Hello Zig Forums so I was wondering: how come modern body armor is still crap? By "crap" I mean useless against rifle fire, especially sniper rifles.
Pic related. I know it's from a game made in 2004 (13+ damn years ago) but I think it's an exciting artist's impression of how future body armor may look like: basically a thick sponge-like vest. In my imagination it could be a "memory" material which changes its state to a thick liquid when hit, thus absorbing/dissipating the energy of the bullet. Then the vest would return to its original sponge structure (with some damage of course).
But enough daydreaming! What we have now is kevlar, steel plates and ceramic plates. "Dragon skin" armor is was an interesting idea: instead of a single big plate there are many small discs sewn in the fabric. Other than that, everybody seems to be out of ideas (apart from exoskeletons, which are a liability IMHO: what happens if you get EMP'd?)
So Zig Forums, is there anything new and exciting in the works? Something magic, to poop on the joy of riflemen whose bullets pierce all?
Except it isn't. There are NIJ IV plates that will stop .338
Nolan Adams
Reality always interferes with body armor.
The human body has a very large surface area and human joints aren't designed to take that much mass without some serious genetic engineering. I mean the Wiesel light tank has about the same surface area of its two crewmens bodies, but because of its geometry it can fit an engine, fuel, and massive weapon as well.
So what do we do? We concentrate armor in head and trunk, where a shot does the most damage. And even then we face a horrible piece of physics - sectional density. It is far more cheaper in terms of engineering and weight to make a projectile that is narrow/long enough and fast enough to penetrate a piece of armor. It's the old armorers dilemma, it is always more efficient to deny the enemy the ability to strike than it is to carry enough armor to meet their strike head on
Third problem is related to the armorers dilemma. If you have good enough training, you can hit the enemy before he has a chance to hit you. This completely removes all need for armor, as long as you replace it with diligent training and discipline. It's possible to train your people to hide so the enemy can't find them, and thus can't shoot them, which also requires zero armor. It's possible to teach your men to take cover so even if they are being shot at, they can hide behind something that serves as basically infinity armor, which also requires them to actually carry no armor on their person.
Huge and bulky, and will only stop ball ammo at a certain range. Enemy switches to AP and you're fucked… same for simply shooting the unarmored spots.
Aaron Bailey
Body armour is basically a stagnant technology until some military or (very large) PMC decides that an infantrymans life is worth somewhere in the region of a few (hundred) thousand dollars. Even if there was a military out there richer and crazier than the present day US armed forces and someone actually greenlit that sort of armour it's going to be far cheaper for your opposition to just use the weapons that can defeat it, even if you had the kind of sci-fi super armour that needed a nuke to crack it the nuke will be cheaper.
We might see loadbearing exoskeletons at some point though, got to find a way to let soldiers carry EVEN MORE GEAR!
Leo Ross
The Fallout series of all things actually handled power armor and exoskeletons with some degree of reasonability in this regard; The T-45d and all the other powered suits in the game were originally designed to make obscenely large weapon systems man-portable and usable in an infantry squad. They only made the decision to add armor as a secondary goal, to better protect the investment of the miniature fusion reactor that powered each of the things.
Bentley Nguyen
I don't think it even exists
Austin Myers
Because you can only add so much armour to something, and no matter how much you add it will never be enough to stop whatever the enemy is packing. The same principle also applies to tanks, ships, aircraft and even military bases.
When it comes to not getting shot in my mind there are 3 basic strategies: not viable for above reasons. achieved by stealth and or maneuverability, favoured by aircraft, light vehicles, favoured by basic bitch Zig Forumsommandos who want soldiers to go into combat with less than 5kg of equipment. point defence motherfuckers, used to protect cities, ships and tanks, probably smaller vehicles too soon.
MICRO POINT DEFENCE
ON EVERY SOLDIER Fuck energy shields, fuck power armor, just cover each soldier and APC with automatted turrets to shoot incoming bullets and grenades out of the fucking air.
Inb4 enemy starts issuing high rotary barrel shotguns to empty your CIWS ammunition or just overwhelm its simultaneous target capabilities.
Ethan Butler
Couldn't you just throw a bunch of bbs at them?
Leo Nelson
How was your first playthrough of Deus Ex with Aggresive defense system?
