active body armor
- Thread starter taliv
- Start date
- Status
shevrock
Member
I was watching a tech update thing i watch on youtube, they mentioned this. I would love to see a video on it.
Millwright
Member
Better check the cigarette vending machine contents, IMO.
Bullets are supersonic, so they get there long before the sound of the shot. From the target's aspect a bullet has an exceptionally "stealthy" profile, so radar/ladar is out as well.......That leaves detecting the "shock"......plus accurately detecting/resolving minute angular change.
Sounds like a Hollywood fantasy to me... >MW
Bullets are supersonic, so they get there long before the sound of the shot. From the target's aspect a bullet has an exceptionally "stealthy" profile, so radar/ladar is out as well.......That leaves detecting the "shock"......plus accurately detecting/resolving minute angular change.
Sounds like a Hollywood fantasy to me... >MW
Claude Clay
Member
so it was IBM that found my bag of magic dust.
of course this only works if you are Barry Allen
of course this only works if you are Barry Allen
gvnwst
Member
Well, if they get it to work, that would be SO COOL!
misANTHrope
Member
Millwright said:
I think a radar unit with a high enough resolution/sensitivity could pick up the extreme Doppler shift from an incoming projectile and work off of that. There's still, however, the problem of effectively scanning the area as well as calculating trajectory fast enough to make a reaction possible.
Pulse
Member
geting Tazed beats geting shot anyday.
but how are they planing to detect the bullet?
current Active defense system for Main Battle Tanks still have problems detecting incoming RPGs at a 100% rate and it still happens that they get False/Positives (bird mush!
).
not to speak of Trajectory of bullets and the external influences on it.
on top of that, even Snipers rarely ever take a shot past 800meters, that leaves less then 1 second for Detection + Trajectory Calculation + Tazeing the soldier so he can fall out of the way.
that stuff is probably far far in the future..
but how are they planing to detect the bullet?
current Active defense system for Main Battle Tanks still have problems detecting incoming RPGs at a 100% rate and it still happens that they get False/Positives (bird mush!
).not to speak of Trajectory of bullets and the external influences on it.
on top of that, even Snipers rarely ever take a shot past 800meters, that leaves less then 1 second for Detection + Trajectory Calculation + Tazeing the soldier so he can fall out of the way.
that stuff is probably far far in the future..
Lightninstrike
Member
Suspending disbelief for the moment, I suppose a millimeter wave Doppler radar might be able to sense an incoming projectile. Of course then we start the discussion about stealthing projectiles to avoid detection and jamming the radar to actively interfere with its functioning. Heck, let's just do away with the projectile entirely and use a laser. Shoots, literally, laser straight and travels at the speed of light which negates the advantage of the sensor.
I should never post after having a beer.
I should never post after having a beer.
nalioth
Member
Let's not get our knickers in a knot, folks.
This is an "idea" at this time, not a proven system.
Technology advances daily, you know, and just because it doesn't work today, doesn't mean it won't work tomorrow. . .
This is an "idea" at this time, not a proven system.
Technology advances daily, you know, and just because it doesn't work today, doesn't mean it won't work tomorrow. . .
Tommygunn
Member
Bionic Body armor? Should this guy worry?????
Last edited:
indoorsoccerfrea
Member
haha I would sit there and throw marshmallows at the person wearing the bionic armor and watch them flail around...
all kidding aside, I am skeptical...
Sato Ord
Member
If you believe this claim I've got a bridge for sale in New York; should be a great investment with low maintenance.
im gunna have to agree with BS claim.
the idea of forcefully causing muscle contractions could be all kinds of bad results for the human body.
what if your running forward, and it decides the best direction to avoid a round is to go backwards.
the idea of forcefully causing muscle contractions could be all kinds of bad results for the human body.
what if your running forward, and it decides the best direction to avoid a round is to go backwards.
