Armored Military Outfit

[Nique]

Master Cheif? (http://www.hamiltonspectator.com/media_archive/jan-11-2007_a.html)

I put this in disscussion becuase I wanted to tackle to actuality of this. Is it realistic? Viable?

Also - this increased defensive move, if employed, means what for the future of military advancement? More deadly guns to overcome the armour? Bypassing ground battle altogethor?

[Mannix]

it means that anybody that can afford to use them on any kind of scale (the US and Western Europe) will have an edge against everybody that can't, just like with current body armor systems. since most wars are probably going to be fought against terrorists/rebel groups/3rd world militias in the future I doubt this'll lead to much escalation, as the other guys will just be running around with AKs just like they are now. Pretty friggin sweet suit though.

[Sithdarth]

Gimme a few years to get my PHD in materials science and I'll make it lighter and more impact resistant. Also, its perfectly possible with current technology. The problem is the US military would rather spend a few billion on some shiny new planes rather than making their troops safer.

[adamark]

That suit would be cool for Delta Forces and and other SpecOps type forces. Neat stuff.

[Arhra]

I must say, while better armour for troops is a good idea, that suit's laughable. I think I need only point out this little line from its creator:

"I did look at Star Wars. I did look at Halo."

I do not believe those are very good sources.

The suit itself doesn't exactly strike me as a masterpiece of design. Rather bulky and I couldn't help but notice the neck's rather exposed. Not to mention the fingers. I would think those are things you would like to be protected from explosions and such. While I think of it, crotch clock? What's wrong with having clocks on the forearm?!

Anyway, to move things along in the discussion area, there have been a lot of military projects to research this sort of thing. For example, a quick search came across this little press clipping about the US Future Force Warrior (http://federalvoice.dscc.dla.mil/federalvoice/040825/future.html). Of course, that's a little dated, given the news is from 2004.

Funnily enough, there's a How Stuff Works (http://science.howstuffworks.com/ffw.htm) article about it too.

Myself, I think a lot of this stuff is still pie in the sky, but some manner of armoured suit coming into use in the military is inevitable.

[Sithdarth]

Except that the Future Weapons system is at least 20 years away if it even works. That and its horribly complex. You need sensors to detect a bullet impact, ones that work damn fast at that. You need sensors to detect when the wearer decides to lift something. You need sensors to determine when the wearer wants to take a step. Then you need a computer to interpret the sensory data, again damn fast, and send out proper commands. Then you need one hell of a power generation/storage system to power all this stuff. The liquid bullet protection stuff itself seems like its going to need large amounts of power. (It only works if you concentrate as much energy into the impact sight as the impacting object has. This tends to be a hell of a lot with most modern bullets.)

"I did look at Star Wars. I did look at Halo."

I do not believe those are very good sources.
Well at least he looked for examples. I mean its not like he copied verbatim he looked and took what seemed to work and left out what didn't work. Not all examples are good examples and sometimes looking at bad ones is as good as looking at good ones.

The suit itself doesn't exactly strike me as a masterpiece of design. Rather bulky and I couldn't help but notice the neck's rather exposed. Not to mention the fingers. I would think those are things you would like to be protected from explosions and such.
Yeah because its so much better to have you head, legs, and most of your arms totally exposed. I mean its not like troops don't still get large chunks of limbs blown off in standard gear. I'm all for the armies future force suit but I think they shouldn't wait that long. We can build armor that's somewhere in between that and today's armor right now and save a lot of lifes. Oh and he seemed to be able to move quite well in that despite its appearance. I'm guessing its padding because traditional bullet resistant materials, and that new liquid metal stuff, don't do well against large scale high impact events. (Those would be explosions.)

[Mannix]

well, despite his being a nerd the guy did invent the bear-impenetrable suit. it's not like he's some random jackass that put together some fancy looking pvc piece of shit.

[Darth SS]

Him posing in it? Not furthering his cause.


I question really only four things about it:

1) Wear, tear and comfort. Most combat operations take place in deserts now. Sand is going to get inside that thing. Will that destroy from the inside out? Second, how long will that thing survive in a combat operation? Will falling and such slowly knock the armor plates off centre? Will weather erode it? Does it need maintenance, etc. Finally, is it comfortable to wear? I understand that's not exactly a paramount concern, but if you think about it, it is valid. You don't want to be walking about a fucking desert with sand grinding against your skin in a terribly uncomfortable tin can for 15 hours.

2) ...Good god, what's with the helmet. There's a few things I question about it, but it boils down to three primary points.

A) You'd have absolutely no peripheral vision. None. Sure, a bit to the sides, but nothing up and down, and not as much side to side. That would definitely be a problem.

B) It's fucking HUGE! I can't even imagine trying to room-clear with that on! You'd hit your head on everything, and if you bent over to duck, you'd be blind on account of that peripheral vision thing.

C) Afghanistan in particular is a war won and lost by getting the locals on your side. You want to show them that you are just a person like them. That thing is more likely to inspire absolute terror and further the message of "The people from the West are actually demons!"

3) Mobility. He had a hard time moving around in it, even if he said "I designed it to allow hand to hand combat." Something tells me his idea of hand to hand combat was "I'm in a blooming tank, they can hit me as much as they want."

4) Cost. You need to be able to ensure quality and then distribute to thousands ofsoldiers. Quickly.



Looking at Star Wars doesn't seem all that unreasonable to me. Oddly enough, I think was the most innovative, realistic, and potentially functional armor designs was that of the Republic Commandoes. It accounted for range of motion, and the plates could be construed as ballistics protection.

[Fifthfiend]

"I did look at Star Wars. I did look at Halo."

I do not believe those are very good sources.

If it weren't for science taking its cues from science fiction, where would the moon landing, laser pointers, or Japan have come from?

[Funka Genocide]

I was only able to see a still picture, as my current computer doesn't allow streaming video, but it looks as if the suit has a stationary helmet, I think someone mentioned that it wouldn't provide enough peripheral vision, however from a purely defense minded standpoint it makes sense, as even the most well padded helmet that's only secured to the skull will allow concussive trauma to vibrate the head or injure the neck. It basically bolts to the more secure skeletal structure of the torso thusly eliminating this possibility. It may be aesthetically unpleasing, but it would offer more protection. The vision ports are necessarily small to prevent a weakness in structural integrity I would suppose.

Something interesting is that peripheral vision in a firefight is not as important as one might suspect. We tend to think of things in Hollywood fashion, bullets flying and heros reacting with lightning fast reflexes to the merest twitch of enemy movement, but in reality accurate fire is done when you're facing forward, sighted down the barrel of the gun. Human beings aren't superheros, and it takes a lot of focus to have a chance of hitting a moving target while your adrenaline is pumping, most shots miss anyways. In a close range firefight, having a bullet proof head would be more important than unimpeded peripheral vision.

