Israeli's develop the first MDC body armor!?! (New Picture!)

[KLM]

It seems some guys here cannot distinguish a 12 gauge shotgun
used in Mythbusters from a .50 BMG heavy rifle.

The difference is about 4 times heavier gun and four times
of kinetic energy at muzzle, for the .50 BMG's favor.

The recoil of the .50 BMG Gepard (link above) with its
long recoil barrel is like pushed back by an adult man.
The shooter is braced or lying down, using the bipod,
and most certainly ready for the kickback.

Now for the "lucky winner" (ie. target):

Getting hit with such a round in armor means a body block,
usually from suprise - that usually knocks someone down.
This time we assume that the armor stop the bullet, and
therefore it transfers all of it kinetic energy to the target.
(Not that contemporary armor would stop it)

Without armor, the target get a fist sized hole, the round
flies another miles, the target collapses from wound shock.
---

Conclusion: the winner of a .50 will not fly away in hollywooditis,
but will be knocked down (or roll with impact, against 20 or lose
an action and initiative in game terms)

Adios
KLM

[Thinyser]

No small arms bullet is capable of knocking a man down via sheer force. Not even a .50 cal.
You could get shot by one of those monsters fired by an A-10 and it wouldn't knock you down via sheer force. People who go down from being shot were 1. shocked by tissue damage and pain, 2. belatedly trying to move out of the way, thus they were off balance when hit and fell down, 3. dead or suffered nerve damage.
Bullets crush tissue (they don't cut as some people think) but the kinetic energy transfer, even for a round from an elephant gun, scientifically is not there. Even hydrostatic shock has been disproven. People fall down because their hurt, dazed or dead, not due to raw ballistic force.

People dont get knocked down they get blown to bits by this size round.

People explode like a mellon when shot by a .50 cal rifle.
I have a short vid clip from our boys in Afganistan sniping Osama's boys. Its not pretty... PM me your email and i'll send it to you.

[finn69]

thanks for the link thiny it was way cool. but not for the faint of heart

[Severite]

el magico -- darklorddc
No small arms bullet is capable of knocking a man down via sheer force. Not even a .50 cal.
You could get shot by one of those monsters fired by an A-10 and it wouldn't knock you down via sheer force. People who go down from being shot were 1. shocked by tissue damage and pain, 2. belatedly trying to move out of the way, thus they were off balance when hit and fell down, 3. dead or suffered nerve damage.
Bullets crush tissue (they don't cut as some people think) but the kinetic energy transfer, even for a round from an elephant gun, scientifically is not there. Even hydrostatic shock has been disproven. People fall down because their hurt, dazed or dead, not due to raw ballistic force.

Well, some things to keep in mind; bullets tear the flesh, they are not blunt nor cutting trauma. They are penetrating. As to knocking someone down.......it is kinda hard to say; without being able to stop the pain (at least without breaking a great many laws) to test that theory. Now, when someone is shot a couple things happen. One, the bullet directly tears through body as an object. Cavitation (the energy of the round transferring to the body) causes a ripple effect (think pond) causing further damage and this is why the exit wound is larger than the entrance wound. Also, someone wearing body armor is more likely to be knocked down anyway..........the force is applied to a greater area, so instead of going through the target, it is completely dispersed on the body armor itself, which actually does cause blunt trauma. Well, I'm tired, so I hope I actually made sense here. Oh, and as for newtons law.......when you are trained to shoot, you are trained to hold the weapon a specific, you are trained to brace yourself a specific way, and, the weapon itself is designed to absorb the opposite energy of the weapon. recoil spring. It increases accuracy and decreases kick.

[Thinyser]

thanks for the link thiny it was way cool. but not for the faint of heart

yeah people exploding is not for the faint of heart.

[grandmaster z0b]

I thought the question here was whether a .50 cal would knock a person wearing this armour (or similar MDC armour).
The laws of physics say that the person who was shot will take the same force as the recoil of the gun, so if they are properly braced like the person who is shooting then they will not fall over, but if they are not well balanced then they may fall or trip just as someone who shot a .50 cal and wasn't properly prepared for it may fall.

[Thinyser]

I thought the question here was whether a .50 cal would knock a person wearing this armour (or similar MDC armour).
The laws of physics say that the person who was shot will take the same force as the recoil of the gun, so if they are properly braced like the person who is shooting then they will not fall over, but if they are not well balanced then they may fall or trip just as someone who shot a .50 cal and wasn't properly prepared for it may fall.

Its actually just a huge tangent

[demos606]

I've yet to see an armor design with recoil compensators and gas vents to absorb the force of firing a bullet, not that those would help much with absorbing the menetic energy of the impact from incoming rounds. Most modern combat rifles have near negligible recoil on single shots and only see notable recoil effects well into the cyclic fire rate. The simple fact that the shooter isn't knocked over by the force of a shot doesn't mean an armored target won't be knocked down on impact.

As for a 50 knocking this stuff down, it doesn't really matter. After the first second of incoming fire they're gonna be just as busy as anyone else still alive finding cover. A 50 at full cyclic fire is a thing of true terror to face in combat.

[Nxla666]

thanks for the link thiny it was way cool. but not for the faint of heart

yeah people exploding is not for the faint of heart.

Thanks for the vid, forwarded it to a couple friends, they liked it to.

[Thinyser]

thanks for the link thiny it was way cool. but not for the faint of heart

yeah people exploding is not for the faint of heart.

Thanks for the vid, forwarded it to a couple friends, they liked it to.

no prob

[grandmaster z0b]

I've yet to see an armor design with recoil compensators and gas vents to absorb the force of firing a bullet, not that those would help much with absorbing the menetic energy of the impact from incoming rounds. Most modern combat rifles have near negligible recoil on single shots and only see notable recoil effects well into the cyclic fire rate. The simple fact that the shooter isn't knocked over by the force of a shot doesn't mean an armored target won't be knocked down on impact.

As for a 50 knocking this stuff down, it doesn't really matter. After the first second of incoming fire they're gonna be just as busy as anyone else still alive finding cover. A 50 at full cyclic fire is a thing of true terror to face in combat.

