IBM Files Patent For Bullet-Dodging Bionic Armor 379
An anonymous reader writes with news that IBM has filed a patent for "Bionic body armor" that would protect a wearer from long-range gunfire by detecting the incoming bullets and administering small shocks to the appropriate muscles required for moving out of the way. Quoting the patent: "When a marksman (such as a sniper) is attempting to fire a projectile from a firearm, the marksman typically prefers to be as far away from the target as possible, thus giving him or her a head start for the escape after the firing. As an example, the longest reported sniper hit was from a distance of about 2500 meters, resulting in a time of flight of about 4 seconds for the projectile/bullet. Had the target been aware of the inbound projectile, avoiding it by simply walking away would have been possible." After detecting the projectile, the armor would calculate the trajectory and "stimulate the target to move in a predefined manner ... sufficient to avoid any contact with the approaching projectile."
Sign me up! (Score:5, Funny)
Snatch (Score:4, Funny)
"Boris the Blade? As in Boris the Bullet-Dodger?"
"Why do they call him the Bullet-Dodger?"
"'Cause he dodges bullets, Avi."
Re:Sign me up! (Score:5, Funny)
you type very well and you even spell well for someone in daycare. you must be in the advanced track.
And how's it deal with multiple shooters? (Score:2)
I'd be most interested in seeing a YouTube clip of it trying to avoid a hail of bullets fired from different angles.
I wouldn't want to be wearing it in that scenario.
Re: (Score:2)
Also, I'm sure there will be tell-tale signs of who is wearing this, and you could fire at them, not necessarily for a hit, but to make them move into an area where you do want to hit them, or even fire a burst, to make someone wearing it move out of the way so you can hit the guy behind him, etc, etc...
"Dance fucker dance"
Re:And how's it deal with multiple shooters? (Score:4, Funny)
Will it allow the wearer to avoid being hit by a flying chair?
If yes, then IBM might actually be able to sell it to a few people.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
in that case even a bulletproof vest would be irrelevant because it cannot stand repeated hits anyway.
that's why a .22lr smg can be far more dangerous than a 9x19mm pistol.
Mechanism of detection? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Mechanism of detection? (Score:4, Insightful)
Or in other words, radar.
Re:Mechanism of detection? (Score:5, Funny)
Throw a handful of gravel against a group of military personel and watch the fun :D
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
...or use a hornet's nest to make a whole military base start jumping around uncontrollably while you just stroll in and set the charges.
The possibility for pranking is endless.
Re:Mechanism of detection? (Score:4, Insightful)
If you throw gravel at several hundred meters per second so as to get the doppler signature required for the system to act, it had better dodge your gravel.
Of course, that won't be very efficient; the gravel would probably disintegrate.
Hmm, maybe if you make metal gravel? And make it aerodynamic? Hmm...
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
sound would not give any warning. very few modern rifles, especially sniper rifles, and most certainly those in the class that will fire past the 1km mark are subsonic.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Actually, your trajectory isn't flat out to 700m. It's just that the range setting on your sight/scope make it look that way.
Assume a spherical horse of uniform density... I mean, assume the bullet has a constant velocity for the entire flight time. For easy math, we'll use a muzzle velocity of 1400m/s, a range of 700m, and call gravity at 10m/s^2. It will take the bullet 0.5 seconds to travel to the target, which means it will fall: (1/2)*(10)*(0.5)^2 or 1.25 meters. Which, if you were going for a cent
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
An airbag armor system would be effectively a Whipple Shield. The penetration of a projectile is blunted by multiple layers of a material separated by a small distance. The initial layers progressively shatter the projectile into smaller parts, each of which have less penetration capability into the next layer. The concept is used in spacecraft to defend against small space debris but it has also been used in tank armor.
Re: (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:4, Interesting)
Jeez, I'd like to patent invisible rocket suits (Score:5, Insightful)
That doesn't mean you can make it work in 10 years or less.
I guess we should be patenting everything we can possibly think of, now. Sigh.