Thinking of a solution to this hindrance though, one could use three dimensional photography and a direct video feed to the eyes (like the virtual boy!) which would move as you moved your head within the stationary helmet. THis would require, I think, a motion tracking unit to determine which direction your eyes were pointed.

Then again, somebody mentioned the neck was exposed, I guess I was wrong. Shit. Oh well, I think my idea is better then.

It hink another main concern of body armor is comfort and durability. It doesn't make sense to be impervious to damage if you can't stand to wear the thing for longer than five minutes. In order to be effecctive it must be comfortable enough to remain on for prolonged periods of time. I think a lot of the stuff that Nike and other sports gear manufacturers do would help in this. Sweat wicking fabrices that breathe and allow air flow over the skin would sriously improve comfort levels I believe. How the armor actually fastens to the human frame is also important, I believe ergonomics is a prime concern, trying to cover the greatest and most vital surface area whil still maintaining an adequate range of motion is paramount.

Using substances that retain impact and piercing resistance even when they're not rigid for the joints and bulkier but more protective substances for the stationary parts of the body is the obvious decision. I believe the primary concern of body armor is to keep the wearer tactically viable as long as possible, while the secondary concern is to just keep them alive as long as possible. Joints will always be relatively vulnerable, as mobility is far more important than physical defense in a tactical situation. You can still kill without protection, you just might die yourself.

This all takes into account an unpowered armor suit, and things like this all ready exist and are in use. SWAT teams use the basic idea, though their helmets are mobile. Adding an energy source opens up all kinds of possibilities. Using a robotics program and some sort of assisted locomotion you could have a suit that responds to the movement of the wearer in predicted patterns, adding support and force to the movements and allowing the wearer to bear a heavier load. The SEALs have used something like this I think, a harness around the legs that lets them carry more weight while running, not sure where I heard that though. Basically it uses an exoskeletal structure to support and compliment the wearers actions. This would allow for the usage of heavier armor as well as for the inclusion of an onboard power supply.

Of course this is pretty much Space Marine armor, so it's nothing new. Whoever shot down science fiction as an improper source has obviously never played Warhammer 40K. heh.

ok I'm just rambling, I like power armor. My bad.

[UltimaZERO]

No, that thing seems completely infeasible at this point. Even if i was high-impact resistant polymer, it looked too thin on most of the joints for it to be completely protective, and was gaudy as hell.
Honestly, I could do without the clock-codpiece.
Also, the uber-bearspray could be lightened up a slight, and the fan vent system needs work in order for it to function properly in the sand, a point brought up by Darth.
It's way too bulky and unnecessary. Personally, I'd cut down on the PVC, and use a higher grade of Kevlar on an inner layer, lightly padded on the chest, groin and immobile sections of the body, followed by a light impact resistant overlayer, which would add some small degree protection to the joints.
Simple and effective enough, I'd suppose. I'm not well versed in armorcrafting.
Also, the helmet? Get real. It looks goofy, but it really looked like a paintball mask to me.
The helm would do well to have a Kevlar drop mask, covering the mouth down to the neck, to lower the possibility of the exposed neck from being destroyed by shrapnel or a shot.
I personally like Kevlar because it works well enough, and it's sheer preference.
If I'm wrong. I'd like for him to prove it, fire a Magnum slug into the helm, groin, chest and arms/legs. And then be in it near and explosion.

Oh, and Funk, SMs for life.

[Sithdarth]

No, that thing seems completely infeasible at this point. Even if i was high-impact resistant polymer, it looked too thin on most of the joints for it to be completely protective, and was gaudy as hell.
You do know the chances of actually taking a bullet to the inside of the elbow or the back of the knee, the most exposed parts, is very small. Anyone trained to fight always shoots towards center of mass with occasional sprays to the head. Simply because its hard to hit a moving target much smaller than that. Oh and the aesthetic quality of an armor is so much more important than its ability to save lives.

It's way too bulky and unnecessary. Personally, I'd cut down on the PVC, and use a higher grade of Kevlar on an inner layer, lightly padded on the chest, groin and immobile sections of the body, followed by a light impact resistant overlayer, which would add some small degree protection to the joints.
Simple and effective enough, I'd suppose. I'm not well versed in armorcrafting.
The reason its bulky is not the PVC though I kind of doubt that's what he used. Its bulky because its padded. It's padded because it has to be padded. Bullet strikes and explosions are very different. A bullet strike is localized and its impact gets distributed over a large area by conventional armor. An explosion hits you from basically every angle at the same time with the force of a bullet. Traditional body armor, and that Future Warrior stuff, might stop you from getting impaled but this armor will stop you from having your internal organs squashed into paste. In sort if you want to defeat explosives you need padding.

Wear, tear and comfort. Most combat operations take place in deserts now. Sand is going to get inside that thing. Will that destroy from the inside out? Second, how long will that thing survive in a combat operation? Will falling and such slowly knock the armor plates off centre? Will weather erode it? Does it need maintenance, etc. Finally, is it comfortable to wear? I understand that's not exactly a paramount concern, but if you think about it, it is valid. You don't want to be walking about a fucking desert with sand grinding against your skin in a terribly uncomfortable tin can for 15 hours.
Actually from the look of it he was wearing some kind of body suit under that thing. Its not hard to imagine something like a dry suit; dry suits keep out water so sand doesn't have a chance. Also, I'm pretty sure all the cloth portions are Kevlar or some other similarly bullet resistant fabric. Also, if its anything like his bear suits, which he said was the base starting point, nothing short of destruction of the suit is going to move those plates. Finally, as for maintenance, traditional Kevlar vest are only good for maybe 10 shots then you have to scrap it an get a new one. This seems a little bit more hardy. At the very least it looks like you could replace sections of it without requiring a whole new suit.

Mobility. He had a hard time moving around in it, even if he said "I designed it to allow hand to hand combat." Something tells me his idea of hand to hand combat was "I'm in a blooming tank, they can hit me as much as they want."
The guy is an experienced martial artist and he really didn't seem to have all that much trouble crouching down and then standing back up. Maybe a few tenths of a second longer but that's not going to get you killed. Especially not wearing something like that.

Cost. You need to be able to ensure quality and then distribute to thousands ofsoldiers. Quickly.
Because money is always more important than human lives.

[Mannix]

Afghanistan in particular is a war won and lost by getting the locals on your side. You want to show them that you are just a person like them. That thing is more likely to inspire absolute terror and further the message of "The people from the West are actually demons!"


