Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 12/18/2005 8:04:53 AM EDT
"According to IsraCast, an Israeli company has created materials made of inorganic fullerene-like nanostructures (IFs) which have amazing shock absorbing properties. During preliminary tests, these materials, which are five times stronger than steel, have successfully resisted to steel projectiles generating pressures as high as 250 tons per square centimeter. These materials could be incorporated in "nanoarmors" able to protect soldiers or police forces within three years."

www.isracast.com/tech_news/091205_tech.htm

dupe?
Link Posted: 12/18/2005 8:07:25 AM EDT
interesting
Link Posted: 12/18/2005 8:12:57 AM EDT
Not bad for a country that was started in the barren desert 60 years ago.
Link Posted: 12/18/2005 8:13:24 AM EDT
Here comes "buckyarmor"

Except from the description, theirs is made out of incomplete carbon nanotubes- materials normally considered 'junk' by those trying to make CN based fabrics...
Link Posted: 12/18/2005 8:13:42 AM EDT
It's like daimond, but less rigid. Pure carbon covalently bonded to itself in all directions, except assembled in a structure with enough empty space in it to allow the material to flex. I can't even keep up with all the nanotube applications they're thinking up anymore.
Link Posted: 12/18/2005 8:16:25 AM EDT
So I guess the Chinese will have this new armor for their troops with in 3 years
Link Posted: 12/18/2005 8:20:09 AM EDT

Originally Posted By passgas55:
So I guess the Chinese will have this new armor for their troops with in 3 years



6 months, its a global economy now
Link Posted: 12/18/2005 8:27:25 AM EDT
This is what the cops will be wearing when they come for your guns.

Link Posted: 12/18/2005 8:29:48 AM EDT

Originally Posted By luger355:

Originally Posted By passgas55:
So I guess the Chinese will have this new armor for their troops with in 3 years



6 months, its a global economy now



Which is why we need to start working on a REAL replacement for the M16 family and the 5.56mm cartridge. A rifle that will shoot a projectile that will work on this.

Toys like the 6.8mm cartridge, the G36, the FN-SCAR-even in its 7.62 version- and and fooling with piston uppers for M4s are a waste of time and money.
Link Posted: 12/18/2005 8:32:16 AM EDT
And the irelevance of conventional small arms starts today.
Link Posted: 12/18/2005 12:49:48 PM EDT
what round do you need to defeat Nano-Armor?


That Phase Plasma rifle in the 40 watt range is starting to look good
Link Posted: 12/18/2005 1:00:04 PM EDT

Originally Posted By NonConformist:
what round do you need to defeat Nano-Armor?


5.7!

Link Posted: 12/18/2005 1:06:18 PM EDT

Originally Posted By dport:

Originally Posted By NonConformist:
what round do you need to defeat Nano-Armor?


5.7!




heh...I was going to say .50 cal. If it can 'penetrate tank aromor at a miles range' like the brady bunch like to claim it should be able to defeat this
Link Posted: 12/18/2005 1:20:12 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Red_Beard:
This is what the cops will be wearing when they come for your guns.




aim for the face...
Link Posted: 12/18/2005 1:21:48 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Red_Beard:
This is what the cops will be wearing when they come for your guns.




Is it wrong that the first thing I thought of was "Oh fuck, how am I going to be able to defeat that?"
Link Posted: 12/18/2005 1:25:07 PM EDT

Originally Posted By thedoctors308:

Originally Posted By Red_Beard:
This is what the cops will be wearing when they come for your guns.




Is it wrong that the first thing I thought of was "Oh fuck, how am I going to be able to defeat that?"



I was thinking the same thing. Or ready to ask...uh so what did penitrate? I think we need to get the box o truth out.
Link Posted: 12/18/2005 1:26:11 PM EDT

Originally Posted By clement:

Originally Posted By dport:

Originally Posted By NonConformist:
what round do you need to defeat Nano-Armor?


5.7!




heh...I was going to say .50 cal. If it can 'penetrate tank aromor at a miles range' like the brady bunch like to claim it should be able to defeat this



doesn't matter. You don't have to penetrate the vest, just get a good hit on the persons torso. The momentum of the bullet will be good enough for one of two things, depending on the mass and velocity of the bullet:

1) knock the wind out of them. This option isn't too good
2) cause severe internal bleeding. This option is better, but you still are going to have to wait for for the person to die.

or, as someone said, just aim for the head.

Now, me personally, I cannot wait till these things get on the civie market... that is if they aren't restricted to royalty(LEOs, Military,presidents,etc.)
Link Posted: 12/18/2005 1:28:54 PM EDT
On a second thought. I really cannot wait for this company to go public. With all the wars going on and stuff, this company is sure to roll in the dough.
Link Posted: 12/18/2005 1:31:32 PM EDT

Originally Posted By PreMed_Gunner:

Originally Posted By clement:

Originally Posted By dport:

Originally Posted By NonConformist:
what round do you need to defeat Nano-Armor?


5.7!




heh...I was going to say .50 cal. If it can 'penetrate tank aromor at a miles range' like the brady bunch like to claim it should be able to defeat this



doesn't matter. You don't have to penetrate the vest, just get a good hit on the persons torso. The momentum of the bullet will be good enough for one of two things, depending on the mass and velocity of the bullet:

1) knock the wind out of them. This option isn't too good
2) cause severe internal bleeding. This option is better, but you still are going to have to wait for for the person to die.

or, as someone said, just aim for the head.

