Is an AT-AT a useful weapon?

As I recall the movie, the speedsters brought one down in exactly that manner, i.e. wrapping a cable around its legs and tripping it.
those legs, joints, large flat-sides are excellent targets for missiles and that thing must have a radar return like an aircraft carrier. So in a very special environment it might prove somewhat useful. But we're going down the same road as the Germans in WWII. Larger and larger armored vehicles until we end up with the Maus. Making a vehicle A.T. by giving it legs is like making an airplane fly by insisting that its wings must flap

Ok, they may have one or two tiny flaws in the original concept, but large isn't always bad if they are protected right (eg. warships are very large targets, but rely on a robust defence to survive in a hostile environment).

I half expect the US Marines to introduce a walking APC based on the AT-AT in the next couple of decades. They could wade ashore from landing ships and walk straight up the beach, protected by armour and a host of defensive weapons and sensors with full command of the battlefield. Ok, perhaps not, but it's an idea.

I would think that if a WW2 Battleship could be destroyed by some bomb wielding planes, I would think thee would have to be some technology available in the Star Wars world to destroy the AT-AT's.

One flaw is the legs me think, if you had made them more mobile, like human legs kinda...not only forward and backwards, but also to the sides.

too top heavy? Too high of a center of balance I'd think.

Messy, exactly. Tanks vs small arms fire. the tank is invulnerable, king of the battlefield. bring in rockets-shaped charges and the tide turns. it's the same old defensive-offensive battle that has been going on since Ugh got a longer stick than Mug.
the battleship was indeed king until aircraft started dropping bombs now the fleet's only job is protecting the carrier.
Machines do not need to be anthropomorphic to function. Tracked amphibious tanks already exist

I was thinking that, instead of such an awkwardly high center of gravity, make the legs telescoping. That way, in relatively flat terrain, you don't have to worry about making such a large target, or worry about a nasty cross-wind catching your driver reading a porn and blowing the whole shebang (keep reading....keep reading) over on its side. You can lower the body down to an appropriate level. If you need to traverse a larger obstacle, or do some old-fashioned street-level fighting, you can hydraulically jack your legs up and clear the obstructions. Or go through them, whichever your preference. Still, in an age of anti-gravity drives and hovering speederbikes, one wonders why their troop transports need make contact with the surface at all, becoming "trip" transports. Back to the original topic, though....Star Wars was light-years beyond its time with regards to special effects and filming. Its engineering and sci-fi wasn't that advanced, though, compared to our concepts today, but then again our idea of "scifi" is based on our current technological base and societal concepts of style. Jules Verne was a man of vision, and he had us flying in space-faring dirigibles while wearing vests and cravats and bowler hats. Ya work with what ya got! The AT-AT of "Empire Strikes Back", to me, with its slow approach and massive twin cheek-mounted cannon represent the slow impending approach of an inexorable juggernaut. Fight it, give it your best shot, and you may get in a lucky punch, but you're gonna get steamrolled. Still...its like Life. You gotta give it that shot.

telescoping means a tube within a tube within a tube, etc getting progressively thinner and more spindly toward the bottom. then there is weight distribution. Wonder how far they sink into the ground at each step. Their spacecraft must be special too, as they somehow are able to make sounds as they travel through the vacuum of space or have to bank to make turns!
How about this? A scout vehicle?

Well, it was the future....ish. And they had a whole universe full of what we would consider exotic metals/materials/technologies to play with. Heck, the Wookees had laser crossbows/rifles to go along with their wood-based tech. That's the great thing about sci-fi....just about anything's plausible!

I can see banking even in the vacuum of space, because you are still governed by centrificul/gravitational laws...same would go for the large capitol ships, banking while making hard course corrections would seem to be alot easier on thier superstructures.

As for sound effects, would you rather sit through an episode of star wars like 2001 space odyssey...stone silent, or would you like to hear the lasers, rocket engines and sounding mines, etc?

Grau, you forget the inertial dampeners. otherwise none of the ships could travel FTL

And the standard Imperial grey paint. Everything has to be grey. Its....slimming.

And is almost invisible against the ice and snow of Hoth

Granted there's inertial dampeners, but you don't see the warships (large/small) doing tactical/evasive manouvers while FTL...

