Slashdot Mirror


Inventor Slims Down Exoskeletal Body Armor

The Hamilton Spectator is reporting that inventor Troy Hurtubise, creator of the "bear-protection suit" made famous by taking a hit from a moving vehicle, has slimmed down his design in hopes of landing a lucrative government contract. From the article: "He has spent two years and $15,000 in the lab out back of his house in North Bay, designing and building a practical, lightweight and affordable shell to stave off bullets, explosives, knives and clubs. He calls it the Trojan and describes it as the 'first ballistic, full exoskeleton body suit of armour.'"

416 comments

  1. Comments by suso · · Score: 3, Funny

    Let the comments about how it looks just like an avatar from Quake/UT/Halo/etc begin.

    1. Re:Comments by Half+a+dent · · Score: 2, Funny

      Nah, looks more like one of the Centurions from the 80s cartoon show.

      BTW is he trying to look mean and aggressive or is the armour uncomfortable for his piles?!

    2. Re:Comments by Liinux · · Score: 3, Funny

      Forget about what he looks like, can it withstand a telefrag?

    3. Re:Comments by MECC · · Score: 5, Funny

      The guy looks a bit short for a stormtrooper...

      --
      "We are all geniuses when we dream"
      - E.M. Cioran
    4. Re:Comments by greenguy · · Score: 2, Funny

      Question is, is it laser-proof?

      Oh, wait. The stormtrooper suits weren't laser-proof. Does anyone else find that to be a bit of an oversight?

      --
      What if I do the same thing, and I do get different results?
    5. Re:Comments by martinussen · · Score: 1

      The real question is: Does it run Linux? If I remember correctly, the laser weapons in Star Wars actually fired plasma. Laser has a strange tendency to move at the speed of light.

    6. Re:Comments by Fallen+Seraph · · Score: 1

      To me it looks like the bastard child of the Spartan suit from Halo (wasn't his name creative? :P) and the corp light in the HL2 mod Dystopia...

    7. Re:Comments by Korin43 · · Score: 1

      And plasma has a tendency of not staying together.

    8. Re:Comments by MECC · · Score: 1

      The plasma has gluon particles.

      --
      "We are all geniuses when we dream"
      - E.M. Cioran
    9. Re:Comments by LightCecil · · Score: 1

      Mjolner is the armor, Spartan II is the SpecOps force. And both are descriptive of the purpose of each component of the NavSpec project.

    10. Re:Comments by metlin · · Score: 1

      Personally, I thought that it looked like the armour Aris Boch wears in one of the Stargate SG-1 episodes.

    11. Re:Comments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      And that's the problem. You think the US army has a bad reputation now? There's something about not having a visible face that screws judgement up, on both sides of the armor. The rest of it is fine, but be very careful before adding the helmet....

    12. Re:Comments by dcsmith · · Score: 4, Funny
      The stormtrooper suits weren't laser-proof.


      Not laser proof?!?! IIRC they weren't proof against an Ewok with a stick...

      --
      This has been a test. If this had been an actual Sig, you would have been amused.
    13. Re:Comments by gripen40k · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure all matter has gluon particles, as it's what holds quarks together, and quarks are what make up proton/electron/neutrons.

      --
      Har?
    14. Re:Comments by silvertear72 · · Score: 1

      ...somehow I'd be a little disturbed about the battle field conversations, due to the position of that clock...

      Sgt.:"Private, what in Sam hell are you doing!?"
      Private:"Sir, just checking what time it is, sir."
      Sgt.:"Damn it private, stop playing with your clock and push forward with the rest of the squad!"

    15. Re:Comments by Dabido · · Score: 1

      I was thinking Half Life ... but yeah, you're right.

      I wonder if it would stop a grizzley bear fired from a rocket? [Or a polar bear, their endangered anyway, why not use them for a practical purpose while we still have them]. :-)

      And what about Sharks with Friggin' lasers on their heads? Does it stop those?

      --
      Sure enough, the cow costume was hanging up next to the superhero outfit and sailors uniform. (S,Spud)
    16. Re:Comments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Power-X-treme!!!

      Those were the days.

    17. Re:Comments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, but the suit did wonders for protecting yourself from being attacked by a person with a bananna.

    18. Re:Comments by SubOptimalUseCase · · Score: 1

      "Do you have it in white?"

  2. WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by Salvance · · Score: 4, Interesting

    WOW - if it pans out, this device is amazing. It only weighs 40lbs, and can withstand the impact from a car or elephant gun? If he can really mass produce it for $2,000 a piece, I would think the government would buy thousands (especially considering decent upper body armor can cost the same amount, and provides limited protection in comparison).

    --
    Crack - Free with every butt and set of boobs
  3. Balmer-proof! by MECC · · Score: 5, Funny

    This thing would probably easily deflect flying chairs...

    --
    "We are all geniuses when we dream"
    - E.M. Cioran
  4. Video of Troy's Suits by DeadSea · · Score: 5, Informative
    If you are not familiar with Troy, this video is a great introduction. It shows him in his first two suits.
    • Beaten with baseball bats
    • Slammed by a large log
    • Pushed off a cliff
    • Hit by a truck
    • Beaten by a gang
    Google Video has a different video
    1. Re:Video of Troy's Suits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Yes, but can it protect you from a toilet thrown off a roof? And how about an angry girlfriend? Or both activities at the same time.

    2. Re:Video of Troy's Suits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

      Or how does it stand up to bout of explosive diarrhea (possibly brought on by the sight of your girlfriend throwing a toilet off the roof at you)?

    3. Re:Video of Troy's Suits by Calinous · · Score: 3, Funny

      I've seen the video on google, and I want to say:
        Starcraft's marines are prior art

    4. Re:Video of Troy's Suits by uber-human · · Score: 1

      ummm...not a troll...almost funny, actually.

    5. Re:Video of Troy's Suits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know if thinking on Robocop or the Power Rangers.

    6. Re:Video of Troy's Suits by orkysoft · · Score: 1

      No, they are derivative themselves. Remember, service guarantees citizenship!

      --

      I suffer from attention surplus disorder.
    7. Re:Video of Troy's Suits by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      Wow.

      Wonder how he protects from muscle strain. Does the suit go rigid briefly on impact like the ski team suits?

      the tests were very impressive tho the trick was bit idealized. I'd like to see a real truck which is more likely to roll over him (basically would a tire rolling over the leg do damage).

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    8. Re:Video of Troy's Suits by rs232 · · Score: 1

      "Wonder how he protects from muscle strain. Does the suit go rigid briefly on impact like the ski team suits?"

      Unlike the suits in the Forever War, this one doesn't come with powered joints, function in a vacuum or survive being attacked with laserbeams by space aliens. Even if the suit survives, the underlying tissue would be totally desiccated from the shockwave.

      --
      davecb5620@gmail.com
    9. Re:Video of Troy's Suits by kalirion · · Score: 1

      Depends, is it an angry super ex-girlfriend?

    10. Re:Video of Troy's Suits by x2A · · Score: 1

      Angry girlfriend thrown off a roof?

      (that's what I do with mine!)

      --
      The revolution will not be televised... but it will have a page on Wikipedia
    11. Re:Video of Troy's Suits by Das+Modell · · Score: 4, Funny
      I noticed a spelling error in the article. It says:

      Dangling between the legs, that would be a clock.

      I'm sure that they meant to say "cock."
    12. Re:Video of Troy's Suits by Zaatxe · · Score: 1

      Hey, in the third take he walks like Asimo!

      --
      So say we all
    13. Re:Video of Troy's Suits by niteice · · Score: 1
      can it protect you from a toilet thrown off a roof?
      How about a serial crusher?
      --
      ROMANES EUNT DOMUS
    14. Re:Video of Troy's Suits by nitehorse · · Score: 1

      Then he hits the guy with the bandages in the head. Why? Because he's smart, He knows the guy with the bandages around his ass is goin' nowhere. He's goin' fuckin' nowhere.

      Where you goin'? NOWHERE.

    15. Re:Video of Troy's Suits by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      I'm not talking science fiction. The most recent olympic ski team wore suits that went from soft to rigid on impact. And then they would turn back soft after a few seconds.

      It looked to me like his arms and legs were being thrown around a bit and there was no protection from dislocated shoulders but maybe the suit firms up and prevents inappropriate movement.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    16. Re:Video of Troy's Suits by zLimes · · Score: 1

      Nope... they spelled it right and judging by the shadow it makes it's about 2 o'clock in the photo.

    17. Re:Video of Troy's Suits by db32 · · Score: 1

      Notice what department it came from. In fact, I found your post doing a quick search since I know hardly anyone actually reads the article and had to make sure at least someone pointed out the dangling "clock". I am however a little nervous about setting the alarm function...not sure I wanna know what happens when it "goes off".

      --
      The only change I can believe in is what I find in my couch cushions.
    18. Re:Video of Troy's Suits by rabiddeity · · Score: 1

      Wow. Now that's some beautiful ragdoll physics in action.

    19. Re:Video of Troy's Suits by Mex · · Score: 1

      Tell that to the Warhammer guys, they won't like it! =)

    20. Re:Video of Troy's Suits by Calinous · · Score: 1

      "Starship troopers" indeed. Loved the book, didn't liked the movie too much. Starship troopers 2 was a real low...
            Anyway, I've seen Starcraft before reading the book, so in my order, prior art is Starcraft

    21. Re:Video of Troy's Suits by EdwinBoyd · · Score: 1

      I dunno, he'd have to be a huge friggen guy.

  5. Trojan by techpawn · · Score: 3, Funny

    THe most trusted name in protection... *ducks*

    --
    Ask not what you can do for your country. Ask what your country did to you
    1. Re:Trojan by skiingyac · · Score: 1

      and that makes the guy in the suit Trojan Man...

  6. Cool! by Liinux · · Score: 1

    "I am robo-Troy! Fear me!"

  7. Clock? by ThePopeLayton · · Score: 5, Insightful
    From the article:
    Dangling between the legs, that would be a clock.
    Since when was an over-sized cup called a clock?
    Honestly if I wanted to place a clock in an efficient location "dangling between the legs" isn't one of the first places I would think.
    1. Re:Clock? by Shivetya · · Score: 1

      well it would expedite the knowing when, and doing of, kissing your ass goodbye

      --
      * Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
    2. Re:Clock? by Digital+Vomit · · Score: 3, Funny

      The word "clock" was a typo in the article. It's easy to accidentally it the 'l' key because it's so close to the 'o' key.

      --
      Modern copyright is theft of culture from everyone and it retards the progress of the useful arts and sciences.
    3. Re:Clock? by suso · · Score: 5, Funny

      Since when was an over-sized cup called a clock?

      When it has a pendulum.

    4. Re:Clock? by spaztik · · Score: 0, Redundant

      I think they misspelled cock in the article.

    5. Re:Clock? by NeuroManson · · Score: 1

      Dammit, I said clock radio. CLOCK radio!

      --
      Just because you can mod me down, doesn't mean you're right. Shoes for industry!
    6. Re:Clock? by Viceroy+Potatohead · · Score: 1

      Yeah, you might get butter in the works!

    7. Re:Clock? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That would make it "coock" wouldn't it?

    8. Re:Clock? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not a typo...just put two hands and face on it and there you go...

    9. Re:Clock? by Geak · · Score: 0

      I was thinking more along the lines of a sundial, problem is you have to wind it once in a while.

  8. Just can't resist....... by ReTay · · Score: 5, Funny

    9 out of 10 Bears polled say

    "Crunchy on the outside gooey on the inside......."

    1. Re:Just can't resist....... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh my gosh!

      Thank goodness everyone around me has gone home for the day. That was a hard laugh to stifle.

  9. Wow did I get this line from the article wrong by ArsonSmith · · Score: 3, Funny

    Wow did I get this line from the article wrong

    "Dangling between the legs, that would be a clock."

    --
    Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    1. Re:Wow did I get this line from the article wrong by Eagleartoo · · Score: 2, Funny

      Begun, the clone wares have.

      --
      -You have been modded appropriately-
    2. Re:Wow did I get this line from the article wrong by Robber+Baron · · Score: 1

      ...and after he gets shot, it becomes a sundial...

      --

      You're using her as bait, Master!

    3. Re:Wow did I get this line from the article wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      "What the hell are you doing? There's kids watching!!"

      "I'm winding my watch."

    4. Re:Wow did I get this line from the article wrong by cHALiTO · · Score: 1

      Yeah, if you were a bit distracted, you might miss the 'l' there.. as a typo it'd have been quite funny :)

      --
      "Luck is my middle name," said Rincewind, indistinctly. "Mind you, my first name is Bad." -- Terry Pratchett
    5. Re:Wow did I get this line from the article wrong by smoker2 · · Score: 1
      Yeah right :

      Hot blonde : do you have the time ?
      bearman: If you've got a can opener !

    6. Re:Wow did I get this line from the article wrong by ptelligence · · Score: 1
      "Dangling between the legs, that would be a clock."

      Its always time for Trojans!

  10. Sure it weighs less now... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    cuz it's the first of the year and he's sticking to his New Year's resolution. I bet it gains the pounds back on later in the year.

  11. Nice by Calinous · · Score: 2, Funny

    The inventor wore it (including helmet) in a four hour drive - and police officer stopped him and let him go after convincing himself that the inventor could see just fine with the helmet on.
          This would be great for soldiers - if able to withstand assault rifle bullets, its weight (18kg) is pretty low for full body armor.

          What makes me curious is this:
    "In the helmet, there's a solar-powered fresh-air system"
          How much fresh air could a solar powered air system produce?

    1. Re:Nice by carpe_noctem · · Score: 4, Funny

      This would be great for soldiers - if able to withstand assault rifle bullets, its weight (18kg) is pretty low for full body armor.

      The suit definitely seems to go along with the current war strategy... make no quick movements, take a huge beating, and then pull off the helmet for some publicity photos in the papers.

      --
      "Quoting famous computer scientists out of context is the root of all evil (or at least most of it) in programming." - K
    2. Re:Nice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How much fresh air could a solar powered air system produce?

      I believe that the fresh air system is a built in fan in the front of the mask that just sucks in air from outside.

    3. Re:Nice by Calinous · · Score: 1

      If so, this could help quite a bit with cooling (and with breathing if there is a filter on the helmet)

    4. Re:Nice by hobbesx · · Score: 1
      "In the helmet, there's a solar-powered fresh-air system"
                  How much fresh air could a solar powered air system produce?

      Well, 'solar-powered fresh-air system' certainly flows better than 'used calculator panels and a fan'.

      I think the better question would be: How quickly can it evacuate an MRE burp?
      --
      This rating is Unfair ( ) ( ) Fair (*) Funny
      Sigh... If only. Modding would be so much more fun.
    5. Re:Nice by Catbeller · · Score: 1

      Real problem with closed suits, as extensively discussed in Heinlein's great old book, "Have Spaceuit, Will Travel", is heat and perspiration buildup. Air needs to circulate, cool air, to evaporate sweat and lower body temperature. Just using cooling isn't enough. You'd roast like a turkey if the heat isn't wicked off somehow.

    6. Re:Nice by FhnuZoag · · Score: 1

      How much fresh air could a solar powered air system produce?

      About enough for a whole planet.

      Sorry for smartassedness.

    7. Re:Nice by ender- · · Score: 2, Funny

      How much fresh air could a solar powered air system produce?
       
      I believe that the fresh air system is a built in fan in the front of the mask that just sucks in air from outside. As long as it has a reverse setting, to rid your helmet of taco burps. :)
    8. Re:Nice by Calinous · · Score: 1

      Plenty for the entire planet, and some extra (storms, hurricanes, cyclones)

    9. Re:Nice by dilvish_the_damned · · Score: 1

      "In the helmet, there's a solar-powered fresh-air system"
                  How much fresh air could a solar powered air system produce?


      It mostly goes out at night, mostly.

      --
      I think you underestimate just how much I just dont care.
  12. While it would rock if this were the real thing... by JayBlalock · · Score: 5, Informative
    This guy is kind of a known crackpot. Do a search on his name plus "Angel Light" or "God Light" if you don't believe me. He claims to have a miracle space ray that (alternately) provides Superman-style selectable X-Ray vision (that is to say, you only see a deeply as you want) OR else cures cancer in lab rats. Or both. Yet when pushed to demonstrate his miracle X-Ray gizmo, he suddenly claimed it was too dangerous to people and dismantled it.

    Just as a start, here's his Wikipedia entry.

    So until his claims are proven, he's in the group of people whose claims should all be taken with a grain of salt.

    --
    Bush: He's Liberal in all the wrong ways.
  13. Sounds pretty tough.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and if it could protect you from being "slapped with a large trout" then I am game for sure.

  14. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by Yold · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Wouldn't want to be wearing one in the desert (jungle, etc), probably a reason why there is limited government interest. Unless this things has some sort of personal AC unit... but that would probably require portable energy beyound military logistical capabilies.

    This isn't a matter of discomfort; dehydration and heat exhaustion would probably make this thing useless for large scale deployment. Maybe good for police forces, or soldiers operating in very hostile condtions, but probably too expensive and immature for mainstream deployment.

  15. This story is appearing elsewhere.... by 8127972 · · Score: 1
    --
    This is my opinion. To make sure you don't steal it, it's covered by the DMCA.
  16. It's the Hudson droid from Red Dwarf ! by Marbleless · · Score: 1

    ... well it is ;)

    --
    --I thought I was wrong once, but I was mistaken.
  17. I AM CANADIAN!! by xTantrum · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    now we can say that and be proud its not just for our beer. whoot!!

    --
    $action = empty(PHP) ? backToC() : unset(PHP) ; "when the concrete cases are understood, the abstractions are readily
    1. Re:I AM CANADIAN!! by somersault · · Score: 1

      I'd actually never heard anything good about Canadian beer until on Slashdot today (though admittedly twice in the same day), and my girlfriend's Canadian!! I didn't even try the beer when I was over there, I had a Corona. For some reason they put a lime in the top, it was disgusting :S Anyway, I think you can be proud: that you're as large as America - geographically at least - but generally renowned for being peace loving and more intelligent (though who isn't renowned for being more intelligent than America? sorry America).