Great - Throw 'em around during a firefight (Score:2)
While this seems like a great way to protect an unarmed VIP (as seems to be the intent), it seems like it'd be a little bit problematic when installed in the armor of a soldier in the field. This seems like it could be more dangerous than beneficial in such circumstances, unless you also apply a number of safety precautions. What if the wearer is already firing or moving? Will it be smart enough to detect preexisting movement? Will it be smart enough to disable the wearer's firearm, in the event that he is
Re:Great - Throw 'em around during a firefight (Score:4, Interesting)
I suppose the logic is this:
Without the suit, you WILL be hit by a bullet.
WITH the suit, you MIGHT accidentally fling yourself off a cliff or whatever.
I'll take the latter odds over the former odds any day of the week.
Re:Great - Throw 'em around during a firefight (Score:5, Interesting)
If the wearer is about to pull the trigger on his M72 LAW when someone fires a rifle at him, do you think it's a Good Idea (TM) to jerk the person around?
Without the suit, you WILL be hit by a bullet.
WITH the suit, you MIGHT accidentally blow up your whole team.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
think president on inauguration day or pope
In a world... where Mecha Saddam and his Robo-Muslims threaten your mom... and apple pie... and FREEDOM...
Only two men have the magic dancing armor that can save the day.
Bionic Barack
and
Powerpope
in:
"Church and State 2: Best Friends Forevarrr!"
wtf (Score:5, Insightful)
Probably the lamest idea ever. Long range sniper kills of this type represent an insignificant minority of deaths, they really think people are going to wear this crap?
The detection method sounds flaky and lame. What I would pay to see though is the other side create an 'electromagnetic' interference device that causes this armor to 'stimulate' the wearer to dive into a brick wall or something.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Probably the lamest idea ever. Long range sniper kills of this type represent an insignificant minority of deaths, they really think people are going to wear this crap?
The detection method sounds flaky and lame. What I would pay to see though is the other side create an 'electromagnetic' interference device that causes this armor to 'stimulate' the wearer to dive into a brick wall or something.
I agree. The whole idea seems like something somebody thought up after getting really, really drunk and watching "The Tuxedo."
Makes great book/movie material, but actually making it functional is a pipe dream at best.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Redundant. As much as I love Jackie's movies, Tuxedo can only be watched while really really drunk.
Re: (Score:2)
It might have been effective if Kennedy had been wearing it.
Re: (Score:2)
...around 2000 fps.
Now that's what I call a graphic card! Can I play Quake 4 at that speed too?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:wtf (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
This isn't about saving lives. It's about getting government money.
Stuff like this sounds sexy. The generation of people in government office who hand out cash for this grew up watching sci-fi movies, and this sounds cool. They even get to try on the armour at sales pitches I reckon. Probably get to take a few souvenir photos.
Compare that with very dry presentations saying more steel is needed to reinforce the armour on military vehicles. It sounds dull, and it doesn't get funding.
This is nothing new. Gover
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
On the steel issue.. a large part of that problem is using vehicles for purposes they were never designed for.
A humvee is supposed to be a relatively light support vehicle that follows behind the front. It was not generally designed to get shot at - adding extra armor plates is a lot of weight that significantly changes how the vehicle handles.
By taking our army that was designed to kick ass and take names against another army, throwing them into anti-insurgency duty where they have to deal with civilians w
Too Many Trajectories? (Score:2)
This reminds me of something I read here recently about meteor strikes on Earth. Basically, we can only map about 0.001% of the sky per day or something small, and there are so many potential meteors out there we may never see that we may just die in our sleep tonight. How could body armor see all the potential trajectories of a bullet, scan them, and react all within a fraction of a second? While the longest bullet travel was 4 seconds, I would imagine that most successful sniper attacks are less, and armo
Super Sonic Rounds (Score:5, Insightful)
The vast majority of sniper rounds are super sonic. (the speed of sound is only about 1,100 ft/s)
So the bullet will hit it's target before the sound wave warning has arrived
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Which is why they aren't going off of sound (detailed in the patent application). They're using EM waves to reflect off of the bullet (either radar, laser, etc).
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Oh brilliant. So all you need is a rocket built to home in on EM waves from the armor?
This sounds way too good to be true.... (Score:5, Insightful)
So the armor emits an electromagnetic signal that can detect, instantly, the movement of a bullet, can calculate the trajectory of said bullet, and somehow ensure that the user is warned enough to move out of the way of the bullet. In the example that they give, the bullet is traveling at 625 meters per second, the size of a bullet coming from a typical sniper rifle is very small. So this armor can detect, say the size of a small marble, from 2500 meters away?
