Paper-thin super material stops flying bullets


Great article about bulletproofing efforts at MIT and Rice University.  One has to wonder how much such material can lighten up the body armor our folks wear into combat, including the helmet, while increasing ballistic protection.  Especially if they can keep the cost below a jillion dollars per Marine.

The material will have to be extensively tested, obviously.  This includes the crucial “Lance Corporal Using the Helmet to Hammer in Engineer Stakes” test.    But Marines have been begging for a helmet that is ballistic proof against 7.62×39, without excessive weight that makes extended wear a problem.

About these ads

4 Comments

Filed under Afghanistan, armor, Around the web, guns, infantry, iraq, marines, war

4 responses to “Paper-thin super material stops flying bullets

  1. I thought the main thing for it was to replace the heavy bullet proof glass in Humvees. At least the article I read through Yahoo news about it stated that. A lightweight helmet that would stop 7.62X39 though, if they can do it for under 250 a helmet heck I’d buy one to protect myself from my kids.

    Like

  2. ultimaratioregis

    Mark, that is true. But imagine a thin segment in between two layers of kevlar on a helmet?

    Like

  3. The only real-world stuff they have right now is that thick chunk of plastic, which would make a lousy helmet. :)
    I read the linked article, then followed a link there to the actual Rice University discussion, which demonstrated there is no “paper thin super material,” but rather something devised at a nano scale in order to speed up research. Consider it a physical simulation. They’re still trying to understand how the stuff works, so I wouldn’t expect

    I’m putting this stuff into the same category as usable military rail guns, space elevators, commercial fusion, and AI; there’s always fascinating articles coming out about the research, and real-world applications are in the future.

    Like

  4. gute

    This article should go with the GCV article. I know their is a BIG difference between armor and body armor, but the point is research. You want tank like protection then build a tank like vehicle that carries infantry (Namer). If we need an interim vehicle until we can build a lighter weight, more survivable and deployable GCV – Stryker TR might be the answer. Just, don’t waste billions trying to figure this out.

    gute

    Like