SFC13557
NES Member
Nope, to old.
-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Bullerproofzone MICH Helmet
- Thread starter SFC13557
- Start date
What the chart shows with regards to fragments is the body armor STOPS the fragments. That's what the armor(assuming you have the soft armor in it) is designed to do-stop fragments. Especially the larger format armor that we wore at that time in Iraq. The plates are the only thing that provide reliable protection from bullets. The enemy only cares about a hit and not what part of the body it hits. They knew that any hit would cause multiple hours of delay with CASEVAC/MEDEVAC, vehicle recovery, possible PBA, stay tied up for follow on SAF, etc.
Armor also has the side benefit of holding the torso together in blast injuries. For well documented examples, see SSG Travis Mills from 4/82(lots of information online) Also read The Outpost by Tapper and see what happened to CPT Robert Yllecas from 3/1. In both cases the armor kept their torso/vital organs together despite limbs being shredded. Mills is still alive, Yllecas died at Walter Reed with his wife watching.
All people are trying to tell you is you're pretty much wasting time/money if all you're going with is a helmet and no armor. Does a helmet help? Absolutely, but in the grand scheme of things the head is a small target which doesn't get hit as much as the torso with all those juicy little vital organs in it.
What is the situation and threat? In almost all cases the armor will come in before a helmet. I got it you have some experiance wearing both, but trust me when I say the getting shot at industry has learned a thing or two over the last couple decades.
If no threat of being shot/picking up fragments/blast injuries a good bump helmet or skullcrusher which is capable of mounting NVGs would be a better choice.
I’m sorry, I’ve been trying to think about this and at a dead end. Can you please elaborate on how a red dot mounted to a helmet would be useful?
In God We Trust
NES Member
Speaking of armor, we had to wear the soft MP vests when I was deployed stateside. They were the cruddy, 20 year old blue ones that 1,000 different troops had sweated into before you got it.
It was summer, hot as hell and I wasn’t worried about getting shot. I pulled the Kevlar panels out of mine and just wore the blue shell to trick the brass. Got away with it for a couple months until my platoon Sgt slapped me on the back. He wasn’t pleased.
It was summer, hot as hell and I wasn’t worried about getting shot. I pulled the Kevlar panels out of mine and just wore the blue shell to trick the brass. Got away with it for a couple months until my platoon Sgt slapped me on the back. He wasn’t pleased.
Love Machine
NES Member
Should’ve put a MacBook in there
Wouldn't the helmet make more sense in a fixed defensive position and fhe body armor when moving?
The thought is, in a defensive position your body can be behind a wall ... when walking around it is exposed.
Not trying to be a d*ck, just trying to learn something new.
Let's use real world data, the kind of people you might find if society collapsed overnight.
While headsets are deadlier (as expected), people get shot more times (about double) center mass than head.
Head here includes neck and face which are not protected by the helmet. For a breakdown of the numbers you can see the chart below.
You can argue most center mass shootings result in wounds, and you would be correct. But what types of wounds? ... wounds that you can keep going and treat yourself or wounds that kill you after a few hours without proper medical attention?
Also, add up all the numbers in this picture then look at the percentage that were head shots.
Last edited:
![[popcorn]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/043.gif "Popcorn [popcorn]")
One of these days we will fight a country who has their shit together. And the return of airburst indirect fire will make all sorts of people happy that they have something ontop of their head.
Just because we've been beating people in t shirts and sandals silly for 20 years doesn't mean we can forget how peers would fight against us.
Helmets are nice to have. From fragmentation, to bullets they're rated to stop to just not banging your head really hard off something.
I always thought of helmets as similar, in a way, to bayonets: sometimes useful, occasionally a lifesaver, but normally used for other things than they're intended for. Soldiers find a million ways to use bayonets and helmets without ever stabbing a bad guy or stopping a bullet. As I pointed out somewhere above, I was more grateful to my helmet for keeping my head unbumped than for keeping it unpunctured.
Also, to a lesser extent than bayonets, their effect is partly psychological. Helmets make you feel safer, even if they don't necessarily do much to make you safer. Except, sure, against indirect. But even then, you're better off getting below grade.
As for cover and concealment... Think of it this way. You're more likely to be shot somwhere other than the head if all else is equal, like if you're walking across a field with your whole body exposed. But if you're in a fighting position or behind a corner or something, your head is actually more likely to become a target. Because that's what you're exposing to the enemy when you peek at him. So the helmet protects against your own tendency to expose your head. You're better off using a mirror, a periscope, a camera, or something else like that.