Sato Ord
Member
All kidding aside, I see a problem here. People actually believe this crap is possible. This is the same type of belief that you see when the mass media buys into BS arguments like you should shoot to wound because there's no need to go for the kill shot when a bullet in the leg will disable an attacker. As if we all have the time and luxury to take such carefully aimed shots when some scum bag is trying to decapitate us, and we all know that bullets always act exactly like they do on CSI.
Come on people, we ain't Roy Rogers, and this is not a Hollywood set.
There is no such body armor, as it would take a radar sighting system that would fry the user, and super computer to process the information. The bulk alone would require a semi tractor to haul it around, not to mention a second rig to haul the cooling equipment.
All of that is fine when you have the powerplant on a navy destroyer to feed your vulcan phalanx providing that you are only targeting one object at a time. However, a suit you can wear on your back that can watch everything within a twenty five hundred yard range on a battlefield?
This type of nonsense is ok to poke fun at, as long as we all understand that Mr. Wizard hasn't invented the means to do it, and probably won't for a very long time.
Come on people, we ain't Roy Rogers, and this is not a Hollywood set.
There is no such body armor, as it would take a radar sighting system that would fry the user, and super computer to process the information. The bulk alone would require a semi tractor to haul it around, not to mention a second rig to haul the cooling equipment.
All of that is fine when you have the powerplant on a navy destroyer to feed your vulcan phalanx providing that you are only targeting one object at a time. However, a suit you can wear on your back that can watch everything within a twenty five hundred yard range on a battlefield?
This type of nonsense is ok to poke fun at, as long as we all understand that Mr. Wizard hasn't invented the means to do it, and probably won't for a very long time.
I don't think so. Sounds too easy to defeat, with hilarious results as a bonus -- like the marshmallows. Or, set off a shell full of tinfoil chaff a few hundred feet above ground and watch all the soldiers do the herky-jerky.
I hope IBM is reading this.
I hope IBM is reading this.
Westermeyer
Member
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2008
- Messages
- 16
I'm getting an image in my mind of someone being shot at with a MG dancing a jig.
IBM and a few other companies have made an art of writing patents for systems that are mostly theory and little technology. Then, if somebody does actually come up with something that works, they can sue for patent infringement and take over somebody else's work.
You know, I remember watching something on the Discovery channel back in the 90's about a computer system that could pick up and track incoming bullets using some sort of system. They demonstrated it with picking up both individual shots and even being able to track the bullets from a spray of full-auto fire, tagging each bullet and its trajectory with a unique has mark identifier (Hello Mr. Excel!). They demonstrated this with an MP5 best I can remember. The most interesting thing was this system could not only track the bullets but also detect where they were going to hit prior to them hitting that spot. This was circa 1995 or so.
Since then, I think this technology has come into use with active bullet screens, a-la the one Obama and McCain gave speeches behind while campaigning or the one that President Musharef hid behind when he went on the Daily Show. System picks up bullet and throws up some sort of bullet resistant blankets to stop the bullet before it stops in the Target. You can usually notice them up if you look for large black rectangular boxes at the edge of the stage in front of the politician. Also, I think TIME magazine had an article on this system back during the campaign trail as well.
I think same idea here, pick up the incoming bullet, predict its point of impact, zap muscles to twich in the right direction. A little far fetched? Yes. But the basic technology to do this is here already.
Since then, I think this technology has come into use with active bullet screens, a-la the one Obama and McCain gave speeches behind while campaigning or the one that President Musharef hid behind when he went on the Daily Show. System picks up bullet and throws up some sort of bullet resistant blankets to stop the bullet before it stops in the Target. You can usually notice them up if you look for large black rectangular boxes at the edge of the stage in front of the politician. Also, I think TIME magazine had an article on this system back during the campaign trail as well.
I think same idea here, pick up the incoming bullet, predict its point of impact, zap muscles to twich in the right direction. A little far fetched? Yes. But the basic technology to do this is here already.
salthouse
Member
FYI- IBM also has a very anti-gun policy regarding its employees.
