Titanium helmet

#3
With all those gongs for this website, haven't you learnt anything?....It doesn't matter what protection it offers or what purpose it serves, if it doesn't look 'ALLY' then we don't want it!!!
 
#8
Carcass said:
So its heavier and doesn't provide as much protection...?
That depends on what flavour of protection you require. Notice from the images that the helmet offers protection to the side of the face. So it actually offers more protection in certain circumstances.
 
#10
Carcass said:
So its heavier and doesn't provide as much protection...?
Keep an eye on their investments. If Gordon Brown puts a few bob into them we'll have 200,000 by next year.

Helmets - Weapons. They all make a good Pension plan.
 
#11
Kevlar specific strength = 2,000 MPa
Titanium specific strength = 360 MPa

Tensile strength isn't a 100% indicator for ballistic protection, but it gives you an idea.

Titanium will have better multi-hit resistance against things that it can stop, but it won't stop things as well. The protection is against low velocity pistol calibres and riot situations.
 
#12
The last picture show the lid with the "Anti-riot shield".

Great, a riot brakes out, pull down the shield and it stops. Worth its weight in gold that little innovation.
 
#13
Gun_Nut said:
Look at the weight!!! 2.5Kg versus 1.4Kg for the UK's Mk6 helmet.

I don't think that they will get many takers.
Only 1.7 KG for the more normal military style one.

Plus, a titanium helmet is not going to be degraded by eveyday use, dropping it and so on. Read the instructions that come with your composite one - helmet should beexchanged if subject to a hard knock (or words to that effect).
 
#14
Dog-faced-soldier said:
Gun_Nut said:
Look at the weight!!! 2.5Kg versus 1.4Kg for the UK's Mk6 helmet.

I don't think that they will get many takers.
Only 1.7 KG for the more normal military style one.

Plus, a titanium helmet is not going to be degraded by eveyday use, dropping it and so on. Read the instructions that come with your composite one - helmet should beexchanged if subject to a hard knock (or words to that effect).
OK, fair one. But you may not be aware that the Mk6 & Mk6a helmets are the only soldier helmets in the world to pass the motorcyle helmet impact test. Why is this important? Well I would bet that soldiers deployed on current ops are far more likely to be hit on the head by a half brick or rock, than by a handgun bullet. I would think that wounds from pistol calibres are a pretty rare thing on the battlefield these days.
 
#15
Check the ballistic claims. It entices you with claims of stopping 7.62 then goes on to say that its travelling at 485m\s, so we are not talking AK rounds here. Also its all 'soft core' what ever that means.

Also a lot of these manufacturers claim helmet weight when they really mean shell weight. Start putting foam pads in and the weight starts to get even heavier, our helmet weight is all up.

Our helmets should be checked after heavy blows but we are talking HEAVY and that's only sensible. How many Mk 6s have you seen deforming or shattering in normal use? The Mk6a is even better.

But... could it be polished up? Imaging the possibilities! MTV doing pimp my combat helmet...
 
#16
kitmonster said:
Check the ballistic claims. It entices you with claims of stopping 7.62 then goes on to say that its travelling at 485m\s, so we are not talking AK rounds here. Also its all 'soft core' what ever that means.
It's a Russian Tokarev pistol round. And when was the last time a western soldier was shot in the head with one of those? The Vietnam war maybe?
 
#18
Frankly, worrying about the ballistics of the helmet is a bit redundant. Do you really think that if something hits you in the head at a kilometre a second, it won't break your neck? Whether the helmet stops the round is irrelevant.

The mk6 is not Kevlar, because that's expensive. It's glass-reinforced plastic (GRP), the stuff yachts are made of, because that's cheap and relatively tough. That is good enough, mostly. all the helmet needs to do is stop shrapnel, accommodate ear defence and eye protection, night vision goggles and the all-important para helmet net. If it looks ally, all the better. If it's light, great; that would make life easier. Metal, though, seems stupid. It conducts blunt trauma very effectively, has to be thick to resist penetration and isn't very tactical; instead of falling over with a muffled thump, you fall over with a loud DING!!!
 
#19
Bravo_Zulu said:
The mk6 is not Kevlar, because that's expensive. It's glass-reinforced plastic (GRP), the stuff yachts are made of, because that's cheap and relatively tough.
The older green Mk6 is nylon, whereas the newer black Mk6a is Kevlar and has improved ballistic protection.
 
#20
Gun_Nut said:
kitmonster said:
Check the ballistic claims. It entices you with claims of stopping 7.62 then goes on to say that its travelling at 485m\s, so we are not talking AK rounds here. Also its all 'soft core' what ever that means.
It's a Russian Tokarev pistol round. And when was the last time a western soldier was shot in the head with one of those? The Vietnam war maybe?
http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot29_3.htm

Click on the next page to see the result.

In fact take 10mins to look at the whole thing.

Then waste an inordinate amount of time looking at other experiments on the website!

Somehow fascinating :oops:
 

Latest Threads