Trek Iron Man armor

Trek Books, Games and General chat
AlexMcpherson79
Lieutenant jg
Lieutenant jg
Posts: 349
Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2018 2:43 pm
Location: Manchester, United Kingdom.

Re: Trek Iron Man armor

Post by AlexMcpherson79 »

Problem with Holographic is... if the power goes, wups. The suit should be designed in such a way that minimal (or no power), the wearer can still move. So, active and passive movement - active is powered, but in passive, the wearer moves it (and it takes the input and multiplies it to a point...)
User avatar
00111010 01000100
Lieutenant
Lieutenant
Posts: 403
Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2018 10:39 pm
Location: Maine, US

Re: Trek Iron Man armor

Post by 00111010 01000100 »

McAvoy wrote:
Mon May 04, 2020 8:11 pm
Not sure about flight though.
I know. I realized the aspects of flight in the suggested tech would be unlikely as plasma waste product from any micro reactions wouldn’t be enough to hop, let alone fly. Sounded cool and maybe more for a superheated plasma burst (magnetically contained and accelerated out at targets) weapons? But extended flight. Nope. I did have a small thought regarding the repulsor technology iron man’s technology uses. A Focused Dark matter stream. Totally hypothetical but considering that it’s a (?) in what is pushing the universe apart and acting similar to anti-gravity on galaxies in our ever-expanding universe+something we cannot see or measure, only see it’s effects. Maybe someday it will be possible to harness that matter for practical applications? I like the holographic suit idea too. Though it may suffer the fate of failure during power loss. I suppose the ultimate goal is to come up with the perfect stand alone power generation/supply system. One that’s small enough to fit in a suit/power armor. Something which can function even at severely reduced or overtaxed periods. One which can provide an abundance of energy without endangering the pilot/operators life. One with highly efficient conversion levels to reduce wasted power. Or has a byproduct that can also be utilized to produce energy (such as thermal byproducts). Preferably not radioactive -> neutron Absorption and protection requires heavy/dense shielding.

Anything else?
“Pull a stunt like this again and I’ll court marshal you... or promote you. Either way you’ll be in big trouble”
User avatar
00111010 01000100
Lieutenant
Lieutenant
Posts: 403
Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2018 10:39 pm
Location: Maine, US

Re: Trek Iron Man armor

Post by 00111010 01000100 »

Well... it was amusing while it lasted. 🙂
“Pull a stunt like this again and I’ll court marshal you... or promote you. Either way you’ll be in big trouble”
RK_Striker_JK_5
3 Star Admiral
3 Star Admiral
Posts: 12071
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 5:27 am
Commendations: The Daystrom Award, Cochrane Medal of Excellence
Location: New Hampshire
Contact:

Re: Trek Iron Man armor

Post by RK_Striker_JK_5 »

If it's limited to the MCU iron Man-admittedly the only version I know of-I think it'd be more than doable.
User avatar
McAvoy
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral
Posts: 5608
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 1:39 am
Location: East Windsor, NJ

Re: Trek Iron Man armor

Post by McAvoy »

RK_Striker_JK_5 wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 11:11 pm
If it's limited to the MCU iron Man-admittedly the only version I know of-I think it'd be more than doable.
I think everything up to the Infinity War version I believe would be within the capabilities of Trek tech. I think at least everything up to the enhanced strength part of it. That seems to be purely mechanical and would require a lot of thought behind it. Everything would have to be small and compact and the onboard computer would be dedicated to be in sync with the user
Otherwise you could easily havd the armor ripping muscles and tendons doing something the user wasn't planning on doing. Redundancies as well as the armors we saw in the MCU retained alot of its abilities even under severe battle damage.

Like the first Iron Man received alot of damage but Tony was still able to move freely. Or like the M VI (Iron Man 2 and Avengers) both received alot of damage. In the Avengers the armor required some tinkering apparently after being banged up on the flying carrier so it could travel to Stark's skyscraper.

MCU Iron Man is the only super hero I can think of where we see a steady stream of improvements from the start to finish with each step being hinted at for the next one. Like how the first few armors required a whole assembly of robotic arms to remove and place the armor on Tony. The Avengers showed a more mobile walking one and then we started to see the self contained armors that stayed around until the nanite version in Infinity War.