Yeah, actually now that I think about it that's probably the biggest issue with the suit besides its theorhetical effectiveness. Especially in Muslim countries where covering your eyes with something as simple as sunglasses is deeply offensive.

[Arhra]

Hmm, I think I should clarify my 'not good sources' comment.

I agree the science fiction is good for inspiration of an idea, for things that haven't been invented yet.

However, it is not the place to go for how to design something, which, to me, the guy's statement seemed to suggest. I do not believe it is wise to base a design off fictional armours, nor even to examine them for flaws in design. They'd have been more designed for aesthetics than protection value after all.

On the issue of the future force thing, my understanding is they're more setting very high goals and implementing the benefits of the research in progressive cycles.

I certainly agree something like that liquid armour seems incredibly impractical at this time.

I think the real test of this kind of full body armour is getting someone to run through your standard army obstacle courses and drills while wearing the stuff.

Because money is always more important than human lives.
Sadly, yes, in some respects money is considered more important than human lives. If an armour proved to be effective, but very expensive to produce, it would see only limited use, or not be used at all.

Going back to this suit specifically, I would say that first you'd want to get the basics sorted out - protection, mobility, comfort, reducing sensory impairment (very important!) and cost, before doing all the little gimmicks like super bear-spray, laser pointers and crotch-clocks. Unfortunately, in the video I didn't really hear or see much about these issues. Just seeing the guy moving around in it more would have been nice.

[Sithdarth]

However, it is not the place to go for how to design something, which, to me, the guy's statement seemed to suggest. I do not believe it is wise to base a design off fictional armours, nor even to examine them for flaws in design. They'd have been more designed for aesthetics than protection value after all.
Couple of things:
1) People designing future armor systems generally want to make them realistic, slightly less so for Starwars than say Halo perhaps. They do this because if it looks impractical it ruins that whole suspension of disbelief thing. Thus they tend to do research on how to design a practical effective armor systems. Generally going so far as to call in experts. Also, designing for aesthetics over protection is in fact a design flaw. One that surprisingly pops up very often.

2) He based his design off his bear suit which has proven itself quite adept at doing what it was designed to do.

Going back to this suit specifically, I would say that first you'd want to get the basics sorted out - protection, mobility, comfort, reducing sensory impairment (very important!) and cost, before doing all the little gimmicks like super bear-spray, laser pointers and crotch-clocks. Unfortunately, in the video I didn't really hear or see much about these issues. Just seeing the guy moving around in it more would have been nice.

Yeah because the army didn't jump ahead to liquid metal armor before they figured out how their going to generate a few kilowatts of power and not have the generator be almost the size of the soldier. Besides its not like he came up with this 2 months ago. He's been working on suits like this for neigh on 20 years and I bet he spent at least 5 years on this particular design. His main concerns have always been protection, then mobility, and then comfort. Cost coming in a close fourth with some of his new materials. Sensory impairment isn't such a big deal. External microphones and cameras are generally better than you standard eyes and ears anyway.

[42PETUNIAS]

this increased defensive move, if employed, means what for the future of military advancement?

It means that Tydeus has some real nice stuff to dress his mercs in.

[Gascmark de Leone]

In my opinion, it's only a temporary solution. There's a reason why soldiers don't cover themselves with steel and iron anymore. It's called guns.

Let's say we can develop this suit. Let's say we can do it fast, cheap, and in high numbers. I doubt it will take the guys who make guns a very long time before they find something that can kill the soldiers.

Ground troops are the most screwed over military units on the earth. A plane can't take control of a building. It can bomb the hell out of one, but it can't really hold a position.

Despite this, I say go for it. If it helps save a life or two, then that's a good thing.

[42PETUNIAS]

Let's say we can develop this suit. Let's say we can do it fast, cheap, and in high numbers. I doubt it will take the guys who make guns a very long time before they find something that can kill the soldiers.


I'm pretty sure that the people being fought over in Iraq in Afghanistan aren't exactly at the pinnacle of technology for their weaponary. Most of them are probably using old weapons, which is what the body armour is built to fight.

[Critic]

Reminds me of power rangers

I like the clock, and belt buckle.

This may become a prototype somewhere down the line, but it takes years to develop and then implement something completely new. This suit may be bullet proof, but it's loud and clunky. Your stealth and maneuverability would probably drop way down with this thing.

[Bells]

Just from the top of my head...

Do we have HUD technology on real life?

Because... the Helmet is clearly the shortcoming on this design... the field of vision is as bad as it gets...

If someone develops e Efficient HUD for helmets, then we can have some good stuff done

[Flarecobra]

I've got another point to bring up, being military myself. How well will that suit hold up in a Nuclear/Biological/Chemical envirenment? I can see quite a few exposed places, and I'm not sure how well the filtering system is. I recall a few times when I was in Iraq some troops came across houses booby-trapped with CS gas grenades. For those who don't know, CS is a stronger form of tear gas. Now, while mild so far as a chemical is, it's not too hard to make more deadly gases, such as mustard gas. That would be my real gripe that no one has really mentioned.

[Mirai Gen]

Look, the guy spent thousands of dollars and hours of work making an extremely effective combat suit. It's almost the same price as most other bulletproof vests as far as mass production goes (Or so he claims), and the guy's got the track record to prove he knows what he's talking about.

It's neither here nor their to try and point fingers because he didn't make a suit for every little detail that marines or navy or army might run into, like getting shot in the elbow or running into poison gas. Those seem like fine-tunings to do later on once it starts going into production. Given the fact that all that troops really have right now - I believe - is standard issue bulletproof vests, at best, I'd rather see this go into production, then we can talk about fine details.

I was skeptical at first - the SPARTAN helmet kind of raised an eyebrow - but after watching a bit he's definately got something going there.

And the crotch-watch. That was funny.

[Karrrrrrrrrrrresche]

If that suit can do what he says it does then who am I to judge that he got inspiration from Halo and Star Wars.
But from what I saw in the video, the suit looks less like a Spartan and more like a Kull Warrior from Stargate.

[Flarecobra]

I wasn't really knocking it. It most certenly has a lot of potental for greatness. However there is a reason part of our standard issue gear is a gas mask.

[Mirai Gen]

True, but that wasn't aimed for you. Just using gas as an example.

[Bells]

I really cant say much.... as i really am not fond of new weapons and war-gear being made...
im my Utopian mind a international law baning the "production of new types and models of war-expecific equipment" would be a better goal to aim for

[Nique]

I'm in agreement in princeple, Bellsouth, but I do kind of prefer a defensive move (like armour) to a more offensive move (more deadly guns)... It's closer to the 'right' direction.