      --
      which is totally what she said
    2. Re:I AM CANADIAN!! by xTantrum · · Score: 1

      are you sure your american? those kinda statements can get you hanged as a traitor. yeah corona is weak. you need some of our molson canadian to do the trick. next time you up we'll pop a cold one on the house. just cause you such a smart guy!! serioulsy i'd mod you up if i wasn't commenting on this thread.

      --
      $action = empty(PHP) ? backToC() : unset(PHP) ; "when the concrete cases are understood, the abstractions are readily
    3. Re:I AM CANADIAN!! by ChunkyLoverYYZ · · Score: 1

      Ok, WAY off topic, but...

      Molson Canadian? Good beer? Please.
      Personally, nothing by Molson or Labatt do it for me. There are a slew of micro (and no longer micro) breweries out there.

      Molson Canadian?

      By the way, neither Molson, Labatt nor Sleeman are even Canadian these days. But hey... semantics.

      --
      "You can surrender without a prayer, but never really pray without surrender" - NP
    4. Re:I AM CANADIAN!! by amliebsch · · Score: 1

      (though who isn't renowned for being more intelligent than America? sorry America)

      Well, I guess it's good for "America" then that intelligence isn't measured by popular opinion, but by actual results.

      --
      If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
    5. Re:I AM CANADIAN!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's your measure of intelligence of a populace?
      I think the under-educated (often poor) population base might skew your "results"...

    6. Re:I AM CANADIAN!! by somersault · · Score: 1

      I would think a slightly better measure would be to have an international IQ test then see where you end up.

      The US has 5 times the population of the UK, but the UK has more than 2/3 of the number of Nobel Laureates (which I would assume is down to individuals rather than the entire population anyway..). That would suggest that the average intelligence per person is a lot higher in the UK, at least according to your measure? What's your point?

      --
      which is totally what she said
    7. Re:I AM CANADIAN!! by somersault · · Score: 1

      No, I'm pretty sure I'm Scottish (and not in that American 'I'm Scottish!' way, but in the way that I was born in Glasgow and currently live in Aberdeen) ;)

      --
      which is totally what she said
    8. Re:I AM CANADIAN!! by amliebsch · · Score: 1

      What's your point?

      My point was that it simply isn't relevant what intelligence level the US is "renowned" to have. We are probably not the per-capita smartest nation in the world by any measure, I will readily concede. But neither are we some barely-literate jerkwater like it's popular to portray us as, and we sure as hell stack up well against Canada of all places.

      As a larger point, I guess I have just grown tired of the US-bashing that is just outright slanderous. I can accept, and I welcome, legitimate criticism. But I grow weary of having to constantly battle vicious lies and rank bigotry. We struggle and contribute mightily to the body of the world's knowledge, culture, and security, and it often seems that our only reward is to have scorn heaped upon us for our apparent lack of perfection.

      --
      If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
    9. Re:I AM CANADIAN!! by somersault · · Score: 1

      You shouldn't take it personally really. But have you ever been to somewhere like Houston? I've not, but I've spoken to a few people from there in person and over the phone. Maybe I'm just biased because a lot of workers in the oil industy aren't the brightest of people, and besides that I know that some of the people I've met from there are genuinely clever, but also just seem to me to be 'slow' in other ways. Of course I may be being hypocritical there, because I usually regard myself as semi-intelligent, but lacking in common sense and just generally being overfocused, so I sometimes don't notice things like changes in the office or at home.

      Tourists also have a really large impact on our opinion of you. For example one of my friends used to work at Edinburgh castle. An american couple asked her if in all seriousness if an electricity pylon in the distance was the Eiffel Tower. I mean, come on...

      We *know* that there are also some very smart people in America, and some of them are actually American themselves, but that doesn't mean that we don't have a lot of evidence of some really dumb Americans! You could say the same for any country, but it's just more noticeable since there are more of you. People from places like Houston have really slow accents too, which makes them *appear* slow thinkers, even though it's not always the case. It's the appearances that matter the most though - look at George Bush. You think people voting a President like that gives the appearance that you are smart as a nation? One of the things I think is the worst is just how the audience are on TV shows. They cheer at the most inane things. I can't remember the name of that show with the boxes full of money and all the bimbos holding them, but it just seems incredibly dumb to cheer and be so jolly at what is in essence a veeeery boring concept for a game show, at least in my opinion. It holds hardly any educational value, apart from maybe slightly increasing your knowledge of statistics, and as for entertainment value, it isn't something I feel I'd make a point of watching, though I've had to wait through it before with my family and girlfriend's family. The UK version is even more dull by the way (saw the american version while I was in Canada).

      --
      which is totally what she said
    10. Re:I AM CANADIAN!! by amliebsch · · Score: 1

      I don't deny anything in your post, but I hope you realize it was just a long-winded way of saying, "these people are different from me; therefore, they are stupid." I don't blame you at all, because know-nothing bigotry is common all over the world - even in the US - but it's a bit much to expect us to take it as informed criticism, especially when delivered with a heaping serving of smug superiority.

      --
      If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
    11. Re:I AM CANADIAN!! by somersault · · Score: 1

      I said I can be stupid too. Plenty of people are different from me but smart, I'm saying that the people I see cheering on Bush and wanting the middle east to be turned into a sea of glass are stupid. There are stupid people everywhere, but Americans tend to likes to loudly proclaim their stupidity to the world rather than just have it drift by un-noticed.

      Oh, oh!! Sorry, I forgot to say I am in a very big way bigoted when it comes to your cars, and I assign the types of car a country makes to the population that buys them. American cars are large, wasteful, and can't turn corners (well I think the Z06 or whatever it is is meant to be a good car, so maybe you're improving :p ). European and Japanese cars tend to be smaller, more efficient and generally handle well. I can't help but feeling smugly superior when I know the little 130HP diesel company car I'm going to get would probably run rings round a big dumb muscle car on a suitably winding (and therefore fun) back road.

      I'm sorry if I appear to be a 'know nothing bigot', but you really should try and think from the point of view of the rest of the world sometimes, another problem I have with the attitude I perceive from a lot of Americans... 'America is bigger and better' 'we should be teaching those un-American countries a lesson', etc etc. I mean some people will genuinely mean well, and not everyone agrees with your foreign policy, but I do consider myself informed - I know that there are exceptions to my stereotyped view of america (a lot of which is even taken from /. and other forums I used to be part of, where the moderator started a whole forum on Counter-Terrorism after 9/11 and tended to ban or otherwise punish those who disagreed with him [was a CS Bots forum at Nuclearbox.com , probably still around, I was the author of TEAMbot but at the age of 18 or so I left in disgust and embarrassment at the way this guy was acting..]), probably more exceptions than I know, but I am only letting you know my opinion which is based on what I see, and is not intended to be racist or to insult every American. I guess I shouldn't criticize people if their differences to me aren't hurting anyone, so I should just try to think of those morons at gameshows, talk shows, and the ones on /. saying America needs to nuke everyone as 'different', rather than dumb..

      --
      which is totally what she said
  18. Sign me up by eviloverlordx · · Score: 1

    I'll take three, please. A different paint job, and you've got the perfect disguise for your local super hero/villain.

    --
    'Loose' is when your pants are three sizes too big. 'Lose' is when you misuse 'loose'.
  19. Pricing... by Krojack · · Score: 2


    * $1000 - $2000 each to your normal market.
    * $100,000 - $250,000 each to the government for the same outfit as above.

    That sounds about right....

  20. More Pictures by lbmouse · · Score: 2, Funny

    Here are some more pictures:
    One
    Two
    Three

  21. Picture here by A+beautiful+mind · · Score: 4, Funny

    A picture can be found here of this revolutionary new technology.

    --
    It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
    Be yourself no matter what they say
    1. Re:Picture here by lawpoop · · Score: 2, Funny

      Here are additional photos.

      --
      Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
      -- Pablo Picasso
    2. Re:Picture here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OH, the HORROR!!!

      This guy has 4 pics of himself in some sort of skin-tight suit on that page...male cameltoe and all. Some people should not share pics of themselves in skin-tight suits.

    3. Re:Picture here by collectivescott · · Score: 1

      Oh man, the crotch on that tron suit is stunning.

  22. I can't wait... by robyannetta · · Score: 1

    Finally, we get to see the real-life 'Red VS Blue.'

    --
    - Just my $0.02, take with a grain of salt, your mileage may vary.
  23. Oh, the naming process went terribly awry... by splitsevin · · Score: 3, Funny

    So, it goes over your body and protects you from harmful things but "Trojan?" Was the name "Ultimate Mega Body Condom" already taken?

    --
    The enemy of my enemy is quite possibly also my enemy. I've made a lot of enemies.
    1. Re:Oh, the naming process went terribly awry... by Thag · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's a play on the inventor's name, Troy. Trojan = "from Troy."

      At the very least, maybe they'll use them in the Halo movie.

      Jon Acheson

      --
      All opinions expressed herein are my own, and not those of my employers, who are appalled.
    2. Re:Oh, the naming process went terribly awry... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Trojan Man" were the first words that came to my mind.

    3. Re:Oh, the naming process went terribly awry... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, nothing says protected more than trojan.

      Hey, this would help all the shy buyers, buy a suit and get a years free supply of "ballons".

    4. Re:Oh, the naming process went terribly awry... by raquor · · Score: 1

      Thank you. I was beginning to think I was the only one that immediately thought: HALO!

    5. Re:Oh, the naming process went terribly awry... by Wolfbaine · · Score: 1

      Or perhaps "Trojan" in likeness to Halo's "Spartan"?

  24. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by God'sDuck · · Score: 4, Interesting

    For extended deployment, yeah, this would be a bear. But I would think for SWAT-style military deployments into occupied buildings, this would be brilliant. Send four "hardened" troops in ahead of the "soft" troops to clear the building, then let them return to base to cool off.

    I would think it would also be handy for the guy who draws the short straw to man the Humvee turret -- in which case AC lines could easily be run up through his feet.

  25. what an embarrassment for the us military by emagery · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Think about it; our military has spent disgusting amounts of our tax money on a similar project that is now in serious trouble and a source of much scandal. Meanwhile, a private citizen of a neighboring country, with an out-of-pocket budget, succeeds (i'm mildly skeptical, but still, it looks good) at making something that would be a very good start towards our own projects. I want my tax-money back!

    1. Re:what an embarrassment for the us military by halivar · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Don't be too sure. I can claim to make a Mars-lander in my backyard with old soup cans; it doesn't necessarily mean I've shown up NASA, or anything.

    2. Re:what an embarrassment for the us military by Viper+Daimao · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's still very dubious whether this thing would be useful in the military. Is it hot? Can you still move around in a firefight? Can it stop actual assault rifle bullets and not just slow elephant gun bullets?

      There's a reason many soldiers to use all of their armor, there's always tradeoffs.

      --
      "In the game of life, someone always has to lose. To me, if life were fair, that someone would always be Oklahoma." -DKR
    3. Re:what an embarrassment for the us military by x1n933k · · Score: 1
      I wouldn't say that. This guy is fine example of how great being on Unemployment can be in Canada.

      I heard he's go a wicked hydro-setup too.

      [J]

    4. Re:what an embarrassment for the us military by trongey · · Score: 1
      ...Can it stop actual assault rifle bullets and not just slow elephant gun bullets?...

      Assault Rifle: AK-47 uses 7.62x39mm ammunition which has a muzzle velocity of 710 m/s and a bullet weight of 7.97g, probably full metal jacket.
      "Elephant Gun": If we're talking about a proper elephant gun then it would fire something like the .460 Weatherby Magnum. That's a 29.16g bullet (usually pointed lead tip) with a muzzle velocity of 810 m/s.

      You have a strange definition of "slow".

      If this suit has really stopped shots from anything similar to the Weatherby load then I'm seriously impressed.
      --
      You never really know how close to the edge you can go until you fall off.
  26. Plan 9 from Outer Space by locksmith101 · · Score: 0

    well, after watching the video - it seems pretty obvious that the so-called inventor dude, managed to get his hands on the robot costume from Ed Wood's - "Plan 9 from Outer Space", or maybe "Bride of the Monster". In either case - good job...

  27. Troy's history by Ron+Harwood · · Score: 2, Interesting

    For those not in the know:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troy_Hurtubise

    He's got his own documentary (via the National Film Board) and he won an ignoble prize...

  28. After taking a look at it by antifoidulus · · Score: 1

    I can say it does seem to double as birth control. Even if you could find a willing woman, by the time you got that thing off well....the mind would be willing but the flesh soft.

    1. Re:After taking a look at it by Catbeller · · Score: 1

      Doing anything interesting technologically in your spare time is always a sure form of birth control. It's mate repellant.

    2. Re:After taking a look at it by Captain+Sarcastic · · Score: 1

      It beat the problems with older armor. Even with a wrench, an armored knight might need some help from oil in order to get his nuts off.

      --
      Strike while the irony is hot! -- The Freethinker
    3. Re:After taking a look at it by Farmer+Tim · · Score: 1

      Even with a wrench...

      Was that "r" a typo?

      --
      Blank until /. makes another boneheaded UI decision.
    4. Re:After taking a look at it by Captain+Sarcastic · · Score: 1

      <grin>Touché!

      --
      Strike while the irony is hot! -- The Freethinker
    5. Re:After taking a look at it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aight, I put on my bear suit and helmet...

  29. Is it waterproof, does it float? by gelfling · · Score: 1

    Seems like you can push it in the water and drown the guy. And oh, it's 120Deg F in Iraq in the Summer.

    1. Re:Is it waterproof, does it float? by the_greywolf · · Score: 1

      A trivial problem. Light-weight coolant suits have been made by NASA contractors for years and could be trivially adapted to this new armor.

      --
      grey wolf
      LET FORTRAN DIE!
  30. Re:While it would rock if this were the real thing by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It would also be interesting if one guy with a few thousand dollars could develop better balistic defence in his back yard than the entire US military machine (or indeed anyone else's military machine) has achieved ever. I'm guessing that if anyone takes him up on his challenge, and fires a sniper rifle at him of the kind being used in say Iraq, he's going to win a Darwin award. :-(

    --
    If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
  31. Wait a second . . . by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

    Wasn't the first version of the bear suit, ripped apart by a grizzly in like 30 seconds? If so, then I would treat this new armor like a MS product: Don't buy version 1 or wait until there is a SP.

    --
    Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  32. Re:While it would rock if this were the real thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Being a crackpot is a prerequisite for involvement with our goverment.

  33. Inventor hopes to sell armour suit to the military by mrjb · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    A much better way to save lives of 'the boys' would be to withdraw the troops already, instead of inventing stuff to make war more efficient and which (therefore) will cost more lives. No matter what side those lives are lost on, they have equal value! But why would he care, at least it will make him a few bucks, right?

    Worse than a serial killer, that's what he is.

    --
    Visit http://ringbreak.dnd.utwente.nl/~mrjb/growingbettersoftware to download your free copy of the book
  34. the name makes sense... by TheSHAD0W · · Score: 1

    ...since it's already associated with protection...

  35. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by CatWrangler · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Nah, bank robbers would love to have these. Run into a bank, take a few shots from the security guard before disarming him. You are "disguised" and if the police pull up, you have a good chance of again taking them out before they get you. A suit like this is a criminal's wet dream (if it works).

    --

    ---
    When you come to a fork in the road, take it! --Yogi Berra--

  36. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by Calinous · · Score: 3, Informative

    I want to say that the rifle (an elephant gun or not) was fired straight into the chest plate. The joints might not be so well armored (and in the 40 pounds version, they are not even be protected).

  37. Queue the crotch-clock jokes by 192939495969798999 · · Score: 4, Funny

    "Hey baby, guess what time it is?"

    --
    stuff |
    1. Re:Queue the crotch-clock jokes by dr_dank · · Score: 1

      "Hey baby, guess what time it is?"

      Woman - squinting: I can't tell, this clock only has a little hand.

      --
      Where does the school board find them and why do they keep sending them to ME?
    2. Re:Queue the crotch-clock jokes by tehcyder · · Score: 1
      What do you say to a man with no arms?

      Have you got the time on you, cock?

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  38. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by jafiwam · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Or, more reasonably for the "prison take-down" teams they use to subdue unruly prisoners.

    The first two guys are in these as they get a bit better use of limbs than holding the standard assault shield.

    Then, the weight of them is a bonus because it'll help them pin the prisoner down.

  39. Re:While it would rock if this were the real thing by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 5, Interesting
    This guy is kind of a known crackpot. Do a search on his name plus "Angel Light" or "God Light" if you don't believe me.

    Thing is, crackpots can still make brilliant discoveries. Newton was an alchemist; Tesla made all sorts of bizarre claims about death rays, "thought photography", and the like.

    Hurtubise's bear suit work seems legitimate, so to the extent that the "Trojan" is an extension of that, extreme skepticism doesn't seem called for. OTOH, the "God Light"...well, maybe dude got hit in the head too many times while testing his bear suit or something.

    --
    Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
    You cannot wash away blood with blood
  40. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by Yold · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Yea, my point didn't come across that clearly. This is an ideal piece of armor for very specialized applications. Don't know what direction the military is moving with mounted armaments, I'd think in the future we'll see joy-stick controlled metal-storm/.50 cals where the gunner is inside a vehicle with software aided remote targeting. Best defense is a good offense you know (especially with RPGs and IEDs).

    SWAT-style applications are a good potential use. Especially for urban police forces. I am skeptical of how much military use this thing would see.

  41. Quit Now or Find Another Market by mpapet · · Score: 5, Interesting

    As someone with personal experience in the area of gov't contracts, there is no way on dog's green earth this guy is going to get anything but a "don't call us we'll call you" from the Fed's.

    What most citizens fail to comprehend is the contracts for things already supplied in very large quantities to the Fed's don't change. They don't until enough moral/political outrage is generated from a given situation that "something must be done!" In the meantime, you get no straight answers from anyone anywhere on the Fed's side.

    He may have a great product, but this is where business acumen is important. The guy has two practical options from a business perspective:
    1. License the technology for pennies on the dollar to the guys already supplying armor to the DOD and then get screwed by them because they know they didn't pay the guy enough to lawyer-up for the battle to establish the obvious years later. This is a classic move in big-business. Buy innovaters then put their innovations on the shelf where they are "safe."