Assuming that this armor can perfect and accurately detect incoming small arms projectiles and warn the user in time, how can the armor know the ground terrain that the wearer has to physically negotiate? Say the person is standing in two feet of snow, or in sand in the desert, perhaps the person is in two feet of water, or they are walking down stairs? The armor requires the user to be an acrobat from what I can tell. And no matter what, unless the armor can fully mobilize the wearer and move them automatically, this system still leaves room for grave human error, meaning it's hardly reliable.
And won't people figure out a way to beat the armor, or beat the system. Imagine a sniper rifle that fires a decoy bullet, that knocks the target down (as he evades the first bullet) and puts the armor wearer in a prone position on the ground, making him or her easy to target. Or perhaps a decoy bullet is shot from one barrel and the real bullet follows in a pre-calculated trajectory requiring no manual aiming for the sniper. Perhaps a bullet can be made undetectable to the electromagnetic pulse that the armor gives off. Maybe the armor can be jammed? You fire a bullet with an electromagnetic pulse destabilizer and then pick off your target when the armor fails.
I should mention that I live like three or four miles from IBM's headquarters in the Hudson Valley, so I hope they let my friends who work there bring in their buddies (or just me) for some live fire demonstrations where we can snipe at blowup dolls wearing million dollar armor with some high tech rifles.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Well, light is an electromagnetic signal I guess.
If the wearer had a 360* light sensor on top of his head, and it was tuned to detect small flashes in the particular light signature of a rifle flash, something like this could work I suppose.
While I'm pretty confident that the electronics could react fast enough for at least a 1000meter range, I'm really not sure how fast the human body responds to the electrical impulses. If the last time I touched live 110v AC is any indication that's pretty bloody fast.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, because there's no way it would get false positives on light flashes. The guy in the suit will look like he is auditioning for riverdance.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, with massive radar antennae. There's no way you can do the same with a six-inch antenna (or whatever).
Also, radar antennae tend to spin so you get a latency in the detection. If it spins (eg.) once per second and you need three readings to be able to calculate the trajectory of the bullet then that's 3.5 seconds latency on average. Plus a second to get out of the way, and, ooops! We've just taken longer than the longest ever snipe.
Re: (Score:2)
...how can the armor know the ground terrain that the wearer has to physically negotiate? Say the person is standing in two feet of snow, or in sand in the desert, perhaps the person is in two feet of water, or they are walking down stairs? The armor requires the user to be an acrobat from what I can tell. And no matter what, unless the armor can fully mobilize the wearer and move them automatically, this system still leaves room for grave human error, meaning it's hardly reliable.
I would rather fall down a flight of stairs than get hit by a bullet.
Just sayin.
-Taylor
New sniper rifle patent (Score:3, Funny)
simulates projectiles in a manner which causes the aforementioned bullet-dodging armor to deliver stimulus which directs it's wearer to repeatedly and fatally strike him or herself in the genitals.
I predict this to be added to the hague conventions in short order.
Another typical IBM patent (Score:5, Insightful)
This is what happens when a company pays its employees for each successful patent, and when employees are even told to put patent applications in their yearly personal objectives, which affect their annual bonuses. You end up with employees spending a large chunk of their work week filing for patents on any random idea that enters their head, no matter how impractical, obvious, or unrelated to the company's actual research and development.
Interesting... (Score:4, Insightful)
First of all, there's accuracy. You don't want your VIP actually walking to intercept the bullet.
Second, size. If your radar is so precise as to detect a bullet even 500 yards away, it's gotta be pretty big.
Related to this, there's energy. For an awesome radar (or anything else) like that, you'd need big-ass batteries, and/or to recharge every couple of hours. Especially in battle, this would be a no-go.
Finally, if they claim that this is really for VIP's under high risk of an assassination attempt, and not for military/police, then the device would probably have to be invisible. I don't think Obama or Bill Gates wants to walk around with a huge thingamajig on his head (remember "Child abduction is not funny"?).