On the 'gas' issue, I think that something like a gas-mask or bio-suit (whatever they call em) could easily be incorporated here. Might add some extra weight, but military folks should be able to handle a certain load right?

[Phlegyas]

Well, plus the alternative, at least in the radioactive or skin-contact gas-type dangers is a HAZMAT suit which isn't exactly the easiest thing to travel around in anyways.As for just a simple Gas Mask, yeah I'd figure that would be a pretty easy mod to put on there, even without that much of a modification (because he has already got that ventilation thing set up. Just smack in an air filter and vacuum seal the helmet). My one point of contention is it would seem, to me at least, to be pretty obvious to show the guy testing out the armor and getting shot to show it works and yet he doesn't do this.

[Elminster_Amaur]

While you're adding things, why not HAL (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6nX5q3gVUM)?

I mean, the HAL system is getting close to practical, why not spend a little time integrating it with this guy's armored suit?

[Azisien]

Military folks already have to handle a heavy load. But I think loads can be a little overblown. Mobility is important, but you would be trained to move and fight in this hypothetical armor system. They wouldn't just throw this at you before you're deployed into battle with a slap on the back and a "K GO!" People using this heavy armor would acclimatize to it, just like knights of old would acclimatize to plate armor (55 year old historians in plate armor is bad for mobility, but put that armor on a trained athelete and they'll still run relay races in it).

As for answering the original question, this certainly won't cause a movement away from ground combat. At least, I seriously doubt it. If there is any universal constant in war, it's ground combat. As someone else stated, you can have all the stealth bombers, naval warships, and F-18s in the world lob all the cruise missiles they want at the enemy, but if invasion and control is your goal, you need the footsoldier to actually BE there.

Although, ideally it's good to try and eliminate ground engagements. The idea should be to put soldiers OUT of the line of fire, not give them great armor to TAKE the fire. And the armor looks really neat, but even I couldn't help but play the Mighty Morphin' Power Rangers theme in my head, while he was posing.

[Demetrius]

Bio cartridges can fit easily into the mask's fan sets and theoretically the helmet would work like a PAPR or a hood, without needing a seal. I would like to see some sort of deflection planes added into the torso/neck area.

[Sithdarth]

The problem with things like HAL is that they work great for lifting and walking. As soon as you try to run, dive, roll, lay prone, or do any other tactical maneuver the robot parts can't keep up. This either causes resistance that slows you down or it out right trips you and you fall over.

Although, ideally it's good to try and eliminate ground engagements. The idea should be to put soldiers OUT of the line of fire, not give them great armor to TAKE the fire. And the armor looks really neat, but even I couldn't help but play the Mighty Morphin' Power Rangers theme in my head, while he was posing.

We've got shoulder fired rocket launches designed for no other purpose than to implode buildings on the heads of snipers. We've got air burst gernades, and bullets, to fly through windows and over trenches to hit people hiding. Heck we've even got sniper rifles that'll punch through one side of a concrete building, then through the person hiding there, and then out the other side of the building. This is great and all but sometimes you just have to go into that building to capture someone alive or to rescue someone.

Your average infantry man on an average combat mission probably doesn't need this much protection. But if you know the situation is extra dangers or there is a chance of running into an IED this suit would really be a lifesaver. Special ops units and swat teams might see some benefit too. The key point behind making this suit was to provide bullet protection where there usually isn't any and all around explosive protection. Well enough explosive protection that you'll go home more or less intact, not so much continue to fight after the explosion.

My one point of contention is it would seem, to me at least, to be pretty obvious to show the guy testing out the armor and getting shot to show it works and yet he doesn't do this.

He said he wanted to do that but its not like the reporters had the proper equipment for the test. Even if they did have it would have been dismissed as unprofessional.

Now he could have brought some stuff but I'm not sure if he even has money left to buy it. Not to mention the permits to carry it around. Then they'd also have to find a suitably remote area to drive to. After all that it'd still probably be dismissed as unprofessional/rigged because he supplied the weapons.

In short, its really hard to set up a professional demonstration like that. Professionals tend not to like to take those kinds of chances with anyones life. Further, anyone willing to take those kind of chances is generally considered not a professional or a crackpot and all findings are rejected out of hand.

[Phlegyas]

I don't see how it is any less professional than just standing around at a photo shoot. You got to any military expo, you test the thing live or show documented tes results, and the fact that he didn't do this makes me wary. I don't fully discredit his opinion, but I also won't back him up, really either.

[UltimaZERO]

I don't see how it is any less professional than just standing around at a photo shoot. You got to any military expo, you test the thing live or show documented tes results, and the fact that he didn't do this makes me wary. I don't fully discredit his opinion, but I also won't back him up, really either.
My thoughts exactly.
And Sith, you made a point about it being impact resistant to explosions, yes?
Well, explosions usually have shrapnel which, if impaled upon a vital joint, will easily kill a man.. i.e the jugular. The suit is still too cumbersome at the moment simply because it doesn't accommodate the current soldier's gear.

I think with a bit of work, notably with some outside source, as he obviously wants it to be as future tech as possible, at the risk of certain practicality (field of view, as one). For the helmet, I'd create a wider field of view and some slots for an anti-chem system, and make a simple drop down Kevlar (or similar) mask flap that would attach to the main piece and surround the neck, reducing impact. (This may affect FoV without proper construction... so it's iffy)
I'd personally keep the 3% bear spray device, as that was a good idea, but the question is now the loading system? Use streamlined cartridges to have a variety of sprays, or use a smaller system, that only accommodates a set amount of the one spray, which has to be refilled a special way, preventing it from being filled in combat. Skipping ahead tot he end to finish this, corners can't be cut in a human armor suit, but this thing needs to stay cost effective. It's utterly useless for small squad maneuvers that require stealth... but there has to be some force that can utilize it, if it can't be mass produced to every foot soldier.
It stands for some SERIOUS improvement, but it's a good start, I can hope.

[Sithdarth]

I don't see how it is any less professional than just standing around at a photo shoot. You got to any military expo, you test the thing live or show documented tes results, and the fact that he didn't do this makes me wary. I don't fully discredit his opinion, but I also won't back him up, really either.
The point wasn't that it was less professional. The point was no one is going to be willing to shoot/blow up the guy. Further, if he did find someone willing to shoot/blow him up it wouldn't be taken as a serious test.

And Sith, you made a point about it being impact resistant to explosions, yes?
Well, explosions usually have shrapnel which, if impaled upon a vital joint, will easily kill a man.. i.e the jugular.