Sato Ord
Member
heron, ROTFLMAO
All I could think about with that mental image was the old Alexei Sayle BBC routine about why it's a good thing the Romans didn't have electricity.
All I could think about with that mental image was the old Alexei Sayle BBC routine about why it's a good thing the Romans didn't have electricity.
Roadwild17
Member
Just imagine the poor sap that wares its armor around base. Guy would be throwing anything they could grab.
Wait, what about riot control, arent things commonly thrown. You could throw a rock in the middle and "bowl" a split.
Wait, what about riot control, arent things commonly thrown. You could throw a rock in the middle and "bowl" a split.
Sato Ord
Member
I absolutely refuse to get into any kind of argument over whether or not this drivel is possible, but my wife just made an interesting observation.
Ever had your arm shocked hard enough to cause a muscle twitch? Did it in turn make your finger twitch as well? Just what the troops need more chance of friendly fire!
Ever had your arm shocked hard enough to cause a muscle twitch? Did it in turn make your finger twitch as well? Just what the troops need more chance of friendly fire!
couple problems here.
First off, the radar would have to detect the bullet from the front of the bullet. due to advances in stealth technology, we realize that the ogive on a bullet is an ideal to near optimal design to deflect radar waves to the side, and thus let it slip through radar.
A radar system this size would have to be extremely large to get complete coverage. The unit would also have power requirements that it would littler need the user to pull around a portable generator behind him in his radio flyer wagon.
also, if it is sooo sensitive as the op seems to think it is, it would most likely activate anytime someone in the same platoon fired at the enemy. and anytime they went in an area with weeds, bugs, waving fields of grain, etc, the system would activate.
as military systems go, a heavy hail storm would reduce an entire brigade of troops into an academy award winning show of epileptic siezures.
First off, the radar would have to detect the bullet from the front of the bullet. due to advances in stealth technology, we realize that the ogive on a bullet is an ideal to near optimal design to deflect radar waves to the side, and thus let it slip through radar.
A radar system this size would have to be extremely large to get complete coverage. The unit would also have power requirements that it would littler need the user to pull around a portable generator behind him in his radio flyer wagon.
also, if it is sooo sensitive as the op seems to think it is, it would most likely activate anytime someone in the same platoon fired at the enemy. and anytime they went in an area with weeds, bugs, waving fields of grain, etc, the system would activate.
as military systems go, a heavy hail storm would reduce an entire brigade of troops into an academy award winning show of epileptic siezures.
i think you guys are making a lot of poor assumptions, and as -v- pointed out, apparently not familiar with current technology.
read the associated article and you'll see the patent mentioned electromagnetic waves to detect the bullet, and given the primary use case seems to be protecting politicians and the like, there's no reason the wave would have to emanate from the armor, and certainly not an assumption that it would. some of you are apparently not even familiar with how compact super-computers are these days. (not that these relatively simple calculations would require that much horsepower. heck, i'll bet you wouldn't even need as much juice as you'd find in a high-end graphics processor these days)
no reason to make wild speculation. go read the article. the patent says the device would track the bullets and calculate whether their trajectory would collide with the path of the person wearing the armor, and only in that event would it actually take action.
read the associated article and you'll see the patent mentioned electromagnetic waves to detect the bullet, and given the primary use case seems to be protecting politicians and the like, there's no reason the wave would have to emanate from the armor, and certainly not an assumption that it would. some of you are apparently not even familiar with how compact super-computers are these days. (not that these relatively simple calculations would require that much horsepower. heck, i'll bet you wouldn't even need as much juice as you'd find in a high-end graphics processor these days)
no reason to make wild speculation. go read the article. the patent says the device would track the bullets and calculate whether their trajectory would collide with the path of the person wearing the armor, and only in that event would it actually take action.
- Status