That in itself is impressive since it shows Tony being able to further refine everything underneath the armor to not only make it more powerful but more compact and easier to Don and remove over time.

That's where I think Trek would struggle. It was be easy to just give a user the armor without the Super strength enhancements and be a really powerful suit of armor. Still able to take phasers or disrupters without damage, or shoot phasers or disrupters. Fly or hover. Etc.
"Don't underestimate the power of technobabble: the Federation can win anything with the sheer force of bullshit"
Coalition
Lieutenant Commander
Lieutenant Commander
Posts: 1005
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 3:34 am
Location: Georgia, United States
Contact:

Re: Trek Iron Man armor

Post by Coalition »

McAvoy wrote:
Tue Jun 09, 2020 3:19 am
I think everything up to the Infinity War version I believe would be within the capabilities of Trek tech. I think at least everything up to the enhanced strength part of it. That seems to be purely mechanical and would require a lot of thought behind it. Everything would have to be small and compact and the onboard computer would be dedicated to be in sync with the user
Otherwise you could easily havd the armor ripping muscles and tendons doing something the user wasn't planning on doing. Redundancies as well as the armors we saw in the MCU retained alot of its abilities even under severe battle damage.
The key idea from the Starship Troopers book would be using negative feedback, rather than positive. Instead of you pushing and the arm pushing more, when you move your arm the armor tries to balance the forces on both sides. So it would need a little bit of force from you, but as long as you can hold your arms in position the armor will try to keep pushing.

McAvoy wrote:
Tue Jun 09, 2020 3:19 am
MCU Iron Man is the only super hero I can think of where we see a steady stream of improvements from the start to finish with each step being hinted at for the next one. Like how the first few armors required a whole assembly of robotic arms to remove and place the armor on Tony. The Avengers showed a more mobile walking one and then we started to see the self contained armors that stayed around until the nanite version in Infinity War.

That in itself is impressive since it shows Tony being able to further refine everything underneath the armor to not only make it more powerful but more compact and easier to Don and remove over time.
Very true

Iron Man 1: Had trouble initially taking it off, as he said to Pepper "Let's face it, this is not the worst thing you caught me doing"
Iron Man 2: Landed on the stage with a removal frame, and he had on an actual suit underneath instead of the bodysuit from #1. He also had the briefcase armor so he no longer needed the full system to put on a suit
Avengers 1: He lands a damaged suit on the outside of his tower, and as he is walking towards the bar the system removes the suit. No standing still, no removal frame that he stands on, he is able to walk normally and still have the suit removed
Iron Man 3: The multi-piece suit that can go to him (after the initial testing beat him up)

Infinity War: The nanotech suit
Relativity Calculator
My Nomination for "MVAM Critic Award" (But can it be broken into 3 separate pieces?)
User avatar
McAvoy
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral
Posts: 5608
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 1:39 am
Location: East Windsor, NJ

Re: Trek Iron Man armor

Post by McAvoy »

The biggest jump of course is the nanite armors. Hell, there seems to be about 30 or so armors developed between Infinity War and Endgame. His last armor was Mk
85.

This whole discussion also comes with why doesn't Starfleet possess armor or at least a setup for their people. Best we got was the security officers in the original Trek movies that had some set up like a helmet and body armor. The helmet seems to be a bit odd but it might be more to protect head injuries from impacts than to protect from phaser fire.
"Don't underestimate the power of technobabble: the Federation can win anything with the sheer force of bullshit"
Coalition
Lieutenant Commander
Lieutenant Commander
Posts: 1005
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 3:34 am
Location: Georgia, United States
Contact:

Re: Trek Iron Man armor

Post by Coalition »

McAvoy wrote:
Sun Jun 28, 2020 2:23 am
This whole discussion also comes with why doesn't Starfleet possess armor or at least a setup for their people. Best we got was the security officers in the original Trek movies that had some set up like a helmet and body armor. The helmet seems to be a bit odd but it might be more to protect head injuries from impacts than to protect from phaser fire.
in early TNG Starfleet did not consider itself a military organization

TNG S2E47 - Peak Performance wrote:PICARD: Starfleet is not a military organization. Our purpose is exploration

KOLRAMI: Then why am I here?

