Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Body Armor

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
  • #1

    Body Armor

    Another question - this one actually not about tanks!

    Body Armor degrades when it absorbs multiple hits. Kevlar will, over time, simply wear out. While Kevlar probably isn't easy to replace (read: nigh impossible) how feasible is the manufacture of new trauma plates in a post 2k environment I mean, they're "just" ceramic, plastic and steel sandwich laminate...but that's not exactly like milking a cow.
    THIS IS MY SIG, HERE IT IS.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    The ceramic would go the way of Kevlar, it requires specialized materials and factories to make. You would be more likely to see metal plates added, the first flak jackets were made of nylon and held overlapping steel strips in pockets on the armor, needless to say, they were very heavy!
    The reason that the American Army does so well in wartime, is that war is chaos, and the American Army practices chaos on a daily basis.

    Comment

    • #3
      Originally posted by dragoon500ly View Post
      The ceramic would go the way of Kevlar, it requires specialized materials and factories to make. You would be more likely to see metal plates added, the first flak jackets were made of nylon and held overlapping steel strips in pockets on the armor, needless to say, they were very heavy!
      Yeah, I can see vehicle armor from completely destroyed (lighter) vehicles making its way to small machine shops for conversion to trauma plates.
      THIS IS MY SIG, HERE IT IS.

      Comment

      • #4
        LOL, I'm afraid that if you are planning to use vehicle armor, its more along the lines of a fabrication plant and a decent forge. Even thin armor would run at least 0.5-inch thick, thats a lot of machining!

        The metal that was used in the bomber crew flak jackets and later in the first issue armored vests is actually quite thin, its initial purpose was not to stop a bullet but rather to deflect and absorb the energy of fragments. You really didn't start getting good "bullet-stopping" armor until the use of Kevlar and later, ceramics.
        The reason that the American Army does so well in wartime, is that war is chaos, and the American Army practices chaos on a daily basis.

        Comment

        • #5
          Originally posted by dragoon500ly View Post
          LOL, I'm afraid that if you are planning to use vehicle armor, its more along the lines of a fabrication plant and a decent forge. Even thin armor would run at least 0.5-inch thick, thats a lot of machining!
          "But sir, I don't wanna wear the vest!"

          "You'll wear it and like it - that stuff will stop a tank round."

          "That's because it's made from tank armor, sir!"

          The metal that was used in the bomber crew flak jackets and later in the first issue armored vests is actually quite thin, its initial purpose was not to stop a bullet but rather to deflect and absorb the energy of fragments. You really didn't start getting good "bullet-stopping" armor until the use of Kevlar and later, ceramics.
          Huh; didn't know that.
          THIS IS MY SIG, HERE IT IS.

          Comment

          • #6
            It's the same with many of the lighter vehicles - their armour is only designed to protect against (ie slow down) small arms fire and shrapnel. As long as the crew and passengers survive relatively intact, it can be considered "effective".
            Naturally this isn't anything close to acceptable with heavier, higher value vehicles such as MBTs, but for scout vehicles and some APCs (aka battle taxis)...
            Last edited by Legbreaker; 11-09-2012, 08:52 AM.
            If it moves, shoot it, if not push it, if it still doesn't move, use explosives.

            Nothing happens in isolation - it's called "the butterfly effect"

            Mors ante pudorem

            Comment

            • #7
              There was a discussion on a thread not all that long ago (late last year maybe) in which I recall suggesting that perhaps sections of kevlar spall liner, cut to size, could be used to repair damaged/degraded kevlar body armour. I'd go looking for the thread but it's late here and likely to take bloody ages.
              sigpic "It is better to be feared than loved" - Nicolo Machiavelli

              Comment

              • #8
                Originally posted by Targan View Post
                There was a discussion on a thread not all that long ago (late last year maybe) in which I recall suggesting that perhaps sections of kevlar spall liner, cut to size, could be used to repair damaged/degraded kevlar body armour. I'd go looking for the thread but it's late here and likely to take bloody ages.
                You can't cut Kevlar like that. It'll delaminate and destroy the integrity of the product. With that said it's not unreasonable to think that removed spall liners could be taken by someone with the knowledge of how to work with Kevlar and properly reassembled into body armor.
                THIS IS MY SIG, HERE IT IS.

                Comment

                • #9
                  now again i really really need to test this in the lab(read range) but i keep hearing that 1/8 steel scale mail atop a layer of chain will deflect most pistol rounds. it ain't much but its netter than just wearing your skivvies.
                  the best course of action when all is against you is to slow down and think critically about the situation. this way you are not blindly rushing into an ambush and your mind is doing something useful rather than getting you killed.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    I'd think body armor is increasingly rare by 2000, and there's not much ability to repair existing armor or fabricate new armor.

                    Plus, at a big picture level, the logistical equation has changed dramatically -- body armor's utility is based on soldiers and their skills being expensive commodities and casualties being politically unacceptable (there's a humanitarian dimension as well, but humanitarian issues only go so far as budgetary items . . .). Circa 2000, even with the loss of life from the nukes and their disruptions, basic trigger pullers are much cheaper than their weapons -- as long as the military can provide meals and security for families from marauders, there will probably be dozens of volunteers to take the place of an infantryman who becomes a casualty. The limiter is weapons and other equipment.

                    Comment

                    Previous template Next
                    Working...
                    X