Bullet Proof Shields For Military Infantry

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the development and practicality of bulletproof shields for military infantry, particularly in the context of current body armor and equipment used in combat situations. Participants explore the potential benefits and drawbacks of using shields, as well as the implications for carrying packs during operations.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the practicality of using a shield, suggesting it would require an extra hand, which may not be feasible in combat situations.
  • Another participant describes the use of different types of packs (full pack and assault pack) and their importance in various scenarios, indicating that the full pack is often left behind when assaulting an objective.
  • A participant shares a personal account of a friend who has survived multiple gunshot wounds thanks to advanced body armor, which includes ceramic plates for protection.
  • There is mention of the idea that a shield could provide temporary protection, particularly in urban scenarios, but its effectiveness and practicality remain uncertain.
  • One participant proposes future technologies for shields, such as monofilament mesh or active camouflage, suggesting that advancements could be made within the next decade.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the utility and practicality of shields in combat. While some see potential benefits, others raise concerns about their feasibility and the importance of existing equipment. No consensus is reached on the effectiveness or necessity of shields.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference specific military equipment and scenarios, but there are unresolved questions regarding the integration of shields with existing gear and the specific contexts in which they might be beneficial.

average guy
Messages
119
Reaction score
0
mechie's
i saw some news footage awhile ago
and the troops were running across an airport runway
being sniped at.
where are they at with developing and issuing shields now?
anybody have first hand experience.
is the thinking keep the heavy pack on so
you don't get shot in the back?
if so i say ditch the pack and go ask for a back shield.
i have seen some shields in sci fi movies and series.
( my girlfriend watches them )

Have A Nice Day!
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
No idea what purpose a shield would really have besides make us use an extra hand which believe it or not will not be possible. As for the pack, it depends which pack you mean. The large MOLLE ruck we usually ditch if assaulting an objective but carry if moving out of a kill box simply because it has all our stuff (mortar shells, food, sleeping bag, etc) and leaving it in a kill box seems like a bad idea. Heck it can even be used to form low cover and base for firing.

The assault pack on the other hand is kept because it, well the name gives it away. So no it isn't used to stop from getting shot in the back. The IOTV is capable of stopping a 7.76mm round. (The IOTV is the body armor currently issued.)
 
A good friend of mine is a forward air controller. Been shot 5 times. $6500 of body armor has kept him safe. It has ceramic plates in the critical spots. They shatter and are replaced.
 
Engineers somewhere else said they're 2 packs; to paraphrase 'full pack' and 'attack pack'. The one time i saw on tv just looked bad, running across open space with full pack. Sounds like things are getting done right and that's good. Idea of shield is light and for temporary protection. Maybe just urban scenario and zero pack once again all sounds good. Go get 'em.

Have A Nice Day!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
the pack contains equipment, and tools necessary to complete a particular mission.
as far as shields go, technology that can be implemented within ten years, maybe a monofilament mesh of some sort or active camouflage
 

Similar threads

Replies
12
Views
4K