    2. Find other markets. One I'm sure would have some interest is the stunts industry in the U.S. If I still rode mtn bikes, I'd look into this to protect my old bones on some of my favorite descents. (The ones that haven't been lawyered away that is) Meanwhile, find a federal contractor who is powerful enough to run at whoever is providing armor now. It'll take 10 years to get a single purchase order, but maybe by the time the guy's grandchildren are running the company they'll be protecting soldiers.

    --
    http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
    1. Re:Quit Now or Find Another Market by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      ...there is no way on dog's green earth this guy is going to get anything but a "don't call us we'll call you" from the Fed's.
      On the contrary, if his product is truly as effective as he says it is, opening a retail outlet in downtown Baghdad would no doubt get him a response from the Fed that is decidedly different than the one you've predicted.

      Seriously though, given the shortage of body armor supplied by the government (many soldiers have had to buy thier own), he could do an end around the Fed contract and sell to soldiers directly.
    2. Re:Quit Now or Find Another Market by Frenchy_2001 · · Score: 1

      Or much simpler: manufacture them yourself and sell them to the highest bidder.
      Once law enforcements will come against people using them, they will either:
        - forbid their sale
        - buy them all
        - both

  42. Re:While it would rock if this were the real thing by JayBlalock · · Score: 1
    Which would be why I didn't say, "OMG DIZ D00dZ TOTALLY LYING! FRAUD CHEA7 HAHAHA!!!"

    Just that, based on past incidents of clear crackpottery, his claims should be given a bit closer inspection than would similar claims from a less impeachable source.

    --
    Bush: He's Liberal in all the wrong ways.
  43. That needs a better name by IPFreely · · Score: 1
    But they are all taken.

    Robocop
    Cybermen
    Goblin (he just needs the flying surf board.)

    --
    There is nothing so silly as other peoples traditions, and nothing so sacred as our own.
  44. #1 Threat by illegalcortex · · Score: 1

    I'm all for the Army getting onboard this project. So when the bears attack, our Army will be ready!

    Seriously, though, Colbert has GOT to have this guy on the show. It's just a natural fit. Yeah, I guess that would be TOO easy.

    1. Re:#1 Threat by amliebsch · · Score: 1

      So when the bears attack, our Army will be ready!

      There is a bear in the woods. For some people the bear is easy to see. Others don't see it at all. Some people say the bear is tame. Others say it's vicious and dangerous. Since no one can really be sure who is right, isn't it smart to be as strong as the bear? If there is a bear?
      --
      If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
    2. Re:#1 Threat by Joebert · · Score: 1
      So when the bears attack, our Army will be ready!

      Perhaps, but will they be ready, for manbearpig ?
      --
      Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
  45. Weird by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Offtopic I know, but this guy looks exactly the same as my German teacher. Rant at me if you like, but its an uncanny resemblence and I had to say it.

  46. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by toQDuj · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Tricky. Aramid polymers (such as Kevlar or Twaron) are a few times stronger per weight unit than steel. Thus a suit made of steel would be a few times heavier than its polymer counterpart. Thus I'd think there's little interest in such beasts.

    One interesting snippet though is that bulletproof vests are not knife resistant and knife-resistant vests are not bulletproof. This has to do with the type of weave.

    B.

    --
    Every experiment which ends in a big bang is a good experiment.
  47. I will resisit grabbing the "low hanging fruit"... by StressGuy · · Score: 1

    darn...that didn't come out right at all...

    --
    A goal is a dream with a deadline
  48. I wonder if he's worked the bugs out... by Tsa05 · · Score: 1

    This guy originally began designing these suits, which he'd previously called MarkI through MarkVI, in order to allow himself to have close-up encounters with bears (driven by an experience from earlier in life). Last time I saw this suit being demonstrated, there was one major problem:
    Troy spotted a bear out in the middle of an open field and began moving slowly towards it from his hiding place. So slowly, in fact, that the bear apparently got bored of sitting still and walked away. Troy's mobility was limited to about 1 step per second and a half.

    Mind you, seeing a whole army of indestructible soldiers marching along at a snail's pace with cars, bombs, etc bouncing harmlessly away from them is darn cool, but I think that's not wuite what the army wants... Notice for example (assuming the posted links to the gang beating are the same that I've seen) that Troy remains unharmed by baseball bats, but is quite unable to right himself (or prevent others from ripping the suit off, I'll bet). Sure, he can take a log battering ram on the chest no problem, but the real question is whether or not he should have to. (if you've never see the log swinging video, find it--it's hilarious).

    1. Re:I wonder if he's worked the bugs out... by Idbar · · Score: 1

      When you said bugs, I thought on killer bees or mosquitoes in the suit. Now, that would be a pain! (or a good attack, I don't believe is completely sealed and as somebody already said, what happens if they throw the guy to a swimming pool?).

  49. Re:While it would rock if this were the real thing by silentounce · · Score: 1

    Newton was an alchemist; Tesla made all sorts of bizarre claims about death rays, "thought photography", and the like.

    Those things were much more believable back in their time. Science has come a long way since then.
    --
    There are many tongues to talk, and but few heads to think. -Victor Hugo
  50. The perfect accessory by Gerocrack · · Score: 2, Funny

    This thing will go GREAT with my debilitating Batman complex! Now all I need is a fortune and an intense personal tragedy!

  51. Re:When you gotta go, you gotta go by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

    Add a catheter.

    --
    Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
  52. Mass production costs would be higher by brokeninside · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Unless I read the article wrong, the suit costs Troy about 2k to make. Mass production for the military would require several steps not counted such as sampling and testing to assure fitness for use. Some of this would be offset by efficiencies of scale but I suspect that the additional costs will be larger than any of the savings attained by moving to mass production.

    1. Re:Mass production costs would be higher by Mark+Maughan · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That's much cheaper than a hospital stay and months of rehabilitation.

    2. Re:Mass production costs would be higher by Nulagrithom · · Score: 1

      Highly unlikely. Fitting vs. mass production, and you think it'll offset the savings? Go tell that to the Chinese sweat-shops that're making all kinds of sizes for jeans right now and letting us figure out what size we need. Mass production can produce much, much more savings than you'd think.

  53. Sure, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Does it run Linux?

  54. Re:Inventor hopes to sell armour suit to the milit by silentounce · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "No matter what side those lives are lost on, they have equal value!"
    "Worse than a serial killer, that's what he is."
     
    Methinks you contradict yourself.

    --
    There are many tongues to talk, and but few heads to think. -Victor Hugo
  55. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by Lazerf4rt · · Score: 2, Informative

    From TFA:

    It covers everything but the fingertips and the major joints.

    Aren't the major joints kind of important? One baseball bat to the pelvis, and the bear-man would be pretty much fubared, no? Doesn't appear to be a real "invincible man" suit like this guy's other inventions.

    Looks pimpy, though.

  56. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by Cigamit · · Score: 2, Informative

    > I'd think in the future we'll see joy-stick controlled metal-storm/.50 cals
    > where the gunner is inside a vehicle with software aided remote targeting

    Actually, thats not the future, its been in use for a while.
    CROWS nest: Safe, armed

    My supervisor at work used one of these when he was deployed and supposedly (I may not be remembering correctly, so assume any error is mine) it can put a grenade in a window at a 1000 yards.

  57. Re:While it would rock if this were the real thing by EinZweiDrei · · Score: 4, Funny

    I say we take off, nuke the suit from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.

    --
    Perhaps life really is full of possibilities.
  58. Reminds me of only one thing... by Omicron32 · · Score: 1
    Terra Nova: Strike Force Centauri

    Stick yer Halo up your arse. This was here first! :p

    1. Re:Reminds me of only one thing... by Catbeller · · Score: 1

      Heinlein was here first. And a lot of others before him. It was called... "science fiction"... it was in magazines and books...

    2. Re:Reminds me of only one thing... by Omicron32 · · Score: 1

      Yes I know! I've read Heinlein, I was just stating for the Halo fans that there were games before that which involved powered armour!

    3. Re:Reminds me of only one thing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about Marathon?
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marathon_Trilogy

      From Bungie also, Halo's loosely based on it, and it started in 1994.

  59. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by A+beautiful+mind · · Score: 1

    Just make sure to hit the right spot on the flamethrower suit.

    --
    It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
    Be yourself no matter what they say
  60. In case of capture... by photozz · · Score: 1

    Type in your command code and detonate the suit in a low yield thermonuclear explosion.

    --


    Dirty Pirate Hooker
  61. Already been done... by quixoticsycophant · · Score: 2, Funny

    Wasn't this technology perfected ten years ago?

  62. What happens... by Landshark17 · · Score: 2, Funny

    How hard is it to take off if you've got to drain the lizard?

    --
    This sig is false.
    1. Re:What happens... by smoker2 · · Score: 1

      That's what powers the clock.

    2. Re:What happens... by SpinyNorman · · Score: 1

      I believe the term you're looking for is "siphon the python".

    3. Re:What happens... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > I believe the term you're looking for is "siphon the python".

      I'm not sure about that. That would involve someone sucking it first... and this is slashdot...

  63. Re:While it would rock if this were the real thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This guy sounds just like L Ron Hubbard: He found the cure for cancer, too.

    http://www.lronhubbard.org/

  64. Problem by maroberts · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The whole suit comes in at 18 kilograms. It covers everything but the fingertips and the major joints, and could be mass-produced for about $2,000, Hurtubise says.

    IIRC, aiming for the joints was a common tactic in days of yore, when knights wore similar protection systems..... once you have the guy crippled and on the floor, a stab to an artery in the groin area would see him off.

    I thought some armour protected the joints too, so I suggest he look at 14th to 16th century solutions to a 21st century problem.

    --

    Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
    Karma: Chameleon

    1. Re:Problem by dave420 · · Score: 1

      The traditional medieval suits of armour protected the joints. Take a peek here.

    2. Re:Problem by JediLow · · Score: 1

      Its a lot different in modern combat - you're trained to aim for the chest above anything else.

    3. Re:Problem by Minwee · · Score: 1

      And just hope that he doesn't run into any bears or trucks who are trained in 14th century combat techniques.

    4. Re:Problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The joints on any suit used to protect the military would have to protect the joints even from air. If the military actually put a suit like this into wide use the switch to gas assaults would be swift and if they were protected from gas then the next switch we might not even want to think about. Give the suits to both sides and we go back to wrestling.

    5. Re:Problem by sco08y · · Score: 1

      IIRC, aiming for the joints was a common tactic in days of yore, when knights wore similar protection systems..... once you have the guy crippled and on the floor, a stab to an artery in the groin area would see him off.

      Yes, but note that swords are a little more close up and personal than bullets. It's hard to pick out someone's joints when they're 50 meters away.

  65. Another Sign of the Times by AttillaTheNun · · Score: 4, Funny
    "to stave off bullets, explosives, knives and clubs"

    These days, even the bears are packing.

    1. Re:Another Sign of the Times by x2A · · Score: 1

      this is canada we're talking about

      --
      The revolution will not be televised... but it will have a page on Wikipedia
  66. Yeah.. but even Newton was Nuts by HighOrbit · · Score: 1

    Just because he has some _other_ strange ideas, doesn't exclude the possibility that he could have brilliant insights in this area. Issac Newton dabbled in Alchemy, the Occult, and fringe theology far more often than he did with physics or math. Perhaps the ability to think differently (and frequently wrongly) leads to the occasional brilliant insight that would never occur to others.

  67. Trojan or Clock by ThePopeLayton · · Score: 1

    So the suit is a trojan? Then why is the thing between the legs called a clock if the suit is a trojan?

  68. Slightly incredulous by kjones692 · · Score: 3, Insightful
    I want to believe that this works, and could be mass-produced for $2,000. And I've seen the stuff about the Grizzly Suit. But "going out and making some videos" does not necessarily equate with "withstanding rigorous testing", and as far as I can tell, he hasn't done either with this new suit. I was also a little suspicious when I read this:

    The whole suit -- which draws design inspiration from Star Wars, RoboCop, Batman and video games --


    In general, stuff in video games is designed to look cool, rather than to be functional. I mean, look at MechWarrior for example. Why would you ever make a combat robot that walks? All you have to do is destroy one of its legs, or, hell, trip it up with a cable. (Of course, there's solid precedent for this.) I'm not saying that this is impossible, but when people announce technologies like this to the media before they undergo substantial testing, it usually means that they need venture capital. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and let's not even go into the Angel Light and God Light (which can "make blind men see and lame men walk").
    --

    Love the Third Amendment?
    1. Re:Slightly incredulous by Alistar · · Score: 1

      I am entirely sure about this, but walking capable humans get around a lot better than our wheeled counterparts. Varying and drastic terrain is easier for a pair of legs than a some wheels or treads.

      Im sure the technology has to go a lot further, but a robotic armor a la mechwarrior or Gundam would have its place. Variable-movement limbs are very handy.

    2. Re:Slightly incredulous by SnowNinja · · Score: 1

      So, how exactly is drawing inspiration from movies and video games less credible than TV series. Cellphones, ipods and Palm Pilots all drew heavy inspiration from Star Trek.

    3. Re:Slightly incredulous by Cervantes · · Score: 1

      Why would you ever make a combat robot that walks? All you have to do is destroy one of its legs, or, hell, trip it up with a cable. Yeah, you're right man. And what is up with "treads"? Seriously, all you have to do is break one link in a tread, or nail one of those juicy, open wheels, and the entire thing is disabled. And really, what kind of an "armoured vehicle" can't even go into a steep ditch? Heck, you can stop it with a dinky little concrete barrier that you or I could step over! How lame is that?

      Seriously, each design has pluses and minuses. It's just a matter of how it's implemented and what countermeasures come up.
      --
      If I knew the wedgies I gave you back in 6th grade would have resulted in this . . . I might have taken a moments pause.
    4. Re:Slightly incredulous by DMNT · · Score: 1
      want to believe that this works, and could be mass-produced for $2,000. And I've seen the stuff about the Grizzly Suit. But "going out and making some videos" does not necessarily equate with "withstanding rigorous testing", and as far as I can tell, he hasn't done either with this new suit.
      Time to call in the Mythbusters! I'd like to see them get a piece of that equipment. Or I can do it myself. I bet I could get FDF interested to do the tests.
      --
      ?SYNTAX ERROR
    5. Re:Slightly incredulous by kjones692 · · Score: 1

      Point well taken. Perhaps the real problem is Legs + High Center Of Mass. Legs would work much better for robots if they were multitudinous, and the mass of the chassis was spread out and close to the ground, which I believe has been shown in some prototypes built at MIT.

      --

      Love the Third Amendment?
    6. Re:Slightly incredulous by Cervantes · · Score: 1

      I'll agree, the high centre of mass could be an issue. I can visualize designs that would overcome that, but not without tradeoffs (like anything).

      The MIT designs were darn snazzy though. :) Much more practical than a standard bipedal idea.

      --
      If I knew the wedgies I gave you back in 6th grade would have resulted in this . . . I might have taken a moments pause.
  69. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by Lazerf4rt · · Score: 4, Funny

    Only problem is, they'd have to rob a bank to afford one.

  70. It still would be nice by Moraelin · · Score: 4, Informative
    I want to say that the rifle (an elephant gun or not) was fired straight into the chest plate. The joints might not be so well armored (and in the 40 pounds version, they are not even be protected).


    Even then it would still work better than most stuff that humans ever used as body armour. If you look back into history, humans have been quite happy with a lot less before.

    Humans settled for a chain byrnie (basically, inaccurately: t-shirt) for a long time, until basically everyone was already trained to slash at the legs. Then they basically just made it longer. When bodkin tips and primitive firearms made maille useless, people just came up with a thin plate armour, but even that wasn't as invulnerable as you'd think. Then eventually guns got more and more powerful and all the weight was concentrated in a super-thick breastplate and helmet... at the price of leaving the arms and legs completely unprotected again.

    (As a side-note, that's one of the factors that confuses people about medieval armours. They see a late musket era breastplate that weighs a lot, and get ideas like, "man, the whole suit must have weighed 100 kilos." In fact, at that point the breastplate and the helmet were the whole suit.)

    At no point was the armour supposed to make someone 100% invulnerable. Something like a lance during a cavalry charge was nigh impossible to reliably stop, because with an armoured man and a destrier horse behind it, that was a helluva lot of energy and momentum pushing that tip. So armour never really tried to be invulnerable to that. Estocs could do a pretty good job of penetrating a knight's armour, and so could warhammers (think a thin sharp spike perpendicular to the handle, much like a pickaxe, not the massive hammers portrayed in video games), and so could back-spikes on axes, spiked maces/morningstars and flails. Even if it didn't penetrate, a mace or flail hit could crush articulations.

    And in the age of chain armour, it was even more funny. A good hard hit with a straight sword could easily crush tissue and break bones even if it didn't penetrate the mesh of iron loops. Padding helped a bit, but only so much.

    Basically the purpose of armour in all ages wasn't to make you invulnerable, but to give you better odds. If on the average you could hope for 1-2 disabling blows deflected by armour before one finally got you, that was advantage enough. Anything more than that that would have been impractically heavy and ultra-expensive. The weight was especially a factor, as they actually had to be able to fight in those suits.

    So basically what I'm saying is that if this suit's only vulnerability are the joints, well, then that's already head and shoulders over what has been considered good armour before.
    --
    A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
    1. Re:It still would be nice by zyl0x · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Also, one other point, a lance is much different than a bullet. The lance has constant force behind it (the horse and rider) as opposed to a bullet, which only has the energy for one push. As such, a lance is much harder to stop than a bullet.

      --
      Blerg.
    2. Re:It still would be nice by Moraelin · · Score: 1

      It's not entirely constant, because in a hard enough impact the wooden shaft of the lance would break. (And that already gives an idea of the forces involved: those were thick wooden rods.) See the non-lethal tournament rules where they kept the score in broken lances. The guy whose lance broke had scored a direct hit, so whoever broke more lances won.

      Still, you do have a point there. For a while that tip would indeed get extra push.

      On yet another hand, though, the main point was that people considered armour useful even though they knew of various ways to pierce it. Whether it was because of different forces, is an interesting physics consideration, but they probably didn't think that much about it back then :)

      --
      A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
    3. Re:It still would be nice by FhnuZoag · · Score: 1

      Maybe, if this armour becomes prevalent, we should consider reintroducing cavalry.