I think with a bit of work, notably with some outside source, as he obviously wants it to be as future tech as possible, at the risk of certain practicality (field of view, as one). For the helmet, I'd create a wider field of view and some slots for an anti-chem system, and make a simple drop down Kevlar (or similar) mask flap that would attach to the main piece and surround the neck, reducing impact. (This may affect FoV without proper construction... so it's iffy)

It'd take a very odd angled and lucky piece of shrapnel to make it into that joint. Not to mention no soft body armor including kevlar will stop shrapnel. Shrapnel tends to be edged like a knife. Knives slice through soft body armor. This is why stab proof vests with solid inserts were invented. Realistically it'd take a very serious chunk of shrapnel to create a wound as serious as being hit by an explosion with a fully exposed head.

Additionally, your putting way to much emphasis on field of view. Night vision goggles both drastically limit field of view as well as completely removing depth perception. Yet our armed forces have fought with night visions goggles for years. Sure it takes a little extra training but at least with the helmet you still have depth perception.

It's utterly useless for small squad maneuvers that require stealth... but there has to be some force that can utilize it, if it can't be mass produced to every foot soldier.
Really how much stealth is possible when you crash through a door and run around inside a house screaming for the enemy to submit. That's the kind of situation you'd use this for. You wouldn't put it on snipers nor on scouts. Maybe have one or two units in a normal squad wearing it just in case of IEDs.

Criticism is good but generally best left to people who've devoted their lives to the subject. Otherwise its way to easy to get lost in seemingly logical arguments that don't really make real world sense. Heck even after studying something for one's entire life that still tends to happen.

[Bells]

I really dont like the idea of taking soldiers out of the line of fire...

Not because i dont value lives mind you... as far as i can say, anyone who goes to a war deserves respect to say the least (as there is a pretty big chunck of people in armies all over the world that wouldnt go if they didnt have to...)

But the fact is that the whole scenario of a "war without conscience" haunts me... you know... the probability of wars being bigger if machines did the killing on the frontlines... and soldiers that never see the faces of anemies...

Some lines shouldnt be crossed, and as wars tend to be REALLY stupid and to blame upon a half dozen people on most cases i really hope that no nation tries to justify wars with stuff like "now we can fight without killling our soldiers, but only the other guys!"

[adamark]

Geez, you guys have no imagination!

Everyone who is writing comments against this suit just isn't seeing the possibilities behind it. You are getting caught up on these miniscule details like "how is he going to crouch" and "how will he roll on the ground."

This is the FIRST full body suit of armor since probably the 1500s when knights were like tanks on the battlefield. Think about it, this trend hasn't been seen in warfare in 500 years. Given that, they are going to need a couple of decades to really come out with something amazing, but you have to start somewhere.

Besides, I can already think of appropriate uses for this suit. SWAT teams. Let's say Narcotics division knows where a meth lab is and they want to storm it, shut it down and make arrests. Meth labs can blow up any second. Send in 15 SWAT shooters wearing these full body armor suits and even if the lab blows up, you won't lose any officers.

This is really an exciting development. I think most warfare technology is boring and counter-productive (because it's just about better ways to kill) but when you have a new trend in the Research and Development area where they are moving toward trying to PROTECT INDIVIDUAL soldiers.... that's great. That's fantastic. I'd put a LOT of money into researching this.

[Darth SS]

Additionally, your putting way to much emphasis on field of view. Night vision goggles both drastically limit field of view as well as completely removing depth perception. Yet our armed forces have fought with night visions goggles for years. Sure it takes a little extra training but at least with the helmet you still have depth perception.

I don't think you give enough emphasis to field of view.

I mean, I agree with the earlier point. Accurate shooting is done while looking down your sights. No quesion there.

However, speaking just from my experience with airsoft (which I know is in no way similar to actual combat) peripheral vision plays a huge part. Peripheral vision tends to be more sensitive to movement than looking straight at something. If I'm staring down the sights and throwing a stream of bbs at someone, I rely on my peripheral vision to cue me in to "Hey, is someone coming? Is there something coming towards me?" If you're lying prone and you don't want to move for fear of compromising your position, you can keep your face pointed towards the ground and move your eyes to track movement. When room clearing you use instinctive shooting more than actual sights, and that is almost entirely using full-field vision.

The helmet denies soldiers all of those, and makes their job needlessly more difficult. I know that a lot of vests claim "bulletproof" but you can never believe those. Some of them randomly fail because of some unseen flaw, and I have no doubt that these suits would follow that trend. Thus, you want them fighting as effective as possible (especially during room clearing, which is what SWAT does almost all the time) regardless of their armor. That helmet denies them that capability.

[Azisien]

A less cumbersome helmet, a variant perhaps, can be tweaked up. I don't think that's the centerpiece, nor something that ruins the entire concept.

[Demetrius]

However, speaking just from my experience with airsoft (which I know is in no way similar to actual combat) peripheral vision plays a huge part. Peripheral vision tends to be more sensitive to movement than looking straight at something. If I'm staring down the sights and throwing a stream of bbs at someone, I rely on my peripheral vision to cue me in to "Hey, is someone coming? Is there something coming towards me?" If you're lying prone and you don't want to move for fear of compromising your position, you can keep your face pointed towards the ground and move your eyes to track movement. When room clearing you use instinctive shooting more than actual sights, and that is almost entirely using full-field vision.

You are forgetting that when actual unit combat is used, each individual is responsible for a very limited range to keep from shooting one another and to maximize effeciency. When playing paintball or airsoft you are generally not a trained individual. However if you get to play against military teams you will find they will kick your ass through teamwork and limited ranges. Emphasis is on target recognition and neutraliztion, not instinctual firing, especially in urban combat situations where innocent people may be around.

Hell, if the thing does what he says I'd wear the damn thing to pick up a next gen console on release day.

[Sithdarth]

Demetrius pretty much said it. If you ever watch a special on SWAT they never use their peripheral vision. They train so that each person clears a well defined and very small part of the room. The guy behind him clears a different section and so on. Further they never fire until they have positive target identification cause they usually deal with situations were there are friendlies. In all, peripheral vision isn't really that important. Also, the visor on that helmet probably provides a lot more peripheral vision than night vision goggles and SWAT and special forces teams fight just fine in those.

[Tydeus]

It means that Tydeus has some real nice stuff to dress his mercs in.

Hell yes it does!

I guess my biggest complaint would be the exposed neck. I mean, the neck is kind of a vital area. You really dont want to get shot there.