But we're discussing whether a person in bullet proof armour will be knocked down or not, so it does matter. If they are immune to damage then they may not be trying to find cover.

It seems to me that the question is how braced to you have to be to shoot a 50 cal? If if picked one up and shot it off the hip without properly bracing myself would it knock me over or would the recoil just shoot the gun off target or out of my hand?

I also presume you cannot shoot a 50 cal machine gun without a tripod or something, in that case being shot by a burst from a 50 cal would knock one over.

[KLM]

It seems to me that the question is how braced to you have to be to shoot a 50 cal? If if picked one up and shot it off the hip without properly bracing myself would it knock me over or would the recoil just shoot the gun off target or out of my hand?

I also presume you cannot shoot a 50 cal machine gun without a tripod or something, in that case being shot by a burst from a 50 cal would knock one over.

Mind you, that the gas vent dampens recoil as much as 40% - and
even with this, I saw a reporter fall when firing a benchrest .50 BMG
rifle (on TV...)

So, as I said before, the long-recoil, gas-vent equipped Gepard's
(Hungarian 12,7 mm heavy rifle) recoil is much like being pushed
by a man. If you are ready, the impact is manageable. If you are
not, you will stagger at least.
Now, being hit by a bullet will be a much violent, and powerfull kick
(if there is an armor, which stops it, in the first hand). So it WILL
knock down a man-sized armored target most of the time.

As for the heavy machine guns, they weight 40+ kgs, so that
alone discourages most people to try to shoot it. Trying it anyway
would most certainly result in broken bones.

Adios
KLM

[Nekira Sudacne]

uh, for all those who say the picture isn't right, the caption test clearly says its "the best candidte for new armor"

meaning they'll base it off that...

[grandmaster z0b]

uh, for all those who say the picture isn't right, the caption test clearly says its "the best candidte for new armor"

meaning they'll base it off that...

Ah, NO.

The caption actually says

Illustration photo - medieval armor.
The discovery of the extraordinary wave-shock absorption quality of the IF materials, position it as one of the best candidates for future protective gear and armor.

It's saying that these new materials are the best candidate for the next generation of armour.

Trust me, that is a nice looking breastplate but that style is very restrictive to your mobility, you couldn't bend or twist your torso very well. The best breastplates only covered the chest and the stomach area was covered smaller pieces allowing better movement.

[Thinyser]

hey, you know how rail guns are known to have their rails worn down too fast

do you think this new... 'MDC material' could be used to make rails resistant enough to such wear?

It depends on a couple of factors:

First does it conduct? If not (or poorly) there is your answer.

If it does conduct is it also friction resistant or just shock resistant? they are very different forces and just because it can absorb shock does not mean that it can resist friction.

[Blight]

People dont get knocked down they get blown to bits by this size round.

People explode like a mellon when shot by a .50 cal rifle.
I have a short vid clip from our boys in Afganistan sniping Osama's boys. Its not pretty... PM me your email and i'll send it to you.

Thanks man me and wife laughed and laughed.
in all seriousness, those were some good shots.

[grandmaster z0b]

hey, you know how rail guns are known to have their rails worn down too fast

do you think this new... 'MDC material' could be used to make rails resistant enough to such wear?

It depends on a couple of factors:

First does it conduct? If not (or poorly) there is your answer.

If it does conduct is it also friction resistant or just shock resistant? they are very different forces and just because it can absorb shock does not mean that it can resist friction.

Depending on what material they use to make it, it may or may not be conductive. I don't think the material itself is friction resistant, however the same article has a link to a new nano- lubricant that could solve that problem.

[Zer0 Kay]

Just for clarity, I meant the Israeli armor; an article cited earlier said it was other materials. Can't quite recall, too lazy.

Haz-Matt. Read my previous posts. It's awfully hard to knock down a vehicle.

No it's not... a motorcycle is a vehicle

[Zer0 Kay]

It seems some guys here cannot distinguish a 12 gauge shotgun
used in Mythbusters from a .50 BMG heavy rifle.

The difference is about 4 times heavier gun and four times
of kinetic energy at muzzle, for the .50 BMG's favor.

The recoil of the .50 BMG Gepard (link above) with its
long recoil barrel is like pushed back by an adult man.
The shooter is braced or lying down, using the bipod,
and most certainly ready for the kickback.

Now for the "lucky winner" (ie. target):

Getting hit with such a round in armor means a body block,
usually from suprise - that usually knocks someone down.
This time we assume that the armor stop the bullet, and
therefore it transfers all of it kinetic energy to the target.
(Not that contemporary armor would stop it)

Without armor, the target get a fist sized hole, the round
flies another miles, the target collapses from wound shock.
---

Conclusion: the winner of a .50 will not fly away in hollywooditis,
but will be knocked down (or roll with impact, against 20 or lose
an action and initiative in game terms)

Adios
KLM

No it looks like someone doesn't watch all of the Myth Buster Episodes. This guy can tell the difference between a shotgun and an M82A1 or variant of. They used it in the diving into water to avoid being shot Myth and I could have sworn they used it in the pig one too though it could have been the shotgun that forced the pigs legs apart, in which case the .50 cal (if they used one) only went through the pig.

[Zer0 Kay]

No small arms bullet is capable of knocking a man down via sheer force. Not even a .50 cal.
You could get shot by one of those monsters fired by an A-10 and it wouldn't knock you down via sheer force. People who go down from being shot were 1. shocked by tissue damage and pain, 2. belatedly trying to move out of the way, thus they were off balance when hit and fell down, 3. dead or suffered nerve damage.
Bullets crush tissue (they don't cut as some people think) but the kinetic energy transfer, even for a round from an elephant gun, scientifically is not there. Even hydrostatic shock has been disproven. People fall down because their hurt, dazed or dead, not due to raw ballistic force.

People dont get knocked down they get blown to bits by this size round.

People explode like a mellon when shot by a .50 cal rifle.
I have a short vid clip from our boys in Afganistan sniping Osama's boys. Its not pretty... PM me your email and i'll send it to you.