Mason Jenkins
If you can get them moving fast enough to be lethal then sure. But don't you want to see widespread use of a 6 barrel, 8 bore, automatic shotgun that fires 6000 rounds of buckshot a minute?
Colton Diaz
Yeah it exist from the factory. Besides that a solid brass bullet will do similar to what AP will do.
Logan Hall
Russia is fielding some pretty advanced armor in it's assault sappers ranks called OVR-3Sh. Essentially it's a bullet proof blast suit, with a passive exoskeleton, modular plates for everything and a hydro-cooling/heating system. Plates themselves are laminated fluoroethylene of a sort with thin sheets of titanium that give them a stupid resistance (like to everything… it's the shit use to make teflon and anti-radiation lining) and relative light weight. Haven't seen the new visors yet.
You kinda win if you force your enemy to standard-issue fucking RPG-7.
Lucas Edwards
At least 20kg is feasible :)
Josiah Ortiz
Fuck lugging around 60 kilos of plates to protect my chest and back. What about my dong? All it takes is some shrapnell and you can say goodbye to any girlfriend or waifu you may have had. How would Zig Forums protect their balls (possibly from radiation as well) and not impede movement?
The cooling system is nothing special. Cosmonauts used that since the sixties, as well as race drivers. It's basically a way to cool the wearer down under all the armour they are wearing, and making sure they don't collapse from all the body heat when you make them do hard physical labour. Passive exo skeletons aren't that effective. You are basically adding dead weight to make sure the soldier doesn't have to put all the weight on his joints and bones, but guess what: that doesn't help. The soldier still needs to move his own body and all of the weight, so all you did is allow them to carry extra stuff wothout breaking a leg because of it. They will still drop dead after 500 meters of march and worse: if they trip and fall (or are pushed over by an explosion or whatever) they won't be able to get back up by themselves. This is only really good for mechanized shock troops or SAWT teams. Titanium is also just as suspicable to spalling as steel is, the layered approach is interesting though. Reminds me of GLARE, which is basically carbon fibre and aluminium layered on top of each other. The main problem you run into though is how to keep the layers together. In the A380 (which employs GLARE in it's roof IIRC) and basically every other application you could think of, this problem was solved by applying glue between the layers, which may sound retarded, because now you need to check every section for air bubbles and whatnot, which costs a fortune, but what other method is there? You could do some sort of pocket system, where you sew a carrier out of kevlar and sew the plates into them, but this would be rather thick and unwieldy, because the thinner the plates the more pockets you need, which means another layer of kevlar as well, which is much thicker than the plate. You could make the plate thicker, but that would defeat the purpose of the layered approach.
Caleb White
Terrorists are certain to have one somewhere and most explosives will take these things out of action.
Camden Reed
Terrorists ain't gonna win war, user.
Still, goddamn the idea of powered armor soldier with an auto shotgun makes my wee wee super hard.
Grayson White
And you're spergook and your ideas are all retarded. As I said, most explosives will take this thing out of action by blowing off a limb or injuring the user too badly to stay in combat.
Brandon Diaz
What? So you imagine the terrorists to just kamikaze rush like in CnC?
And you call me retarded?
Owen Lewis
Let me say it again. Graphene Curiass
Easton Stewart
It's basic physics honestly, user. It's incredibly easy to make sharp objects that are extremely quick puncture through surfaces. The only ways to prevent this is to create something that is both thick enough to stop the penetration, and tough enough to absorb the impact, while simultaneously NOT causing internal bleeding from the shock of impact (don't underestimate internal bleeding, even a nice bruise on your hands can effectively put you out of service for a lot of tasks or only at half efficiency). All of this must be accomplished while simultaneously being light weight and maneuverable because a heavy target is basically immobile (which is a bad thing in a gun fight since even armor will only protect you from so many rounds as can be seen by that SWAT drug bust video where the guy got shot 23 times in like 4 seconds and his armor finally gave out even though it was rated for that sort of rifle ammunition). tl;dr- Armored vehicles are one thing because you can design it to withstand the shock or weight, but you can't redesign the human body yet.
Kayden King
...
Ryan Clark
High speed cameras will never be fast enough for a speeding bullet. Maybe a spectrometer, but at that point the enemy has already shot you before the point defense system can release a counterfire.