I'd like to see something on that suit like what grthwllms' avatar has (page 3). I mean, it restricts mobility of the head/neck somewhat, but really, if it comes up just to the chin, you're hardly losing any mobility or field of vision at all. It just has to be designed nicely, but it can be done with a very minimal loss of mobility/field of vision.

The problem with kevlar on the neck is that the force of the impact can still collapse your trachea, and that's not a fun way to die. Granted, you have a better chance of receiving life-saving treatment (considering that emergency tracheotmies can be performed on the field), but still, I'd like to see an impermiable neck guard.

[Darth SS]

I'm sorry, what?

I had a summer job where I worked for the Calgary Police Department, and specifically SWAT. (I set up rooms for them to practice on, and swept and took out dead flashbangs. FYI, they don't own Night Vision goggles. They have torchlights and incredibly large spotlights.) They sure as hell used their peripheral vision. If they didn't, then they are using tunnel-vision, and that, as I was told, is exceedingly dangerous.

As it was broken down for me, I was told this; They break the room into quadrants and into halves, and they practice largely four-man room clearing. While they do use more people, that's just so they can blanket a house incredibly fast. Men one and three clear the bottom half of the room, men two and four clear the top half. Each person takes a quandrant that they fire into first, and if they do have a clear shot on that target, the second guy covering that half will take the shot. And, of course, each man takes an assigned route based on when they enter the room.

Why was peripheral vision so important, I asked. Simply put, if you close one eye and stare straight down the sights, you are going to kill people. People are not static. People inside a room may stumble and fall, or try and run. It's helpful to know if someone is stumbling in your direction, or if that guy on your side with the knife is coming at you. You need to go in and get a near instant count of how many people there are in your quadrant, and then pick shots as needed. You can't scan, stop, acquire, shoot, scan. You have to acquire, shoot, acquire shoot.



Also, as for the comment concerning the military and 360 coverage, they do still need peripheral vision. If everyone is staring down their sights and don't have any peripheral vision, they are not going to notice anything unless it stumbles across their line of fire.

[DeviousToast]

How easy are the suits repaired? Do new panels get popped onto the suit, or do you replace the entire suit when it gets worn? How much wear can the go through before you need a new one?

Not sure if he mentioned it, but GPS could easily be incorporated into the suit, along with some simple bioreaders that can just see if the person's heart is still beating. Knowing where to find injured troops after a building collapse or explosion would aid in recovery.

There's weapons now that will tell you, in a display on the weapon, how much ammo is left in a clip. Seems to me that data can be fed pretty easily inside the helmet. HUD stuff some of you were talking about.

I can see the range of vision giving difficulty manipulating, say, doorknobs and bomb disposal. Reloading, while the soldiers may be practiced at it, would still be difficult without bring the gun up to your face.

[42PETUNIAS]

I can see the range of vision giving difficulty manipulating, say, doorknobs and bomb disposal. Reloading, while the soldiers may be practiced at it, would still be difficult without bring the gun up to your face.

I don't really see how it would make it difficult to do doorknobs and bomb disposal. I mean, for both you're just looking at one thing, and dealing with it.You don't need any peripheral vision at all. Also, for reloading, my guess is that pretty much all soldiers are trained enough that reloading a gun presents no difficulties. I don't understand why it would be difficult, I mean, they can just look down at the gun. Neither of those things deal with the real problem of peripheral vision with those helmets.

[Sithdarth]

I had a summer job where I worked for the Calgary Police Department, and specifically SWAT. (I set up rooms for them to practice on, and swept and took out dead flashbangs. FYI, they don't own Night Vision goggles. They have torchlights and incredibly large spotlights.) They sure as hell used their peripheral vision. If they didn't, then they are using tunnel-vision, and that, as I was told, is exceedingly dangerous.

I'm sorry but that is one poor ass under equipped SWAT force. Also, if as I think, you mean Calgary in Canada I can see why there might be a difference.

As it was broken down for me, I was told this; They break the room into quadrants and into halves, and they practice largely four-man room clearing. While they do use more people, that's just so they can blanket a house incredibly fast. Men one and three clear the bottom half of the room, men two and four clear the top half. Each person takes a quandrant that they fire into first, and if they do have a clear shot on that target, the second guy covering that half will take the shot. And, of course, each man takes an assigned route based on when they enter the room.

Wait so they just bust in and start firing because that's totally the opposite of American SWAT teams. In America SWAT teams do not fire lethal rounds unless the suspect has a weapon, refuses to comply, and isn't responding to nonlethal measures. Of course that could be a misreading on my part of a misswording on yours. Otherwise the procedure is very similar.


Why was peripheral vision so important, I asked. Simply put, if you close one eye and stare straight down the sights, you are going to kill people. People are not static. People inside a room may stumble and fall, or try and run. It's helpful to know if someone is stumbling in your direction, or if that guy on your side with the knife is coming at you. You need to go in and get a near instant count of how many people there are in your quadrant, and then pick shots as needed. You can't scan, stop, acquire, shoot, scan. You have to acquire, shoot, acquire shoot.

That is not peripheral vision. Peripheral vision is the vision way out to the sides. What you are describing is depth perception. They are totally different things. You can have depth perception without peripheral vision. This is peripheral vision. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peripheral_vision) This is depth perception. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depth_perception) Also, the visor on that helmet is essentially right against the eyes. It probably only cuts of 20-30 degrees of your field of vision. That's generally considered good enough for driving so it should be good enough for fighting. Also, you can still till if something is moving toward you or not with only one eye. Its just slightly harder and it can be overcome with training.

Further, just shooting when you acquire is a hell of a lot more dangerous than closing an eye. Not to mention you can't even acquire a target with your peripheral vision. The process would probably be more off a scan/acquire, identify, shoot. That is unless you like killing civilian hostages and unarmed people.

Also I have discovered this. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SWAT#SWAT_equipment)
In nighttime or low-light operations, SWAT units may be equipped with night-vision goggles. Mirrors on extension poles, for looking around corners while not putting an officer directly in the line of fire, are amongst some of the more unusual and ad-hoc device used by teams to deal with unique situations.

I should further point out its virtually impossible to wipe out your entire peripheral vision. Mainly because there is only a very very small section of actually focused vision. The amount you get from night vision goggles is more than enough to scan a section of room and that helmet looks to provide even more. Maybe similar amounts in the up and down direction but definitely more side to side. (You really don't need the up and down kind anyway as that's the direction you scan most of the time.)

Also, as for the comment concerning the military and 360 coverage, they do still need peripheral vision. If everyone is staring down their sights and don't have any peripheral vision, they are not going to notice anything unless it stumbles across their line of fire.

