94450e No.559906
Hello /k/ 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 /k/, is there anything new and exciting in the works?
Something magic, to poop on the joy of riflemen whose bullets pierce all?
316345 No.559907
>>559906
Except it isn't. There are NIJ IV plates that will stop .338
d0bd62 No.559914
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.
>>559907
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.
820da8 No.559931
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!
bd08ed No.559937
>>559931
>We might see loadbearing exoskeletons at some point though, got to find a way to let soldiers carry EVEN MORE GEAR!
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.
7070c4 No.559942
>>559914
>ap .338
I don't think it even exists
>shooting the unarmored spots
<with a .338
8c4a6e No.559946
>>559906
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:
>1: Covering yourself in so much shit that it doesn't matter even if you do get shot
not viable for above reasons.
>2: Not getting shot in the first place
achieved by stealth and or maneuverability, favoured by aircraft, light vehicles, favoured by basic bitch /k/ommandos who want soldiers to go into combat with less than 5kg of equipment.
>3: shooting the shit getting shot at you
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.
8c0caf No.559949
>>559937
>The T-45d
Fuck off, Todd. You didn't write shit.
820da8 No.559951
>>559946
>Man-portable point defence
Inb4 enemy starts issuing high rotary barrel shotguns to empty your CIWS ammunition or just overwhelm its simultaneous target capabilities.
dc8600 No.559952
>>559951
Couldn't you just throw a bunch of bbs at them?
649132 No.559954
>>559946
How was your first playthrough of Deus Ex with Aggresive defense system?
820da8 No.559955
>>559952
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?
f195cb No.559956
>>559942
Yeah it exist from the factory. Besides that a solid brass bullet will do similar to what AP will do.
b323d4 No.559961
>>559931
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.
9c2f41 No.559965
>>559942
>.338 is a spray and pray round
c87a26 No.559966
>>559961
>uses dirt cheap RPG from afghanistan left over from the billion wars there
nothin personell, kid.
a94155 No.559973
>>559966
You kinda win if you force your enemy to standard-issue fucking RPG-7.
d0bd62 No.559976
>>559946
>basic bitch /k/ommandos who want soldiers to go into combat with less than 5kg of equipment.
At least 20kg is feasible :)
00a6c1 No.559979
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 /k/ protect their balls (possibly from radiation as well) and not impede movement?
>>559952
>>559951
>>559955
>inb4 "SPERGGOOK WAS RIGHT ALL ALONG!"
>>559961
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.
c87a26 No.559981
>>559973
Terrorists are certain to have one somewhere and most explosives will take these things out of action.
a94155 No.560001
>>559981
Terrorists ain't gonna win war, anon.
Still, goddamn the idea of powered armor soldier with an auto shotgun makes my wee wee super hard.
c87a26 No.560005
>>560001
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.
a94155 No.560007
>>560005
What? So you imagine the terrorists to just kamikaze rush like in CnC?
And you call me retarded?
4f7bd2 No.560008
Let me say it again. Graphene Curiass
807861 No.560018
>>559906
It's basic physics honestly, anon. 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-
>Guns have to focus on two factors: Speed and Penetrative Power
>Armor has to focus on like 20 different variables that would make it worthless if not counterbalanced
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.
0373f0 No.560021
>>560008
>Graphene
<Difficult & expensive to make purely
<Conducts electricity extremely well
<Conducts heat extremely well
<Is transparent
<Still heavy as fuck
<Still breaks and cracks like ceramic and would need to be used in plates
The only realistic use for it is dissipating lasers
807861 No.560038
>>559951
>Rifle with BB shotgun underbarrel
>When you fire rifle, it fires in 3 rounds bursts and launches BBs as well to distract point defense system
>>559946
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.
807861 No.560039
>>559981
Let's not forget you can make a tank-busting bomb out of fertilizer or goat piss relatively easily.
