• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

OMGF!

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
:shocked:

would be nice if it were more compact though...

i imagine he'll be getting a call from are 51 soon 😛
 
Originally posted by: J0hnny
wow, damn, that armor took quite a beating. I'd send it to the troops in Iraq, if not for door armor, then for a big seat cushion!
Click to expand...

That is actually a practical idea. If the entire bottom of the vehicle is padded with this stuff, then landmines wouldn't be a problem.
 
But the quesion remains, is that his compound that's stopping bullets or severall layers of steel? If you surround your car with that material from all the sides, how would it be different from a car?

What I'd like to see is how much portection does his product retain when reduced to much more managable size. And also, how much does it weigh at that size.
 
Originally posted by: SagaLore
Originally posted by: J0hnny
wow, damn, that armor took quite a beating. I'd send it to the troops in Iraq, if not for door armor, then for a big seat cushion!
Click to expand...

That is actually a practical idea. If the entire bottom of the vehicle is padded with this stuff, then landmines wouldn't be a problem.
Click to expand...

It's not the shells of a landmine that kill the car/tank crews. It's the powerful blast and shock. A lot of times the bottom of the vehicle is not penetrated, but human body just can't withstand the force of the blow. Kills you instantly. Those seat cushions are useless.
 
Originally posted by: chrisms
Originally posted by: Mookow
His test didnt really prove anything about his armor's resistance to grenades and RPGs. Shrapnel and shaped charges are a lot different than dynamite strapped to your armor, and shotgun pellets are about the easiest projectile to stop. I'd like to know what specific round they were using for the 7.62mm testing. And I think he was talking about M855 rounds rather than M995 when he said "AP 223" rounds.... basically, it wasnt as impressive as he leads you to think. Now, if it took 50 rounds of 50BMG rounds without failing to stop any, then I'd be impressed.

That said, I am not against this stuff being tested. Just that it isnt a sure thing.
Click to expand...

Correct me if I'm wrong but the reporter said they used slugs later. She also said they used the most powerful ammo.

Regardless if it is different, that much dynamite strapped to your armor still should blow that thing to pieces.
Click to expand...

Typical slugs arent good armor penetrators, either. And the most powerful loadings of a given chambering wont necessarily penetrate well. In other words, a 357 +P+ load with a Glaser Blue bullet is not going to penetrate farther than generic 357 FMJ range rounds, despite the fact that the Glaser loaded to +P+ is more "powerful". Also, unless he has military connections, he wouldnt have M995 (which is the actual 5.56mm NATO AP cartridge), he is more likely to have M193 or M855, which are not AP bullets, although many people call them AP.

And, of course, this is a case of a reporter talking about guns. Many reporters were convinced that the AWB banned fully automatic rifles... or at least they said as much in their editorials. I just mention that as one more instance of the media not knowing WTF they are talking about with respect to firearms; if you know much about firearms you tend to notice the media routinely publish errors regarding firearms. Or they create errors (ie, the "cop killer bullets" hype) to generate readership/increase viewers. Either way, a reporter's claim that they were the most powerful possible doesnt sway me much. A reporter stating that he used M995 or M2 would make this be more impressive to me.

A shaped charge will penetrate armor more effectively than a stick of dynamite by at least an order of magnitude per unit of explosive used. The actual figure, when using a modern shaped charge, is probably several orders of magnitude. Strapping a stick of explosive to a piece of armor doesnt prove much at all. If they at least encased the explosive in metal (so as to generate some shrapnel), that would be an improvement.
 
Originally posted by: paulney
Originally posted by: SagaLore
Originally posted by: J0hnny
wow, damn, that armor took quite a beating. I'd send it to the troops in Iraq, if not for door armor, then for a big seat cushion!
Click to expand...

That is actually a practical idea. If the entire bottom of the vehicle is padded with this stuff, then landmines wouldn't be a problem.
Click to expand...

It's not the shells of a landmine that kill the car/tank crews. It's the powerful blast and shock. A lot of times the bottom of the vehicle is not penetrated, but human body just can't withstand the force of the blow. Kills you instantly. Those seat cushions are useless.
Click to expand...

Depends on the type of mine. Anti-vehicle or Anti-personnel. Big difference there.

Anti-vehicle is designed to give a large explosion. Anti-personnel is designed to fire shrapnel, kind of like the MarkII "pineapple" Grenade.
 
All of this might be true, but you can still see the benefits of the padding. It is no different than our officers wearing kevlar vests. It won't stop a soldier from getting hurt, or possibly even getting killed, but it increases his chances of surviving, and that is the point of this stuff. Sure, it might be offer no more protection than the equivalent thickness of steel, but it comes at a much cheaper and easier to manage material. Not to mention, you can put this into the wall spaces of a conventional vehicle. and get a similar armouring effect without the weight.

You can also think of the other applications, insead of the steel plate in the current uniforms, you can have a thinner piece of this stuff and get similar protection. A soldier that isn't carrying as heavy a load might have a better chance at surving, or you can give him additional gear or ammo.

While i agree the mine protection will most likely be useless since the concussion will still kill everyone, the added protection without the high costs of more more convetional armor, might still prove to be a useful thing.

He is a bit of a drama queen though, and stikes me as soomeone who is tring to be more convincing by adding the human element.
 
I can make a weapon that would annihilate that armor.... seriously, Mookow is right, shaped charges would make it a whole different story. And I didn't see the likely weapons to be used against vehicles... 66.7mm LAW would have made his armor FUBAR.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top