Landon Flores
Let's not forget you can make a tank-busting bomb out of fertilizer or goat piss relatively easily.
David Turner
And supercapacitors* fuck you.
Josiah Cruz
As IED yes.
But as conventional weapons to be used against infantry and armor? Nope.
Rifles design for use by "snipers" are a niche tool for use in niche situations. They use larger bore .30 precision match loads, they're not some magic tool that endows mystic abilities to the shooter, nor are they some "silver bullet" device. A 300gr Sierra HPBT MK .338LM out of a McMillan Tac-338 has the same power when fired out of Cletus' Savage Model 111 Long Range Hunter. Stop using video games as a data source. Body armor design is the way it currently is because of monetary limitations and a lack in effective materials for armor capable of meeting the NIJ Level-IV standard while not crushing the wearer or seriously reducing mobility and limb articulation.
Until someone decides to break out the man-portable indirect fire systems, then you're a sitting duck waiting to be peppered with shrapnel or shwacked by a direct hit. As combat moves more and more toward COIN, LIC and MOUT armor becomes a more and more necessary tool.
Alexander Bennett
The moment body armor that's good against everything including 50 cal anti-materiel -type rounds, mechs will become a needed invention, and will become a reality. The soldier, even squad level hasn't seen an arms race, because weaponry has outdone armor. Remember, tanks are the chariot, upgraded. Chariot, then maybe some type of shielded car. Then the sort of pseudo-tanks of the Brits, which lead to a back and forth which left WW II having genuinely advanced tank designs…
Anyway, it's a back and forth, but right now guns are crazy powerful compared to wearable armor.
Tyler Wilson
What?
Lincoln Jones
Hm? The only particularly light form of graphene is graphene aerogel, which as the name implies is an aerogel. The type that would theoretically be used in body armor is graphene gyroid. I wonder what pop sci article you read '"graphene" is good for body armor' from.
Asher Johnson
What sort of rating is the armour? Even if it's NIJ Level IV there are still bullets that will go through it.
Parker Hernandez
The density of pure graphene polymer is only 2.2 g/cm^3. Aluminum is 2.7 g/cm^3 . I guess Aluminum, the sit that the build aircraft out of is "heavy as fuck."
Grayson Flores
The only difference between an IED and a professional explosive is how much time you're willing to invest into it. It's the same shit and it doesn't matter if it gets the job done. You sound like that user who threw a bitch fit when I pointed out my $1.50 knife accomplished all the same tasks his $55 knife did.
Okay..? "Graphene" itself describes a 2 dimensional pattern. The various potential types of graphene are 3d arrangements. Graphene polymer is as related to graphene gyroid they are boht to aerogel. Google what a gyroid is.
I know what a gyroid is. Know matter how you print it it will still be lighter than aluminium. If steel plates are light enough then graphene composite materials will be as well. Layer it with less brittle materials such as steel, or polyurethane and it will be very effective.
Connor Johnson
IED only advantage is because nobody knows it's an IED.
If it becomes conventional, then it's nothing to write home about.
Andrew Campbell
Those are specifically designed to absorb the explosions and shrapnel that the sappers own explosive weaponry creates… A Russian assault sapper team is 7 guys in a BMO-T (APC version of a T-72), carrying an ungodly amount of RPO-A launchers (there are 32 racks in a BMO) and at least two GM-94.
They're the guys the call when the regular Russian infantry (which completely outgun NATO infantry to begin with) doesn't have enough firepower to break through fortification/urban environment. Same as they did in WWII (assaults sappers are the guys you see with steel heavy plate armor medieval-like in photos), they don't care how heavy the armors are because it's not intended for a prolonged use, because if those guys get stuck in a long firefight, the next escalation is calling their brigade artillery support… which is a fucking TOS-1 "pocket Hiroshima" squadron.
Alexander Lewis
It's not. Level 3 and 4 will stop rifle rounds. Level 4 will even stop armour piercing .3006 at close range hitting square on.
The problem is that it is quite thick so they make small plates to protect just the vital organs. This is not so bad for soldiers in places like Afghanistan, if they are hit in a non vital spot they will be treated and usually survive, I think we only lost 30 men in Afghanistan and often it was due to hits that got in under the arm pit or got through some other way(that and IEDs obviously). It's still an issue though.