807861 No.560040
>>560021
And supercapacitors*
fuck you.
a94155 No.560048
>>560039
As IED yes.
But as conventional weapons to be used against infantry and armor? Nope.
a5ed0a No.560100
>>559906
>Hello /k/ so I was wondering: how come modern body armor is still crap?
>By "crap" I mean useless against rifle fire,
NIH Level-IV rate armor stops M2 AP, ESAPI weight 5lbs per plate.
>especially sniper rifles.
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.
>>559914
>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.
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.
35b9be No.560152
>>559906
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.
4f7bd2 No.560165
>>560021
>Graphene
>Heavy
What?
0373f0 No.560168
>>560165
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.
820da8 No.560169
>>559961
What sort of rating is the armour? Even if it's NIJ Level IV there are still bullets that will go through it.
4f7bd2 No.560176
>>560168
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."
807861 No.560177
>>560048
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 anon who threw a bitch fit when I pointed out my $1.50 knife accomplished all the same tasks his $55 knife did.
4f7bd2 No.560182
>>560179
Current battery tech sucks
0373f0 No.560186
>>560176
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.
a5ed0a No.560188
7070c4 No.560195
>>559965
>.338 is anything but a center of mass round
0373f0 No.560198
>>560188
>pitt.edu
That's a university freshman's paper
<"to stop an AK-47 assault rifle bullet from piercing through the skin. Currently bulletproof vests are made of Kevlar which has the capability of stopping small caliber handguns and shotguns. However, to stop impact from an assault rifle such as an AK-47,"
>mse.umd
Specifically looking at and comparing it to other transparent armors
>ausa.org
No sources, so it can be disregarded regardless, but
>Wondering just how strong this new material was, he took it to a shooting range and discovered that bullets couldn’t pierce it, either
The embodiment of pop sci
>ncbi
It agrees. It has practicality in electronics, or as shock cushion. Not as armor.
4f7bd2 No.560204
>>560186
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.
a94155 No.560235
>>560177
IED only advantage is because nobody knows it's an IED.
If it becomes conventional, then it's nothing to write home about.
b323d4 No.560236
>>559966
>uses dirt cheap RPG
>it does nothing unless it's a direct hit.
>OH FUCK.jpg
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.
bfc7e9 No.560249
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.
bfc7e9 No.560253
>>560236
>regular Russian infantry (which completely outgun NATO infantry to begin with)
How so? I'm genuinely curious.
d0bd62 No.560259
>>560100
>man-portable indirect fire systems
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.
157dcf No.560260
>>560179
You need a power supply, tests with back mounted ones in Iraq just caused the troops to get cancer.
d0bd62 No.560263
>>560169
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.
d0bd62 No.560264
Here is the 7N14, and the rough equivalence of their levels.
bfc7e9 No.560474
>>559914
>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.
…..
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.
d0bd62 No.560480
>>560474
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.
bfc7e9 No.560482
>>560480
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.
cdd7d6 No.560489
>>560263
>>560169
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.
807861 No.560502
>>560182
Graphene Supercapacitors could solve that problem.
cdd7d6 No.560504
>>560253
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.
4f7bd2 No.560513
>>560502
Possibly, even then those fuckers will require tons of maintenance. I can see them being used in urban combat.
447963 No.560535
>>560263
>All of these are at point blank range.
Do you mean real point-blank range, which is hundreds of yards.
Or do you mean "really close".
f195cb No.560540
>>560535
Think cokefag shooting at trash close.
cfed8b No.560545
>>560504
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.
94450e No.560565
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…
Future promises:
- graphene-based
- plastic plates (like ceramic but won't shatter?)
- liquid armor: STF (shear-thickening fluid)
- exoskeleton (aka "power armor")
Sci-fi impossible/jokes:
- 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.
58444e No.560584
get it into your heads you niggers body armor is ass
you want to be vietnam fucking shit tier all the time
000000 No.560585
>>560584
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.