Seriously, I don't know if it's a good idea to give somebody a patent for an idea if they haven't addressed so many key issues.
brilliant! (Score:2, Funny)
Since bullets typically travel faster than sound, you first get hit by the bullet, and then you get an electric shock on top of that. What fun.
What will those IBM guys patent next?
Re:brilliant! (Score:4, Funny)
Title... (Score:5, Funny)
IBM Files Patent For Bullet-Dodging Bionic Armor
Reading that title, I got a mental image of body armor sensing incoming bullets and dodging them by jumping off of the wearer.
We can Rebuild him. We have the technology. (Score:2, Funny)
Sorry...won't work (Score:5, Funny)
The sniper was Canadian, so I'm pretty sure the armour wouldn't have saved the target in the long run. The sniper was told that the guy he killed was responsible for blowing up ten skids of imported microbrewery beer. If the rifle didn't work, that sniper would have run down there with a dull, rusty spoon, cut the guy's balls off and beaten him to death with them.
It's the Canadian Way.
Radar-armor means we need... (Score:2, Funny)
It dodges lasers too! (Score:2)
Is this a troll patent? (Score:3, Insightful)
Who would have thought... (Score:4, Funny)
BUT... (Score:2, Funny)
Finally! (Score:2)
Something similar was demo'd in the 70's (Score:2)
I guess the novel part of this is to buld a taser into the mechanism - though, I would expect most politicians would prefer to take a bullet than to crap themselves in public as a result of the shocks they receive.
So what are they saying? (Score:4, Funny)
It's just a patent. (Score:3, Interesting)
It's just a patent, it doesn't represent any actual project planned and certainly is no waste of bailout/stimulous package money.
I for one welcom such advances, as some day our troops will be wearing exoskeletons which may be able to make movements for the wearer - this is a step towards the machine revolution, where we are all anhiliated by robotic exoskeletons where the human is either dead or no longer has control... oh crap.
More money in pie defense... (Score:2)
I'm sure people like Bill Gates would have paid for something that would detect and intercept incoming pies. They're a more credible threat for a well funded and high profile market.
Re:Yes! But will it... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Stimulate to move... (Score:5, Funny)
New goal for terrorists - trigger the response in the armor making the wearer look weird and become exhausted.
Re:Stimulate to move... (Score:4, Interesting)
Hmmm - to make the wearer escape the shot, the shocks would basically have to be admitted from one side only, to make the wearer move away from that side...
I wonder whether it could be used differently - e.g. make the wearer move in front of a moving car (ouch); or better, aid kidnappers by sending out a signal which actually makes the wearer jump / move towards the kidnappers getaway car - it would make kidnapping so much easier, if the victim would actually help you... ;-)
The question then would obviously be, can the armor be tricked into believing that WAS an incoming shot that would require this particular movement to evade 'the shot'...?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
In _Iraq_? Darned straight they'll wear it on convoy duty or for presidential guard duty, if it works.
It's also _completely_ useless against long-range sniper rounds, since those exceed the speed of sound quite easily. I have a reference page for the US M99 open right now. At 1000 yards, which is well within the capabilities of a well-trained sniper, the velocity of a round is 1500 fps. That's roughly 40% faster than the speed of sound.
And simply peppering an area with remote gunfire causing US troops to da
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
OK, let's go down the list of possible sources of information, shall we?
Light? No good, the optical field is very confusing, with dust, buildings, etc. There's too much optical noise.
Radar? Oh, yes, that works well to track a small, high velocity object in a similarly cluttered field. Moreover, the radars have to be so scattered that they are also expensive to deploy.
Sound? Several of us have already mentioned the problems with that.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Oh, yes, that works well to track a small, high velocity object in a similarly cluttered field.
It is exactly the high velocity that makes it so easy to track. It would stand out like a sore thumb on doppler radar. And since you only care about bullets aimed at you, it will also be almost stationary in the radar's field of view.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I believe I've read about similar things being developed/trialled for deployment in Iraq, precisely for the purpose of pinpointing sniper shots. They just airdrop a bajillion little gizmoes that are basically a GPS, a radio and a mic. They detect a gunshot, and squeal their position and the exact timestamp of the shot. Any radio listening can triangulate gunshots much faster than a bullet (or the sound front) can move.
Re:Stimulate to move... (Score:4, Funny)
I can see the headlines now:
IBM sued when bodyarmor snaps wearer's spine.