Hmm and you authenticated this? If there is film then there is also been courts martialed for the incident. Not because they necessarily used it but because it was caught on film, it's all about perceptions.

[Zer0 Kay]

I thought the question here was whether a .50 cal would knock a person wearing this armour (or similar MDC armour).
The laws of physics say that the person who was shot will take the same force as the recoil of the gun, so if they are properly braced like the person who is shooting then they will not fall over, but if they are not well balanced then they may fall or trip just as someone who shot a .50 cal and wasn't properly prepared for it may fall.

Hmm good point I'd say that if the armor doesn't give that it would knock the person back even if it's only a little bit.

[Zer0 Kay]

It's bad enough some find slaughter of people to be fulfilling religious doctrine. It is quite another to find slaughter of even guilty men entertaining or humorus. As Nietzsche said "Wer mit Ungeheuern kämpft, mag zusehn, dass er nicht dabei zum Ungeheuer wird. Und wenn du lange in einen Abgrund blickst, blickt der Abgrund auch in dich hinein. "

[Zer0 Kay]

hey, you know how rail guns are known to have their rails worn down too fast

do you think this new... 'MDC material' could be used to make rails resistant enough to such wear?

It depends on a couple of factors:

First does it conduct? If not (or poorly) there is your answer.

If it does conduct is it also friction resistant or just shock resistant? they are very different forces and just because it can absorb shock does not mean that it can resist friction.

Depending on what material they use to make it, it may or may not be conductive. I don't think the material itself is friction resistant, however the same article has a link to a new nano- lubricant that could solve that problem.

Not to mention if they are nano-tubes what is keeping them from placing everyother layer perpendicular to the others allwing them to be used as pores?

[KLM]

It seems some guys here cannot distinguish a 12 gauge shotgun
used in Mythbusters from a .50 BMG heavy rifle.

The difference is about 4 times heavier gun and four times
of kinetic energy at muzzle, for the .50 BMG's favor.

The recoil of the .50 BMG Gepard (link above) with its
long recoil barrel is like pushed back by an adult man.
The shooter is braced or lying down, using the bipod,
and most certainly ready for the kickback.

Now for the "lucky winner" (ie. target):

Getting hit with such a round in armor means a body block,
usually from suprise - that usually knocks someone down.
This time we assume that the armor stop the bullet, and
therefore it transfers all of it kinetic energy to the target.
(Not that contemporary armor would stop it)

Without armor, the target get a fist sized hole, the round
flies another miles, the target collapses from wound shock.
---

Conclusion: the winner of a .50 will not fly away in hollywooditis,
but will be knocked down (or roll with impact, against 20 or lose
an action and initiative in game terms)

Adios
KLM

No it looks like someone doesn't watch all of the Myth Buster Episodes. This guy can tell the difference between a shotgun and an M82A1 or variant of. They used it in the diving into water to avoid being shot Myth and I could have sworn they used it in the pig one too though it could have been the shotgun that forced the pigs legs apart, in which case the .50 cal (if they used one) only went through the pig.

I only saw the hung-pig, hollywoditis-knockdown episode, but I
can tell you, there were no M82 rifles (or any other .50 BMG or
heavier rifle) on the table.

Plus, see parts in bold, in my previous post.

Adios
KLM

[Thinyser]

No small arms bullet is capable of knocking a man down via sheer force. Not even a .50 cal.
You could get shot by one of those monsters fired by an A-10 and it wouldn't knock you down via sheer force. People who go down from being shot were 1. shocked by tissue damage and pain, 2. belatedly trying to move out of the way, thus they were off balance when hit and fell down, 3. dead or suffered nerve damage.
Bullets crush tissue (they don't cut as some people think) but the kinetic energy transfer, even for a round from an elephant gun, scientifically is not there. Even hydrostatic shock has been disproven. People fall down because their hurt, dazed or dead, not due to raw ballistic force.

People dont get knocked down they get blown to bits by this size round.

People explode like a mellon when shot by a .50 cal rifle.
I have a short vid clip from our boys in Afganistan sniping Osama's boys. Its not pretty... PM me your email and i'll send it to you.

Hmm and you authenticated this? If there is film then there is also been courts martialed for the incident. Not because they necessarily used it but because it was caught on film, it's all about perceptions.

You are certainly welcome to attempt to authenticate this but after seing it I have no reason to disbelieve it is what it is.

Also just because it was fillmed doesn't mean that the military caught the people whom filmed it and thus there may not be any court martials associated with it. The military doesn't catch everything that its soldiers do that is against the rules, there are tons of weapons that make it to the black market that attest to this.

I have also seen (on the history channel) a 5 gallon jug explode and jump 2 feet off the ground when shot by a .50 cal, the slug then prodeded to completely pierce a second and penetrate into a third 5 gallon jug that were behind the first.

Remember the .50 cal round is not really meant to be used against "soft" targets such as people. It is meant to be fired against vehicles and light armor. This is not to say that it is not effective against people (it is TOO effective) but this is its secondary purpose since there are lighter and cheaper rifles that can take down people just as effectivly (though at shorter ranges).

[Zer0 Kay]

It seems some guys here cannot distinguish a 12 gauge shotgun
used in Mythbusters from a .50 BMG heavy rifle.

The difference is about 4 times heavier gun and four times
of kinetic energy at muzzle, for the .50 BMG's favor.

The recoil of the .50 BMG Gepard (link above) with its
long recoil barrel is like pushed back by an adult man.
The shooter is braced or lying down, using the bipod,
and most certainly ready for the kickback.

Now for the "lucky winner" (ie. target):

Getting hit with such a round in armor means a body block,
usually from suprise - that usually knocks someone down.
This time we assume that the armor stop the bullet, and
therefore it transfers all of it kinetic energy to the target.
(Not that contemporary armor would stop it)

Without armor, the target get a fist sized hole, the round
flies another miles, the target collapses from wound shock.
---

Conclusion: the winner of a .50 will not fly away in hollywooditis,
but will be knocked down (or roll with impact, against 20 or lose
an action and initiative in game terms)

Adios
KLM

No it looks like someone doesn't watch all of the Myth Buster Episodes. This guy can tell the difference between a shotgun and an M82A1 or variant of. They used it in the diving into water to avoid being shot Myth and I could have sworn they used it in the pig one too though it could have been the shotgun that forced the pigs legs apart, in which case the .50 cal (if they used one) only went through the pig.