58444e No.560586
>>560585
Speed is the essence of war. Armor only slows you down and you will get killed anyway.
cdd7d6 No.560587
>>560545
>The armored transport comparison of pitting a low intensity humvee against a medium intensity BTR is kinda being dishonest.
Where the fuck did I say that???
>A more fair comparison to the BTR would have been an M113 or Stryker
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).
>>560545
>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.
Not at squad level they don't. They have attached support squad… Guess what? Russia has that too.
ea15b2 No.560590
>>560586
Speed is the essence of war. Guns only slow you down and you will get killed anyway.
bfc7e9 No.560608
>>560586
It does not slow you down that much if at all to any noticeable degree and it increases survivability.
If anything is slowing the modern soldier down it is the 30kg back pack.
58444e No.560619
>>560608
Well when i was in the military and given on of those heavy as fug breastplates i sure wished back for the light equipment we used in basic training.
bfc7e9 No.560629
>>560619
Did you ever see combat?
73d143 No.560631
>>560482
>defenders still have to expose themselves to shoot
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.
>>560608
>does not slow you down that much if at all
>crouch running in interceptor armor
Fucking lol.
8c0caf No.560632
>>560619
What would be the one piece of equipment you'd consider weighing yourself down for, instead of plate?
58444e No.560634
>>560629
no_
>>560632
A Rocket launcher tbh
bfc7e9 No.560636
>>560631
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.
e1a50f No.560639
>>560259
Rifle grenades aren't that heavy.
>>560585
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.
>>560631
>Most armor is so badly designed it doesn't even protect when prone.
I'm really curious how a rail-mounted gun shield would work on the field.
73d143 No.560641
>>560636
>Why do you need to crouch run anywhere?
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.
>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.
…. yeah? Kind of. That would be a perfect battle.
>>560639
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.
a94155 No.560651
>>560641
Anything against this?
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.
dee96e No.560652
>>559946
>be soldier of the future
>on patrol
>suddenly my personal CIWS goes off
>feel thankful, knowing that the incoming enemy rounds are being shot down before they can harm me
>unbeknownst to me, enemy has advanced their firearm technology
>enemy bullets have their own CIWS
>my CIWS rounds are shot down before they can intercept the bullet
>die
65070b No.560654
>>560641
>yeah? Kind of. That would be a perfect battle
So you basically want to bring back trench warfare?
73d143 No.560660
>>560651
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.
>modern infantries are at least motored
You would be surprised how much time a modern soldier spends marching.
>>560654
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…
743b7b No.560661
>>560652
why not shoot you with the ciws bullet in the first place if it's so fast
65070b No.560663
>>560660
>Is it just me or do you have some weird idea about soldiers never taking cover in modern warfare
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.
b2dddc No.560664
>>560652
>>559946
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.
000000 No.560674
>>560664
>air force question in a body armor thread
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: https://archive.fo/TlcYr
>>560641
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…
8b807c No.560675
>>560587
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.
73d143 No.560686
>>560663
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?
>>560674
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…
b2dddc No.560705
>>560674
>**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.""
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.
4fbd80 No.560710
>>560177
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.
4fbd80 No.560713
>>560675
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.
7dd859 No.560720
>>559961
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?)
>>560502
>supercapacitor meme
>he doesn't know about infinitely superior glass batteries
>>560641
>>560674
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.
7dd859 No.560724
>>560720
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.
820da8 No.560727
>>560652
>Not mounting a CIWS on the CIWS projectiles
Well, what the fuck were you expecting to happen?
3363a3 No.560739
>>559906
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.
de2247 No.560740
>>560675
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.
>>560720
>Teflon (a thermoplastic)
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.
7070c4 No.560746
>>560720
>glass cells
>a single man's pipe dream
>real in any material way
73d143 No.560754
>>560720
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.
>>560675
>>560740
They changed the weird hat and skit for this.