![[rofl]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/013.gif "ROFL [rofl]")
tuna
NES Member
So now we’re back to might as well be using a bike helmet, since stateside we’re not going to be getting indirect air bursts with real shrapnel.
I’m confused about the purpose of this helmet.
Is it for Civil War 2? Who is our enemy? Troops or Antifa? Either case I don’t know if this is worthwhile.
Is it LARPing at the range? Then it’s good if you like it.
Personally, I’ll pass on helmets and plate carriers. I’ll just duck like they used to in the old days. Or I’ll get hit, whatever. Im not going to start acting safe now, helmets, vests, seat belts, masks, dr tests, etc. Life is fatal, I’m not gonna spend it uncomfortable.
It’s better to have something and not need it than need it and not have it.
We spend thousands every year on fire preparedness like smoke detectors, batteries for them, fire escape maintenance and fire extinguishers. Are we going to need them? Probably and hopefully not, but if we do I’ll be glad I spent the money.
Last edited:
There are reasons i'm moving to semi northern NH. Lack of need for armor/helmets is one of them.
Of course then we have this pic from an OIS a couple miles from where I'm building a house.
and even in the places we've been hanging out for the last couple decades I'm grabbing a helmet too
I probably am too, but that's not quite what the OP's saying. He's already said he's not going off to the Ukraine.
He's giving a rec in case we've got a spare few hundo burning a hole in our pockets.
Did you just use “hooah”? I was going to ask if you just non-sarcastically used it, but then I realized it really doesn’t matter if you’re being sarcastic or not. God that word needs to die.
Last edited:
It really depends on the type of fighting you’re planning on getting involved in. Day to day routine or current normalcy rule of law environment? A helmet is stupid and concealed soft armor is the way to go if you feel the risk is elevated.
But for actual conflict or some mythical doomsday/civil war scenario, if you get into a firefight, you’re going to be looking for cover. And then you’re going to try and expose as little as possible as you shoot, which generally ends up being your dome. And that’s not necessarily defensiveness positions. You’re going to be trying to maneuver, while also reducing your target size. But that dome always has a habit of protruding, whether it be during a half assed low crawl, running behind a stone wall, etc.
Last edited:
Mesatchornug
NES Member
Dennis in MA
NES Member
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2007
- Messages
- 38,239
- Likes
- 33,156
The music is really loud and screechy and the chicks, despite all of their come-hither looks never want you to go thither.
Oh, and they might be all dudes.
SFC13557
NES Member
Red dot/green dot aligned with sight line, you look/focus on target acquisition in CQB situation, dot appears on target and you shoot. Same as red/green dot sight mounted on firearm. I don't know if they exist or feasible, just a thought. I think it's better than a flashlight because even thou flashlight illuminates target, bad guy shoots back at light which is you.
SFC13557
NES Member
"All people are trying to tell you is you're pretty much wasting time/money if all you're going with is a helmet and no armor. Does a helmet help? Absolutely, but in the grand scheme of things the head is a small target which doesn't get hit as much as the torso with all those juicy little vital organs in it.
What is the situation and threat? In almost all cases the armor will come in before a helmet. I got it you have some experiance wearing both, but trust me when I say the getting shot at industry has learned a thing or two over the last couple decades."
Like I said, if I was going into an all-out war scenario you are correct. Urban combat with indirect fire body armor a must. Static defensive position, hell yes! Moving thru the woods of the Northeast with full LBV with basic combat load plus water and a ruck not so much. Reason for helmet is because you find cover/concealment but must expose your head to see what's going on and fix your enemy to lay down suppressive fire or return incoming fire. Like I said if I was a 25 yr old stud it would be more practical physically but at this point in time body armor would probably be more of a hindrance if I have to be mobile.
What is the situation and threat? In almost all cases the armor will come in before a helmet. I got it you have some experiance wearing both, but trust me when I say the getting shot at industry has learned a thing or two over the last couple decades."
Like I said, if I was going into an all-out war scenario you are correct. Urban combat with indirect fire body armor a must. Static defensive position, hell yes! Moving thru the woods of the Northeast with full LBV with basic combat load plus water and a ruck not so much. Reason for helmet is because you find cover/concealment but must expose your head to see what's going on and fix your enemy to lay down suppressive fire or return incoming fire. Like I said if I was a 25 yr old stud it would be more practical physically but at this point in time body armor would probably be more of a hindrance if I have to be mobile.
This'll be a fun game.
I think he's said he enlisted at 33 as an Army Reserve infantryman, and the Guard took over all the infantrymen... sometime in the '80s? I think the process was over by the time I enlisted in '94.
I'm guessing SFC was born in... 1957. Final answer!
Similar threads