I only saw the hung-pig, hollywoditis-knockdown episode, but I
can tell you, there were no M82 rifles (or any other .50 BMG or
heavier rifle) on the table.

Plus, see parts in bold, in my previous post.

Adios
KLM

OK so what was the highest power gun or rifle they used then? I know it wasn't the shotgun... or am I thinking the bulletproof glass episode where they found out what they used on the show wasn't. Oh and sorry if I came off uh... abrupt, rude or any other manner that is impolite.

[Zer0 Kay]

No small arms bullet is capable of knocking a man down via sheer force. Not even a .50 cal.
You could get shot by one of those monsters fired by an A-10 and it wouldn't knock you down via sheer force. People who go down from being shot were 1. shocked by tissue damage and pain, 2. belatedly trying to move out of the way, thus they were off balance when hit and fell down, 3. dead or suffered nerve damage.
Bullets crush tissue (they don't cut as some people think) but the kinetic energy transfer, even for a round from an elephant gun, scientifically is not there. Even hydrostatic shock has been disproven. People fall down because their hurt, dazed or dead, not due to raw ballistic force.

People dont get knocked down they get blown to bits by this size round.

People explode like a mellon when shot by a .50 cal rifle.
I have a short vid clip from our boys in Afganistan sniping Osama's boys. Its not pretty... PM me your email and i'll send it to you.

Hmm and you authenticated this? If there is film then there is also been courts martialed for the incident. Not because they necessarily used it but because it was caught on film, it's all about perceptions.

You are certainly welcome to attempt to authenticate this but after seing it I have no reason to disbelieve it is what it is.

Also just because it was fillmed doesn't mean that the military caught the people whom filmed it and thus there may not be any court martials associated with it. The military doesn't catch everything that its soldiers do that is against the rules, there are tons of weapons that make it to the black market that attest to this.

I have also seen (on the history channel) a 5 gallon jug explode and jump 2 feet off the ground when shot by a .50 cal, the slug then prodeded to completely pierce a second and penetrate into a third 5 gallon jug that were behind the first.

Remember the .50 cal round is not really meant to be used against "soft" targets such as people. It is meant to be fired against vehicles and light armor. This is not to say that it is not effective against people (it is TOO effective) but this is its secondary purpose since there are lighter and cheaper rifles that can take down people just as effectivly (though at shorter ranges).

Good point about the black market.

about the .50 being for anti-vehicle. Not all of them. Remember the Desert Eagle isn't as high powered. Oh and not just vehicles, there for any "materiel".

[KLM]

OK so what was the highest power gun or rifle they used then? I know it wasn't the shotgun... or am I thinking the bulletproof glass episode where they found out what they used on the show wasn't. Oh and sorry if I came off uh... abrupt, rude or any other manner that is impolite.

A .308 Win or .338 Lapua (in the hung-pig, knockdown-hollywooditis
episode). They are in the 3000-4500 Joule muzzle
energy range (12 gauge shotguns also in this domain!), while
.50 BMG is around 17700 Joule (Yeah, four-six times that much,
and the exsoviet 14,5 mm round is about 50% more powerful,
placing it around 25 kJoules!)

BtW, the .50 "Action Express" round of the Deser Eagle fame is
about 1500-2000 Joules at muzzle.

And last, it is a debate, not a flame, so no offense taken.

Adios
KLM

[Thinyser]

No small arms bullet is capable of knocking a man down via sheer force. Not even a .50 cal.
You could get shot by one of those monsters fired by an A-10 and it wouldn't knock you down via sheer force. People who go down from being shot were 1. shocked by tissue damage and pain, 2. belatedly trying to move out of the way, thus they were off balance when hit and fell down, 3. dead or suffered nerve damage.
Bullets crush tissue (they don't cut as some people think) but the kinetic energy transfer, even for a round from an elephant gun, scientifically is not there. Even hydrostatic shock has been disproven. People fall down because their hurt, dazed or dead, not due to raw ballistic force.

People dont get knocked down they get blown to bits by this size round.

People explode like a mellon when shot by a .50 cal rifle.
I have a short vid clip from our boys in Afganistan sniping Osama's boys. Its not pretty... PM me your email and i'll send it to you.

Hmm and you authenticated this? If there is film then there is also been courts martialed for the incident. Not because they necessarily used it but because it was caught on film, it's all about perceptions.

You are certainly welcome to attempt to authenticate this but after seing it I have no reason to disbelieve it is what it is.

Also just because it was fillmed doesn't mean that the military caught the people whom filmed it and thus there may not be any court martials associated with it. The military doesn't catch everything that its soldiers do that is against the rules, there are tons of weapons that make it to the black market that attest to this.

I have also seen (on the history channel) a 5 gallon jug explode and jump 2 feet off the ground when shot by a .50 cal, the slug then prodeded to completely pierce a second and penetrate into a third 5 gallon jug that were behind the first.

Remember the .50 cal round is not really meant to be used against "soft" targets such as people. It is meant to be fired against vehicles and light armor. This is not to say that it is not effective against people (it is TOO effective) but this is its secondary purpose since there are lighter and cheaper rifles that can take down people just as effectivly (though at shorter ranges).

Good point about the black market.

about the .50 being for anti-vehicle. Not all of them. Remember the Desert Eagle isn't as high powered. Oh and not just vehicles, there for any "materiel".

The desert eagle is a pistol we are specifically talking about the .50 bmg round ...i didnt feel the need to specifiy this each time

As to the materials comment that was my point. what on a battle filed is material...vehicles...rarely would you be shooting at rocks or through walls though this would be the gun to do it with.

[Nxla666]

Now whilst the armor might stop a .50 cal bullet from going through you, how much padding would it take to keep said round from breaking your ribs or rupturing organs from the transfer of all that kinetic energy.