Now, me personally, I cannot wait till these things get on the civie market... that is if they aren't restricted to royalty(LEOs, Military,presidents,etc.)



Last month we already had a post about transparent aluminum applications for face shields.
Link Posted: 12/18/2005 1:33:02 PM EDT

Originally Posted By captainpooby:
Not bad for a country that was started in the barren desert 60 years ago.


Link Posted: 12/18/2005 1:33:43 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/18/2005 1:38:13 PM EDT by olyarms]

Originally Posted By captainpooby:
Not bad for a country that was started in the barren desert 60 years ago.



Give the USA, some credit. Im going to bet it was nearly funded 100% with our tax dollars as well as a joing project if its real.

ETA: Being this is from Isracast I don't belive it.
Link Posted: 12/18/2005 1:34:06 PM EDT
Link Posted: 12/18/2005 1:34:33 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Planerench:

Originally Posted By PreMed_Gunner:

Originally Posted By clement:

Originally Posted By dport:

Originally Posted By NonConformist:
what round do you need to defeat Nano-Armor?


5.7!




heh...I was going to say .50 cal. If it can 'penetrate tank aromor at a miles range' like the brady bunch like to claim it should be able to defeat this



doesn't matter. You don't have to penetrate the vest, just get a good hit on the persons torso. The momentum of the bullet will be good enough for one of two things, depending on the mass and velocity of the bullet:

1) knock the wind out of them. This option isn't too good
2) cause severe internal bleeding. This option is better, but you still are going to have to wait for for the person to die.

or, as someone said, just aim for the head.

Now, me personally, I cannot wait till these things get on the civie market... that is if they aren't restricted to royalty(LEOs, Military,presidents,etc.)



Last month we already had a post about transparent aluminum applications for face shields.



if that becomes the case, why do we need guns anymore, since it is obvious that once this shit hits the LEO and military market, there is no fucking way we will ever win a revolution against tyranny?
Link Posted: 12/18/2005 1:38:56 PM EDT

Originally Posted By HeavyMetal:
I predicted this months ago.

www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=401434


Us americans arent to stupid
Link Posted: 12/18/2005 1:40:45 PM EDT

Originally Posted By PreMed_Gunner:

Originally Posted By Planerench:

Originally Posted By PreMed_Gunner:

Originally Posted By clement:

Originally Posted By dport:

Originally Posted By NonConformist:
what round do you need to defeat Nano-Armor?


5.7!




heh...I was going to say .50 cal. If it can 'penetrate tank aromor at a miles range' like the brady bunch like to claim it should be able to defeat this



doesn't matter. You don't have to penetrate the vest, just get a good hit on the persons torso. The momentum of the bullet will be good enough for one of two things, depending on the mass and velocity of the bullet:

1) knock the wind out of them. This option isn't too good
2) cause severe internal bleeding. This option is better, but you still are going to have to wait for for the person to die.

or, as someone said, just aim for the head.

Now, me personally, I cannot wait till these things get on the civie market... that is if they aren't restricted to royalty(LEOs, Military,presidents,etc.)



Last month we already had a post about transparent aluminum applications for face shields.



if that becomes the case, why do we need guns anymore, since it is obvious that once this shit hits the LEO and military market, there is no fucking way we will ever win a revolution against tyranny?



Something always comes along.....like bootleg armor! Leg the governement pay to find a way around it. They will have to once everyone has it.
Link Posted: 12/18/2005 4:51:48 PM EDT
Headshots always have a way of saying: "Fuck you."
Link Posted: 12/18/2005 4:54:41 PM EDT


Originally Posted By captainpooby:
Not bad for a country that was started in the barren desert 60 years ago.




If the U.S. gave me the kind of money that Israel has gotten, I could turn Greenland into an awesome place.

With me as EMPEROR !!!!
Link Posted: 12/18/2005 4:55:30 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Planerench:

Originally Posted By PreMed_Gunner:

Originally Posted By Planerench:

Originally Posted By PreMed_Gunner:

Originally Posted By clement:

Originally Posted By dport:

Originally Posted By NonConformist:
what round do you need to defeat Nano-Armor?


5.7!




heh...I was going to say .50 cal. If it can 'penetrate tank aromor at a miles range' like the brady bunch like to claim it should be able to defeat this



doesn't matter. You don't have to penetrate the vest, just get a good hit on the persons torso. The momentum of the bullet will be good enough for one of two things, depending on the mass and velocity of the bullet:

1) knock the wind out of them. This option isn't too good
2) cause severe internal bleeding. This option is better, but you still are going to have to wait for for the person to die.

or, as someone said, just aim for the head.

Now, me personally, I cannot wait till these things get on the civie market... that is if they aren't restricted to royalty(LEOs, Military,presidents,etc.)



Last month we already had a post about transparent aluminum applications for face shields.



if that becomes the case, why do we need guns anymore, since it is obvious that once this shit hits the LEO and military market, there is no fucking way we will ever win a revolution against tyranny?



Something always comes along.....like bootleg armor! Leg the governement pay to find a way around it. They will have to once everyone has it.




yeah, like the hun's sigline says "if you don't have xxx on day one of the revolution, you'll have them on day 2"

Link Posted: 12/18/2005 5:59:21 PM EDT
Hey, I found a pic of the new armor that is being developed.


Top Top