    4. Re:It still would be nice by tinkerghost · · Score: 1
      and so could warhammers (think a thin sharp spike perpendicular to the handle, much like a pickaxe, not the massive hammers portrayed in video games),
      That would be a military pick. The massive hammers you see in videogames are a seperate weapon - often based on the Norse descriptions of Moljinar (appologies if that's misspelled) Thor's hammer. Military hammers have a different purpose, crushing skulls inside the armor instead of piercing them is the main one.
      That said, yes it's very common for weapons to have multiple surfaces - hammer 1 side, pick the other. Pole arm designs are a nightmare to catalog simply due to the wide variety of combinations people put together. Axe, Hammer, Spear, Hook, and Blade were all designs used in creating the business end of polearms - often 3 at a time. (Blade being a slightly curved heavy slashing blade as opposed to the chopping axe blade).
    5. Re:It still would be nice by rajanala83 · · Score: 1

      wikipedia says the chinese even had paper armour btw

    6. Re:It still would be nice by q-the-impaler · · Score: 1

      Another point is how does this prevent internal organs, such as your brain, from hitting bone and bruising. Answer is: It can't. Taking a hit by a car is all fine and well for your bones, but it won't protect the damage from the jarring of your organs. He shouldn't market it with taking a hit from a moving car, but stick to the more likely scenarios that you can really escape without injury.

      Kudos to the guy for taking this so far on his own, but keep some reality in it.

      --
      Sierra Tango Foxtrot Uniform
    7. Re:It still would be nice by Gryffin · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Then eventually guns got more and more powerful and all the weight was concentrated in a super-thick breastplate and helmet... at the price of leaving the arms and legs completely unprotected again.

      Actually, it wasn't until the advent of smokeless powder that firearms really got the upper hand.

      I've seen several (U.S.) Civil War-era breastplates in museum collections. They weren't common, hardly rare; they aren't seen in period photos, because they were worn under the uniform.

      Most I've seen had a dent or two from bullets that faile to penetrate; apparently even those big, fat .69 caliber Minie balls weren't powerful enough to get through a well-made breastplate.

      I can recall seeing only one breastplate that failed: the officer who wore it took a direct hit from a 3" cannon at a range of just a few feet, while storming an artillery emplacement. I don't think it's unreasonable for such armor to fail in that circumstance!

      --
      Learn from the mistakes of others. You won't live long enough to make them all yourself.
    8. Re:It still would be nice by PresidentEnder · · Score: 1

      While it is possible to break a battle lance the same way as a tourney lance, they are really two different things: a tourney lance was designed to break, because you didn't want to kill the other fellow (who might very well be riding next to you in a real battle).

      --
      I used to carry a bottle of whiskey for snake bite. And two snakes. -Nefarious Wheel
    9. Re:It still would be nice by Harmonious+Botch · · Score: 1

      They shoot horses, don't they?

    10. Re:It still would be nice by radtea · · Score: 1

      Actually, it wasn't until the advent of smokeless powder that firearms really got the upper hand.

      I've seen several (U.S.) Civil War-era breastplates in museum collections.


      There may have been some variation over time as to which had the upper hand. I've seen an English civil war era (cica 1640) breastplate with a nice round hole in it over the heart. Looked like 45 calibre ball or thereabouts. But that armour was probably made of very low-grade steel compared to the relatively modern steel available during the American civil war 200 years later.

      We live in the Exotic Materials Age, and it is quite possible that for a time armour will once again give significant protection against most weapons. The ascendency of firearms over armour is not quite so monotonic as it is often portrayed.

      --
      Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
    11. Re:It still would be nice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obviously we put the horses in exoskeleton armour too.

    12. Re:It still would be nice by Moraelin · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the correction, it is very much appreciated.

      Still, I don't know of any historical one-hander weapon that resembled the massive 5-10 pound sledgehammers portrayed in video games. And some would realistically weigh a lot more, judging by the hideously oversized metal head. Iron is quite heavy. I've seen the blunt side of warhammers (ok, picks), for example, but it's still a relatively small surface and a relatively lightweight weapon. Even two-handed swords rarely weighed more than 5 pounds and some weighed as little as 3. I've tried swinging a 5 pound smith's hammer as a one-handed weapon, and while it would be very much possible, it's entirely too unwieldy and slow as a weapon IMHO. So I really have trouble imagining that someone would actually go into battle swinging a 10 pound sledgehammer in one hand.

      Mjolnir is a mythological weapon, same as Zeus wielding lightning as a spear, or Odin riding an 8-legged horse. It's supposed to show off how powerful those gods are, compared to you puny mortals. Mjolnir is described as killing giants or indeed crushing whole mountains with one blow, which is a testament not only to how great (and massive) the hammer was, but also how awesomely strong was the god wielding it. I wouldn't exactly take it as representative of an actual weapon wielded by mere mortal soldiers.

      I'm sure you know these things better than I do, so please don't take it as a lecture. All I'm trying to say is why I find the hammers in video games to be, well, unrealistic.

      --
      A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
    13. Re:It still would be nice by Abreu · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but that one was multiple layers of paper and glue and, while still not very good, it was cheap and better at protecting a footsoldier than what you imagine.

      --
      No sig for the moment.
    14. Re:It still would be nice by tinkerghost · · Score: 1
      I'm sure you know these things better than I do, so please don't take it as a lecture. All I'm trying to say is why I find the hammers in video games to be, well, unrealistic.
      Hell yes they are unrealistic - who want's the realism of a warhammer looking like a 2# ball peen hammer? It's my avatar - and by gods it's going to have something that looks like it belongs in the hand of a god, not Bubba the bodyshop cog.
      As for trying to swing a 5# smith hammer - the weight is wrong - a metal shaft with pommel will drop the CM back closer to your hand & give you more control - or you use it more like an axe & keep the head moving in circles & figure 8's - using momentum for force & just redirecting it --- check out 'Conquest' - I think it's from Discovery channel - they cover a lot of the medieval weapons --- or check out the SCA for some links to dissertations on the weaponry.
      Also, some of the criteria for Knighthood were insane - at one point French Knights were required to Scale 2 walls arms length appart in full armor. Add to that that the Broadsword frequently weighed in at 5-10#, a Welsh longbow has 100#+ pull weight, and knights did frequently walk to the battlefield so that their horse was fresh for the battle - and you get that these grunts were in truely awesome physical condition.
    15. Re:It still would be nice by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      Still, I don't know of any historical one-hander weapon that resembled the massive 5-10 pound sledgehammers portrayed in video games. And some would realistically weigh a lot more, judging by the hideously oversized metal head. Iron is quite heavy. I've seen the blunt side of warhammers (ok, picks), for example, but it's still a relatively small surface and a relatively lightweight weapon.

      Perhaps I can clarify a few things. I read way too much about historical weaponry as a child. The small military hammers you describe were usually paired with a pick on the back end for practical reasons of the type of warfare they were used in. They were designed to be used primarily from horseback or as part of a defensive line. The pick was for armored foes with war hats and the hammer was for everyone else (the peasants and conscripts). The hammer was not designed to be used to crush armor particularly that I have ever heard of, but to crush unarmored skulls without as much risk of getting stuck.

      There were some weapons more similar to the "fantasy" war-hammers described. They were actually large wooden hammers, with metal plates on the end with some rare examples using smaller stone heads. Such weapons amongst in Chinese, mediterranean, and northern European cultures are thought to derived from building implements.

      The closest thing to classic depictions of Mjölnir I've seen were variants of renaissance era "swordbreaker" hammers used in the off hand to break or bend the light bladed dueling swords of the time.

    16. Re:It still would be nice by gstoddart · · Score: 1
      I can recall seeing only one breastplate that failed: the officer who wore it took a direct hit from a 3" cannon at a range of just a few feet, while storming an artillery emplacement. I don't think it's unreasonable for such armor to fail in that circumstance!

      You, sir, have a shocking talent for understanement. =)

      A 3" canon from a few feet --- I would fully expect that to penetrate any man portable armour. Or, at the very least, relocate the wearer to a different spot than they had just been occupying. :-P

      Cheers
      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    17. Re:It still would be nice by ozbird · · Score: 1

      The armour used by the Kelly Gang around 1880 is a good example. Made from ploughshares, it weighed around 97 pounds (44kg). It stopped police bullets, but movement was restricted; that said, like most armour the intimidation factor played a big part - if you take a shot or two and they bounce off, legging it seems a really good idea under return fire. In 1880, they were eventually taken down by the obvious (in hindsight) - bullets fired at the legs.

      This new slimmed down suit may be more practical, but is it intimidating? I'm not sure - it's vaguely comical. A bigger, heavier, Robocop/Cylon suit may be better overall: "You have five seconds to comply."

    18. Re:It still would be nice by BlueStraggler · · Score: 1

      Actually, they (both armourers and buyers) thought about it quite a bit. The armourer's proof was a mark on a suit of armour (typically the breastplate, but also often the helmet) that certified it for the most dangerous weapons of the day. It was no pretty stamp, either, but a full-on bullet impact, fired from short range. Every suit of a certain quality was individually proofed in this way to show that it could take a bullet before anyone was asked to pay for it. Fancy suits with lots of metalwork and engraving would work these proof marks into fancy rosettes and other designs, so they can be tricky to spot on many museum suits. Most armour images on the web are SCA-type replicas, and they do not take their armour as seriously, so you won't see many proof marks there. This guy, however, clearly does take his armour seriously - I've seen the video of him getting creamed by a pick-up truck. Holy crap. I have no doubt he's fired many guns at his prototypes.

      As guns became more powerful, the breastplates became heavier to withstand the armourer's proof without bursting; in time they had to make the back plate lighter in order to keep the breastplate heavy enough to take a musket ball. Eventually, however, they gave up trying to keep the breastplate fully-gun-proof. Then they lightened up the breastplate to the point where it would not stop a short-range shot; however, it would still protect against the spent bullets that were flying around a battlefield, and which were the cause of many casualties.

    19. Re:It still would be nice by Bob+Uhl · · Score: 1
      Add to that that the Broadsword frequently weighed in at 5-10#

      Do you have a source for that statement? According to What Did Historical Swords Weigh?, the average weight of normal swords was between 2 1/2 and 3 1/2 pounds, and even the massive examples were only about 4 1/2 pounds. Moreover, I hardly think that carrying 10 pounds of weapon would make qualify one for 'truly awesome physical condition.'

      Regarding your assertion that French knights has to scale two walls arms' length apart, do you have any source for that? It wouldn't surprise me if they were able to (armour's only about 70 pounds, and evenly distributed across the body isn't a great inconvenience to movement), but the notion of national standards for knighthood in the mediaeval period sounds extremely iffy to me. If anything, it sounds like the sort of thing one might hear at an SCA event--possibly based on some true story (e.g. a knight climbing a couple of walls to show off), heard third- or fourth-hand. I'm in the SCA, and enjoy it; there are a lot of folks therein who really know their stuff--and rather more who don't.

    20. Re:It still would be nice by Calinous · · Score: 1

      The horses had their own armour. While heavy steel armour for horses was usually used only for ceremonial/tournament purposes, horses were protected somewhat with other means (not that it would protect them from the arrow of a longbow or the bolt from a crossbow)

    21. Re:It still would be nice by Calinous · · Score: 1

      Maybe they use inflatable hammers

    22. Re:It still would be nice by Calinous · · Score: 1

      A 3" canonball would relocate just a part of the wearer to a different spot

    23. Re:It still would be nice by Calinous · · Score: 1

      The longbows recovered from Mary Rose had a pull strength in the 90-100 pounds range. However, identical replicas made now have the pull strength in the 150+ lbs.
            "Considerable practice was required to produce the swift and effective combat fire required. Skeletons of longbow archers are recognizably deformed, with enlarged left arms, and often bone spurs on left wrists, left shoulders and right fingers."

    24. Re:It still would be nice by tinkerghost · · Score: 1

      The knight quote is from a display at one of the meuseums in MA (Worcester Armory IIRC)- durring one of it's displays of medieval armor. I cannot quote their source, and it may have been related only to the province to which the armor was tied.
      Carrying 10# of metal doesn't make you in great shape - being able to swing it accurately for an extended period of time does. I will however stand corrected on the weight issue - research instead of relying on my decafinated brain does indicate weights substantially lower than I had recalled.

    25. Re:It still would be nice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Heh, they're going to say something similar when the "internet generation" dies. Ah, porn addiction.

      Skeletons of chronic masturbators are recognizably deformed, with enlarged right arms, and often bone spurs on right wrists, right shoulders and right fingers."

  71. Real Picture or Fake Science by ThePopeLayton · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I have looked at all of the different news sites and they all have the same picture. I know that it is common for a single set of pictures to be released to the press so the fact that all the sites have a picture doesn't concern me, rather it's that the picture is so low quality.

    Today a consumer can easily buy a 8 MP camera so there is no reason that this picture shouldn't be much better quality, also the pixelation, to me at least, screams photoshop.

    After reading about all the crack pot ideas this guy has come up with in the past ("God Light", "Angel Light", "1313 paste") why does everybody immediately believe this guy is telling the truth? I personally don't. First the suit looks TOO much like Halo, second whats up with that huge clock or cock?, third whats up with all the different contours on the suit (if this thing was really body armor would it need to be contoured like it had a million gadget built into it, which according to the article it doesn't?).

    So I personally think this whole thing is a fake (much to my chagrin). I would love to hear why you think different.

    1. Re:Real Picture or Fake Science by Dr.+Spork · · Score: 1

      Good point. Good post. I suspect the same thing, though I suspect it's about 40% real. I do think the guy is serious about getting into the suit and taking a bullet, but the picture is almost certainly embellished - and that should make us suspicious.

    2. Re:Real Picture or Fake Science by ionizer · · Score: 1

      perhaps the Hamilton Spectator photographer only released those two pics at a low resolution. Maybe to see a higher res version one would need to contatct said photographer directly. No need for a photoshop or fraud conspiracy.

    3. Re:Real Picture or Fake Science by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here's a link to Discovery Channel video that shows a product based on his "1313" paste, a lightweight blast pad, withstanding dynamite, sniper rifles, and shotguns.

      http://www.exn.ca/dailyplanet/view.asp?date=9/15/2 004#
      (click the "Fire Jeep" video)

      I don't think it would be honest to call this one, at least, a crackpot invention. This is enough to convince me that the stuff works as advertised. There's a segment of the clip showing an experiment where he wears a thin mask of his "fire paste" over his face, and has a guy blowtorch the other side.

      No mention of "angel light" or "god light", however.

  72. Interesting concept by Charcharodon · · Score: 1
    From a developement standpoint it is somewhat interesting what he is doing.

    Depending on the mission a solider has a limited amount of weight he can carry. 40lbs for armor is alot for the guy humping it out in the mountains, but not so bad for the guy riding in a vehicle or standing at the gate who doesn't have to carry his own ammo, water, food, and pack.

    Of course the military is already working on that too from making existing things lighter, to robotic pack-mules, and my personal favorite powered exoskeletons. The last have been getting steadily better every year. They're slow and noisy but they now can carry themselves plus another 150lbs (300lbs total) at a walking pace. Take that guy's idea add another 110 lbs of armor, weapon, ammo, and fuel and you'll have a good idea of what they are like.

  73. Re:While it would rock if this were the real thing by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 4, Informative

    Ok, he's videotaped himself, IN THE SUIT, being hit by a truck, wailed on by baseball bats, etc. And you're arguing that the suit must not exist because he also believes in some other nutcase idea?

    Look, the suit exists. There's documentary evidence. (Literally; a documentary was made about his efforts to use the suit to observe hibernating bears, which is what it was originally designed for.) Regardless of what else he believes, this is definitely a product that can be useful to the military.

  74. Choice of name by jiawen · · Score: 1

    Would that be the condom or the horse?

    1. Re:Choice of name by k3vlar · · Score: 1

      Suprisingly enough, my guess would be the condom. The Trojan Horse was more of a secret way in, and would have offered little in the way of protection.

      --
      Unlike porn, which yada yada rimshot hey-ooh!
  75. all I can say is.... by Grinin · · Score: 1

    I WANT ONE!

  76. Re:While it would rock if this were the real thing by Catbeller · · Score: 1

    Yet somehow no one seems to mention ElRon's cures in major media... and such trepidation on editors' parts leads to Beckham and his wife being recruited, as latest rumor seems to have it. If people actually knew about what ElRon actually claimed to have done, his "religion" would be classified with Nigerian royality scams.

    Keep spreading the word of Xenu (xenu.net).

    BACK on topic, sorry, this guy is doing what we SF and comics geeks always wanted to do as kids: build our superhero suit. I spent years redoing designs, and even today I perk up on hearing about a new impact or slash resistant fabric.

    From what I can see, he's swiped (joke) my idea of plating the face, and running video to a screen in front of the eyes from a camera. I see only one camera. Bad idea. Use two, and two small hirez screens in front of the eyes -- this gives some stereoscopic perception. 2D viewing not good when you are fighting for your life or trying to target something. Alternatively, some sort of prism arangement could work, and be proof against risk of electronic breakdown that a camera system entails. A man with a plated face can take a shot from an Uzi to the nose. Yeah, they can shoot your camera, but the camera would be where your face is, so you're ahead by points by being alive. And you can always jack in a spare camera into a USB port, and then won't they be sorry for blasting you in the punum.

    If you can make the armor light enough, you can move at a normal rate of speed, without power enhancement.

    Sad part is, in ten years we won't have these suits. The Homeland Security Enforcement Elite will. So much for the second amendment and the theoretical right to revolt by handgun. Guns ain't worth much if they snicker when you shoot them.

  77. YES, AND ENSLAVE US ALL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why do inventors invariably whore themselves out for money and go straight to the government and military with the most deadliest of inventions. This is why the government fights and kills to protect its monopoly on printing money.

    Ever since the Trinity project and the development of the nuclear bomb, inventors and scientists really disgust me for their libertine lack of morals and total oblviousness to the ramifications of what they are doing. Science for the sake of science... but does that really apply when you are creating more clever ways to give the corrupt police state more devastating ways kill or enslave the population.