[Thinyser]

Now whilst the armor might stop a .50 cal bullet from going through you, how much padding would it take to keep said round from breaking your ribs or rupturing organs from the transfer of all that kinetic energy.

Hmm we need to invent Megapadding

[Thinyser]

How much give and flex does this new armor have when hit with a bullet? I don't imagine we're talkin' borg plate here.

Nobody knows yet...so lets all dream that this stuff is gona revolutionize body armor with a thin, light weight, soft when you want it to be a rigid when a bullet or knife impacts it, nigh impenetrable, wonder suit.

[Zer0 Kay]

No small arms bullet is capable of knocking a man down via sheer force. Not even a .50 cal.
You could get shot by one of those monsters fired by an A-10 and it wouldn't knock you down via sheer force. People who go down from being shot were 1. shocked by tissue damage and pain, 2. belatedly trying to move out of the way, thus they were off balance when hit and fell down, 3. dead or suffered nerve damage.
Bullets crush tissue (they don't cut as some people think) but the kinetic energy transfer, even for a round from an elephant gun, scientifically is not there. Even hydrostatic shock has been disproven. People fall down because their hurt, dazed or dead, not due to raw ballistic force.

People dont get knocked down they get blown to bits by this size round.

People explode like a mellon when shot by a .50 cal rifle.
I have a short vid clip from our boys in Afganistan sniping Osama's boys. Its not pretty... PM me your email and i'll send it to you.

Hmm and you authenticated this? If there is film then there is also been courts martialed for the incident. Not because they necessarily used it but because it was caught on film, it's all about perceptions.

You are certainly welcome to attempt to authenticate this but after seing it I have no reason to disbelieve it is what it is.

Also just because it was fillmed doesn't mean that the military caught the people whom filmed it and thus there may not be any court martials associated with it. The military doesn't catch everything that its soldiers do that is against the rules, there are tons of weapons that make it to the black market that attest to this.

I have also seen (on the history channel) a 5 gallon jug explode and jump 2 feet off the ground when shot by a .50 cal, the slug then prodeded to completely pierce a second and penetrate into a third 5 gallon jug that were behind the first.

Remember the .50 cal round is not really meant to be used against "soft" targets such as people. It is meant to be fired against vehicles and light armor. This is not to say that it is not effective against people (it is TOO effective) but this is its secondary purpose since there are lighter and cheaper rifles that can take down people just as effectivly (though at shorter ranges).

Good point about the black market.

about the .50 being for anti-vehicle. Not all of them. Remember the Desert Eagle isn't as high powered. Oh and not just vehicles, there for any "materiel".

The desert eagle is a pistol we are specifically talking about the .50 bmg round ...i didnt feel the need to specifiy this each time

As to the materials comment that was my point. what on a battle filed is material...vehicles...rarely would you be shooting at rocks or through walls though this would be the gun to do it with.

So the initial mention of .50 cal is of the High Velocity Version. However, just because someone says 9mm AP doesn't mean the rest of the conversation should eliminate the AP. Shouldn't that be HMG instead of bmg? So a 9mm sized round fired from a railgun can't do MD? Or a 9mm with more propellant behind it? Last I checked a smaller (lighter) round with an equivalent amount of propellant of a larger round will travel faster than the larger round. So again it's the propellant, not the bullet. Still it also doesn't disprove my earlier point that PB changed their MD rules. That a machine gun that does SDC can't damage a tank because all the round don't land in the same place at the same time.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=materiel The rounds are supposed to be used to disable vehicles, communications equipment, weapon systems, lower caliber weapons (to refuse capture by enemy forces), belt buckles, BDUs, officer's insignias (of course the last three are what was said to be the target if a person is attacked). Oh last I checked rocks and walls, but especially rocks don't usually match the first definition, which by the way is the one the military uses.

[KLM]

They didn't originally use a .50 Cal for the pig, but they went back for the "revisited 2" episode... The second time they didn't hang it from a hook (that upset the center of gravity) but supported it from the chest to give it the same balance and center of gravity as a standing human, they also put on a bulletproof plate to make sure that Buster (the pig) absorbed as much of the kinetic impact as possible. Even with a large .50 cal rifle the pig simply slumped down and didn't fly back, the myth is still busted... Though remember the myth was questioning whether a person would fly back as in the movies, not so much whether they would fall down.

That explains a lot of misunderstanding.

As a side note: did the vest stop the .50 bullet? ( I guess not,
since I saw footage when a .50 rifle shot through a BTR-80
- ie. flash on the BTR's side, then flash on the sand bank behind
the APC)

Adios
KLM

[Thinyser]

No small arms bullet is capable of knocking a man down via sheer force. Not even a .50 cal.
You could get shot by one of those monsters fired by an A-10 and it wouldn't knock you down via sheer force. People who go down from being shot were 1. shocked by tissue damage and pain, 2. belatedly trying to move out of the way, thus they were off balance when hit and fell down, 3. dead or suffered nerve damage.
Bullets crush tissue (they don't cut as some people think) but the kinetic energy transfer, even for a round from an elephant gun, scientifically is not there. Even hydrostatic shock has been disproven. People fall down because their hurt, dazed or dead, not due to raw ballistic force.

People dont get knocked down they get blown to bits by this size round.

People explode like a mellon when shot by a .50 cal rifle.
I have a short vid clip from our boys in Afganistan sniping Osama's boys. Its not pretty... PM me your email and i'll send it to you.

Hmm and you authenticated this? If there is film then there is also been courts martialed for the incident. Not because they necessarily used it but because it was caught on film, it's all about perceptions.

You are certainly welcome to attempt to authenticate this but after seing it I have no reason to disbelieve it is what it is.

Also just because it was fillmed doesn't mean that the military caught the people whom filmed it and thus there may not be any court martials associated with it. The military doesn't catch everything that its soldiers do that is against the rules, there are tons of weapons that make it to the black market that attest to this.

I have also seen (on the history channel) a 5 gallon jug explode and jump 2 feet off the ground when shot by a .50 cal, the slug then prodeded to completely pierce a second and penetrate into a third 5 gallon jug that were behind the first.