Personally I don't care what it looks like, as long as it works.
bfc7e9 No.560756
>>560641
>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.
So you admit they are not always in cover?
>…. yeah? Kind of. That would be a perfect battle.
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.
cfed8b No.560774
>>560587
>Most Strykers only have a RWS mounted M240
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
>the M2 is outdated meme
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.
73d143 No.560775
bfc7e9 No.560792
>>560775
>1. A supermajority of a soldiers time isn't spent near the front lines.
Well then he does not really need body armour or even a gun.
>2, A supermajority of the time he spends in the front lines, he doesn't engage in combat.
It's best to be prepared if you are on the frontlines
>3. A supermajority of the time he spends in frontline combat, he does so in fortifications.
Wrong.
>4. A supermajority of the time in frontline combat he can't access fortifications, he has access to cover or concealment.
He has to physically get to it and he is not going to spend literally 100% of the time hiding behind one peice of cover and never peeking out to shoot.
>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.
Yes.
>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.
No. A plate will protect his vital organs from both.
>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.
Wrong, this isn't a video game where everybody hits where they aim 100 metres away in a combat situation and if it is hitting things not covered by the plate he has a far higher chance of surviving.
dee96e No.560798
>>560661
Because they have to be very small
>>560727
Don't blame me man, the contract went to the lowest bidder.
>>560754
That image gives me an idea, is there any reason having a helmet with a visor made of two pieces of angled bulletproof glass or similar wouldn't work? Would the thickness required be too heavy for practical use?
aa10bb No.560801
>>559954
It would have to be pretty damn subpar, given that ADS means you can't get the invisible-invincible-robot-instakilling-nano-mind-spy-drone unfortunately.
>>560007
I just want you to know that I value and appreciate your contributions to this board.
73d143 No.560804
>>560792
These things are my opinions, I was trying to make my beliefs clear so there was no confusion. These beliefs are informed by my own experience not any government data, and neither are your counter-arguments, which are also opinions.
>vital organs
There's no such a thing as a nonvital organs.
Nicking an artery in a forearm can cause a person to bleed out in five minutes. Any body armor that allows a range of motion in arms, legs and neck exposes the kind of blood vessels that can mean death if cut in just 2-15 minutes. And if there are any troops around to attach a tourniquet to a soldier in shock, he wouldn't be taken by surprise and would be behind cover.
>where they aim 100 metres
I'm trying to account for sniper fire as well.
The soldier was limited to a soldier standing in a place with no cover, and no time to react which means he's likely alone and being hit by a surprise attack. This means a guard. In that situation, the things that would most likely be attacking him are a LMG or a sniper rifle.
And that's the only case when heavy armor is necessary.
>>560798
Bulletproof glass is very heavy. Several times as heavy as steel armor for the same protection level.
8b807c No.560808
>>560740
Fair enough, thanks; it should be at least effective in stopping shrapnel taking out the manhood in combat I suppose.
>>560754
The neck flap offer fantastic protection from both the sun.
Warrior - assault armor kit
It was developed in the Russian Research Institute of Steel. The armored suit is intended for protection during the assault. The weight of the complete set is 62 kg.
The area of protection against bullets released from AKM, AK74 rifles and Dragunov sniper rifle from a distance of 10-25 m is (total / reinforced):
front part: 104/58 dm²
back: 41/13 dm²
Withstands and close ruptures of grenades.
Adopted by the Russian Border Service [1]
05988d No.560816
>>560792
>There's no such a thing as a nonvital organs.
youve shown your hand, mr lmao. anal probe moar
bfc7e9 No.560817
>>560804
Actually there is a fair amount of data backing up what I say, such as combat footage and casualty statistics.
>There's no such a thing as a nonvital organs.
You are just arguing semantics, most hits to the limbs are survivable hence part of why causality rates are quite low in places like Afghanistan, if a soldier gets hit it's not in a a vital organ so unless it hits an artery he will survive.