    1. Re:YES, AND ENSLAVE US ALL by Ced_Ex · · Score: 1

      How do you figure that this invention is deadly? It's building a device meant to protect people.

      --
      Live forever, or die trying.
    2. Re:YES, AND ENSLAVE US ALL by Nulagrithom · · Score: 1

      Does that really apply when you've gone bankrupt? You gotta pay the bills somehow, and the government has the deepest pocket books. And I somehow think that if he DIDN'T sell it to the government they'd rip it from his hands in some legal battle anyway, that is if some other private contractor were actually interested enough to do something about his design, which I doubt. Otherwise he's simply thrown all his money away on a prototype suit for no reasonable use, and now he can't eat.

    3. Re:YES, AND ENSLAVE US ALL by capnchicken · · Score: 1

      I share your sentiment, but as long as it's legal for citizens to own body armor (Connecticut and New York :( ) then I see no problem with better armor, just make it available to the populace.

      --
      A libertarian shat on my carpet once. Claimed the free market would sort it out. -Ford Prefect(8777)
    4. Re:YES, AND ENSLAVE US ALL by Voltageaav · · Score: 1

      Because in the wrong hands, it would give people a significant advantage. It's happened before. http://www.cnn.com/US/9702/28/shootout.update/ 10 policemen where shot before they were able to take down 2 robbers with body armor. In this case, the officers had to go to a nearby gun store to get sufficent firepower to take the guys down and it took over 200 officers. Let me point out that the body armor these guys were using dosn't come close to what this guy has developed.

      --
      Someone save me from this sanity.
    5. Re:YES, AND ENSLAVE US ALL by Ced_Ex · · Score: 1

      You can't use that arguement "Because in the wrong hands...", only because it could apply to just about everything! In the wrong hands, a kitchen knife... In the wrong hands, a baseball bat... The list goes on...

      Look, take the grenade for instance. It's invented, it's out there, and yet, we have no grenade crimes. If they can control the distribution of grenades, they can do the same for this body armour.

      --
      Live forever, or die trying.
    6. Re:YES, AND ENSLAVE US ALL by Voltageaav · · Score: 1

      The parent asked "How could this be dangerous?". I made the point that when used by criminals, it gives a SIGNIFICANT advantage to them over normal police forces. In combat, any sort of advantage is dangerous. The enemy holding higher terrain could prove dangerous to people who have to attack them there. A kitchen knife, baseball bat, and yes, even a gernade wouldn't give criminals nearly as much of an advantage over police as this armor would.

      --
      Someone save me from this sanity.
    7. Re:YES, AND ENSLAVE US ALL by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      This may sound odd, but periods of true oppression usually come when a section of the population is able to effectivly protect itself from the attacks of another.

      There's a reason why guns have been known as the 'great equalizer'. With it, it doesn't matter as much whether you're a fit 19 year old man or a 90 year old grandmother. Both have much more even chances against each other if they're armed with guns than bare handed.

      With no real effective defense, tyrants tend to die too fast to go far. You still need a large force of bodyguards, who may always stage a ku.

      Effective personal armor increases the effeciveness of professional forces(such as nobles) more than non-professional militia forces. Thus tyrants can push more without having to worry as much about the consequences.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    8. Re:YES, AND ENSLAVE US ALL by databeast · · Score: 1

      try taking a look at the truth behind the hollywood shootout a little more

      it took the cops so damn long to take those guys down because honestly, most of them had learned their shooting skills from the same school of thought that makes people think shooting with the gun sideways is effective..

      I can take you on naked as the day I was born and walk away from it if you cant hit the side of a barn at ten feet.

      in the end they just went for accuracy-though-volume. real professional.

    9. Re:YES, AND ENSLAVE US ALL by feargal · · Score: 1

      coup, not ku.

      --
      "A goldfish was his muse, eternally amused"
  78. A lot of Batman references but... by StressGuy · · Score: 1

    Isn't this more of an Iron Man thing?...or does it need to fly first?

    --
    A goal is a dream with a deadline
  79. you joke but.. by SuperBanana · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The article mentions "high powered weapons", such as an elephant gun. Only problem is- an elephant gun isn't "high powered" in military terms. It's a damn big bullet, but big bullets have low velocities and are horrible at piercing armor because they spread their impact energy across a wide area.

    An AK47 is a very high powered assault rifle (well over 2,000fps) and the favorite weapon of Iraqi guerrillas. Standard 7.62mm bullets (no idea if that's what the guerrillas are using) reportedly goes through more than a quarter inch of steel at close range. The armor piercing rounds will slice through a titanium+kevlar jacket like butter; it's doubtful this guy's suit could fare any better. I'm guessing Iraqi guerrillas don't have many AP bullets, but I bet they could find some if they needed to.

    How about a 30-06? Small round, and extremely high velocity (over 2,500 fps.) AP rounds were used in WW2 against "lightly armored" targets (jeeps and such.)

    BMG .50 cal? Aka the gun that marines use to punch holes in just about everything short of armored personnel carriers. And yes, there are a number of non-US rifles similar in purpose to the .50 BMG that Iraqi guerrillas could get their hands on. Getting hit by a .50 BMG in the head would probably give you a severe concussion or kill you just from the physical energy of the round alone. To stop said bullet, your helmet would probably have to weigh more than the entire suit...

    1. Re:you joke but.. by amper · · Score: 1

      Getting hit by a .50 BMG in the head would probably give you a severe concussion or kill you just from the physical energy of the round alone.

      Yes, if I threw it at you as hard as I could.

      If I *shot* you in the head with a .50BMG, your head would more than likely be vaporized, or at the very least completely and instantly disintegrated.

      To stop said bullet, your helmet would probably have to weigh more than the entire suit...

      True, but to stop said bullet, your helmet would need to be constructed of the sort of armor that we tend to put on main battle tanks, and even than would be iffy in some cases.

    2. Re:you joke but.. by silentounce · · Score: 1

      You may have read gp, but you did not comprehend it. What he was saying was that even if the helmet could stop the round from penetrating, "[it] would probably give you a severe concussion or kill you just from the physical energy of the round alone." Granted, he didn't spell it out exactly for you. He assumed that people would be able to deduce what he meant. I've fired a fifty cal. They'll put softball size holes in vehicles from several hundred yards away. And yes, I know the round isn't the size of a softball, it's the force that kills ya.

      --
      There are many tongues to talk, and but few heads to think. -Victor Hugo
    3. Re:you joke but.. by TubeSteak · · Score: 2, Interesting
      The article mentions "high powered weapons", such as an elephant gun. Only problem is- an elephant gun isn't "high powered" in military terms. It's a damn big bullet, but big bullets have low velocities and are horrible at piercing armor because they spread their impact energy across a wide area.
      The .306 & 7.62mm rounds have muzzle velocities around 2700~2800 fps.

      Elephant guns use calibers ranging from .357 to .70 and have muzzle velocities around 1600~2000 fps, using black powder or nitrocellulose/nitroglycerin and still have more energy than those two rounds you cite.

      The larger elephant gun rounds have 5,000~9,000 ft/lbs of energy in them.
      How is that not high powered?
      Or do you just mean "not fast"

      P.S. The definition of "armor piercing" involves the composition of the bullet and not its ability to pierce armor.
      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    4. Re:you joke but.. by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      If I *shot* you in the head with a .50BMG, your head would more than likely be vaporized, or at the very least completely and instantly disintegrated.

      Nah, heads are too soft. The average .50BMG round would just put a hole through it. If it was sufficiently armored (as I believe the previous poster was implying) you could stop such a round, but the armor would probably be too heavy for you to walk in and the force transferred to the helmet would likely kill you anyway.

      True, but to stop said bullet, your helmet would need to be constructed of the sort of armor that we tend to put on main battle tanks, and even than would be iffy in some cases.

      A couple of ceramic plates would probably manage just fine, no need to go beyond that. A couple inches of steel works too, at least in one case I saw.

      P.S. shooting a gallon sized can of beans with a .50BMG is pretty amusing. I wouldn't say "vaporize" but certainly "destroy" applies.

    5. Re:you joke but.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Well it's complicated. I'm an ex-Marine and the M-16 rounds we were issued were completely different from civilian rounds. For instance:

      * The powder they used was composed of silvery disks, not black powder grains. Each disk was about 1/32 of an inch wide, and flat. Someone told me once that they contain some magnesium to help the powder burn more consistently, but I can't verify that.

      * The projectile itself was made of steel, with a thin core drilled through it and filled with lead (for weight). It was jacketed with copper.

      * The muzzle velocity, according to our manuals, was 2800 feet per second. The chamber pressure was over 52,000 psi.

      We were told that our modern M-16s would fire straight through a car. They went through people without even slowing down. This was apparently a reaction to some of the older, viet-nam era ammo being underpowered, deflected by brush, etc. HOWEVER, we were ALSO told that the body armor issued to Force Recons (our friends in the next berthing on ship) would stop "everything short of a fifty cal round". The armor was composed of layers of kevlar sandwiched with disposable ceramic/steel layered plates. The heavy kevlar vest padded the armor, the actual bullets were stopped by the plates. They were heavy, but the guys didn't complain!

      Note that "everything short of a fifty cal round" means "fifty cal rounds penetrate rather effectively". If you've ever seen a fifty cal round, they're HUGE. The brass is like an inch or an inch and a half wide and a foot long, with the actual projectile being as big as your pinky. The rounds are made of steel with a lead core for weight just like all our other rounds. They'll go right through concrete, steel, you name it.

      Funny anecdote: when I was in training, we were told "according to the Geneva convention, you may not fire a fifty cal at a human target! It is an anti-vehicle weapon only. So, Gentlemen, swing that fucker wide when you're hitting the pickup truck at the end of the street! And it's their own damn fault for getting in the way!" :)

      Bottom line: it's possible to create armor that will protect against small arms fire (like AK-47's) but much harder to guard against a heavy machine gun like a Browning. If the suit works against most small arms fire, it's worth building. But you shouldn't expect miracles.

    6. Re:you joke but.. by nester · · Score: 1

      Extruded powders are not limited to military rounds. (You can buy surplus green tip 5.56, btw.)

      5.56 rounds can go thru someone, but ideally they fragment.

      A steel jacketed (or solid) bullet would destory a barrel in no time. Bullets are almost exclusively copper jackets or lead. .50 BMG is 3.9 inches (99mm) long, not 12 inches.

      Plz read:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M855
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.50_BMG

    7. Re:you joke but.. by Terminal+Saint · · Score: 1

      He was likely exaggerating the size of the cartridge, which is actually somewhere in the vicinity of 6" long. Also worth noting that while recruits are often told stories about how you're not technically allowed to use .50s against infantry so you have to aim for the uniform, etc., the geneva convention doesn't actually prohibit it.

      --
      It's sad when choosing an installation directory on your own qualifies you as an "advanced user."
    8. Re:you joke but.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An AK47 is a very high powered assault rifle (well over 2,000fps) and the favorite weapon of Iraqi guerrillas. Standard 7.62mm bullets (no idea if that's what the guerrillas are using) reportedly goes through more than a quarter inch of steel at close range.

      Very correct as to penetration. I've got a Romanian AK-47 that will shoot through steel plates quite handily. My first time out on the range someone had left out an empty propane tank. At 50 meters the shots (standard steel-case Wolf ammo) went all the way through the steel tank quite handily. I'm guessing it would punch through concrete cinder blocks reasonably well, but I haven't had the chance to try that yet. Any armor that could hold up against that is very well-engineered indeed.

    9. Re:you joke but.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The St. Petersburg war convention is over 140 years old and is still in effect. It prohibits the use of projectiles weighting LESS than 400 grammes AND containing explosives being fired at human targets. Therefore, cal .50 (12,7mm) is illegal to fire at people if the projectile contains explosive. Majority of .50 rounds are solid metal, but some "multipurpose" versions exists, which have about 2 grammes of trotil inside. Nowadays armies try to get around the convention by making small (20-35mm caliber) explosive ammunition that uses air-burst, so they can claim it was technically NOT fired at people. Rather cynical. BTW, I think USA did not sign the St. Petersburg convention.

    10. Re:you joke but.. by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      I'm fairly certain that a .5" hole through the center of your head - right in the face! - would have a fairly detrimental impact on your prolonged survival. Even if it was slowly bored a grain at a time using ancient Chinese secrets.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    11. Re:you joke but.. by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      Sounds to me like what you're describing for 5.56NATO ammo is the M855 stuff. That's not steel ammunition. It's lead, with a copper jacket. It's different than the stuff used in Vietnam - I don't recall what it was, exactly - but it wasn't that substantial. I suspect that the Vietnam troops were just shitty shots (them bein' constripts, an' all), and that they used the 'brush stopped my bullets' argument in much the same way Bubba complains about not being able to find the blood trail for the deer he just missed.

      You may be thinking of M995, which has a tungsten core and is AP ammo, but I doubt it. IIRC that's only issued for use in the SAW. (But if you're a Marine, hell - I'd not be surprised if your CO just said fuck convention. :P And I say that fondly.)

      You might find this interesting; it debunks the .223/5.56 NATO round the M4/M16/SAW uses fairly thoroughly with quite indepth data: http://www.ammo-oracle.com/body.htm

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    12. Re:you joke but.. by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      I won't say your incorrect, but I think the concentration on sniper fire in the Iraqi theater is misguided. The inventor could have served himself better by ignoring the issue of bullet penetration completely. This sort of protection would be much more useful against the sort of damage that the enemy is actually inflicting...roadside bombs.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
  80. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by yincrash · · Score: 1

    or the weight could make it harder for the officer to get up when he's knocked over.

  81. Re:Inventor hopes to sell armour suit to the milit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ok Ill bite, first off, this guy is Canadian. Canada is not as of yet involved in iraq. We are currently involved with international security efforts in afganistan. The article claims that his motivation is to help protect canadian soldiers like one of his family members that is currently serving.

    Secondly, are you a fucking loonytune? How is creating a body armour to protect our sons and daughters from potshots fired from warring tribal insurgents liken him to a serial killer? I am by no means a conservitively slanted kinda guy, did you bother to do any reserch at all about afganistan and the canadian armed forces in general? didnt think so... you would know that the local population is quite glad that the taliban is gone and even gladder that the murauding insurgants are being held back from destroying what is left of thier country by a few brave men and women. If we weren't there helping, they would be in a bad way.

    Iraq is a different problem all together. How do you keep 3 angry blood feuding ethnic groups located closely together from continuing to slaughter each other by the hundreds sometimes? Well Saddamn figured the best system would be a Iron fisted Fear regieme where brutal murders, torture, and thuggery were used to keep the population in line. when an insurgancy up north sprung up, he used nerve gas.

    Everytime america tries to leave, Iraqies start trying to fuck each other up again. So how would incorperating great inexpensive body armour to american security forces be a bad thing? do you thing the fighting forces there like sparring with insurgents? what is stopping the insurgancy from laying down thier arms and going back to farming or working or living a peacefull existance?

    In conclusion, I think you either need to shutup, or go out east for a couple weeks. Perhaps you will pry your head out of your ass with the assistance of some cold reality. ya dork.

  82. Re:While it would rock if this were the real thing by kerrle · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm not making a comment on this guy's stuff one way or the other, but having seen first hand exactly how government contractors/projects work, I'd say it's entirely possible and even probable that a private group or individual could beat them on specific types of projects.

    Unless you've seen it, you wouldn't believe the level of miscommunication, ineptitude, petty politics, and flat out greed that can get in the way of actually getting a real product developed with the government.

  83. Pfff... by Jugalator · · Score: 2, Funny

    Is this supposed to be exciting? I've had my endoskeleton since birth. Bah!

    --
    Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
  84. *AHEM*... by StressGuy · · Score: 1

    Time for a stiffer mainspring

    Time to "Spring Forward"...now "Fall Back" SPRING FORWARD! FALL BACK! SPRING FORWARD!...(you get the idea)

    Time to switch to brass bells

    Time to go from "analog" to "digital"

    anyone else care to add?

    --
    A goal is a dream with a deadline
  85. kinda like poking a bear with a stick by DarthVain · · Score: 1

    Well good for him. Sure looks a lot better and more practical that his last suit. However my only missgivings are in this paragraph: "In the helmet, there's a solar-powered fresh-air system and a drinking tube attached to a canteen in the small of the back." I am pretty sure the solar-powered fresh-air system is a fancy way of saying a solar powered fan in the helmet. More disturbing that that would be: "A laser pointer mounted in the middle of the forehead is ready to point to snipers, while LED lights frame the face." #1 I think I would prefer to point out snipers with something other than the middle of the forehead. Thats kinda like poking a bear with a stick in my books. #2 I love how included into that statment was how your face is lit up with LED lights, you know, just in case the sniper missed the stupid laser pointer in the forehead, he can aim at the lit up face. I actually laughed out loud when I read that paragraph, he may want to re-think some of those helmet elements. :)

    1. Re:kinda like poking a bear with a stick by JediLow · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The LEDs aren't there to illuminate the person's head... they're there to be flashlights (did you look at the pictures at all?). I'm not sure why you'd want a laser to point at snipers but the location is a good one - you just have to look at them to point.

    2. Re:kinda like poking a bear with a stick by Vegeta99 · · Score: 1

      the laser in your head has a wavelength 543nm, and the RPG being launched a foot away from you knows that it's target is a 543nm colored dot in the direction that it was shot.

      or, even better: The laser is merely a rangefinder. GPS coordinates are given for both the wearer and the target. The RPG is GPS guided.

    3. Re:kinda like poking a bear with a stick by NeuroManson · · Score: 1

      Contrary to how cool such things look in sci fi movies, lighting elements inside of any helmet do not help, and in fact, hinder the wearer. Ever turn the lights on inside your car while driving at night? Now imagine your windshield is a little more vertical, so it reflects those indoor lights directly into your eyes. You're going to lose up to 3/4 of your nightvision.

      It goes beyond stupid ideas, and enters the realm of the retarded.

      --
      Just because you can mod me down, doesn't mean you're right. Shoes for industry!
    4. Re:kinda like poking a bear with a stick by Pitr · · Score: 1

      Wow... poor bear...