Not entirely true. In any case its vastly more dangerous to try and trust your peripheral vision. Peripheral vision serves only one purpose. Its a fight or flight warning system against predators. It detects only movement no matter how slight or insignificant. (This is why horses in parades generally were blinders.) While storming a dark room even a moving shadow will look like a solid dangerous object to a person. If you turn to check it out it'll keep you from clearing your quadrant. This is one of the reasons SWAT and other tactical units work in teams. The other being mostly speed.

Further, during moments of high stress you are subjected to a certain degree of tunnel vision weather you like it or not. Its a biological reaction to stress and the fight or flight response. No matter how much you try to train or will it away it never goes away. Especially if you happen to be doing something life threatening. This effect is generally much more restrictive to peripheral vision than any device a tactical unit would place over their eyes.

[DeviousToast]

I don't really see how it would make it difficult to do doorknobs and bomb disposal. I mean, for both you're just looking at one thing, and dealing with it.You don't need any peripheral vision at all. Also, for reloading, my guess is that pretty much all soldiers are trained enough that reloading a gun presents no difficulties. I don't understand why it would be difficult, I mean, they can just look down at the gun. Neither of those things deal with the real problem of peripheral vision with those helmets.


I'm saying for things like opening doorknobs and loading guns, people use peripheral vision whether they notice it or not. It's probably something that would just take some getting used to. Not every soldier has been trained to assemble a sniper rifle blindfolded, and you may want to be keeping an eye on one thing while you do something else. *shrug* If you're doing a semi-complex activity with your hands, that would severely cut down your ability to multitask, or notice enemy soldiers flanking you or even coming straight at you if you were looking down (ACK MONSTROUS SENTENCE). It just seems the helmet would make your vision like an owl, where you have to swivel your head to get any range of sight, and that's not an option when you have to pay attention to whatever it is you're doing.

Also, it has been mentioned that your peripheral vision is better at detecting motion than your direct sight line. Not having that outer zone of different sensitivity cuts down on how effectively a soldier can scan an area. If your vision passes over someone who was holding still, you might miss them. I think that the tunnel vision is something enemy soldiers would learn to exploit pretty quickly.

Now, if you put those location sensors I was talking about earlier in, that data can also be sent to the rest of the squad's HUDs (I know the helmets don't have them yet, but this is going along with my ammo remaining idea too)... then, have one soldier be the Information Tech (kind of like radio men used to be), you could equip that person with a heartbeat sensor in addition to his normal gear (or in place of the bear spray maybe), and have the data from his equipment sent to the rest of the squad.

I realize I'm gradually making these suits more complex (which increases the chance for failure), but the more you can tailor various lines of suits to various jobs and positions, the more effective they be than just as armor. Which seems to be this guy's goal.

[Toastburner B]

How easy are the suits repaired? Do new panels get popped onto the suit, or do you replace the entire suit when it gets worn? How much wear can the go through before you need a new one?

Oddly enough, the other Toast came up with one of the same ideas I did. :gonk: Unless this guy came up with something beyond modern body armor, sections are going to have to be replaced as they are hit. If it's anything like the body armor they have now, it's effectiveness is going to degrade the more it gets hit, until eventually it's too fractured to stop anything.

Also, one thing that made me laugh...the laser pointer. I'm not too experienced in this sort of thing, but I don't really see how, in the middle of the day, that the dot will be clear enough to see, much less sight a weapon on.

The other thing I can think of is weight. Sure, it's 'lightweight', but how is it going to effect the solider who is already hauling 90+ pounds of gear around? Will it allow easy access to the pack on the troop's back?

Also...the guy tries to look cool by posing with two pistols, but how about about an assault rifle? I'm sure he's thought of this...it seemed odd he did the pistols instead of a rifle.

I'm not mocking the idea as a whole...I'm all for having better armor for our troops (a friend from high school died over there), but it's not the do all and end all the guy tries to sale it as.

[Darth SS]

I'm sorry but that is one poor ass under equipped SWAT force. Also, if as I think, you mean Calgary in Canada I can see why there might be a difference.

Well, the question comes down to this;

Do you take a police officer off the street to do this menial job?

Do you bother hiring someone with full salary to do this menial job?

Do you just hire a teenager who will gleefully do this menial job for low pay?

As for Night Vision goggles, it basically boils down to this: What's the point?

Sure, if they were going to try to sneak up on people all Sam Fisher-like, then it might be useful. But if you're blowing a door open, and charging in yelling at people, you're just as well off with about a dozen torchlights as you are with NVGs.

Wait so they just bust in and start firing because that's totally the opposite of American SWAT teams. In America SWAT teams do not fire lethal rounds unless the suspect has a weapon, refuses to comply, and isn't responding to nonlethal measures. Of course that could be a misreading on my part of a misswording on yours. Otherwise the procedure is very similar.

I presume they do the same thing. I was just there to clean up after room-clearing drills. Thus, it stands to reason that they were practicing room clearing. Not securing rooms, or coaxing people to stand down, but rather the basic pattern for entering a room and shooting the people that need to be shot.

That is not peripheral vision. Peripheral vision is the vision way out to the sides. What you are describing is depth perception. They are totally different things.

No I'm not.

Knowing if there is a person to your left who is moving is peripheral vision. Is has nothing to do with the distance of what you're focusing on.

Also just to clarify:

You are suggesting that when entering a room, a SWAT member starts on the left, slowly pans across (because apparently peripheral vision isn't important) so he doesn't miss anything, then stops at each target (who warrants shooting) and lines up his shot before panning again?

I'm saying that they know roughly where their target is, decides whether or not to shoot, and then moves their gun over to roughly where the next target should be.

You're right. Your way is much more thorough and makes much more sense.

[Azisien]

Intuitively, the peripheral vision argument makes NO sense. I'm sorry Sith, Deme, but it sounds like you guys are trying to convince us the sky is actually green.

You're arguing that the part of your vision that covers the most area by far, however crudely, isn't important. That a hard-coded reaction-response mechanism triggered by movement in your peripheral vision is somehow inferior when you have a highly trained individual using his acute vision only. What makes more sense is this highly trained individual using both effectively.

But, intuition ain't enough, right? So intrigued, I asked all of my friends and aquaintances in the military now or previously:

How important is/was peripheral vision when you were serving? On missions, patrols, etc?

I asked a US Army Sgt who served in the most recent Iraq War, US Army Sgt who served in Desert Storm, and two PFCs in the Canadian Forces, one of whom was in Afghanistan. Well, I won't bother writing out a whole script, mainly because I didn't write down what they said anyway. Unilaterally, they all said peripheral vision is absolutely essential. One even said (paraphrase): "What could be more important than sight?"