Ian Robinson
How so? I'm genuinely curious.
Jason Perry
The point of cover isn't to make you invulnerable, its to force the enemy to carry heavier weapons. And if they aren't trained to take cover too, they'll be carrying heavier armor as well.
Evan Lewis
You need a power supply, tests with back mounted ones in Iraq just caused the troops to get cancer.
Camden Stewart
Russians don't test their armor according to National Institute of Justice standards…
They use the GOST system, which is entirely different. It classifies common threats according to momentum and sectional density, then pits them against armor to find as close to possible the "breaking point" of the armor.
In rough example these are the classes: 1 - 9mm parabellum 2 - 7.62x25, 5.45x18, 12 gauge (18.5mm) armor piercing slug 3 - AK-74 with 7N6 4 - AK-74 with 7N10 5 - SVD with ball 6 - SVD with 7N14 All of these are at point blank range.
The highest (7N14 out of SVD) penetrates 5mm (1/4 inch) of hardened carbon steel plate at 300m, which is 160m/s (~550fps) slower than the point blank range test for the body armor.
That performance is roughly equivalent to 30.06 armor piercing black tip out of a 22 inch barrel.
No idea what this specific set of armor is rated for, but it's titanium so you can bet it will be tough.
Bentley James
Here is the 7N14, and the rough equivalence of their levels.
….. Real combat is not like a movie, the vast majority of shots fired by professional soldiers miss.
Concealment is okay but once you start firing it goes out the window, that's if you are not spotted before then.
Often there is no cover, or the cover is not bullet proof, or you need to move to cover or you need to advance or you need to actually expose yourself to shoot, or you get flanked etc.
Aiden Lewis
That's a problem for the assaulting party, and has been well developed around WWII with the assault phase of combat. All our weapons and tactics are based on it.
Evan Wilson
It's more of a problem for them yes but the defenders still have to expose themselves to shoot, could still get flanked and might need to move troops around in the open to adapt to the situation.
Sebastian Wright
Rating is Gost 6a. 3 shots of 7BZ3 (armor piercing incendiary) at 5.10m the average penetration between the three of them not exceeding 17mm in penetration.
To give you an idea pic related is a Gost level 5 plate at 25m fired at with pretty much everything (223 rem commercial, 3 type of 7.62x39, 2 type of 7.62x54R ball and 7n14. Yes level 5 is already tough enough to take multiple armor piercing SVD sniper rounds, but the back plate deformation at 5,10m is over 17mm so they consider it's not enough. NIJ acceptable backplate deformation is around 44mm). That level 5 plate is a simple technical steel which despite being quite thin (it's a side plate on the pic but it's the same width for front/back) still weights 4.5kg.
Lightest Russian APC = BTR with a 14.5 under turret gun. Average NATO APC = something with a pintle 7.62 GPMG (worst case scenario SAW gunner pretending to be useful). Most people thinks a 14.5 machine-gun is just a Russian "a bit bigger .50cal" when in fact it's more powerful than most 20mm.
An US squad (and largely all NATO squads tend to follow the pattern) is a squad leader (with a M4), a medic (with a M4), and two four-man fire teams, each fire team has a SAW and two M4 rifles, one M16 with an M203. That's 6 M4 carbines, 2 M16 rifles with M203 grenade launchers and 2 SAW LMG.
A Russian (BTR) combat element of a squad is also ten men strong (12 with gunner and driver of the BTR), 1 Squad Leader with an AK-74, 1 RPG gunner (+ AKs-74u), 1 assistant RPG with an AK-74, 1 SVD gunner (+ AKs-74u), then two fireteam of 1 grenadier with an AK-74 + GP-25 1 PKM gunner, 1 assistant PKM with an AK-74
That's 6 AK-74 rifles with 2 gp-25 grenade launchers, 2 AKs-74u carbines, 1 SVD Sharpshooter rifle, 2 PKM GPMG, 1 RPG launcher with an assortment of rockets.
Both have additional disposable launchers (66mm for US, 72.5mm for Russians) per vehicles. They used to have RPKs instead of PKMs back in soviet times (which closed the gap quite a bit) but today it's an extremely rare sight in operation.
Sebastian Lewis
Possibly, even then those fuckers will require tons of maintenance. I can see them being used in urban combat.