      --

      --Not to be worried, Pitr fix.
    5. Re:kinda like poking a bear with a stick by grassy_knoll · · Score: 1
      I'm not sure why you'd want a laser to point at snipers but the location is a good one - you just have to look at them to point.


      Perhaps for these?

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_guided_bomb
  86. You crazy gringo by Fist!+Of!+Death! · · Score: 1

    "Its many features include compartments for emergency morphine and salt, a knife and emergency light."
    Now just add one for slices of lemon and a canteen of tequilla...ole

    --
    Nothing witty
  87. Re:While it would rock if this were the real thing by JayBlalock · · Score: 1
    What the hell? I encourage skepticism of someone WHO CLAIMS TO HAVE CURED CANCER and somehow this translates into my saying the suit doesn't exist?

    It's one thing to build a suit that can stand up to blunt force impact. It's quite another to build one which can, as he claims, stand up to high-calibur arms fire and any manner of other things that would be necessary for it to be a soldier suit, as he claims. Plus, what about other things like heat / sweat? How long can you wear the thing before passing out?

    Etc etc etc.

    Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. And I would put the idea of the creator of the "God Light" claiming to have made a combat suit superior to anything the world's military R&D departments could come up with... at a cost about 1/100th of what current models cost... as being pretty damn extraordinary.

    AS I SAID IN THE SUBJECT LINE, it would rock if this were the real thing. But you're going to have to show me more than him getting hit with a baseball bat to convince me. Let's haul him out to Yuma and get some elephant guns and see how he does.

    Or are you saying testing and skepticism is no longer a requirement?

    --
    Bush: He's Liberal in all the wrong ways.
  88. If this guy makes bears suits... by DRAGONWEEZEL · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Howcome the Seahawks didn't wear them on Sunday?

    Go HAWKS!

    --
    How much is your data worth? Back it up now.
    1. Re:If this guy makes bears suits... by DRAGONWEEZEL · · Score: 1

      come on I know it's offtopic, but ...

      Oh yeah, geeks don't watch football

      --
      How much is your data worth? Back it up now.
  89. Re:While it would rock if this were the real thing by iabervon · · Score: 1

    Militaries have to design armor that you can actually do useful stuff in. With his early suits at least, you couldn't really do much other than watch sleeping bears. The hard part isn't really making yourself nearly indestructable; it's making yourself nearly indestructable and still able to chase people, open doors, hear people sneaking up on you, grab things, etc. If this guy were on patrol in Iraq, insurgants would kidnap him by catching him in a net, dragging him off, and removing the suit. It's not any better than just staying in a bunker all the time.

  90. futuro MAN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    wheres the rocket thats supposed to be on his back, is that thing on his hip a phaser or laser pistol?

  91. Re:While it would rock if this were the real thing by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

    This guy is kind of a known crackpot.

    Yes, he is. But he also build a bear suit that protects him from being hit with a truck. It exists and works. That the man is insane doesn't mean it doesn't work. Many of his other ideas are nuts. But the suit exists and works. It was so bulky that others wouldn't use it, but that's what he's fixing, and with his obsessive and insane personality, I believe he will accomplish his goal (and no one will use it until after he's dead because of the stigma of buying from a nutjob).

  92. Re:While it would rock if this were the real thing by ByteSlicer · · Score: 1

    While I can imagine a suit like this working, I also have questions about its effectiveness. A suit like this wouldn't protect a human from rapid acceleration/deceleration. Our brains are actually suspended in a fluid, so too much acceleration/deceleration would cause the brains to hit the inside of the skull, causing a concussion. If the force is big enough this could cause a knockout or even brain damage or death.
    I wouldn't jump of a cliff with one of these!

  93. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by Ced_Ex · · Score: 1

    Kind of off topic, but what's the reasoning behind leaving the HUMVEE Turret all open like that? Could they just install a covered turret with the material they use for the Pope mobile? Some protection is better than nothing.

    --
    Live forever, or die trying.
  94. After reading this quote: by rehtonAesoohC · · Score: 1

    The whole suit -- which draws design inspiration from Star Wars, RoboCop, Batman and video games --
    The only thing that comes to mind is Triumph the Insult Comic Dog:

    "You are a huge nerd!"
  95. Yay Canadians! by zyl0x · · Score: 1

    Us Canuks make all the gadgets, and you Americans go out and "field test" them for us.

    --
    Blerg.
    1. Re:Yay Canadians! by Creepy · · Score: 1

      you've never seen the documentary on this guy, have you?

      he field tests each one *personally*

      and while yes, the documentary did paint him in a bad light, the guy's main purpose in life was/is to wrestle a grizzly (to the point he bankrupted his multi-million dollar scrapyard business), and if you can take that seriously you're a better person than I am.

          By far the funniest documentary I remember ever seeing, though I haven't seen it since catching it in a university theater many years ago, so I don't know how well it stands the test of time.

  96. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by Ruff_ilb · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Right, but if someone gets trampled or hit with something heavy while NOT in this suit, their weight is going to be the least of their concerns.

    --
    http://www.TheGamerNation.com/Forums
  97. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by Joebert · · Score: 1

    Robbers get away because they are able to quickly change their appearance out of view, not because they've out-gunned their opponent.

    That suit doesn't look like it's very easy to get in and out of.

    --
    Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
  98. With this we can take back endor... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    HAH, with this we can finally retake Endor with impunity...no little furry dwarves with sticks and rocks shall block the progress of the new order...

  99. Attributed to... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Gary Larson. May the Far Side be with you!

  100. I have no trouble believing it costs 2k per unit by brokeninside · · Score: 1

    If he already knows the /how/ of putting it together and has a defined bill of materials, then there is no reason to believe that his estimate of 2k per unit in mass quantities is inaccurate. But what I bet isn't considered in the cost is the price of testing and quality control. This isn't a simple widget where a mere visual inspection suffices for weeding out bad units. A large enough percentage of the production output will need to be taken to the lab and destroyed to ensure uniform output and fitness for use.

  101. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Who the hell would come at someone dressed like this with a knife?

    But then again, if we learned nothing from Ewoks v. Empire...

  102. Wayne Industries Already Developed This... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...a few years ago, but the government didn't think a soldier's life was worth $300,000, so they shelved it. Weirdly enough, that prototype suit seems to have disappeared -- at least, Wayne Industries has taken it off their basement inventory list.

    They also had a nifty bridge-building vehicle called "The Tumbler," but that seems to have been decommissioned as well -- it's probably in a boneyard somewhere, I'm guessing.

    But, boy, we could really use some of this stuff to protect us ordinary citizens against all those crazies who just got released from Arkham, and that vigilante who dresses up like a bat.

    -- Harvey Dent
    -- District Attorney, Gotham City

  103. Re:While it would rock if this were the real thing by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

    Yep, I don't expect something like that comming from anywhere else than the garage of some inventor. Now, I don't expect it to come by now either.

  104. Half-Life 2 IRL!!! by thegnu · · Score: 1

    Let the comments about how it looks just like an avatar from Quake/UT/Halo/etc begin.

    I'm just now getting around to playing Half-Life 2 (the shame!), and I was thinking how if having completely armoured abusive police is fun on a tiny little screen, it must be way cooler in real life! Speaking of which:

    I, for one, welcome our not so much new, rather more highly armoured overlords.

    --
    Please stop stalking me, bro.
  105. First? I don't think so. by Helldesk+Hound · · Score: 1

    > "... He calls it the Trojan and describes it as the 'first
    > ballistic, full exoskeleton body suit of armour.'"

    So what were all those medieval body-suits of metal armour?

    1. Re:First? I don't think so. by Shai-kun · · Score: 1

      >So what were all those medieval body-suits of metal armour?

      Not ballistic?

      --
      ...or so I've been told.
  106. For space assembly and exploration BUT BIG PROBLEM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    While this would be -extremely useful- for space suits and Mars EVA suits, there is a problem.

    The human body still can only stand so many g's before squishing and so much torque before bones break, even if the suit could handle it.

    And could a laser or other weapon cause it to contract uncontrollably and squish the wearer?

    Now consider using this fabric as "muscle" for robots and telops, perhaps in the place of gear mechanisms. Martian dust can't get in to grind at it. Application of heat or cooling from piezos would make your robot or telop move. Sweet.

  107. Re:While it would rock if this were the real thing by Paulrothrock · · Score: 1

    Hell, the firepaste and 1313 paste all look like perfect shuttle heat tile replacements.

    --
    I'm in the hole of the broadband donut.
  108. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by AK+Marc · · Score: 3, Informative

    Tricky. Aramid polymers (such as Kevlar or Twaron) are a few times stronger per weight unit than steel. Thus a suit made of steel would be a few times heavier than its polymer counterpart. Thus I'd think there's little interest in such beasts.
    One interesting snippet though is that bulletproof vests are not knife resistant and knife-resistant vests are not bulletproof. This has to do with the type of weave.


    You are mixing "strength." Aramid polymers are not stronger than steel if your measure is bending it. They may be able to stop a bullet with a few times less material, but that's not a measure of "strength." If solid parts are so bad, why are the ballistic plates solid inserts into bullet proof armor? Solid is better than fabric sometimes. The benefit of this suit is not the suit as he makes it. He can't make it as it should be made. It should be lightweight but strong sandwiches of cermaics and steel, covered in a woven fabric (Kevlar, if you wish) bonded to it. Something with some form holding capabilities (the steel) added impact resistance (the cermaics), and penetration stopping (the fabric) all made into an armor patter like the one he laid out.

    With the right materials, his would be bulletproof and knifeproof, just like you mention is difficult to do. It would also be lighter than people expect, though it would still probably be very bulky.

  109. Re:While it would rock if this were the real thing by Falladir · · Score: 1

    If the helmet is rigid, heavy and cushioned, the damage from a headshot would be minimal. The weight is the problematic part.

  110. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by AKAImBatman · · Score: 2, Informative
    Wouldn't want to be wearing one in the desert (jungle, etc), probably a reason why there is limited government interest. Unless this things has some sort of personal AC unit... but that would probably require portable energy beyound military logistical capabilies.

    In this video, he claims that the built-in AC unit is powered by powerpacks on the back of the helmet with solar recharging capability. (I presume the headlights are powered by the same packs.) FWIW, there are battery packs with extremely long field-use durability. Nothing incredible, but enough to keep the guy suited for an 8 hour mission before he has to visit the charger to swap battery packs.

    Getting back to the Yucca Mountain thread the other day, they *could* use some of that material for batteries that never die, or at least recharge themselves. Unfortunately, I doubt the military would want to take the chance of any radioisotopes getting into the hands of enemy combatants.
  111. Re:While it would rock if this were the real thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Right. I can't believe this guy is still in the news after ... years. I first saw a show, I bet 10 years ago, on him. It was a piece on one of the network's typical news editorial shows, done at the end as a sort of warm-wrap-up. The reporter was good to him and said, in the end, "I like this guy. There are two constants in life: oxygen and mediocrity. This guy is definitely not mediocre." Of course, looking back, maybe the news guy was also saying he is short of oxygen too. Troy had gone bankrupt designing these, sorry Troy, stupid suits of armor. They even interviewed real-life bear biologists who said, simply, "we don't need a suit of armor to do what we do ... what's this guy talking about with his armor?" Troy could actually only show the news guy his suit after he paid a fee to the place that housed it, as they had confiscated it as an asset and he had nothing else. The reporter even made comments about the sick bank that would do this to the poor guy.

    Troy's hair and garb (a huge hunting knife housed across his upper chest) all makes him seem self-contrived, pretentious. Yes, his final suit of armor may stop a piece of log from slightly slamming into him, or a bat, or a sword, or a small arm round, but you can't move in it. Watching him trying to walk in the thing is funny. 1 mile a year.

    Troy even showed drawings, and they looked strikingly similiar to iron man, which is the bottom-line about this guy: he's really sorta off a bit and wants to be iron man, but uses someon government stuff that he really has no claim to -- nor does the government want him -- in order to live out a fantasy. Meanwhile, he has no money, and any that he has he sinks into the would-be suit of armor.

    The real story here is how this guy continues to be in the news -- I even saw him a couple of years ago on some stunt-man special on fox or something. They piled up a "wall of brick!" he stood in front of it and a "ram!" knocked him through it. Well, the bricks weren't even mortered together, he sorta just fell backwards rather ungracefully, but hey, the show was 2-bit, and they needed some filler. It was indeed hyped as is Troy as is this armor.

    No, Troy, iron man isn't real or, at least, you ain't him....

  112. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by utopianfiat · · Score: 1

    I can see how this would be a problem. After all, it's not like they practice sit-ups in bootcamp.

    --
    +5, Truth
  113. Bah! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wake me up when he creates an endoskeleton suit of armor.

  114. This presumes a need for humans in battle by rhinokitty · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The government does not have enough money to buy standard body armor for the soliers in Iraq in 2007, they won't buy this. It is too heavy, the soldiers are already carrying too much on their backs. It is not "powered" so its not going to lighten their load, and it does not have climate control, protection against radiation, chemical, biological or telekenetic attacks. It would be better and cheaper to build a fleet of machines to go into battle than to pour money into something like this.

    I think radio controlled airplanes with bombs and guns would blast this thing into oblivion and be much cheaper to build and deploy.

    1. Re:This presumes a need for humans in battle by CrashPoint · · Score: 1

      ...and it does not have climate control, protection against radiation, chemical, biological or telekenetic attacks.
      Holy shit, the insurgents are recruiting psychics now?
  115. Can't say I wasn't expecting Robo Armor. by DaedalusHKX · · Score: 5, Funny

    But don't forget folks, this is still oppression gear. Have your laughs, because they're not building this stuff to oppress towel heads overseas, they're building this stuff to kick in your door, when you're hacking at 2400 hours, after 3 jolts of coffee and downloading your happy warez. Remember, violent offenders get out on good behaviour after raping women, while you, as a "l33t haxor" and "warez d00dz" will likely never see the sun again.

    Its you that'll be facing the robo troopers, not the "bad guys". The bad guys will already have the anti robo trooper guns.

    Anyone remember Kevin Mitnick arrested as if he was Wesley Snipes, at the point of several dozen M16's? Yeah... the "lethal" "warrior" Kevin "pudge" Mitnick. You, could be the next Mitnick.

    Just my ten cents. Hope you spend it well.

    --
    " What luck for rulers that men do not think" - Adolf Hitler
    1. Re:Can't say I wasn't expecting Robo Armor. by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

      The guy you describe hasn't seen the sun in quite a while as it is, so no loss there...

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    2. Re:Can't say I wasn't expecting Robo Armor. by Drooling+Iguana · · Score: 2, Funny
      Remember, violent offenders get out on good behaviour after raping women, while you, as a "l33t haxor" and "warez d00dz" will likely never see the sun again.
      Ha! The joke's on them! I never see the sun anyway.
      --
      ... I'm addicted to placebos
    3. Re:Can't say I wasn't expecting Robo Armor. by SinGunner · · Score: 1
      When they kick out your front door

      How you gonna come?

      With your hands on your head

      Or on the trigger of your gun.

  116. Re:While it would rock if this were the real thing by SECProto · · Score: 0

    how can you view newton and tesla from the point of view of someone in their time? science has a long way to go still before it can explain everything.

  117. I didn't say anything about fitting by brokeninside · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Let's compare.

    Inspecting a pair jeans to ensure that it meets fit for use standards means a visual inspection on an assembly line. A single worker can inspect a few pairs of jeans per minute. And if a unit passes inspection without being fit for use, the manufacturer, at most, has to refund the wholesale cost of a single pair of jeans /if/ the consumer complains about it.

    Inspecting body armor to ensure that it meets fit for use standards means a pain-staking, time-consuming inspection which includes hitting it with several types of ordinance and exposing it to all sorts of chemicals. Further, statistical analysis must be done so to ensure that the the sample size takes the percentage of units that will be suitable for use in the field to at least three (if not four or five) nines. If a unit passes inspection without being fit for use, someone may die or be critically wounded and the manufacturer may be subject to recalling entire lots of thousands of units if not subjected to a huge product liability law suit.

    Don't confuse fitness for use with the armor fitting a soldier. The two have very little to do with each other.

  118. I'm waiting... by kyjl · · Score: 1

    ...For the ceramite-plated, servo-assisted power armor that requires to be wired directly to your nervous system to function. Cuz this thing just don't cut it.

    --
    Perl, n. A language spoken by Eskimos.
  119. Re:While it would rock if this were the real thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My wife was in a forestry class with him years ago. He was a crackpot even then.

    Yeah, his bear suit work was legit. But in the end it didn't work; the bear quickly disassembled it.

    It's one thing to withstand an impact carefully aimed at the licence-plate-sized metal plate in the center of the suit's chest - as the inventor demonstrated. It's another to withstand a serious impact on shoulder, elbow or waste joint - as the bear demonstrated.

  120. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by c_forq · · Score: 3, Informative

    I believe it is because the Humvee is designed to be an all purpose vehicle, and the guns can be quickly mounted or dismounted depending on what they need the vehicle for. The Humvee is a truck first, and an armed platform second - quite the opposite of a tank or howitzer.

    --
    Computers allow humans to make mistakes at the fastest speeds known, with the possible exception of tequila and handguns
  121. Re:While it would rock if this were the real thing by x2A · · Score: 1

    Yeah but the constitution does explicitly give you the right to use the sleeves from his first suit, so ya know... that's something, right?

    --
    The revolution will not be televised... but it will have a page on Wikipedia
  122. Or domestic use... by Civil_Disobedient · · Score: 1

    But I would think for SWAT-style military deployments into occupied buildings, this would be brilliant.

    Would probably be pretty useful in riots and other domestic crowd-control situations as well.

  123. Metroid Reference by FluffyArmada · · Score: 1

    Samus would be proud.

    --
    If con is the opposite of pro. Then isn't congress the opposite of progress?
  124. Aircon.. by slashmojo · · Score: 1

    From the article..

    there's a solar-powered fresh-air system and a drinking tube attached to a canteen in the small of the back

    Not quite aircon but better than a hole in the head, as they say.

  125. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by neoform · · Score: 1

    forget all that..

    how you supposed to take a pee while wearing that thing?