But I stand by my previous comment: The suit doesn't have to be a final design. I believe it's a prototype for a reason. Helmet no good? Do some redesigning. You have to admit, the features it had were spectacular. Air conditioning? Damn!

My only other general comment is that, shouldn't the suit actually more heavily protect the neck if it's supposed to withstand explosions? I know it's very unlikely you'd get hit in odd joints in a firefight, but those explosive shockwaves would hit...pretty much everywhere no? A nicely preserved, decapitated body, because the poor soldier's neck was exposed when the IED went off.

[Darth SS]

Aye, that air condition is a nice touch.


Do you think he could make a heater for really cold areas of operation?

[42PETUNIAS]

they could probably add insulation and such, but I don't think canadian troops are fighting in many arctic climates.

[Darth SS]

Who knows?

Denmark's making a move on our 3km island in the Artic.

[Azisien]

I'm sure they could, yeah. Also keep in mind, in a cold climate if it's well insulated, and especially if you're staying active, your body's heat would do most of the work. But I don't see why they couldn't add in some heat sources. Perhaps the heat source in the body's core would be optimal, though.

And as for fighting in cold climates, well, who knows what'll happen down the road, when resources are tighter and everybody finds out there's an ocean of fresh water and oil underneath Antarctica...

[BitVyper]

It's utterly useless for small squad maneuvers that require stealth

Because that's clearly what it's designed for. It seems to me that a lot of the naysayers are just going after it because it's not going to be 100% resistant to everything ever, and apply in every situation. That's not the point. I mean, how much military hardware out there actually IS all-purpose? I guess if you count a soldier's underwear as military hardware... and a good knife can be pretty useful almost anywhere. But really, most of it is designed to be as effective as possible in certain situations. Tanks aren't particularly useful for stealth manuevers either. Fortunately, we usually know what we're getting into, and can prepare troops accordingly.

As for the helmet; in any situation where you'll be wearing this suit, you should probably be looking straight ahead anyway. If anything, it might keep one focused on what they're supposed to be doing. At the very least, if you're looking somewhere, your body should be turning in that direction anyway.

I think Musashi actually commented on that; turning where you're looking, that is. Yeah, he wasn't exactly what you'd call well versed in today's warfare, but that's one thing that remains largely true. Focusing on your peripheral vision or flitting your eyes about at everything isn't likely to help you anywhere, whether it's in a fist fight, or in shoot-out. Focusing on what you're facing will. If something isn't important enough for you to face it, it isn't important. If stuff is coming at you from all sides, then you're probably screwed anyway, and trying to focus on everything at once isn't going to help.

[DeviousToast]

I think it's good for crazy nutty shock troop combat. It's psychological combat. It's not for peace keeping, it's not for defense. Seriously, a battalion of black storm troopers with bear mace marching at you... shit.

Just kidding. Not completely, but somewhat. :)

Regarding the neck protection, I think maybe something that would secure the helmet more, or limit the lateral range of motion would be good. I'd say that shrapnel or heat damaging the neck/throat wouldn't be as big of an issue as whiplash, or broken necks from the shock wave. If you're wearing a heavy helmet with AC and HAM radio and direct TV, it could snap your neck damned well if there wasn't some sort of movement limiting feature, to keep the neck from breaking and the brain from concussing itself.

[Phlegyas]

Tanks aren't particularly useful for stealth manuevers either.

I find that statement quite hilarious. Don't know why, but I do.

I also find it quite hilarious that people are actually considering the absurd idea that peripheral vision is not a top priority. See, think of it this way, when does a soldier use Night Vision? There would be Situation A where he is far away from his target which may or may not also have Night Vision (most likely not) and is surrounded by dozens of his own comrades so peripheral vision isn't such a big deal here and thar be Situation B where a soldier is clearing a room of terrorists that are, for some reason beyond my understanding, apparently playing Pinochle in the dark and can't see the damn soldier anyways because they don't have Night Vision. Basically, you are using the use of Night Vision as an example of how peripheral vision is not important when the situations where Night Vision is utilized have specific characteristics that make peripheral vision not important. Situations, I might add to drive the point home, that are not exclusive to the situations that this suit would be warranted to.

In conclusion, I agree with Azisien. Nice but the helmet needs improvement. Oh, and holy hell, are you serious!? Yeah, that sums it up. I leave in peace.

[Sithdarth]

Peripheral vision comments

Ok biology lesson time:

Adrenaline is a nifty little hormone that is always released when you put your life in danger. There is simply no way around this little fact of evolution. On of the effects of adrenaline is tunnel vision which can be quite severe. (http://www.vpc.org/studies/uninfour.htm) Now your vision is still there you brain just ignores it. Also, you tend not to notice it. This effect is generally worse than whatever amount that helmet cuts off.

Also, there is no way it cuts of all peripheral vision. Your visual range is 120 degrees the part that is actually clear extends only 3 degrees. Now you may note that the visor is rather small. However, its also very snug against your eyes once its on your head. For example, make the shape of an L with your thumb and your fingers. Then place you thumbs at the tips of your forefingers. You should now have a rectangle. Place that against your head and look through it. That's about the visual range you should retain in this helmet. Its not all that different than say goggles you wear for paintball.

You are suggesting that when entering a room, a SWAT member starts on the left, slowly pans across (because apparently peripheral vision isn't important) so he doesn't miss anything, then stops at each target (who warrants shooting) and lines up his shot before panning again?
No. The purpose of the team is so that no one has to pan or scan at all. You enter the room you point your gun at your assigned area and you fire if need be. That's why you need to trust the people on your team; its also how you clean a room quickly.

I'm saying that they know roughly where their target is, decides whether or not to shoot, and then moves their gun over to roughly where the next target should be.
See if you do it right you don't have to move your gun at all or maybe just a few inches. They people you need to shoot are never more than say 30 degrees to either side. That's well in the visual range of that helmet.

No I'm not.

Knowing if there is a person to your left who is moving is peripheral vision. Is has nothing to do with the distance of what you're focusing on.
See you were talking about knowing if someone is moving toward or away from you. That only happens in your central vision and its called depth perception. Depth perception also handles distance. It requires both eyes. Far Peripheral vision has no depth perception because only one eye covers that area. So all you can till is that something moved. You can't tell what it is or and usually you can't even tell what direction its moving.

[Gascmark de Leone]

Actually, peripheral vision is a good thing to have. Yes, in a gun fight, it's not required, but it helps to have it when you aren't in one.

[42PETUNIAS]

1: That has clearly been argued into the ground
2: This thread has been dead for a month