Remember the .50 cal round is not really meant to be used against "soft" targets such as people. It is meant to be fired against vehicles and light armor. This is not to say that it is not effective against people (it is TOO effective) but this is its secondary purpose since there are lighter and cheaper rifles that can take down people just as effectivly (though at shorter ranges).

Good point about the black market.

about the .50 being for anti-vehicle. Not all of them. Remember the Desert Eagle isn't as high powered. Oh and not just vehicles, there for any "materiel".

The desert eagle is a pistol we are specifically talking about the .50 bmg round ...i didnt feel the need to specifiy this each time

As to the materials comment that was my point. what on a battle filed is material...vehicles...rarely would you be shooting at rocks or through walls though this would be the gun to do it with.

So the initial mention of .50 cal is of the High Velocity Version. However, just because someone says 9mm AP doesn't mean the rest of the conversation should eliminate the AP. Shouldn't that be HMG instead of bmg? So a 9mm sized round fired from a railgun can't do MD? Or a 9mm with more propellant behind it? Last I checked a smaller (lighter) round with an equivalent amount of propellant of a larger round will travel faster than the larger round.

I was specifically talking about the .50 cal BMG round nothing else...I didnt feel the need to clarify because it is obvious that a pistol is NOT used for sniping or anti-material aplications. Somehow because the desert eagle can fire the same diameter bullets you felt the need to bring it up ... just like you are bringing this new tangent of vellocity into the discussion. Yes of course everyone knows that faster bullets do more damage so what? Why do you bring this up to me?

So again it's the propellant, not the bullet.

and the .50 AE round fired by the desert eagle doesn't have enough propellent to make it an anti-material weapon, nor does it have the accuracy to make it a sniping weapon. So obviously it is not the gun used in the video, to which my .50 cal reference was talking about.

Still it also doesn't disprove my earlier point that PB changed their MD rules.

I never commented on this at all...why are you bringing it up?

That a machine gun that does SDC can't damage a tank because all the round don't land in the same place at the same time.

Again I never commented on this at all...why are you bringing it up?

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=materiel The rounds are supposed to be used to disable vehicles, communications equipment, weapon systems, lower caliber weapons (to refuse capture by enemy forces), belt buckles, BDUs, officer's insignias (of course the last three are what was said to be the target if a person is attacked). Oh last I checked rocks and walls, but especially rocks don't usually match the first definition, which by the way is the one the military uses.

So by our military standards an attack against a belt buckle, BDUs, or an insignia...constitutes a materials attack? sombody is playing word games.

Also I said "rarely would you be shooting" through rocks and walls. though if you need to this would be the gun. The .50 cal BMG a round meant for messing up machinery...usually vehicles, but can be used against just about any target short of a tank.

Just because it can shoot people doesn't mean that is what is was intended for. You can shoot people with 25mm rounds or an RPG but that doesn't mean the weapon was meant to do so.



BTW how is your search to verify the authenticity of that video going?

[grandmaster z0b]

This .50 cal thing may not be that significant - the projectile used in the Nano-armor testing struck at 1.5 km per second, which is insanely fast. The quickest .50 cal rounds can reach a velocity around half of that (According to the US army manuals they top out with a muzzle velocity around 3050 feet/second). It almost sounds like APNano used a low powered rail gun to shoot this armor with.

When this armor is hardly damaged from a projectile traveling double the speed of a .50 cal (apparently a larger round as well), then I think the .50 cal itself is rendered fairly useless... Hell, it just about renders any convetional firearm ineffective. And knocking the opponent down becomes moot if he just sits up unharmed and starts shooting at you...

What I'm wondering is how this armor fares against explosions... Imagine wearing a full environmental suit of this stuff and being virtually impervious to grenades, landmines and RPGs...

The really amazing thing about this armour is not just how much damage it can withstand but it's apparent shock absorbing ability.

Well, I think that any explosion would hurt the person inside, for the armour to move properly it needs to allow the limbs free movement, which means they can be dislocated and the joints would be bent in directions they were just not meant to go. It may be possible to minimise this with limiting the way certain joints can move in the armour, but that would probably restrict movement a lot more than armour normally would and may make them an inefficient soldier.

Although we may see two kinds of this armour, a lighter one for normal infantry which would still be vulnerable to explosions, and a big heavy, slow one for withstanding lots of damage, but they would probably wait until they have a working powered exo-skeleton for that.

[Thinyser]

This .50 cal thing may not be that significant - the projectile used in the Nano-armor testing struck at 1.5 km per second, which is insanely fast. The quickest .50 cal rounds can reach a velocity around half of that (According to the US army manuals they top out with a muzzle velocity around 3050 feet/second). It almost sounds like APNano used a low powered rail gun to shoot this armor with.

When this armor is hardly damaged from a projectile traveling double the speed of a .50 cal (apparently a larger round as well), then I think the .50 cal itself is rendered fairly useless... Hell, it just about renders any convetional firearm ineffective. And knocking the opponent down becomes moot if he just sits up unharmed and starts shooting at you...

What I'm wondering is how this armor fares against explosions... Imagine wearing a full environmental suit of this stuff and being virtually impervious to grenades, landmines and RPGs...

The really amazing thing about this armour is not just how much damage it can withstand but it's apparent shock absorbing ability.

Well, I think that any explosion would hurt the person inside, for the armour to move properly it needs to allow the limbs free movement, which means they can be dislocated and the joints would be bent in directions they were just not meant to go. It may be possible to minimise this with limiting the way certain joints can move in the armour, but that would probably restrict movement a lot more than armour normally would and may make them an inefficient soldier.

Although we may see two kinds of this armour, a lighter one for normal infantry which would still be vulnerable to explosions, and a big heavy, slow one for withstanding lots of damage, but they would probably wait until they have a working powered exo-skeleton for that.

nobody knows how heavy this stuff is nor how thick it needs to be in order to provide that kind of stopping power. For all we know a full suit of the stuff might weigh 150+ pounds and thus not be at all usefull for personal body armor... its all just speculation at this point.

I want to see what comes of this in say 5 years.

