Unique Invention Ideas: ISSCE, AND, and Miniature Beacon

[Wolf5370]

Actually, have you ever tried to throw a tennis ball through a curtain? It losses a lot of its energy trying to lift the curtain (all of it). This is useful for a portable shield wall perhaps (for a lay up for example - or temporary command post etc). If the bullet can not cut through the material, it wll loose energy quickly within the folds of the sheeting. A rigid base would actually help the bullet to cut through (by providing tension of the surface) and would also do little to reduce the force itself.

 

[WhoWee]

Actually, have you ever tried to throw a tennis ball through a curtain? It losses a lot of its energy trying to lift the curtain (all of it). This is useful for a portable shield wall perhaps (for a lay up for example - or temporary command post etc). If the bullet can not cut through the material, it wll loose energy quickly within the folds of the sheeting. A rigid base would actually help the bullet to cut through (by providing tension of the surface) and would also do little to reduce the force itself.

That was my original thought with the curtain. The trade-off was the angled surface provided by the frame.

 

[JaredJames]

I'm not talking about pulling the material tight and making it rigid.

To take your analogy further, which stops a tennis ball quicker:
a) a curtain of cotton?
b) a curtain of cotton with a brick wall behind it?

Regardless of how it's supported, it needs to dissipate the force of the impact object. If you can't do that effectively you don't stop it - this is where you need additional structure as WhoWee said to replace the bodies component.

 

[Wolf5370]

Yes of course.

Either we have a small lightweight frame and leave the impact resistance (and cut resistance) to the "fabric", or we have a lighter material that can pass the force through to a strong back board of some kind (whether that is physical or the curtain locking together and using the frame as a support), or we ignore the curtain idea altogether and go back to some interlocking shield (for reflecting). Or we move to the next idea in the brain storm and see where that goes...

How about this for an idea. A non-Newtonian liquid (or maybe just a solidifying foaming/rubber agent) that can be stored in small high pressure cannisters, that can fill up plastic sacks (like sand bags - or larger) insitu (expanding or mixing from the cannisters - expanding due to pressure release, mixing with the air, or a reactor/catalist substance). Piled on top of each other they can act as sand bags without the mass of damp sand! Bullets are simply absorbed . The gell could rubberise enough so that it does not leak from the bullet holes (or at a slow rate). They can simply be left behind and "rebuilt" next stop. Perhaps even a chemical that will make them breakdown after a given time (or sun light/air exposure etc) - to stop reuse by the enemy.

If we used custard, we could even eat it afterwards (that was a joke of course!)

 

[Pattonias]

The way modern military body armor works now is the kevlar layer, which is relatively thin prevents the bullet from penetrating. The ceramic "plate" absorbs the impact of the bullet. You still get knocked on your butt, and you still get bruised up, but you aren't dead. The plate can only take a couple hits before it is too cracked to prevent impact damage to the body. I would argue that there is a form of these portable protective curtains in the form of tanks. They have large guns to.

 

[WhoWee]

The way modern military body armor works now is the kevlar layer, which is relatively thin prevents the bullet from penetrating. The ceramic "plate" absorbs the impact of the bullet. You still get knocked on your butt, and you still get bruised up, but you aren't dead. The plate can only take a couple hits before it is too cracked to prevent impact damage to the body. I would argue that there is a form of these portable protective curtains in the form of tanks. They have large guns to.

I see 2 problems with hiding behind a tank. First - you're not really hiding. Second - don't people shoot larger guns at tanks than at people?

 

[WhoWee]

The "curtain" concept I had in mind would be portable. Something to guard a soldier while firing. Although I do like the idea of a "tent" concept to protect from shrapnel.

 

[Pattonias]

I can tell you that your first priority to build this curtain would be materials. Using existing bulletproof "curtain" tech, anything large enough to be of use would weigh too much. You also have to figure that if your enemy has the means to destroy a tank, nothing you are carrying with you will be enough to keep you from harm. You'll have to find a way to get the shield to the front lines without reducing the amount of weaponry/ammo that the soldier is carrying. You'll also have to implement a method for setting it up in a reasonable amount of time while under fire in such a way that it would remain tactically advantageous to do so.

 

[WhoWee]

I can tell you that your first priority to build this curtain would be materials. Using existing bulletproof "curtain" tech, anything large enough to be of use would weigh too much. You also have to figure that if your enemy has the means to destroy a tank, nothing you are carrying with you will be enough to keep you from harm. You'll have to find a way to get the shield to the front lines without reducing the amount of weaponry/ammo that the soldier is carrying. You'll also have to implement a method for setting it up in a reasonable amount of time while under fire in such a way that it would remain tactically advantageous to do so.

The original idea was for a firing screen - body width and adjustable height (top of head gear) while laying on the ground - perhaps 30" wide by 18" high?

 

[WhoWee]

You also have to figure that if your enemy has the means to destroy a tank, nothing you are carrying with you will be enough to keep you from harm.

I didn't think a foot soldier would be fired upon by weapons designed to kill tanks?

 

[Pattonias]

Soldiers are fired upon by weapons designed for destroying larger vehicles all the time.

Think current wars, not conventional wars between conventional armies, because at the moment the tech of a conventional war won't be as affective.

 

[bonker]

Military applications are an awful waste of a good education. Sorry if this sounds faggy.

 

[JaredJames]

Military applications are an awful waste of a good education. Sorry if this sounds faggy.

You do realize that we've developed more through military application than any other means?

 

[bonker]

You do realize that we've developed more through military application than any other means?

This argument reduces to the maxim: "necessity is the mother of invention"

While I would agree with your assertion, I would suggest that is not an optimal state of affairs.
One could also consider the inventions that conscientious scientists have not developed due
to their military applications.

Guys, you've got to get over the "bombs are cool" thing.

 

[JaredJames]

This argument reduces to the maxim: "necessity is the mother of invention"

Correct and it's very true.

While I would agree with your assertion, I would suggest that is not an optimal state of affairs.

You can't not agree. It's fact.

One could also consider the inventions that conscientious scientists have not developed due to their military applications.

Such as?

Guys, you've got to get over the "bombs are cool" thing.

Please show me explicitly where anyone has stated/implied that. For one, we're not discussing bombs.