    --
    MABASPLOOM!
  126. Not Economical by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The government would have developed something like this ages ago if it was economical. The matter of fact is the troops we have deployed around the world simply don't get shot often enough to make it anywhere near as expensive to replace them as it is to equip all of them with $2,000 worth of body armour and ship it out to them. Rumsfeld was interested in developing more stuff like this for political reasons, but most of the army is not, and now that Rumsfeld is gone it's unlikely the mood will change any time soon.

  127. I can't help myself... by binary+paladin · · Score: 3, Funny

    Dude, where can I purchase one of these "AK47s" or "30-06s"? I can barely get 60 fps out of my current video card. And, what resolution are these babies pulling those kinds of frame rates on?

    (I'm a jackass. I know.)

    1. Re:I can't help myself... by steveo777 · · Score: 1

      Hot Damn! I needed that laugh. Thanks!

      --
      This sig isn't original enough, it's time to come up with something witty...
  128. Too late by kahrytan · · Score: 1

    I feel sorry for this guy. He spent $15,000 on a suit that the military has no use for. The military currently working on liquid body armor. The liquid is used in addition to the Kevlar vests.

    --
    \
  129. Even if the military doesn't bite, by NeuroManson · · Score: 1

    I'm sure Stephen Colbert is shopping around for bear proof armor. Especially since apparently someone has put in a constitutional amendment that arms all bears.

    --
    Just because you can mod me down, doesn't mean you're right. Shoes for industry!
  130. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by flyingsquid · · Score: 2, Informative

    For one thing, the primary risk is not from above, but from below (IEDs) and the sides (IEDs, small arms, RPGs), so that's where you should concentrate any additional armor. For another, there are limits to how much further the HUMVEE can be modified: it's already slow and dangerously prone to rollovers because of all the added armor, and adding armor to the top of the turret is going to make those problems even worse.

  131. A Trojan With a Clock? by fuse2k · · Score: 1

    ...I sure hope he ain't a one minute man

  132. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by Voltageaav · · Score: 1

    He didn't design it to make someone invincible. He made it to protect people from as much as possible as still be practical for use in combat. His first design may have protected a lot better, but extreamly limited mobility.

    --
    Someone save me from this sanity.
  133. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by Minwee · · Score: 3, Funny

    No worries. I just checked my email and I have been approved for five mortgages and sixteen unsecured credit cards this week alone.

  134. Critical sentence in the article... by rahvin112 · · Score: 1

    There is a critical sentence in the article that I don't think many people are grasping. The suit doesn't provide protection to major joints. I thought the suit was pretty cool till I realized he couldn't solve the problem of covering joints and still having flexibility. This means (just like the old suits of armor) that the suit has a vulnerability at every major joint (knees, hips, elbows and shoulders). If you look at the suit you will notice he only has black fabric over his hip bones and midsection and probably the same fabric on the front of the elbows, back of the knees and under the arms. This means the suit has as many vulnerabilities as it does protections, and it no doubt causes a reduction in mobility. Even if he did make it look like the chief in Halo.

    It's a cool idea but more than worthless as a full suit in battle. This isn't to say that better vests and armor couldn't be developed using his ideas if his claims are real.

    1. Re:Critical sentence in the article... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is a new fabric that does offer some ballistic protection by hardening momentarily under stress. I'm sure that it could be incorporated into this armour Shear thickening fluid (defensereview.com) of course all of this is predicated on the fact that both of these work as advertised or close enough that some more research can bring them to fruition.

  135. Feh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not impressed. Call me when you've developed body armor with Priss Asagiri in it.

    http://www.gweep.ca/~edmonds/anime/BGC/priss/img/p riss-hardsuit.gif

  136. He HAS cured cancer by Loadmaster · · Score: 2, Funny

    Here's what we know:

    1. The suit exists
    2. Cancer exists
    3. Flashlights exist
    4. He has one (suit and flashlight)
    5. He doesn't have cancer

    Therefore he has cured cancer because 5 comes after 1. I don't think anyone can argue with that (especially when put in bullet format). If anyone needs more convincing I can put this into a 35 page PowerPoint document for further truthiness.

    Swi

  137. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by KORfan · · Score: 1

    Yes, the Humvee (HMMWV) is designed as a truck, but we're using them as wheeled APCs (Armored personel carriers). The suspension is pretty strained by the extra armor that has been added. Sticking a real turret on there puts us over the limit, or forces us into unacceptable tradeoffs, like decreasing underbody armor.

    Keep in mind, "quickly" mounting the guns (or antitank missiles) means you don't have to ship it back to the states. It's not a 5-minute job; you usually spend a bit of time in a machine shop.

  138. last time.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Last time I saw this dude his suit was mostly duct tape. lol goverment contract.

  139. You're all thinking it... by Minwee · · Score: 1

    Hi, I'm Troy Hurtubise. You might remember me from such films as "Project Grizzly" and "Mommy, What's Wrong With That Man's Face?"

  140. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by gstoddart · · Score: 1
    WOW - if it pans out, this device is amazing. It only weighs 40lbs, and can withstand the impact from a car or elephant gun? If he can really mass produce it for $2,000 a piece, I would think the government would buy thousands

    Well, he personally can't mass produce them. His 'research lab' is his garage out back where he and his buddies hang out.

    If you have ever seen the documentary film Project Grizzly, this guy is a bit of an odd-duck who thinks he's doing serious research on bears and the like. Mostly, he spends his time building these big suits, having his friends wail away at him, and cultivating an image of an uber outdoorsman. In short, he seems to be a bit of a flake and most people don't take him that seriously.

    The scenes of him hanging out in a municipal dump, hanging out with bears, and acting like he's advancing scientific research is enough to give you a bit of a sense of the fact that he's completely normal.

    He's always had the goal of having a suit whereby he could get up front and personal with the bears, and learn a whole lot about them. I wouldn't look for much military interest in this thing. It's a device which more novelty than something which is very practical. Least wise, for any actual military applications IMO.

    His intended purpopse of getting up close and personal with bears in the wild seem more like an obsession than anything of any real value.

    Cheers
    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  141. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by Clever7Devil · · Score: 1

    Cars, bats, bullets: these things have no effect on the newest in high-tech body armor.

    The one thing it can't deflect? A good old-fashioned Slashdotting.

    --
    "By the time they had diminished from 50 to 8, the other dwarves began to suspect 'Hungry.'" -Gary Larson
  142. Re:While it would rock if this were the real thing by p0tat03 · · Score: 1

    the "God Light"...well, maybe dude got hit in the head too many times while testing his bear suit or something.

    Never underestimate the powers of falling off your toilet while trying to hang up a clock. Sometimes getting hit in the head is good. ;)

  143. the idea is ass backwards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    DARPA has it right. Remote controlled (in some cases autonomous) vehicles that can search and destroy (oops, I mean sweep and clear).

    A much better and safer direction to go. The marines sit in their underwear drinking bear and reading porn and occasionally get into a robotic firefight using a joystick.

    Wrapping warriors in this kind of extensive body armor is almost as silly as thinking future tactical aircraft will have pilots.

  144. Don't forget about arrows.. by willy_me · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Another purpose for armor was to protect against arrows. Without armor a simple arrow can disable or kill any opponent. Why use swords if arrows work so much better? Armor (and shields) allowed armies to pass under waves of arrows to finally attack their opponents. Armor can actually get in the way when in hand to hand combat. The extra weight reduces your speed and stamina. And regardless of how good your armor is, there will always be holes. Should an opponent have a significant advantage in speed they will find those holes and win. If tired and weighted down, your opponent will have a significant advantage in speed.

    So you are absolutely right about "1-2 disabling blows deflected by armour" but I would like to add that arrows make up a significant portion of those disabling blows. In fact, look into the history of warfare for different regions and you'll see that armor gets stronger along with bows getting more powerful. I would argue that increased armor is a result of more powerful bows + armor piercing arrowheads.

    Willy

    1. Re:Don't forget about arrows.. by Moraelin · · Score: 1

      Very valid point, and no arguments there. I've mentioned the pencil-shaped bodkin tips and firearms a few times as reasons for the changes in armour over time. Still, thanks for making it even clearer.

      --
      A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
  145. Unfornunate last name for the inventor... by robophobe · · Score: 1

    Looks like it could be pronounced 'hurt u biz'

    --
    There was a time when movies had plots. So you knew who's ass it was, and why it was farting.
    -Not Sure
  146. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by Warg!+The+Orcs!! · · Score: 1

    Suit or no suit, if he goes in alone he's going down. For every nut there's a nutcracker. Being taken by prisoners is every prison officer's worst nightmare.

    --
    Travelling forward in time at a rate of 1 second per second.
  147. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by twitter · · Score: 1

    for SWAT-style military deployments into occupied buildings, this would be brilliant. Send four "hardened" troops in ahead of the "soft" troops to clear the building, then let them return to base to cool off.

    It's called a robot and they are already sent in.

    If the armor is good for anyone in a situation, it should be issued to all.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

  148. Crappy crappy design ... SciFi designs DON'T work! by MarkTina · · Score: 1

    Hands up who has looked at armor from Ye Olde Days ? Not the flashy stuff the generals and Kings wore but the stuff your soldier/knight wore. Notice that it's nice and smooth ? That's because in those days they realised that if you had an edge or ridge a sword/axe/arrow could snag onto then that edge just helped the sword/axe/arrow get enough purchase to cut in ... not something you'd find comfortable. You want to deflect impacts not just absorb them.

    So this guy has designed a suit of "armor" that while it is probably made of the right materials the is pretty much all edges, joints, creases and other showy bits, all of which adds up to more places a bullet can lodge and drive in.

    I bet he did his elephant gun test at a point blank angle and just proved that the materials could absorb the impact, want to lay a wager that if you did a test of firing the elephant gun at say a 30 degree angle across into the suit you'd get the fun viewing of a limb being torn off as the bullet lodges into his nice showy suit and then tries to take that part of the suit with it .. when instead you want to maximise the chance of the bullet splashing off.

    This guy has watched too many scifi movies where the armor is all pretty looking to make it look good, real armor is quite boring in design, it;s all about function ... so please let him do his personal test, I'll watch the blood and carnage on YouTube :-)

  149. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by shawn(at)fsu · · Score: 5, Funny

    Depends on the knife, a robust Swiss Army Knife has a can opener inlcuded.

    Parent has a very funny and insightful post BTW.

    --
    500 dollar reward for tip(s) leading to the arrest of the person(s) who stole my sig.
  150. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by jdray · · Score: 1

    The video seems to be having some trouble (it cuts out about the time he says "talked to the professionals in the field..."), and I'm not sure what the Yucca Mtn. discussion was about, but... knowing your interest in RTGs, I presume that's what you're referring to. It's possible that with an ultracapacitor/RTG combination, there would be enough cost/benefit for the military to use them. The question is, could you get something powered by an RTG into civilian (police) hands?

    --
    The Spoon
    Updated 6/28/2011
  151. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by Yold · · Score: 1

    metalstorm could put about 40 grenades per second (not per minute!!) into the same window

  152. Hmm by kitsunewarlock · · Score: 1

    Live Action Halo anyone? With real bullets too.

    --
    Ginga no Rekshiya Mata Each page.
  153. Re:While it would rock if this were the real thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah imagine that. Something as complex as a computing machine in the hands of ord....

  154. Reminds me of Tony Stark by broohaha · · Score: 1

    The guy kind of reminds me of Tony Stark.

  155. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by stupidfoo · · Score: 1

    Future Weapons - Tonight, 9 PM ET - Discovery

  156. he's gonna get stiffed by the system... by advocate_one · · Score: 1

    the big boys'll get their contacts in high places to stall him with nitpicking requirements changes while they get their own version approved, for twenty times the unit cost... $2000 a suit is far too cheap for the big boys to make a profit on...

    --
    Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
  157. Re:While it would rock if this were the real thing by Whomp-Ass · · Score: 1

    http://www.exn.ca/news/video/exn2003/09/03/exn2003 0903-firepaste.asx

    Firepaste...Seems to work. Not all of his crack-pottedness is off-base.

  158. Neither can I... by MikShapi · · Score: 1

    You send your video card flying at 60 feet per second? Darn, no wonder you're bitchin about how crappy it works...

    --
    -
  159. custom fit by hoooocheymomma · · Score: 1

    So I know that racecar drivers have their seats custom molded to their bodies, both for comfort, and for safety. I would expect that these suits would have to be custom fit in order to absorb impacts in a way that was safe for the people wearing them. I would imagine that would get much more expensive than $2000 per suit.

  160. Viagra saver. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    This guy is a genius.

    I'm gonna buy one if he changes the clock dial to leds, blinking in red letters:

    .
      N
    N O T
      W
  161. iSuit? by LunchSpecial · · Score: 1

    Quick! Trademark the word iSuit before Apple, Cisco or Linksys beat you to it!

  162. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by Desert+Raven · · Score: 2, Informative

    Unless they've changed pintle ring mounts since I was in the service, swapping guns is *less* than a 5-minute job. This isn't really a turret, it's a pintle on a rotating ring mount. You pretty much carry the gun to the vehicle, drop it on the pintle, and away you go. There are some specialized weapons that may require more complicated mounting, but I haven't seen one on that type of mount.

  163. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by AdamThor · · Score: 1

    This ought to sooth the fears of the local people that we are there to invade their country and turn their women into robots. Nothing says 'I am your friend! You can trust me!' like a frowning mustachioed man dressed like robocop and batman's secret love child. When approached with this constructive criticism, the inventor attempted to eat the interviewer and process his constituent chemicals into another suit of armor.

    --
    -- "Oh. This guy again."
  164. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by valdezjuan · · Score: 0

    I have no idea how accurate my statement is, but it seems to me, that the secondary risk (with the primary being IEDs) would be from snipers, gunmen, or RPGs fired from positions on top of rooftops or building. Given the open nature of the turrent, it would be an ideal place to attack (imho), even if you just walked up and tossed a grenade, or some other explosive device (perhaps aproaching from the back of the vehicle). Hopefully, the soldier up top would be able to notice someone sneaking up from the rear, though when the sh!t hits the fan, who knows (they could be engaged with another target and not be covering the rear). I would imagine that the open nature also gives the soldier operating the turrent a much better field of view, they would have full access to their peripheral vision, which of course comes at the price of exposure.

  165. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by Nutria · · Score: 1
    Who the hell would come at someone dressed like this with a knife?

    Someone who wants 72 nubile rewards in Paradise?


    --
    "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
  166. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by c_forq · · Score: 1

    I have a friend who is a machine gun team leader in the United States Marine Core, and when station in vehicles his title is a vehicle commander. From my understanding from him mounting a gun on a Humvee is a 5 minute job. If I recall correctly it was common to switch the gun with artillery in less than 5 minutes. Now putting a turret in a Humvee not packaged with one... that takes some time, and I think would only be one in rare cases.

    --
    Computers allow humans to make mistakes at the fastest speeds known, with the possible exception of tequila and handguns
  167. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by Fallen+Seraph · · Score: 1

    I saw a video demo of the suit yesterday actually. It has a built in fan in the front of the helmet too keep the area around your neck cool (and therefore, the rest of your body since there are so many arteries running through that area. To power it, the back of the helmet contains small power packs that are recharged by small solar cells on the back of the helmet.

    It's got a lot of other interesting features as well. I've never been in the military myself, but frankly it seems as if it's a lot more protective than anything I've seen a soldier in recently. And there's still that intimidation factor, because an invading force looks almost inhuman in suits like that.

    The video btw is here: http://www.hamiltonspectator.com/media_archive/jan -11-2007_a.html
    May take a while to load since the site is still getting hammered.

  168. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by gripen40k · · Score: 1

    What about a Kevlar apron of sorts? Although this has undoubtedly been thought of before, it still might help.

    --
    Har?
  169. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by triffid_98 · · Score: 1
    One critical point here. An elephant gun does not traditionally fire armor piercing rounds, it fires large caliber lead slugs. Great for stopping elephants, not so great for piercing armor. I rather suspect $5 worth of FMJ ammo > stormtrooper steve.

    I want to say that the rifle (an elephant gun or not) was fired straight into the chest plate. The joints might not be so well armored (and in the 40 pounds version, they are not even be protected).
  170. The real market for this suit is ... by KingKaneOfNod · · Score: 1

    Star Wars fans! All he has to do is make them in white. No joke, I know a guy who paid $600 for a lightsabre that was nothing more than a fluorescent light with colouring on it and a handle. He'd definitely pay $2000 for something as cool looking as this.

  171. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by Macgrrl · · Score: 1

    I think you are refering to compressive vs. tensile strength. An example of this would be concrete has a high compressive strength rating (can absorb high compressive/crushing forces) but has quite poor tensile strength (twisting or bending) and will crack or spall. Conversely, steel has a high tensile strength (resistent to twisting/bending) but is comparitively easily deformed by crushing forces. This is why in construction you often use steel reinforce concrete - it has the benefits of both materials in resisting compressive and tensile forces.

    During materials sciences classes we were shown the differences between 'bulletproof' and 'armoured' glass. Generally "bulletproof" glass can absorb the forces of a single bullet in a given area (can't remember the size off the top of my head), an "armoured" panel can absorb half a dozen or so bullets in close proximity. The way this is done is by layering glass with sheets of a flexible polymer, the kinetic energy from the bullet(s) is dispersed through the polymer layer, reducing the likelyhood that the panel will break/tear/shatter. The number of layers affects the amount of energy that can be dispersed, and therefore the number of bullets.

    --
    Sara
    Designer, Gamer, Macgrrl in an XP World
  172. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by ArsonSmith · · Score: 1

    It was Return of the Jedi of which you speak and also another part of why you can never trust media. In the movie they showed only the few lucky successes that the Ewoks had and didn't show the massive slaughtering that they actually took.

    --
    Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
  173. Here's an actual video for the picture sceptics. by Tsuki_no_Hikari · · Score: 1

    http://www.hamiltonspectator.com/media_archive/jan -11-2007_a.html

    While he showed no demonstrations of being hit with that suit, if it's like his bear suit, it'll hold up well.

  174. Britian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually "gunless" Britian has a problem with this. Normal US-style body armour does a poor job against knives (as they are not a problem in the US). However, in the UK knives are common. So, the UK body armour is modified to include a chain mail component.

