Comments on: EFP Armor on the Way

By: Joe

Joe — Fri, 11 Jun 2010 04:45:25 +0000

A comment about the "2nd place, Ceramics (which are in fact glass)" reference. Ceramics are not glass. Glass is amorphous and soft. Ceramics used in armor are polycrystalline and have a very high hardness. Two different animals. In-fact, we make transparent ceramic that we put on the strikeface of glass laminates which results in using 50% less glass/polycarbonate behind it. Remember, hardness defeats hardness, so since glass is so soft, it really only slows down the projectile. It does not crack nor erode it. Ceramics on the other hand are harder than the threat and therefore crack the core of high hardness core threats and erode that core thus allowing the material behind the ceramic (even if transparent ceramic) to catch smaller fragments. Also don't confuse "glass ceramic" with "glass" nor with "ceramic". Three different materials.

By: marine

marine — Thu, 03 Jun 2010 22:52:30 +0000

hardwire armor will stop an efp, go to liveleak and search bradley/ied and you should find pics of the hardwire armor that stopped the efp. the rest of the video is a firefight !

By: Erik

Erik — Fri, 26 Mar 2010 18:07:05 +0000

I would try add-on armor with alternating layers of metal and bullet-resistant glass filled with sand and water. Wet sand packed densely between metal and glass layers might be able to slow the projectile enough that the vehicles armor could stop it. The inner and outer layers could be stainless steel and the middle layers bullet-resistant glass. The add-on armor would need to be water tight to prevent the damp sand from drying out. The dampness of the sand could help reduce the heat of the projectile. This add-on armor could probaly be made from junkyard materials (the bullet-resistant glass a possible exception) and the sand provided by the desert.

By: Howard Kent/ARMORDEVELOPMENT.com

Howard Kent/ARMORDEVELOPMENT.com — Fri, 07 Aug 2009 18:24:54 +0000

Dear Christian,
I must share some armor developer’s comments“
1) An EFP is not a “bullet”, it is a piece of copper formed by an explosion rather than hammer forging or casting. Copper simply splashes on the surface of harder materials unless it’s mass is great enough to distort the structure of the ceramic or glass. We have all seen lead or copper bullet impacts on steel and this is the same effect.
2) To stop a bullet you de-spin it and deform the point to cause greater resistance to passing through the armor material. To stop a shaped charge or EFP you splash the “jet” or forged fragment on glass or ceramic and then absorb the mass related force with steel or S2.
One guy said he stopped .45 slugs with marbles…a form of vehicle armor which contained hundreds of marbles was patented and went away. I have stopped 5.56mm ball with two layers of bathroom tile and some sheet metal backing. These are perfect examples of 1 and 2 above.
Carry on, you are very knowledgeable…nobody can know everything, not even me on the subject of armor and we own high speed cameras, thermal imagers and accel test rigs.
Very truly yours,
Howard D. Kent
ARMOR Development GROUP, LP

By: Thaddeus

Thaddeus — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 06:34:44 +0000

Badly need your help. A physicist is an atom’s way of knowing about atoms.
I am from Gabon and also now am reading in English, please tell me right I wrote the following sentence: ““
Best regards :-D, Thaddeus.

By: mickey

mickey — Tue, 27 May 2008 17:41:28 +0000

You will find this YouTube Movie useful.
Abrams-in-Iraq
http://youtube.com/watch?v=EP3G2bHs6Ys