Since I'm not in that part of the universe and privvy to thier technology, I have at assume it's nessecary...lmao

BTW, the AT-AT reminds me of the Elephants Hannibal used effectively against the Romans during the Punic wars. The Persians and Moguls used them against thier enemies, too.

I think the AT-AT would have success on the battlefield as long as the Empire had adequete assets to support it. It would be like sending a King Tiger onto the battlefield by itself...unsupported, it'll get ripped to shreds. With other assets to keep pressure on the enemy, the King Tiger can be deployed with great results.

Well, just look at its name: All-Terrain Armored Transport. That pretty much says it all. Send a DC-3 or a deuce-n-a-half in to the battlefield alone, and its toast. Another prob I have with the AT-AT is the fact that they put no defensive weaponry on it other than those front cheek-mounted cannons (and maybe a swivel turent, can't really tell). You can defend in front of you, that's it. It needs a dorsal turret or two, maybe a couple of waist-gunners. Having AT-ST's sprinting around you is fine and all, but they can't be everywhere. Eventually a -109 is gonna slip past your -51 escort.

Grau, one of the great features of Sci-Fi is the ability to by pass any problem with future tech. So RA, forget the AT-AT's obvious vulnerabilities it has defensive energy screens to protect it from any attack from any quarter.
Grau, I do like your War Elephant comparison. Depending on the region, War Elephants were usually not the major set piece of a battlefield though they could quickly change the direction any battle with their mere appearance, sounds and odor. Enemy soldiers not use to seeing or combating elephants could break discipline and rout. Cavalry horses were also known to dislike the smell, sight or sounds of oncoming elements and refuse to proceed.
As powerful as they were, War Elephants were ponderous at times (though as fast as a horse at straight speeds in some cases) and not highly maneuverable. They were also prone to break attack when punished from arrow (especially flaming arrows), sword or spear wounds, often sending the uncontrollable beast back into friendly ranks, disrupting charges. The driver of the elephant also sat up high and unprotected from enemy artillery and was subject to wounds and death, rendering - in effect - the war elephant driverless. Though confusion caused by wounds or hyperactivity common on the battlefield, the driver was provided a wooden mallet and chisel to which he could drive a stake through the spine of the elephant, killing it from causing anymore damage to one's own side.
Another known method to combat the War Elephant was the War Pig. Elephants would apparently dislike the sounds and quick movements of the small animals enough to disrupt their war mentality and their driver's commands. Additionally, it is reported that these War Pigs would be covered in oil and set alight, then sent in the general direction of the elephant causing even more commotion.
As methods in combating the War Elephant became more apparent, the creatures were assigned a contingent of soldiers to guard the vulnerable underbelly of the beast, particularly from spear attacks. As such, the group of soldiers guarding the War Elephant became the first victims of most any engagement involving the great beasts.
And so once again, full circle. Make a weapon more and more powerful and it becomes a greater and greater target requiring more and more resources to guard and protect it

The Infantry being carried don't appear to have any ability to use their weapons whilst buttoned up. that seems a bit antiquated to me.

The vehicle has a very high silhouette making concealment very difficult. The inability to follow targets tracking across their field of fire is a major weakness, hence lukes order to get in close .

Love how the AT-AT takes so long to reach the rebel base, they have time to evacuate.
Where was the Imperial air support? Get on the radio and call it in!
NASA did a study for Mars Landers and went wheels or legs. And wheels won. Legs are just too complex for what needs to be light and simple. Tracks also lose to wheels.
Maybe the wheel wasn't invented yet

I always assumed the Empire used the AT-AT's because the rebels shield generator was still up ant the only thing that could get in was ground forces - no air support- so the Empire used what they had on hand, the AT-AT's. Better that sending in just infantry.

parsifal said:

The Infantry being carried don't appear to have any ability to use their weapons whilst buttoned up. that seems a bit antiquated to me.

The vehicle has a very high silhouette making concealment very difficult. The inability to follow targets tracking across their field of fire is a major weakness, hence lukes order to get in close .

Click to expand...

Related question(s)...how do the infantry get in the thing and how do they deploy out when in combat? If' it's role is as a transport going into defended locations, surely the stormtroopers need to be disgorged somehow? Or am I missing the point...again?