Jordan Scott
Do you mean real point-blank range, which is hundreds of yards. Or do you mean "really close".
Wyatt Bailey
Think cokefag shooting at trash close.
Jaxon Hernandez
The armored transport comparison of pitting a low intensity humvee against a medium intensity BTR is kinda being dishonest. I could say that NATO troops are better armed because they rolled in with high intensity bradlys even though the BMP3 would be the correct comparison to make at that point. A more fair comparison to the BTR would have been an M113 or Stryker which could have anything between an M2, Mk19 automatic grenade launcher or even a minigun. Some Strykers are even being tested with 30mm autocannon. The army also has designated Carl Gustav and M67 recoiless rifle specialists and designated marksmen since the Afghan conflict. Muhreens having the SMAW and designated marksmen before then.
Gavin Cook
So a short recap of what we have now:
- kevlar and similar aramids (defeated by single shot) - ceramic plates (defeated by multiple shots) - steel plates
It's a bit underwhelming that steel plates seem to be the best choice. They have a medieval smell to them IMHO. But hey if it works…
- Predator style shoulder-mounted mini turrets defense system - Quake 2 style "power shield" (force field armor) - MBT style reactive armor bricks
Now some will disagree, but from what I read so far graphene looks the most promising. Of course we're not talking graphene on its own, but layered with other good stuff (like kevlar and STF) similar to how the modern composite armor of tanks is made.
We could yet have light textile armor without kilos of plates in it.
This is grown ups talking, kid. You need to mature some.
But actually I'll entertain you, troll. How about you explain why body armor is a bad idea? I'll take you seriously if you can bring good points, which I highly doubt. You'll probably just parrot the word "nigger" a few times more, like a moron.
Gavin Hughes
Speed is the essence of war. Armor only slows you down and you will get killed anyway.
Where the fuck did I say that??? Most Strykers only have a RWS mounted m240. And a M2 has about half the punch of a KPV (which is why they should have been replaced by 15mm NATO in the 80's).
Not at squad level they don't. They have attached support squad… Guess what? Russia has that too.
Camden Baker
Speed is the essence of war. Guns only slow you down and you will get killed anyway.
Yeah maybe an inch or two. Are you implying body armor doesn't have an inch or two worth of gap anywhere? Most armor is so badly designed it doesn't even protect when prone.
Fucking lol.
Robert Walker
What would be the one piece of equipment you'd consider weighing yourself down for, instead of plate?
Juan Collins
no_
A Rocket launcher tbh
Nathan Morris
You expose more than an inch to shoot.
Why do you need to crouch run anywhere? Apparently all soldiers do is hide behind a rock poking there gun over the top only exposing the inch or two that is their trigger finger and then never move from that position.
Logan Morgan
Rifle grenades aren't that heavy.
It seems to me that the logic of such arguments is this: a man can only carry around 20-30kg, therefor you should start adding equipment based on your priorities until you hit the cap. By the time you are done with weapons, ammo, comms, basic uniform and first aid kit you are already so close to the limit that you are better off giving a flak vest to the soldier.
I'm really curious how a rail-mounted gun shield would work on the field.
Zachary Bennett
Because profile is shorter that way, and considering the majority of rounds are flying chest high it means just by crouching I gain nigh-invulnerability to bullets.
Another reason heavy armor is retarded.
…. yeah? Kind of. That would be a perfect battle.
Gunshields would be a huge help. Even a gunshield the size of an iPhone can reduce casualties massively, because most fighting is done belly to ground.
I don't see why it can't be standard aside from weight, in fact, make it foldable.
Still, it would be best if you can wear heavy armor as well as having gun shield.
And the speed argument is nonsense anyway, modern infantries are at least motored. Powered armor soldiers, if exist, would only be mechanized infantries for assault purpose, not patrol grunts.
Wyatt Powell
...
Brody Brooks
So you basically want to bring back trench warfare?
Juan Martin
Israelis do gunshields, because they massively save lives… but such tactics are too good for goys. The only armor thats useful would be full body kevlar flak bodysuit, to reduce the range at which fragmentary munitions are deadly.
You would be surprised how much time a modern soldier spends marching.
