Jump to content

Welcome to Airsoft Forums UK
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Infantry Armour and its Evolution.


  • Please log in to reply
24 replies to this topic

#21
lil airsofter

lil airsofter

    AF-UK Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 253 posts

  • Guns: vfc scar-l, we svd, ics akS 74U, tm five-seven, ics sig 551, and lots more

  • Loadouts: multicam and plce webbing.
the tank will only last as long as its defences, and its getting more dangerous as some of the higher end soviet gear has just started to filter down so it is a dangerous time to be in a tank.
sights are there for a reason, you dont need a bigger battery, you need better eyes.

#22
geoffreym

geoffreym

    AF-UK Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 885 posts

  • Guns: Star L1A1, M16 MRF Stryker, 2 TM MEU's, G&P pulse rifle, KWA MP7, KJW X-5, Ares Tavor,

  • Loadouts: DPM, assault vest, webbing. pattern 56 gear (falklands). congo mercenary.

  • Sites: Cool under Fire, Apocalypse

Well one of the arguments for taking 5.56 over 7.62 was that 5.56 rarely goes through-and-through a human, whereas 7.62 can go clean through somone and not kill them outright (I'm not talking about the 'bezerker' syndrome or 'running amok', or even in Somalia/Serria Leyonne where the locals were drugged out of their eyeballs, but literally the round sailing through the body without hitting bone/organs). Aaand I'm not quite sure where I was heading with that...

You have to get that balance of protection and movement.
With the current generation of firearms, the speeds involved (excluding the big high velocity stuff like .50cals) probably isn't enough to cause "instant mush" with someone's organs - but would be enough to break bone. Grenades on the otherhand - perhaps. (of course the easiest thing to do would be flippantly say "don't get spotted!")

As for your Sci-fi stuff - in 5 years time, the commanders of Challenger 2s may well be making "power up the forcefield" quotes, as BAE have designed (and it looked pretty useful actually) 2 electrically charged anti-munition devices (ok, forcefields). One charges the armour plates so stuff explodes just before contact, the other projects an electronic charge around that explodes shells in mid air (some feet away from the tank)

As for IVFs - they don't know what they are. Not enough room for a proper full squad, not enough firepower to take on tanks, not enough armour to engage tanks.


unfortunately i have to disagree with shields, magnetic fields maybe, not shields though, the power needed to survive even 1 shot would be astronomical, and tests done by the americans in 1980's (i'll try to find the article) showed that the feedback caused by the field collapsing basically fried everything electronic and electrical (i'm talking about shields not the forcefield above).

i'd personally go along the lines of dampening fields which lessens the impact of the projectile, and theoretically allows faster vehicles/powered armor/aircraft, and allows personnel to survive the harder knocks, possibly even tank shells on "powered armor" (in the loosest sense, more along the lines of a modified ricas with powerpack) without even staggering.

and shorter term, micro-laser lasers to detonate larger/slower projectiles (RPG's, 120mm, badly made 7.62mm), might even be able to miniaturize them enough to fit the weapon and sensor on shoulders and helmets, maybe even use that telepathic helmet to make it into a hidden weapon for last ditch situations.

352a9bbb-46e1-428e-9bba-d051fc3d1c54_zps


#23
rusty1109

rusty1109

    AF-UK Starter

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 70 posts
I also will have to dig out the paper but there is some interesting work going on with regards to shield use in space-flight.

For small objects (which of course can be devastating at high speeds) one field imparts them with a charge and another causes them to pass harmlessly around the ship rather than smack into it.

Similar technology could in theory work with a tank.

#24
Hubert

Hubert

    AF-UK Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 646 posts

  • Guns: Currently playing with:
    Walther PPK & P99 with suppressor, SIG-Sauer P228
    W.E. L85 & SUSAT

  • Loadouts: FBI/ NYPD Detective.
    Generic soldier 2007+

unfortunately i have to disagree with shields, magnetic fields maybe, not shields though, the power needed to survive even 1 shot would be astronomical, and tests done by the americans in 1980's (i'll try to find the article) showed that the feedback caused by the field collapsing basically fried everything electronic and electrical (i'm talking about shields not the forcefield above).

i'd personally go along the lines of dampening fields which lessens the impact of the projectile, and theoretically allows faster vehicles/powered armor/aircraft, and allows personnel to survive the harder knocks, possibly even tank shells on "powered armor" (in the loosest sense, more along the lines of a modified ricas with powerpack) without even staggering.

and shorter term, micro-laser lasers to detonate larger/slower projectiles (RPG's, 120mm, badly made 7.62mm), might even be able to miniaturize them enough to fit the weapon and sensor on shoulders and helmets, maybe even use that telepathic helmet to make it into a hidden weapon for last ditch situations.


I hadn't heard anything from the charged armour tests since 2008 (started by BAE in 2001), but nothing to say the project was being dropped. At the time I'd only seen tests done on 'hulks' of tanks, rather than an actual combat ready vehicle, but I'd be interested to read that 80's report.
As for the projected field-bubble, at the moment, it only detonates missiles rather than shells, but it's curretly mounted on an FV432 chassis, which is fully mobile. The BAE project was started in 2007, and the telegraph, times and 2 science papers (I can't remember which now) reported last year that the MoD (post defence cuts, the proejct is still getting support) was adding financial support to the project the theory being that should it work, it could be applied to the CVR(T) family in Afghanistan. But it's still early days.
When in deadly danger, when beset by doubt: run in little circles, wave your arms and shout
- Parody of the Litany of Command, popular with Commissar cadets.

#25
geoffreym

geoffreym

    AF-UK Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 885 posts

  • Guns: Star L1A1, M16 MRF Stryker, 2 TM MEU's, G&P pulse rifle, KWA MP7, KJW X-5, Ares Tavor,

  • Loadouts: DPM, assault vest, webbing. pattern 56 gear (falklands). congo mercenary.

  • Sites: Cool under Fire, Apocalypse
found it, unfortunately it's only in a book, can't find an internet article, "Pan Ballantine's illustrated history of the violent century; Allied Secret Weapons, The War of Science", and my date was wrong sorry, 1958 and then given up 1963.
And missile detonating fields i can understand better.

352a9bbb-46e1-428e-9bba-d051fc3d1c54_zps





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users