[grandmaster z0b]

This .50 cal thing may not be that significant - the projectile used in the Nano-armor testing struck at 1.5 km per second, which is insanely fast. The quickest .50 cal rounds can reach a velocity around half of that (According to the US army manuals they top out with a muzzle velocity around 3050 feet/second). It almost sounds like APNano used a low powered rail gun to shoot this armor with.

When this armor is hardly damaged from a projectile traveling double the speed of a .50 cal (apparently a larger round as well), then I think the .50 cal itself is rendered fairly useless... Hell, it just about renders any convetional firearm ineffective. And knocking the opponent down becomes moot if he just sits up unharmed and starts shooting at you...

What I'm wondering is how this armor fares against explosions... Imagine wearing a full environmental suit of this stuff and being virtually impervious to grenades, landmines and RPGs...

The really amazing thing about this armour is not just how much damage it can withstand but it's apparent shock absorbing ability.

Well, I think that any explosion would hurt the person inside, for the armour to move properly it needs to allow the limbs free movement, which means they can be dislocated and the joints would be bent in directions they were just not meant to go. It may be possible to minimise this with limiting the way certain joints can move in the armour, but that would probably restrict movement a lot more than armour normally would and may make them an inefficient soldier.

Although we may see two kinds of this armour, a lighter one for normal infantry which would still be vulnerable to explosions, and a big heavy, slow one for withstanding lots of damage, but they would probably wait until they have a working powered exo-skeleton for that.

nobody knows how heavy this stuff is nor how thick it needs to be in order to provide that kind of stopping power. For all we know a full suit of the stuff might weigh 150+ pounds and thus not be at all usefull for personal body armor... its all just speculation at this point.

I want to see what comes of this in say 5 years.

Well we can say that it wont weigh that much, and that it should be lighter and offer better protection than what we have now.
It's five times stronger than steel (even more for Titanium Disulfide) and

The new Tungsten based IF material has up to twice the strength of the best impact resistant materials currently used in protective armor applications such as boron carbide and silicon carbide,

clearly it's better than what we have now, therefore it must able to perform better for the same shape and weight.

As it's nano-tech I think it's shock absorbing ability and super strength comes from it's molecular construction and therefore it shouldn't have to be very thick at all. If it's 5 times stronger than steel, then a thin plate of nano armour will be 5 times stronger than a thin steel plate.

The real question is cost and how much can be made at once. Would it have to be made of scales or can we make large pieces? How easy is it to work with?

[Thinyser]

This .50 cal thing may not be that significant - the projectile used in the Nano-armor testing struck at 1.5 km per second, which is insanely fast. The quickest .50 cal rounds can reach a velocity around half of that (According to the US army manuals they top out with a muzzle velocity around 3050 feet/second). It almost sounds like APNano used a low powered rail gun to shoot this armor with.

When this armor is hardly damaged from a projectile traveling double the speed of a .50 cal (apparently a larger round as well), then I think the .50 cal itself is rendered fairly useless... Hell, it just about renders any convetional firearm ineffective. And knocking the opponent down becomes moot if he just sits up unharmed and starts shooting at you...

What I'm wondering is how this armor fares against explosions... Imagine wearing a full environmental suit of this stuff and being virtually impervious to grenades, landmines and RPGs...

The really amazing thing about this armour is not just how much damage it can withstand but it's apparent shock absorbing ability.

Well, I think that any explosion would hurt the person inside, for the armour to move properly it needs to allow the limbs free movement, which means they can be dislocated and the joints would be bent in directions they were just not meant to go. It may be possible to minimise this with limiting the way certain joints can move in the armour, but that would probably restrict movement a lot more than armour normally would and may make them an inefficient soldier.

Although we may see two kinds of this armour, a lighter one for normal infantry which would still be vulnerable to explosions, and a big heavy, slow one for withstanding lots of damage, but they would probably wait until they have a working powered exo-skeleton for that.

nobody knows how heavy this stuff is nor how thick it needs to be in order to provide that kind of stopping power. For all we know a full suit of the stuff might weigh 150+ pounds and thus not be at all usefull for personal body armor... its all just speculation at this point.

I want to see what comes of this in say 5 years.

Well we can say that it wont weigh that much, and that it should be lighter and offer better protection than what we have now.
It's five times stronger than steel (even more for Titanium Disulfide) and

The new Tungsten based IF material has up to twice the strength of the best impact resistant materials currently used in protective armor applications such as boron carbide and silicon carbide,

clearly it's better than what we have now, therefore it must able to perform better for the same shape and weight.

As it's nano-tech I think it's shock absorbing ability and super strength comes from it's molecular construction and therefore it shouldn't have to be very thick at all. If it's 5 times stronger than steel, then a thin plate of nano armour will be 5 times stronger than a thin steel plate.

The real question is cost and how much can be made at once. Would it have to be made of scales or can we make large pieces? How easy is it to work with?

All correct but how thick of a steal plate do you need to stop a 7.62 NATO round? I ask that because i think that is what the military grade body armor is designed to do. Now even at 1/5th the thickness that has still got to be several mm thick. We don't know the density of this material so maybe its 2,3,4,5 times as dense as steel and thus even though it can be made thiner and still the same impact resistance that doesnt mean that it will be all that much lighter.

If the gave us some real numbers, such as the thickness of the piece used to stop those 1500 meter/se steel slugs as well as how much the stuff weighs then we would be able to have a good idea of the potential for body armor or if this stuff is gonna be more for vehicles.

[Zer0 Kay]

No small arms bullet is capable of knocking a man down via sheer force. Not even a .50 cal.
You could get shot by one of those monsters fired by an A-10 and it wouldn't knock you down via sheer force. People who go down from being shot were 1. shocked by tissue damage and pain, 2. belatedly trying to move out of the way, thus they were off balance when hit and fell down, 3. dead or suffered nerve damage.
Bullets crush tissue (they don't cut as some people think) but the kinetic energy transfer, even for a round from an elephant gun, scientifically is not there. Even hydrostatic shock has been disproven. People fall down because their hurt, dazed or dead, not due to raw ballistic force.

People dont get knocked down they get blown to bits by this size round.