Bodyarmor electrocutes soldier in field
New body armor provides new technique for weightloss
Can't touch this, hammer time
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Electronic reflexes are faster than yours. Electronic senses are faster than yours. I would absolutely beg for this kind of armor if I was in a situation where I might take a sniper bullet. There's absolutely no way I could see the muzzle flash, recognize it, judge the bullet, and move out of the path fast enough.
And if you take your idea of an audio/visual cue, you merely add the human reflex time to the machine's..."wtf is that beeping noise?" *arghI'mdead*
Re:Stimulate to move... (Score:5, Informative)
I would think it better to use visual HUD and/or audio cues to let the wearer know they are in the path of fire. This whole idea of the suit controlling your movements involuntarily seems like a poor idea created by someone who's probably never actually been shot at before. (note: neither have I)
Actually, it sounds like the creators have been shot at before, or had access to people who have. When you first notice incoming fire, your brain has an almost comical "WTF?" moment that lasts at least a half second. If you're well trained and/or have been shot at before, your "lizard brain" is already screaming at your muscles to get moving. If not, you might stand there for as long as 3 or 4 seconds before you can get your thinker running and get moving. A flashing red light on a HUD indicating "incoming fire" would probably be just enough warning for you to realize you've been hit by enemy fire, so it's not a complete surprise. I'd have loved something like this suit when I was in Afghanistan.
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Stimulate to move... (Score:5, Insightful)
...or right into the path of the SAME bullet.
I mean, how accurate can this thing be? Maybe the bullet detected by the suit was going to pass two feet to the left of you. If the suit makes you jump to the left ... ooops!
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Stimulate to move... (Score:4, Insightful)
The trig. is easy, sure, the problem is getting accurate data points on a tiny piece of metal moving at twice the speed of sound on a vector almost directly towards you.
Luckily the patent office accepts patents for impossible things.
Re:Stimulate to move... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, if you can link the sensors together this could also be used to have people jump in front of the bullet to defend the target. Think President + Secret Service.
Re:Stimulate to move... (Score:5, Insightful)
Personally I find it hilarious that you are actually suggesting we use a highly sophisticated machine to control a suit which turns the person inside into a meat shield to protect someone else. Surely by the time we've actually invented this amazing device we can figure out something else to put between the speeding bullet and the president rather than another fucking human being! :).
Re:Stimulate to move... (Score:5, Funny)
jump to the left ... ooops!
and then a step to the right!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
A reasonable practical concern. However, it's just a patent for "futuretech," not a practical invention (yet?). Also, I don't know how accurate small phased-array radar systems are, or by how much you could improve the accuracy of your estimate of the bullet's state by incorporating a dynamic model (using, e.g., a Kalman filter). But I think that both questions need answering before this idea, even with "existing" technology, can be dismissed.
Re:Stimulate to move... (Score:5, Informative)
Right into the path of another bullet. Or a truck. Or an electric fence. etc.
You've obviously never been hit with a 5.56 round while wearing ceramic body armour. That little 8 gram bullet is like getting punched. You don't really feel the point of impact, but you are knocked sideways anyway. And the ceramic body armour breaks after only one bullet. After that you are on your own.
Re: (Score:2)
I thought the ceramic armor was made of little discs so you only lose one disc per hit.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
As you can see [wikipedia.org], it's not made of small discs. The reason for this is easy to see, IMO: having one big plate allows for the kynetic energy of the bullet to be spread over a large surface. I.e., instead of getting hit a lot of force in a tiny area as the bullet would do, the victim will get hit with the same force spread across a big area, which will make the pressure per square centimetre much smaller. Using small discs (I guess you mean like chainmail [wikipedia.org]) would probably turn a smallish entry hole into a big one due to the kynetic energy not being spread enough. At least, it would mean having bones breaking and inner tissue rupturing.
Well it all depends how you lay out and support the discs: Dragon Skin Body Armor [wikipedia.org]
--
join my mafia family [mafia-rpg.com]
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Stimulate to move... (Score:4, Interesting)
Bullshit, the Dragon Skin guys cooked their test data, they are being prosecuted; their armor is NOT better,
Read your own link, fucktard. No one is being "prosecuted", and the question of whether the DragonSkin product is better or not is still up in the air. I have seen about a 50:50 split on reports that one side or the other skewed the test procedure to make one or the other come out on top. I wore the current Army OTV off and on for 2 years and have seen it both fail and succeed first hand.