PICARD: Because with the Borg threat, I have decided that my officers and I need to hone our tactical skills. In a crisis situation, it is prudent to have several options.

RIKER: I still prefer brains over brawn. I think it's a waste of effort to test our combat skills -- it's a minor province in the make-up of a starship captain.
It might have changed a bit later in TNG & DS9, especially with the Dominion War
Relativity Calculator
My Nomination for "MVAM Critic Award" (But can it be broken into 3 separate pieces?)
User avatar
Captain Seafort
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 15538
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Blighty

Re: Trek Iron Man armor

Post by Captain Seafort »

McAvoy wrote:
Sun Jun 28, 2020 2:23 am
This whole discussion also comes with why doesn't Starfleet possess armor or at least a setup for their people. Best we got was the security officers in the original Trek movies that had some set up like a helmet and body armor. The helmet seems to be a bit odd but it might be more to protect head injuries from impacts than to protect from phaser fire.
I wouldn't consider the lack of a phaser-resistant helmet to be a significant issue - until very recently helmets and body armour were designed to protect against knocks and light shrapnel, not direct fire.
Only two things are infinite - the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe: Albert Einstein.
User avatar
McAvoy
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral
Posts: 5608
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 1:39 am
Location: East Windsor, NJ

Re: Trek Iron Man armor

Post by McAvoy »

Coalition wrote:
Sun Jun 28, 2020 8:50 am
McAvoy wrote:
Sun Jun 28, 2020 2:23 am
This whole discussion also comes with why doesn't Starfleet possess armor or at least a setup for their people. Best we got was the security officers in the original Trek movies that had some set up like a helmet and body armor. The helmet seems to be a bit odd but it might be more to protect head injuries from impacts than to protect from phaser fire.
in early TNG Starfleet did not consider itself a military organization

TNG S2E47 - Peak Performance wrote:PICARD: Starfleet is not a military organization. Our purpose is exploration

KOLRAMI: Then why am I here?

PICARD: Because with the Borg threat, I have decided that my officers and I need to hone our tactical skills. In a crisis situation, it is prudent to have several options.

RIKER: I still prefer brains over brawn. I think it's a waste of effort to test our combat skills -- it's a minor province in the make-up of a starship captain.
It might have changed a bit later in TNG & DS9, especially with the Dominion War
Sort of early TNG writing.

I always viewed them as exploration fleet first and military second. They obviously designed their ships with combat in mind when they put phasers and photon torpedo launchers on board. There is a fan theory that early TNG was complacent and thought they could take care of anything that was thrown at them. Until at least they were introduced to the Borg. Peak Performance does show that mentality. No war games? Pretty stupid. Very short sighted.

Later seasons in TNG showed that Starfleet was involved in some wars. Probably not a full war but border skirmishes but they had to fight nevertheless.

Perhaps that fan theory is right. All the potential threats wouldn't be able to handle a full Federation war machine bearing down on them like the Cardassians for example or if Romulans decided to start something, Federation were allies with the Klingons who would be more than willing to fight the Romulans.

So they designed ships with extra comfort, had families on board. War exercises were frowned on. Starfleet ships would barely retaliate when being fired on (how many times did Picard let ships fire on the Enterprise for a little bit before returning fire?). Then the Borg happened. It shake them to the core. Their pride was shakened. The Borg cube could destroy whole fleets. So they start designing ships with combat in mind but not as secondary feature but at least equal to the exploration side. The Defiant herself breaking that and being a warship with limited capability elsewhere.

Maybe they started to max out the potential of their ships in power whereas the Galaxy class was designed with the idea of potential enemy as opposed to being designed with maximum firepower their technology would allow.

Like First Contact showed a Borg cube being heavily damaged and ships actually taking hits and keep on fighting.

I kind of like that.
"Don't underestimate the power of technobabble: the Federation can win anything with the sheer force of bullshit"
Post Reply