>I'm trying to account for sniper fire as well.
Snipers generally aim for centre of mass and if he hits a limb as I said before that is much more survivable. They often miss too.
>The soldier was limited to a soldier standing in a place with no cover, and no time to react which means he's likely alone and being hit by a surprise attack. This means a guard. In that situation, the things that would most likely be attacking him are a LMG or a sniper rifle.
Again, his vitals are protected, they are aiming at centre of mass and they still are going to miss many of their shots.
>And that's the only case when heavy armor is necessary.
You still need it if you are in any kind of combat situation, nobody ever stays behind one piece of cover for 100% of the time never exposing themselves.
000000 No.560868
>>560804
>There's no such a thing as a nonvital organs.
OK but some organs are more vital than others. Additionally some are doubled. For example getting shot in the lung sucks but at least you have two lungs. That means that one lung by itself is less vital than the heart.
Anyway you will commit the "Nirvana" logical fallacy if you reject the body armor solution just because it's not a perfect solution: "it doesn't protect the wrists from sniper fire, therefore it's not worth carrying its weight."
>>560798
>That image gives me an idea, is there any reason having a helmet with a visor made of two pieces of angled bulletproof glass or similar wouldn't work?
I'm thinking it would distort forward vision to unacceptable levels.
What I don't like in the picture of >>560754 is how the visor doesn't bind to the jaw protector, making the entire thing look cheaply thrown together. I shouldn't judge so quickly though, it's still experimental. Also the helmets seem to have HMD (helmet mounted display). That's cool. HMD will increase situational awareness and I bet it will become standard stuff in less than 50 years.
000000 No.560874
>>560754
Also about their rifles, they look like FAMAS G2 but still use the old 25 round mags?
Also, they have some electronic thingy attached under the barrel, does anybody know what it does exactly?
728e3f No.560876
>>560590
This reminds me of that FPSDoug video where he goes running outside with a knife because everyone runs faster with a knife, that guy was also the originator of BOOM HEADSHOT. Ah, the mid 2000s were good times.
de2247 No.560898
>>560754
Nah your pic is what the infantry part of the program was looking like early on.
Current FELIN gear look like that.
Note that unlike everybody else "future infantry program" the french one has actually gone through as a whole and most of the infantry is issued actually the whole thing which is pretty awesome, especially the networked environment.
They splurged a bit for the new armor batch after attacks on military personnel in France because of the need to work as an anti-stab vest and the stupidity of the three layers of vest thing (which everyone knew was retarded from day 1).
As a result the ones on order are a custom version of the NFM Thor plate carrier.
205343 No.560906
>https://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/high-quality-wear-resistant-uhmwpe-plastic_60623689707.html
We need more ballistic tests done on this shit. There's hardly anything on Youtube and half of it is using those retarded $500 sheets that're sold as armor. If one of us could buy some of this stuff, cut it into various thicknesses and sizes, and post the results, that'd be great.
000000 No.561436
>>560906
Small bumpo for interest.
5a9227 No.561488
>>560713
An armored "skirt" couldn't be made aesthetic, I mean warriors wore what is basically a metal dress for 1000+ years and they looked fucking badass.
I don't see why we couldn't reproduce a hauberk out of kevlar and/or other ballistic materials. You could incorporate a kevlar aventail that attaches to a combat helmet and could even wear a standard plate carrier if you wanted to. Pauldrons I believe would be both unnecessary and cumbersome. With the aventail you already have two layers of padding/protection on your shoulders and the right side pauldron in particular would interfere with proper shouldering of the rifle.
For the rest I don't think you need more protection than the standard goggles, knee/elbow pads, gloves and boots that we already use. Ballistic visors or googles sound cool but they tend to be more trouble than they're worth because they're heavy, impair vision/awareness and tend to fog up.