Bring back? Trench warfare never went away. The only difference is that trench warfare is more mobile nowadays, because we developed assault phase combat and fused munitions are so common.
Every army that isn't retarded practices some version of it. We do it with sandbags for example, most armies currently do. Sandbags are easier to shift, in case the enemy attacks from a different direction. It's also easier to fill and stack a bunch of bags than it is to dig a hole in the ground, especially if its freezing or… rock. Slavs do actual trench warfare, it's being done in Ukraine right now.
Is it just me or do you have some weird idea about soldiers never taking cover in modern warfare? Just walking around, standing straight, on battlefields…
why not shoot you with the ciws bullet in the first place if it's so fast
Gavin Taylor
No, I just had some weird idea that you had a weird idea that warfare should be all static trench lines. Hence, my asking for clarification, which somehow seems to have given you the weird idea that I have a weird idea about battless being conducted with soldiers out in the open, never taking cover.
William Butler
Speaking of which I had the idea of aircraft carrying extremely sort-ranged smaller-than-stinger air to air to missile pods for the sole purpose of shooting down incoming air to air missiles. It sounds feasible with current technology so I'd appreciate if someone explains me why I am retarded.
Not to be a topic nazi but your question is off topic. You're better off starting a dedicated thread for it.
But to try to answer it anyway: the numbers don't add up well: one anti-missile per missile. It doesn't seem efficient to be carrying a dozen little missiles just for self-defense purposes. But if you're talking something different like little drones, your idea may work. Link related: archive.fo/TlcYr
Gunshields look pretty cool. However I imagine they must be quick-detachable to not be a burden. Clearing a room with those things still attached…
Xavier Davis
Irrelevant to your post, but relevant to your nationality; what was the French army's trial for personal armour that had the guy with the Kevlar skirt, and the kevlar helmet neck shield? I've been looking all over the place for information about it but I can't seem to find anything.
Jayden Collins
Nah.
It's a supermajorities thing.
1. A supermajority of a soldiers time isn't spent near the front lines. 2, A supermajority of the time he spends in the front lines, he doesn't engage in combat. 3. A supermajority of the time he spends in frontline combat, he does so in fortifications. 4. A supermajority of the time in frontline combat he can't access fortifications, he has access to cover or concealment. 5. A supermajority of the time he has no access to fortifications, concealment or cover and is still fighting, he has time to lie prone on the ground. 6. A supermajority of the time a soldier has no time to lie prone, and is standing on a flat pane of glass completely exposed to enemy fire, usually from fragmentation devices… a flak suit is of a lot more use than heavy plate armor. 7. In a situation where a soldier has no time to react, and is completely exposed to enemy rifle fire, heavy plate armor wouldn't do any good anyway. Because the rifle fire is either well aimed, or automatic, and hitting things that aren't covered by plate. 8. We have limited the situation to… what? Inaccurate semi automatic rifle fire towards a a guy standing guard in the middle of nowhere? This situation is so limited that the very issuing of plates armor can be limited to maybe 10% of the ground forces in those situations.
tl;dr The gist is that heavy plate armor isn't useful 99.99% of the time, yet a soldier carries it 100% of the time. Consider the number of health problems caused by carrying plates, or the number of wounds caused because plate interfered with taking proper cover…. do the number of times a soldiers life is protected by plate armor outweigh those? Does it break even? And if it does, does the relative amount it breaks even at justify the added expense of heavy plate armor?
Room clearing is so rare we're developing different guns for it, because troops have time to switch them out. But there are also the folding gun shields…
Benjamin Lee
That's why I posted a multi hardpoint pylon as a crude example. The technical limitation is weight
an AMRAAM weights 150kg
a sidewinder 85
a stinger less than 20
Assuming a rocket-pod-shaped cluster for lessened aerodynamic burden platform you could theoretically have more than 5 countermissiles for every mainstream air combat missile launched by fixed wing fighters. That could result in every airfight resulting into a dogfight for a gun solution with the multi-missile-pod aircraft having an extra advantage of putting extra pressure on the foe during the close quarter combat even assuming a lesser hit probability vs aircraft for the small missiles than even the earliest variants of sidewinders and manpads.
