Polyethylene Bulletproof Vests Better Than Kevlar 345
teflonscout writes "When I think of bulletproof vests, the first word that comes to mind is Kevlar. Wired is running a story on Dynema SB61, a bulletproof material that is made of polyethylene. It is a higher grade of the plastic found in Tupperware. The story also mentions the recall of Second Chance bulletproof vests that were made from Zylon, a material that degraded slowly when exposed to moisture. At least one police officer was injured when a bullet penetrated his Zylon vest. Polyethylene is impervious to moisture. The first vests made from this new material are 5mm thick and can stop a 9mm bullet traveling at 1777 feet per second, which is slightly better than other top of the line vests."
Re:Back to the drawing board. (Score:2, Insightful)
my question though, will it weigh less than kevlar? every chunk of kevlar that i've held (my father made vests for a while) was extreamly heavy... I'd say if this substance is lighter and allows for more agility it just might be worth it, but again, let's not jepordize safety for mobility
Re:How does it compare (Score:3, Insightful)
Nothing is bullet-PROOF. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:And new laws to federally prohibit (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:to bad our troops are treated like shit (Score:4, Insightful)
Not quite. There's a lot of good products that should be used, but they aren't because of the almighty dollar. Usually it takes a few dead bodies, the tears of weeping mothers, pointed fingers, and fistfuls of public rage to force the government to supply adequate equipment to its troops. And even then they only supply it because of public image.
Re:"New Material for Thinner, Lighter Body Armor" (Score:5, Insightful)
I've worn the modern vests, and while they aren't nearly as bad as they were 10 years ago, they still aren't good. If I could get the same protection from something even a quarter less weight, I'd make the switch without a second thought. That two or three extra pounds can mean the difference of being able to march my ass another couple of kilometers to safety or have a few extra rounds of ammunition when I really need it. That's a huge mental advantage, and despite all we say about war, it's the mental aspects (on the soldier) that make it difficult in the long run.
Re:Back to the drawing board. (Score:3, Insightful)
Stopping AP rounds is all well and good, (Score:3, Insightful)
If I could invent two types of armor, one that worked against a 30mm round, but looked like the bomb disposal suit, and a piece of armor that only worked against 22 caliber rimfire, but looked and felt identical to a cotton T-shirt; the Tshirt-like armor would be the real success.
Re:Etcetera (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Box Of Truth (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Etcetera (Score:3, Insightful)
I somewhat doubt it.
on the one hand you have companies developing armor on the other you have companies developing weapons. Armour manufacturers will reasearch what the weapon manufacturers are doing and vice-versa and attempt to counter it and users of the equipment will just adjust what proportion of thier weight or financial budgets they spend on each so that the armour on the battlefield stays balanced with the weapons on the battlefield.
Re:to bad our troops are treated like shit (Score:3, Insightful)
Polyaramid fibers like kevlar may lose strength when they get wet, but polyethylene generally doesn't tolerate heat very well.
Re:And new laws to federally prohibit (Score:2, Insightful)
As crazy as it is to have rules about shooting at each other, the ones that exist have good reason.
Re:Back to the drawing board. (Score:3, Insightful)
I'd think the difference is that the poly absorbs more energy thru phase change than the kevlar does. Kevlar acts as a net to stop the bullet getting thru by tightening up. The fibers themselves don't absorb damage, just spread it out. Poly being slightly weaker would absorb the energy of the bullet thru generating heat that breaks up the molecules... sounds counter intuitive, but that heat has to come from kinetic energy... or something like that. The same reason bicycle helmets are mostly styrofoam and not steel... it's the body underneath that's fragile, safety gear can be replaced for minimal cost over the cheapest GSW surgery.
Re:Actually, the army's tests are in dispute (Score:2, Insightful)
I R'dTFA. My suggestion :
"It's simply a question of weight. Standard armour weighs 28lbs; Dragonskin weighs 47lbs. Despite increased flexibility and arguably better protection, our people can't operate effectively or safely under that penalty - their mobility, stamina, ordnance, and other equipment would all be unacceptably reduced. Therefore, with regret, the USArmy cannot allow the use of Dragonskin for military personnel. However we concede that it *may* be of use to noncombatants, for example news reporters."
USArmy public relations are a brain-dead bunch of morons for not being more up-front about it. They had a golden opportunity to appear both professional and caring, and somehow ended up looking irrevocably like a bunch of corrupt, disingenous wankers. It's a classic example of the type of autistic military "communications" that have made the USA so reviled in the Middle East & elsewhere.
Much respect to soldiers on the groud - the US jarhead, the UK marine with sore buttock, whoever. But USArmy high command should f*ck off, re-read their copies of Sun Tzu, and notice the bits that stress the importance of diplomacy in war.
Conrad