116a60 No.561489
>>561488
I still believe that you would be better off with a shrapnelproof greatcoat. Instead of a skirt and a hauberk you'd only need one piece of equpment.
ae070a No.561546
>>561489
Perhaps I was unclear. A separate skirt is unnecessary what I was suggesting is a hauberk like the left image of the viking but with an aventail (the coif looking thing on the face and shoulders of the guy on the right). So basically something like in pics related but with modern materials and design.
The brigandine skirt and chest armor would likely be way too heavy if made of anything capable of actually stopping rifle rounds.
79c488 No.561548
>>561546
I see. Actually l, I too was suggesting something similar in the previous thread, just instead of a hauberk it should be modelled after a Mongolian deel.
79c488 No.561551
>>561548
Of course, this line of discussion was started by a Canuck suggesting a similar arrangment, and then it was reinforced by that early Felin suit. It's a pity that the board is so small that people can end up as "pseudo tripfags".
94450e No.561722
>>561488
For a moment I was thinking such a skirt would hamper mobility, then I realized those guys ran around swinging axes and swords. So now I'm 100% unsure what to think.
>>561551
I'm still keeping an eye on this thread but I don't post much, having nothing to add. If I had a gun I'd test some plastic bricks…
I have to say though, the optics/camera on the FELIN FAMAS are stupidly big, that's on area of improvement that sticks out.
7f5aca No.562605
>>561548
> it should be modelled after a Mongolian deel.
<Hungarian
<wants Mongolian inspired armour
Who /thinking/ here?
e6c329 No.562609
>>562605
That's actually because of this picture. As you can see the method of fastening is quite ideal to wear it over additional layers of cloth.
7f5aca No.562621
>>562609
Neurotypicals would call this 'humour'.
In case you didn't already know about, this site will be of interest to you:
sturgeonshouse.ipbhost.com
Lots of interesting shit there regarding small arms design.
7c5c0b No.562629
>tfw the future is ran by shotguns filled with birdshot in a race to blind the enemy the fastest
f8bee8 No.562756
>>560801
you can find that augmentation canister twice actually
7dd859 No.563057
>>560746
>that single man being the inventor of lithium ion batteries
in any other scenario, you'd be right.
0a5fc9 No.563344
<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).
BULLSHIT NIGGER THAT'S A REAL THING AND YOU KNOW DAMN WELL IT IS AND HAS BEEN FOR THE LAST DECADE STOP PRETENDING TO BE SOME ENGINEER
0a5fc9 No.563351
>>560038
<High speed cameras will never be fast enough for a speeding bullet. release a counterfire.
WRONG
>>560586
<Speed is the essence of war.
No, Intelligence is.
You beat your enemy by using your brain to counter his moves.
If speed were the essence of war, the leopard 2 would be the best tank ever made.
It's not, it's a piece of shit designed for "expendable warfare" where the tank and doctrine is designed for loss in the same way the soviets had their doctrine.
It screams kike philosophy, designing your war machine with the idea in mind that the soldiers inside it are fully expendable to the point where you remove armour so you can save money while also making it lighter so the tanks can reach the front and be destroyed/maybe get a single kill quicker.
They have to rely on magical tech like ERPs and gyro stabilization to fill in the gaps where a tank should be, instead they've made a bastardized tank destroyer like us brits ALREADY FUCKING TRIED IN THE 50-60S
What's germany going to call on when it needs a TANK?
Not a tank destroyer, not an APC.
The Leopard is only good because it's never been fully deployed in a combat operation the way the Challanger and the (((Abrahms))) have.
The Leopard is the "more speed/armour = better for war" argument in a microcosm.
Some people think they know better than the rest of human history, design equipment or make doctrine that flagrantly supports armour/speed instead of a balance between the two like anybody with more than 80 iq can guess just by looking in the mirror and realizing that humans are built to be both strong while not bulky enough to become encumbered by the weight of their strength.
All human creations will naturally be put through this filter where the slow, encumbered vs light, weak will be put through the test and will evolve into an equal melding of the two.