Nathaniel Lee
Not trying to derail but you have me curious, how did you find a servicable knife for $1.50? I assume you're talking about a fixed blade knife for starters but even if we throw out the benefits of a folding knife, I can't imagine a $1.50 knife is made of decent steel (i.e. can hold a useful edge for more than 2 seconds and is reasonably rust resistant). I could believe you if I'd ever seen milsurp knives go that cheap or if you'd said a $25-35 knife is just as serviceable as any high end boutique nonsense knife, but $1.50 pushes the limits of credibility.
Benjamin Rodriguez
Somebody posted pics and info in the last body armor thread we had. It might still be in the bottom of the catalog if you look.
That concept seems incredibly sound in all technical aspects and it performed better than any other system in testing IIRC. Unfortunately, it failed the "aesthetics" test being a skirt and all even though I think it looks cool in a Roman Paladin meets Druid way.
Brandon Sullivan
Not sure how Teflon(a thermoplastic with low surface friction and high melting temperature) has to do with a thermoset plastic-titanium laminate armor.
Teflon is also used to make anti-radiation linings, again because of its low friction, and the fact it likes to form on iron; irradiated particles don't stick to it and its easy to coat the inside of pipes with it, coupled with its high melting point, make it a great coating for low-temp reactor pipelines. (the high-temp ones use something else much more complicated)
Those cooling shirts with the pipes in them has been in use since the 60's in spacesuits. (the sun heats the surface of spacesuits on EVA about 170 celsius and it cools to around -200 on the other side of the planet, the shirts they wear both heat and cool.)
These suits are only for sapper squads, right? So its basicall'y a bulletproof EOD suit? (aren't EOD suits basically bulletproof anyways to stop shrapnel?)
Gunsheilds look like they'd be best for battlerifles, given that you're supposed to use the larger guns in more open/large areas naturally devoid of cover(esp cover with holes the right size for shooting out of while still being protected well). Gunsheilds seems like a great idea to me, the shield will be pointing at the enemy(ideally)
Kevlar, it seems, is going to get another point for being armor: They use it as EXTERIOR WALLS on the ISS. Recently they tested an inflatible habitat module on the ISS, and to protext from micrometeorite strikes, the entire outside is kevlar armor.
Forgot to mention that an average micrometeorite is moving at around 10,000 meters per second (ground speed), several times faster than a bullet, and can vary greatly in size, shape, and impact direct. Orbital collisions can be very complicated, but a russian space station(salyut 7) and some satelites have been taken out by meteorites.
David Brooks
Well, what the fuck were you expecting to happen?
Jacob Torres
Isn't there some experimental magic bullet stopping paper they're trying out with the police? The biggest issues so far is the cost of making a good suit impervious to rifles.
Leo Ramirez
It was part of the FELIN program early on, the ballistic hauberk thing was the armor they wanted for vehicle crews IIRC as an anti-spalling/shrapnel armor. It's dubious it could have withstand rifle rounds on it's own but no reason why they couldn't have added front/sides/back inserts.
Polytetrafluoroethylene is what is used to make Teflon, the whole family of the fluoropolymer is used for various neat applications (including heat, radiation and acid resistant lining). The way I think this works is I'm assuming they're not using a thermoplastic but a thermoset (you can do both with fluoropolymer, making it highly heat resistant) in a similar crystalline structure to PTFE that, unlike most materials, almost does not undergo an impact-induced phase transition (which is why teflon has a very low friction coefficient). The resulting coating or laminating an already strongly resistant material (like titanium alloy) with that should make it even tougher because the projectile has trouble to impart energy to the surface of the fluoropolymer resulting on most of the energy bouncing back to the projectile and ultimately in far less penetration.
David Russell
...
Nicholas Howard
Machine guns and LMG specifically should be fitted with gunshields. Because the people carrying them are more often doing so outside of the base, away from support, and the LMG doesn't room clear often.
They changed the weird hat and skit for this.
Personally I don't care what it looks like, as long as it works.
No it wouldn't, you would not get anywhere, hit anything and you would not adapt to the situation so you would most likely get flanked or have one part of the line broken through.
Isaac Green
I'm going to need a citation on that one. I'm hard pressed to even find a picture of one without a CROWS mounted M2 You realize that an M2 will perforate a BTR at combat range making this shit irrelevant right? I guess I should add that SOME units carry a designated launcher and marksman at squad level.