By: Trent Telenko

Trent Telenko — Sat, 10 May 2008 17:07:15 +0000

David Woroner,
Your contentions are not supported by the facts on the ground in Iraq.
MRAPs save lives and in their role as troop transport thay are superior protection than anything else on the battlefields there — up to and including a 63 ton Abrams — in protecting them from the IED threat.
In addition, the usefulness of glass laminate in stoping high explosive shapred charges and EFPs have been proved on Iraqi battlefields multiple times.
The following are links to photos of battlefield damaged Abrams, Humvees, MRAPs and a glass laminate armor protected D-9 bulldozer.
1. The picture at this link shows a 63 ton Abrams tank destroyed by a large IED in Iraq.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1602087/posts?page=9#9
2. The picture at this link shows a 63 ton Abrams takn destroyed by an “IED Daisy Chaign” of 152mm artillery shells:
[REMOVED BECAUSE LONG LINK CAUSED FORMATTING ISSUES: Editor]
3. The pictures at this link show an armored Humvee hit by a large IED and a RG-31 MRAP hit my a similar sized IED:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1602087/posts?page=1#1
4. This link is to a series of pictures of the glass laminate armor of a D-9 Bulldozer struck by a RPG high explosive shaped charge warhead. Similar results have been noted on glass laminate armor by EFP hits:
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=5ea323d564&to_friend=1
This is the text that went with that photo:
>D9 CAT Takes RPG Hit and Lives
>In early 2003, the U.S. bought nine 62 ton D9
>armored Caterpillar bulldozers into Kuwait for
>the Iraq campaign. The D9s, and their Israeli
>made armor kit, were purchased because of the
>Israeli success with the dozer in urban warfare
>against Palestinian terrorists. America had used
>the D9 during the 1960s in Vietnam, but after
>that only used the smaller (35 ton, with armor
>kit) D7. The D9 was not needed for urban fighting
> in Iraq during 2003, but was found very useful
>(much more so than the smaller D7) for combat
>engineering tasks. The D9 quickly cleared
>highways of debris and built temporary roads for
>combat vehicles. One D9 was thought to be as
>useful as four D7s, and there is a lot of
>enthusiasm among combat engineers to keep the
>D9s, and get more of them. In 2004, the D9s were
>used for combat operations in places like
>Fallujah.
>Photos by LTC Norm Root
5. The photos at this link shows a US Marine 6x6 Cougar MRAP struck by a 200-300lb IED in western Iraq. None of the crew was killed in this attack:
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2007/08/imagine-this-was-snatch.html
Your contentions about MRAPs and the protective properties of glass laminate armor are not supported by the facts anyone can find using a google search engine.

By: Trent Telenko

Trent Telenko — Sat, 10 May 2008 16:01:48 +0000

FYI from MSNBC, the cut in of improved armor variant MRAPs is being reported on from Kuwait:
>Upgrades readied for battle
>
>Meanwhile, at Camp Arifjahn in Kuwait, the
>military is reinforcing some of the
>blast-resistant with additional side armor

By: David Woroner, Pres/CEO Survival Consultants Int'l llc.

David Woroner, Pres/CEO Survival Consultants Int'l llc. — Sat, 10 May 2008 02:02:49 +0000

Once again I am disgusted with our “technology folks,” DARPA, ONR, etc. Bah!
Lets keep this simple. Chobham Armor quite frankly is vastly inferior to ANY glass.
The reason is the difference between hi velocity and hyper velocity. The “break point” is 2000fps.
I can put a penny through an inch of stainless at 3700fps.
I don’t want to “teach tango’s” jack.… But be aware that the “ladder of armor” is quite simple.
In last place, Metals
In 2nd place, Ceramics (which are in fact glass.)
In 1st place, Glass.… Glass does not “melt” so to speak like the last and second places. Anything over the Hyper, you need glass.
When I was “trained many moons ago,” we were taught to use manhole covers. yep, thats right, whats gonna stop that? hmmm? why do you think the SS Welds them shut when there is a motorcade?
Anyways, I have already Patented two hand in hand systems to defeat not only detonation shearing forces, but over and underpressures. The second one specifically deals with efps.
**Note– If you mount 3 inches thick laminate glass to that beast (which I truly, truly hate!) I’d be surprised if it even moved! How much cost in fuel alone (not to mention the “sticker price”) is gonna just get chucked out there?
The Mrap is stupid, plain and simple. Ive been saying it for a long time, and now were gonna mount about what? 25K Pounds of Glass on it as well? What the heck are we thinking? No wonder were not “quite” the super power we used to be.
Between fuel, cost for glass, etc, etc.…. why not build something that just WORKS!
Best, David

By: Jeff

Jeff — Fri, 09 May 2008 19:28:54 +0000

Trent,
That looks like the article that I read. Thanks for finding that.