There are no outliers to this rule, you cannot name me 1 single civilization that developed a tactic that relied too much on speed/armour that wasn't countered to the point where the civilization had to completely re-evaluate how they perform warfare or be destroyed by their enemies who learned how to balance these two correctly.
>>560619
t. never heard enemy rifle fire
The first time my section heard rifle fire from the enemy the 3 guys in my section who thought plates were "heavy as fug" all said "shit" in pure unison because they decided they didn't want to carry around life saving armour plates and instead run around like dickheads, quick dickheads, mind you.
dd3c2a No.563381
>>563351
The Mongols were an unstoppable tide known for their horse archery and mobile cavalry despite their lack of well organized infantry, heavy cavalry, and siege engines compared to the Europeans. They created a massive empire that only collapsed because the sons of the khan were squabbling asshats who divided it up when pops bit the dust. I'd say the Mongols are the premier example of "Speed is the essence of warfare".
f19f85 No.563387
>>563351
No, not one factor has never been determinate to warfare. It is always been a combination of several. But you are correct. Speed is always a factor, but if we look at Soviet battles at Rzhev or before Kursk Or just the entire war lol, failure to out maneuver the enemy and instead of utilizing battering ram tactics like Zhukov did for the majority of the war still results in massive casualties.
>>563381
Aye. But today where there is rough technological parity not sure about the US intelligence, numbers, morale, and speed are all factors.
If we look at the Kursk the Germans did the stupidest thing possible, attempt to penetrate a heavily defended, muti-layered defense specially designed to slow down armored advance as much as possible The same is true for Stalingrad and the first Chechnya, albiet those were idiotic orunintentional.
The basic issue of heavy body armor for US troops is the fact the public cant deal with X amount of troops. Add that and the training of the troops plus issues the Germans faced with in the second world war with troop rotations due to the lack of expendable peasants like the Soviets had in comparison you have the reason for why we have body armor. Western countries simply cannot afford the casualty ratios of China/Iran/Afghanistan or some African shithole.
>inb4 Kikery.
That's also an issue. As long as there is no significant external force pressuring modern governments to adapt newer armor, there is no reason to. At some point it becomes mobility/cost prohibitive to issue new armor as it costs more than the life of a human soldier. Just the sad way things are.
2e0bea No.563393
>>563057
They're not real yet. If he lives long enough they may be, but for now, nimh and lithium are goodenough for me :^)
94450e No.563522
>>563344
>THAT'S A REAL THING AND YOU KNOW DAMN WELL IT IS AND HAS BEEN FOR THE LAST DECADE
Troll much? The only thing that exists right now is kevlar with plates (ceramic or steel).
There is no sponge armor, liquid armor, plastic armor or graphene armor, yet. As in actually in use and issued to soldiers and not just a scientist plaything. If I'm wrong show me.
000000 No.570253
3c429e No.570277
>>563522
Composite metal foam is emerging as a viable armor. A 1 inch thick plate was able to get level IV rating. Yes I know the firearm blog is cancerous but this is cool. thefirearmblog.c om/blog/2018/04/06/cmf-armor-tagainst-23mm-shells/
Considering the weight savings, the extra bulk isn't that bad.
000000 No.570570
>>570475
Wow that's cool. I though those things were still a couple of years in the future but here they are. Graphene+Plastic plates are probably not that far off.
5b6250 No.570582
>>559906
Body armor might save your life. That's about it. If you're shot even though it protected you all your gear would be fucked, and your shit needs to be replaced. Level3a is excellent for civilians in street clothes. Level 3 takes a lot of getting out of your basement. If you can do 10 pull ups you're going to be worthless. Above all even without minimum armor protection your water, and ammo is going to be heavy. You won't escape weight. I use both chest rig, and armor. If the woods on the move armor seems pointless. Stuck defending the same area armor help the mood a lot.