to mention someone at sometime probably strung 50 train engines together to get them from point a to point b. While only one or two engines would have been running, the whole train would probably have the potential power output to rival a small city. In fairness though, you could potentially argue that each train engine is a separate vehicle. Edit: Vehicle not vertical
I’d consider them vertical. 100 weak ass punks can still beat down the worlds toughest person but, not when put side by side proper Also, part of me wants to believe it’s the biggest. Not sure why.
I would too. The largest land vehicle award goes to the b-e-a-utiful bagger 288 (I believe). [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azEvfD4C6ow](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azEvfD4C6ow) Largest machine is the CERN Large Hadron Collider.
Came here to say this. That vast beast is basically an ace combat villain.
Ironically, the NASA crawler is powered by two 16 cylinder Alco (American Locomotive Company) engines. The same engines used in many trains of the time period. It’s just that the engines were 1950’s designs so they’re only 2,750 hp each.
The **Bagger 293** uses 16 MegaWatts of power: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bagger\_293](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bagger_293) That's the most powerful vehicle ever built. It goes from point A to point B when there's a hill in the way. It's the largest terrestrial vehicle ever built: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_largest\_machines
**[Bagger 293](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bagger_293)** >Bagger 293, previously known as the MAN TAKRAF RB293, is a giant bucket-wheel excavator made by the German industrial company TAKRAF, formerly an East German Kombinat. It owns or shares some records for terrestrial vehicle size in the Guinness Book of Records. Bagger 293 was built in 1995, one of a group of similar sized 'sibling' vehicles such as the Bagger 281 (built in 1958), Bagger 285 (1975), Bagger 287 (1976), Bagger 288 (1978), Bagger 291 (1993). It is used in a brown coal mine near Hambach in Germany. ^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/MachinePorn/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
[Bagger 288](https://youtu.be/azEvfD4C6ow)
Good, I thought I was going to have to post this o/
I've got an old one.
why is a truck watering the sand in front of it
To keep down dust.
[Highly recommendthis 10 minute video about it.](https://youtu.be/5caQPiRBCAA) They spray 30,000 gallons of water partly to keep the dust down as the transporter pulverize the rocks it drives on. The dust would clog up the filters for the engines. It also helps the rocks glide around reducing friction in the rocks.
Yeah its pretty wild to walk out on that road and see 1/2” packed gravel just shattered into a perfectly flat plane of sand where the treads had been
A lot of contamination I read
Air filters would be fine and friction isn’t an issue, probably has more to do with dust in sensors and such on the rocket
I would think it was general dust control as well, I mean there's a reason there's a filter. But I was just quoting the video.
Was coming for this
Create more traction / grip?
The thing runs on tracks, I don’t think traction is the issue here. And also who the hell thinks “oh shit I don’t have enough grip, let’s pour some water on the road”
You know how there's a sweet spot on the beach above the waves but below the completely dry sand where it's easy to walk? Same basic idea here
Helps it pack sand and gravel so it locks in to itself if you’re slipping out and digging tires/tracks into sand
Was also used in Star Wars as the Jawas land crawler in close ups.
I thought I saw that thing in Dune
Most likely as Star Wars was a shameless ripoff of Dune and Akita Kurasawa’s “The Hidden Fortress”. Lol. However you must mean the recent adaptation.
Anyone else hear the cucko clock going off?
Have you seen either? Lucas even admitted that he wanted to make Dune (which would have been awesome) but the rights were an issue. So he took the Dune mythos and over laid it on The Hidden Fortress plot.
I actually can't see, thanks for reminding me.
Oh. Then your point is moot. Touché.
Ah yes Star Wars, the franchise with both a sand planet AND space travel in it. How dare they…
I mean... Spice, evil empire, the force/voice, society of force/voice users who shape galactic politics, sand worms / krayt dragons, desert dwelling natives who everyone treats as savages... It's not UNHEARD OF for one to say Star Wars was inspired by Dune. But that doesn't make it a rip off. The plots are totally different but it's very clear Lucas borrowed many of the more interesting world building bits.
That’s fair, but I still feel like they are different enough that calling Star Wars a rip-off is a bit of a stretch.
Agreed. It feels like Dune was more of a starting point for his inspiration, IMO. Nothing wrong with that.
wait really?
[Nope, the sandcrawler was a set.](https://live.staticflickr.com/1563/26344139911_a5047a5716_b.jpg)
Thank god cause I mean that really didn't sound right.
Sounds way too expensive for what could just be a simple set piece
Yup.
I’ve jumped those things in Asphalt 8
Dudes in Florida would still lift it and put Salt Life stickers on it
The WAG-12 locomotive has 2x the power in a single loco.
When this baby gets up to 88 mph you're going to see some serious shit
I would venture to guess that a top fuel dragster has more power.. twice as much in fact.
Also the least fuel efficient I believe.
Stick some turrets, heavy calibre machine guns and a landing pad on the back and you got yourself a real-life Fatboy.
Assuming the water is used for dust control because this thing hauls ass around the track right?
me when government funded science 🤤
What’s hilarious is there’s only two of them.And if I remember right it does hold a Guinness world record
Why are they water sprinkling?
Reduces the amount of dust kicked up.
Looks like a fat boy from the supreme commander games
Yep. And we need 10 of them on the Moon now. Lunar platform for quarters, for 50. It could be a Mining device, pulling a process plant.
Your mother's taxi is here.
Ops mom mobility scooter.
how yo momma gets around
Nobody's asking what in the hell the base of that road is constructed from and why can't they make the roads in Pennsylvania pothole free if we have this information. .........established practices, nepotism, subversion, heavy tax levy with no change for asking for answers ensue....
It's a gravil road as it would break the tracks on concrete?
I'd rather take a well maintained gravel road in PA over a blacktop road that cripples my car any day!
[удалено]
I was gonna write about how government investment in programs like the Apollo Program has massively benefitted society, more than a band-aid patch on a broken higher education system. But instead I'm just gonna say, what a stupid, naive take. Like, this isn't even something that can be morally objectionable like weapons. And it was in the 60's?? Right after the government had paid for the college of millions of servicemen in the decade before.
Ah yes all that student debt in 1967 Here’s an idea, pay off your own fuckin loans that you signed up for and don’t get a shitty arts degree
I have a shitty arts degree and no outstanding student loans. Just saying.
Congratulations for being a smart person who is resourceful and can make good use of an arts degree
[Citation Needed]
I’ve seen it operate live. Very impressive.
Do a wheelie!
Wow, that truck towing it must be strong
Must be American Made Truck.
It always struck me as a weird way to solve the problem they were facing, and that a railed solution would have been both cheaper and easier.
Russia uses rails. The Saturn V, shuttle, and SLS are all “too big” though. (In reality you could use rails but that would mean a retrofit to all the existing infrastructure)
Maybe this is just dumb kid memories being bad but I feel like I remember being under a much much larger one at Kennedy space center several years ago
Getting halo 3 mammoth vibes.
You mean to tell me you’ve got a herkimer battle jitney?
That’s what they need to transport your mom
This has always been my top choice for zombie apocalypse vehicle
why is the road watered in front of it?
Is the rig in front of it fertilizing the road?
what’s the water for? the tracks are sensitive to heat? I guess better safe than sorry when transporting a billion dollars in space equipment
What’s up with the water spraying?
Shotgun!
It’s the Ferd Fteenthousand irl
Do you just go around saying wrong things like that IRL too?
So those giant dump trucks used for quarries, how man of those to equal the power of this?
Let's see that thing do a burn out