The live fire test guys who evaluate this stuff take their jobs very seriously, they didn't buy that crap armor for good reason (performance not price).
Yeah, no one would ever manipulate a test [wikipedia.org] to make the product chosen look better. I've spent too many years using the end result of DoD procurement and testing procedure to have absolute faith in it. Sure, the guys conducting the test might be serious straight shooters, but what do you know about the pentagon political hacks who drew up the test procedure? Was it tailored to subtly exploit a particular weakness of the Pinnacle product? Pinnacle seems to think so.
Not everything is a conspiracy by the corrupt gubment.
No, but DoD procurement is rife with idiots who make poor decisions, and then go to the ends of the earth to back up those poor decisions, because to admit error is to admit incompetence, and promotions get harder when you've admitted incompetence. The Pentagon is a political rat's nest, full of infighting, backstabbing, and deal-cutting.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually, the plates generally in use by NATO nations are designed to stop up to 3 hits from 7.62 rounds. Now, granted "designed to" doesn't mean they will, but if you're suggesting that the plate is useless after only one hit from a 5.56 round, then you're just plain wrong.
Re:Stimulate to move... (Score:5, Informative)
Actually, the plates generally in use by NATO nations are designed to stop up to 3 hits from 7.62 rounds. Now, granted "designed to" doesn't mean they will, but if you're suggesting that the plate is useless after only one hit from a 5.56 round, then you're just plain wrong.
You're talking about the NIJ testing requirement for level 3 plates. They are required to stop 3 .308 rounds. NIJ certified level 4 plates are required to only stop 1 30-06 Armor Piercing round. This ends up having very strange effects on plate design. It is correct that a level 4 ceramic plate can shatter and become ineffective after stopping only one round.
Other weirdness of the design of plates is the things they will and won't stop. Some level 3 plates will stop the required 3 .308 rounds, but will be penetrated by M193 5.56MM rounds. Others will stop M193 all day long but be penetrated by M855 5.56MM. Some will stop M193 but not M855, and vice versa.
It's strange, but that's how the NIJ testing standards for level 3 and level 4 work currently. There are more than a couple of websites around that do other ad-hoc testing on armor plates and vests to try to do more extensive testing.
Re:Stimulate to move... (Score:5, Interesting)
Actually, the plates generally in use by NATO nations are designed to stop up to 3 hits from 7.62 rounds. Now, granted "designed to" doesn't mean they will, but if you're suggesting that the plate is useless after only one hit from a 5.56 round, then you're just plain wrong.
Fortunately, I've never actually been hit with either a 5.56 or a 7.62 myself. But I've seen people get hit, and I'm not sure if there were multiple hits on the same plate or not. In Lebanon two years ago we couldn't even exchange our equipment for two weeks, and I wasn't keeping score of who was getting hit or where (front, back). But I can attest that no one was seriously injured by a bullet through the armour. I should probably mention that we were absorbing a nice mix of 5.56 (M16), 7.62 short (AK47) and 5.54 (AK74) rounds (and the occasional mortar or RPG!).
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Sorry about that. We'll try to get those US taxpayer dollars to you on the first of the month from now on.
US taxpayer dollars do not pay for locally-developed and produced technology, only technology imported from the US. If I'm not mistaken, the US _imports_ personnel-protection technology from my nation. In fact, it's the fact that _I_ test it in Lebanon that US soldiers can wear it and feel [relatively] safe.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Of course, now they have dragon skin armor:
Can stop a grenade safely, and multiple hits.
Stopping grenade shrapnel has never been a problem. The earliest soft body armour would stop grenade shrapnel, and not bullets.
Re: (Score:2)
If all you want to do is kill, then yeah, maybe. We don't have the technology for it, but in the long run you could probably pull it off. You'd lose a lot of situational awareness, and have various other issues to overcome, but it might be worthwhile anyway.
Thing is, such machines would be fairly useless in a conflict like the current wars in Iraq/Afghanistan. You can't send a robot to check on shop owne