Project Reality Forums

'[R-DEV wrote:Gaz']The Mk.6 helmet is not primarily designed to be bullet-proof. It will deflect most 9mm rounds, and given the angle and velocity of impact, 5.56mm rounds. 7.62 from massive range will not penetrate it either.

It was designed as shrapnel protection from grenades and other nasty stuff

I have always felt real sorry for any chap wearing an old steel pop becuase i always thought they where rubbish compared to the kevlar ones, am i right or wrong. The British army still used steal ones in the Falklands i believe (paras got some kevlars ones though), poor sods or not.?(how does Kevlar helmets - MK6 compared with old steal versions)


P.s All other countries seem to have realy Frizt shapped helmets but the Mk6 looks nothing atall like a frizt ones (US/french/gemeran - all Frizt style): http://www.euro-surplus.jp/Headgear%20& ... helmet.jpg
compared to:
http://secure.specialtydefense.com/imag ... 0large.JPG

US seem obessed with that style and so many other countries - is the Mk6 shape any better or worse?

arthuro12 wrote:lolz, well theres NO way that a helmet stops bullets, a helmet is for example to stop rocks and stuff.. (u know, shite that drops from the sky, like frogs and fish..)

And what do you base this on may I ask? And do you mean stop as in making the bullet drop to the ground or do you mean stop as in not penetrating?

My platoon leader took one of our standard issue helmets put it on the range and fired at it from 100 meters away with a slight angle, the bullet did not penetrate it deflected.

yeh im with ya there Gyberg, Arthuro you have no evidence to back tht..

but yeh. is it possible to change the amount of damage is inflicted in certain areas, or like evrythin else thts important in vBF2, Hardcoded?

-Ryan

Gyberg wrote: My platoon leader took one of our standard issue helmets put it on the range and fired at it from 100 meters away with a slight angle, the bullet did not penetrate it deflected.

Depends on the angle. But it will almost certainly break your neck so the result is fairly the same. The americans developed a helmet that was able to stop a assault rifle bullet from close range but whats the point when it ends in a fatal injury anyway. The velocity and thrust of a assault rifle bullet is very powerful.

U.S. Marine Corps Lance Cpl. Bradley A. Snipes, antitank assaultman, 3rd Mobile Assault Platoon, Weapons Company, 3rd Battalion, 6th Marine Regiment, Regimental Combat Team - 2, holds the helmet that saved his life. During a recent mission with his platoon, Snipes was shot in the head by an enemy sniper. The only thing that saved his life was the Kevlar helmet. U.S. Marine Corps photo by Sgt. Jerad W. Alexander

http://www.defendamerica.mil/profiles/n ... 0205b.html

Mr. Snipes? Worse than xX1337SniP0rzXx. j/k

Ironic? It was only time.

After that, I'd need a beer or something.

Expendable Grunt wrote:After that, I'd need a beer or something.

And clean pair of underwear

An interesting though not totally scientific site for bullet penetration etc. is

http://www.theboxotruth.com

If you scroll down there is a section where they do some limited testing with a helmet, as well as with some body armour. The ranges involved are not far so keep that in mind.

youm0nt wrote:

http://www.defendamerica.mil/profiles/n ... 0205b.html

ESS Profile NVG Goggles, i have a pair!, anyway.

Due to the already shite hit detection system, is it really wise to be going on about helmets being able to stop rounds in the game?

U.S. Marine Corps Lance Cpl. Bradley A. Snipes, antitank assaultman, 3rd Mobile Assault Platoon, Weapons Company, 3rd Battalion, 6th Marine Regiment, Regimental Combat Team - 2

or

LCpl Snipes, US Army.

Snipes was shot in the head by an enemy sniper

No he fucking wasn't. He was shot in the helmet. If he was shot in the head, he'd be dead