People explode like a mellon when shot by a .50 cal rifle.
I have a short vid clip from our boys in Afganistan sniping Osama's boys. Its not pretty... PM me your email and i'll send it to you.

Hmm and you authenticated this? If there is film then there is also been courts martialed for the incident. Not because they necessarily used it but because it was caught on film, it's all about perceptions.

You are certainly welcome to attempt to authenticate this but after seing it I have no reason to disbelieve it is what it is.

Also just because it was fillmed doesn't mean that the military caught the people whom filmed it and thus there may not be any court martials associated with it. The military doesn't catch everything that its soldiers do that is against the rules, there are tons of weapons that make it to the black market that attest to this.

I have also seen (on the history channel) a 5 gallon jug explode and jump 2 feet off the ground when shot by a .50 cal, the slug then prodeded to completely pierce a second and penetrate into a third 5 gallon jug that were behind the first.

Remember the .50 cal round is not really meant to be used against "soft" targets such as people. It is meant to be fired against vehicles and light armor. This is not to say that it is not effective against people (it is TOO effective) but this is its secondary purpose since there are lighter and cheaper rifles that can take down people just as effectivly (though at shorter ranges).

Good point about the black market.

about the .50 being for anti-vehicle. Not all of them. Remember the Desert Eagle isn't as high powered. Oh and not just vehicles, there for any "materiel".

The desert eagle is a pistol we are specifically talking about the .50 bmg round ...i didnt feel the need to specifiy this each time

As to the materials comment that was my point. what on a battle filed is material...vehicles...rarely would you be shooting at rocks or through walls though this would be the gun to do it with.

So the initial mention of .50 cal is of the High Velocity Version. However, just because someone says 9mm AP doesn't mean the rest of the conversation should eliminate the AP. Shouldn't that be HMG instead of bmg? So a 9mm sized round fired from a railgun can't do MD? Or a 9mm with more propellant behind it? Last I checked a smaller (lighter) round with an equivalent amount of propellant of a larger round will travel faster than the larger round.

I was specifically talking about the .50 cal BMG round nothing else...I didnt feel the need to clarify because it is obvious that a pistol is NOT used for sniping or anti-material aplications. Somehow because the desert eagle can fire the same diameter bullets you felt the need to bring it up ... just like you are bringing this new tangent of vellocity into the discussion. Yes of course everyone knows that faster bullets do more damage so what? Why do you bring this up to me?

So again it's the propellant, not the bullet.

and the .50 AE round fired by the desert eagle doesn't have enough propellent to make it an anti-material weapon, nor does it have the accuracy to make it a sniping weapon. So obviously it is not the gun used in the video, to which my .50 cal reference was talking about.

Still it also doesn't disprove my earlier point that PB changed their MD rules.

I never commented on this at all...why are you bringing it up?

That a machine gun that does SDC can't damage a tank because all the round don't land in the same place at the same time.

Again I never commented on this at all...why are you bringing it up?

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=materiel The rounds are supposed to be used to disable vehicles, communications equipment, weapon systems, lower caliber weapons (to refuse capture by enemy forces), belt buckles, BDUs, officer's insignias (of course the last three are what was said to be the target if a person is attacked). Oh last I checked rocks and walls, but especially rocks don't usually match the first definition, which by the way is the one the military uses.

So by our military standards an attack against a belt buckle, BDUs, or an insignia...constitutes a materials attack? sombody is playing word games.

Also I said "rarely would you be shooting" through rocks and walls. though if you need to this would be the gun. The .50 cal BMG a round meant for messing up machinery...usually vehicles, but can be used against just about any target short of a tank.

Just because it can shoot people doesn't mean that is what is was intended for. You can shoot people with 25mm rounds or an RPG but that doesn't mean the weapon was meant to do so.



BTW how is your search to verify the authenticity of that video going?

Lost interest in the video... besides don't ever recall stating that I was going to go try. Someones previous statement was that the .50cal was the baseline for MDC rounds. My point is that it doesn't freaking matter what size the round is it could be .22 and do MD or .99cal and still only do SDC. My statement on the MDC rule changes was meant to be a comment that the modern HMG .50 cal or any other projectile weapon that does SDC with a single round shouldn't do MDC EVER.

[Thinyser]

well I agree with the "no MDC from a SDC round ever... even in burst" comment but that had nothing to do with what you were posting toward me.....at least I could not see that anywhere in what you were saying to me before.

[TechnoGothic]

If this pans out, maybe...

for those too lazy to click the link, Isreal has developed a nano material that can withstand the simultanious impact of 4 deisal trains.

New Picture thanks to Glitterboy

7 or 8 years ago i saw a special on Discovery about a new nano-fiber they dicovered.
C14 or C 16 ??

They showed a single 1 moluclue thick sheet looked like Tin Foil but black in cover. They fired handguns, rifles, the bullets just dropped to the ground. The sheet absorded all the kinetic force.
When they fired a LAW at it, it hit but didnt blow up until it hit the ground.
That was Awesome.

Glade to see they have kept trying to make more use out of it and simuliar nano-fibers.

[Thinyser]

If this pans out, maybe...

for those too lazy to click the link, Isreal has developed a nano material that can withstand the simultanious impact of 4 deisal trains.

New Picture thanks to Glitterboy

7 or 8 years ago i saw a special on Discovery about a new nano-fiber they dicovered.
C14 or C 16 ??

They showed a single 1 moluclue thick sheet looked like Tin Foil but black in cover. They fired handguns, rifles, the bullets just dropped to the ground. The sheet absorded all the kinetic force.
When they fired a LAW at it, it hit but didnt blow up until it hit the ground.
That was Awesome.

Glade to see they have kept trying to make more use out of it and simuliar nano-fibers.

Hmm I watch the discovery channel as well as the history channel pretty much constantly....and I've never caught this. Seems incredibly impressive...a paper thin sheet of cloth that stops bullets dead.... Wonder how I missed it?

Anyone have any info about this on the web?

[Blight]

here is a really good write up, It's the one i used to figure out what everyone was talking about. (ps you will need adobe reader)
http://www.tfe.gatech.edu/faculty/kumar ... Sampe2.pdf
I'll look up more.