  175. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by Danny+Rathjens · · Score: 1
    Unless this things has some sort of personal AC unit...
    FTFA:
    In the helmet, there's a solar-powered fresh-air system and a drinking tube attached to a canteen in the small of the back.
  176. Smegging Dupe by Droid+Rot · · Score: 1

    This guy has just ripped off the 'Hudzen' android from Red Dwarf series 3 "The Last Day"!!!

    Hudzen http://www.reddwarf.co.uk/deck06/images/image_bank /3-7l.jpg
    Trojan http://www.hamiltonspectator.com/images/hs/hs15587 62_1.jpg

  177. Re:While it would rock if this were the real thing by etherlad · · Score: 1

    He claims to have a miracle space ray that (alternately) provides Superman-style selectable X-Ray vision (that is to say, you only see a deeply as you want) OR else cures cancer in lab rats. Or both. Yet when pushed to demonstrate his miracle X-Ray gizmo, he suddenly claimed it was too dangerous to people and dismantled it.

    The Angel Light and God Light are two different devices. Look at the Wikipedia entry you cited again.

    The Angel Light was allegedly too inimical to life and he dismantled it. The God Light is the opposite: he's challenging people to prove that it doesn't work.

    --
    Soylens viridis homines es
  178. What about the Hospital Bill by Firethorn · · Score: 3, Insightful

    There's still Mark Maughan's point that it's cheaper than a hospital bill.

    I'll use US soldiers for an example because that's what I'm familiar with.
    Injured soldier:
    Hospital: approx $6k/day
    Artificial limb: ~$3k
    Flying home on medivac: $10k

    Dead Soldier:
    $250k insurance policy(he pays for it, but it's heavily subsidized)
    $100k death gratuity for dying in a war zone/hostile action

    In either case you have the loss of a trained soldier to worry about.

    It quickly adds up. It pays off exceptionally well if you give it to the soldiers who are 1% or more likely to die in the line of duty of something this would prevent, and about 10% likely to suffer an injury requiring medivac to an out of theater hospital and extensive rehab or seperation from service.

    As for mass production, he's obviously tested the suit, possibly multiple suits, though it's probable that he's simply repaired the one after shooting it. Heck, that'd be a benefit right there. Replacing a $500 breastplate after being shot is still cheaper than replacing an entire $1.5k intercepter vest. Well, at least $1250 of it, it's $250 each for the front and back plates, and one may still be usable. Once shot the vest itself is to be discarded.

    Buy a few thousand of them and the fact you completely destroy ten suits in testing would still add less than $10 to the cost.

    --
    I don't read AC A human right
  179. Re:Attributed to...yep by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that was polar bears standing over the smashed open igloo all stained red around the new opening

    Love that guy, got a farside calendar right next to me here, he is teh comic tesla!

  180. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by rtechie · · Score: 1

    Or, more reasonably for the "prison take-down" teams they use to subdue unruly prisoners.

    Yeah, now instead of getting sprains and broken bones from these "takedowns" they'll get crushed limbs. Yay! More prisoners in wheelchairs!

  181. Forget police use by kireK · · Score: 1

    I want a set for Dragoncon, size XXXXL please.

  182. Yeah, but... by nixkuroi · · Score: 1

    Can he still take on a bear? I mean, that's the original purpose of it right? Can you imagine how embarrassing it would be to fight through a platoon of lightly armed Iraqi soldiers only to have a bear at the Baghdad zoo screw off that helmet and take you out?

    Fucking bears...

  183. Re:While it would rock if this were the real thing by foreverdisillusioned · · Score: 1

    Except he's advertising that his suit can resist BULLETS now. There's a big difference between being bear-proof and bulletproof. I'll be extremely surprised if it can actually provide protection against standard high velocity FMJ rounds, let alone armor piercing rounds. As someone else has already noted, an elephant gun does NOT fire high-velocity rounds. Given that no one has yet mentioned or linked to hard evidence that the suit has actually been tested vs. modern military firearms, combined with the guy's crackpot "God/Angel light" claims, I'd say that extreme skepticism is indeed warranted when it comes to claims that the suit would be ideal for military use.

    Potential riot control, animal control, and bomb squad applications is another matter entirely. There is videotaped proof that his suit can withstand blunt force trauma rather well--there is NOT proof (that I'm aware of) that it can withstand modern, high powered firearms.

  184. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by CodeBuster · · Score: 1

    Perhaps this is a silly question, but why not simply modify the Bradley so that the turret is enlarged to carry multiple coaxial weapons, in addition to the Bushmaster auto-cannons, with the ability for the gunner to fire any combination of the available guns simultaneously?

  185. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by KORfan · · Score: 1

    I had three guys who I had reason to believe knew what they were talking about (one did depot maintenance) who corrected me when I said it was a quick swap. They insisted this was not something where a truck pulled up and you did it in the field. Maybe they meant changing weapon types (MG to ATM) or installing a weapon mount on a bare truck rather than replacing the same weapon, or maybe the system has been fixed since they told me. I used to make AFV fire control systems at Astronautics; I'm not making this up. My info is probably out of date.

  186. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by Bob+Uhl · · Score: 1
    or the weight could make it harder for the officer to get up when he's knocked over.
    I don't think that'd be a problem--mediaeval suits of armour weighed 70 pounds or so and one can do acrobatics in them. The key is weight distribution: sure, 70 pounds on your right shoulder will throw you off, but a few pounds on one shoulder, a few on the other, a few on your lower back, a few on your head, a few on your arms, a few on your thighs, a few on your calves &c. are no problem.
  187. Bullet proof suits = bring back swords/maces? by spineboy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    So if these suits do catch on, and if they are really bullet proof, maybe we'll have to go back to pick-axes and other medieval weapons that were used against the knights. The evening news would be much cooler to watch police taking out a suited up robber with a shield and a pick.=, instead of some lousy shoot out.

    --
    ..........FULL STOP.
  188. Re:While it would rock if this were the real thing by Emetophobe · · Score: 1

    I've seen him on Discovery Channel several times, he is definitely a bit looney, but he has also produced some pretty cool inventions, like his fire paste.

    See the video here, http://www.exn.ca/dailyplanet/view.asp?date=8/31/2 004. It's the 6th link down, titled "Fighting fire with fact".

  189. Mod parent up by Meph_the_Balrog · · Score: 1

    The only things you missed in what was otherwise an excellent breakdown of costs, is the cost of training a replacement squaddie for the duration of the injured soldiers convalescence, and the expense of the medical staff needed (in training and time spent).

    1. Re:Mod parent up by Firethorn · · Score: 2, Informative

      Good point about the replacement; Medical costs are folded in with the 'hospital stay' daily rate.

      8 weeks of basic training would be $3k for the salary of the trainee alone, then you figure another $400 to feed him, $800 for his 'share' of the drill instructor.

      Then you have the advanced combat training. Another 8 or so weeks(varies by specialty and enviroment), at $4k for the trainee's salary(been promoted), Another $1k because you have more personal training being conducted. Food, housing etc...

      Call it $10k and 4-6 months to get yourself a basic squaddie.

      As for the fitting, well, I'd do it the way I want to do weapons. You're issued your equipment, to include weapon, gas mask, and armor along with the more convential uniform items & duffel bag.

      Well, come to think of it, the armor could be issued when the recruit reports for advanced combat training or is assigned to a combat position. That way the suit might fit a bit better, as most trainees gain weight once out of basic/boot.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    2. Re:Mod parent up by EvanTaylor · · Score: 1

      I seem to remember (up to 10 years ago) some Colonel being interviewed about the cost of the military, and that training each Army Soldier was roughly 1 million dollars. This estimate doesn't seem so outlandish as there are many layers of support behind that drill sergeant, the building of the camp, food, the medical care (all the shots, etc given before boot camp), etc, etc.

      The equipment cost is pretty much nothing, the development cost is pretty high.

      At least a lot of military spending trickles down into civilian life (and the research too).

      --
      Sleep is for the weak.
  190. His secret ingredient? by The_mad_linguist · · Score: 1

    Diet Coke. No, seriously. He's made two or three different crazy inventions by now, and claimed that the secret ingredient for them was Diet Coke.

  191. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by khallow · · Score: 1

    OTOH, I do recall amusing stories of knights who became useless once they were knocked off of their horses. But they might have been wearing a lot more than 70 pounds of armor.

  192. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by couchslug · · Score: 1

    Good reason for police response teams to have .50 BMG sniper rifles with AP ammo.
    A .50 AP would punch through that suit laughing all the way. The North Hollywood bank robbery already shows police need effective sniper rifles.

    Plate armor? Meet longbow!

    --
    "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
  193. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by Agripa · · Score: 1

    An example of this would be concrete has a high compressive strength rating (can absorb high compressive/crushing forces) but has quite poor tensile strength (twisting or bending) and will crack or spall. Conversely, steel has a high tensile strength (resistent to twisting/bending) but is comparitively easily deformed by crushing forces.

    I am pretty sure the difference in tensile and compressive strength you studied for steel is because of how it is used compared to concrete. Thin walled tubes and surfaces fail do to buckling before compressive strength becomes an issue. Concrete would fail in tension on the opposite side before buckling would be apparent.

  194. Forgot modern age by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Modern combat is more maneuver intensive than the olden days, since explosives and machine guns make static positions easy targets. Many other factors that have been alluded to that can make it impractical, such as mobility, ease of discarding if it fails, and air flow.

    Modern body armor as it is today is typically a Kevlar vest to stop 9mm rounds, with ceramic "strike plates" that can take one or two rifle rounds before shattering. Mostly, it protects against shrapnel, the most deadly thing on the modern battlefield. A good helmet is also essential, as a disproportionate percentage of shrapnel wounds to the head are fatal due to faster blood loss or neurological damage. Total weight of about 25 lbs on the body, and 3lbs on the dome. $1600 for a suit of body armor and $300 for a Kevlar helmet is less than an officer's monthly pay.

  195. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by Mex · · Score: 1

    If you had RTFA, you may have known that it supposedly contains both air conditioning and water. Solar powered.

  196. quick! by jeffybob · · Score: 1

    someone find John Connor!

  197. yuck yuck yuck!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    man, will i miss the blue and white uniforms, this is too much like robocop!

  198. I have a bridge to sell you on Mars by jdun · · Score: 1

    If you believe Troy Hurtubis then I have a bridge to sell you on Mars.

  199. The importance of one letter by mattcoz · · Score: 1

    "Dangling between the legs, that would be a clock."

    People would have been gawking for an entirely different reason.

  200. mobilty not 'protection' by Nyph2 · · Score: 1

    The argument I've heard for years against any kind of exoskeleton is in any type of modern warfare, mobilty is key. This seems like it would detract from your mobility pretty significantly(40 some lbs before anything else you need to carry) while not offering much significant in terms of protection - the joins are exposed, there's no way that faceplate has the armor levels of the actual armor plates in there, and the armor can only stop 'high powered' guns like an elephant gun, which as another poster already mentioned isnt very high powered compared to say, the common AK47 because it's a larger bullet traveling at a lower speed, something easier for armor to stop.
    Just doesnt cover the problems they've been having with armored exoskeletons for combat use for quite some time now.

    1. Re:mobilty not 'protection' by trongey · · Score: 1
      ...and the armor can only stop 'high powered' guns like an elephant gun, which as another poster already mentioned isnt very high powered compared to say, the common AK47 because it's a larger bullet traveling at a lower speed, something easier for armor to stop.

      Remind me to not go elephant hunting with you, because whatever you're shooting is just gonna piss off the elephant then he'll trample you to death.
      --
      You never really know how close to the edge you can go until you fall off.
    2. Re:mobilty not 'protection' by Anonymous+Cowled · · Score: 1
      an elephant gun... isnt very high powered compared to say, the common AK47 because it's a larger bullet traveling at a lower speed

      Let's have a look at that...

      Standard "elephant gun" cartridges include:
      Rigby Magnum - a 26 gram bullet with a muzzle velocity of 700 m/s
      .460 Weatherby Magnum - a 32g bullet with a muzzle velocity of 790 m/s produces over 8000 foot pounds of energy
      Nitro Express variants - the .700 being a massive 65g bullet with a muzzle velocity of 600 m/s, producing nearly 9000 foot pounds of energy at the muzzle

      Whereas assault rifles tend to use cartridges of a much smaller caliber and lighter loads e.g.
      The Russian AK47 uses a 7.62x39mm M43 round - a 7.92g bullet, with a muzzle velocity of 710 m/s, producing nearly 1500 foot pounds of energy)
      The US M16 and variants use a 5.56x45mm NATO round - a 3.95-5.18g round with a muzzle velocity of 772-930 m/s producing ~ 1250-1350 foot pounds of energy at the muzzle.

      So - saying that the AK47 (or any other assault rifle) is more powerful than an elephant gun is just wrong.
  201. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by Laserwulf · · Score: 1

    There already is a cooling unit being tested for body armor; it's less than 5 pounds, and can run for approximately 8 hours on a rechargeable battery.

    --
    "Make cyberlove, not cyberwar!" -Khaed(544779)
  202. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by wathiant · · Score: 1

    I don't know about this version, but previous versions of his suit actually DID have a personal AC unit. Since this is supposed to be an improved version, I would think that the AC unit is still in there somewhere.

  203. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by Jon+Peterson · · Score: 1

    This is an urban myth. Armour designed for actually fighting in didn't weigh more than 20Kg, and even heavier jousting armour was light enough to walk around in.

    --
    ----- .sig: file not found
  204. Needs Improvement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    First, what's up with the clock?

    The laser pointer shouldn't be on the head .. I'll bet any light hitting that thing would light it up pretty well ... plus you don't want a pointer going where you look. Stick it on an arm... and give an easy switch. Or simply remove it and save the laser pointer for the gun, where it's really needed.

    Cooling... someone mentioned this would be bad to wear in the desert. A while back I saw on a tv show or maybe the news about a system of cooling used for children who have this disease which makes it so their body won't keep them cool. Maybe it uses a lot of power, I don't know but every troop in iraq should be wearing one if they aren't heavy. (a child can wear one.. how heavy can it be?) It could probably be built into the suit.

    For the military, they want human augmentation. Without some improved strength from this armor, I don't know how much they're going to care. If it can be made biohazard-safe ?? then maybe.

    Still, notice the hips? It needs armor skirts on the sides. On a news program a while back they talked about how the kevlar vests sent to Iraq were not protecting as well as they should and I believe they had a man on the program who says that a small addition, flaps over the shoulders and more coverage under the underarm would increase soldiers chances of surviving attacks by quite a bit with minimal additional weight.

    Can the average swat officer run/move in all the ways they would need to with this?

    Still, the government isn't doing anything like this to protect police or soldiers so it's nice to see someone working on it. I hope it does what the guy says it does and if so, I hope it gets put to good use.

  205. Very easy to defend against. by master_p · · Score: 1

    All you need is a rope/chain shooter; a gun that shoots ropes/chains and directed at the feet would make the person wearing the armor fall down and not easily stand up again.

  206. $15K??? by jimstapleton · · Score: 1

    If he thinks the DoD is gonna contract to someone that efficient, he's off his rocker.

    He won't get a contract on suits who's initial models cost any less than $1M/ea

    --
    34486853790
    Connection too slow for X forwarding? Try "ssh -CX user@host"
  207. I was never arguing against that point by brokeninside · · Score: 1

    It's a Red Herring unless you think you can quantify the value of human life. I don't.

    1. Re:I was never arguing against that point by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      As a member of the military, you can bet that my life, as well as every person in uniform, has had his or her value quantified. It may not be a complete quantification, but it's there.

      You can't commit to war otherwise.

      Other than that, it becomes a question of 'how many lives can I save with these dollars if I invest it into X versus Y'. Sure, you might love to invest in both, but you don't always have the luxury of having that much money or resources.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
  208. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by Big+Nothing · · Score: 1

    "I would think it would also be handy for the guy who draws the short straw to man the Humvee turret -- in which case AC lines could easily be run up through his feet."

    I think you're confusing him with the guy who draws the short straw at Guantanamo.

    --
    SIG: TAKE OFF EVERY 'CAPTAIN'!!
  209. It gets better every day :-) by gd23ka · · Score: 1

    Sorry to see this modded to +5 funny, but hey, keep going. You probably already know that the deck is stacked against
    people posting "unpopular" things but at least in my experience for every -1 TROLL I get there is someone to reverse
    that with a +1 insightful/interesting.

  210. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by wyohman · · Score: 1

    What exactly is an "elephant gun?" I would hardly expect the suit to stand up to cartridges capable of stopping an elephant. I doubt it would stop a .416 Rigby, .416 Remington Magnum, .416 Weatherby Magnum, .450 Nitro Express, .458 Winchester Magnum, .458 Lott, .460 Weatherby Magnum, and .470 Nitro Express, .500 Nitro Express or .600 Nitro Express.

  211. I'm not certain that I buy that by brokeninside · · Score: 1
    Sure you can quantify some things such as how much a nation is able and willing to spend on protective gear. And certainly failure rates and cost/benefit analysis is somewhat appropriate there.

    But I don't believe for a minute that the protective gear purchased by the Pentagon or any other military institution is purchased based on the odds of having to pay out life insurance, train replacements, etc. Rather what happens is that a budget is set by Congress and the President and the decisions makers in the Pentagon are given X amount of money for purpose Y and figure out the best way to spend it. I'd be very surprised if the sorts of analysis brought up in this thread past the actual cost of production and testing for fitness of use are considered at all.

  212. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by sco08y · · Score: 1

    Unless this things has some sort of personal AC unit... but that would probably require portable energy beyound military logistical capabilies.

    Or you could just ride in an air conditioned vehicle. Or integrate a personal cooling suit. My biggest question is how quickly you can get in the prone and roll since the best armor is a big chunk of dirt between you and the bullets.

    IIW the Pentagon, I'd give it to weapons squad. An M240B is supposed to have a crew of 3, gunner + assistant + ammo bearer. (I'm presently an assistant gunner.)

    Now, a 240 really needs at least two men on the gun because the gunner has to keep his eyes downrange while the AG takes care of ammo and barrel changes and such. But I wonder if it wouldn't be possible have a chain gun that draws off the suit's power. A chain gun is a far simpler mechanism because it doesn't rely on recoil or gas to operate, and you can set your rate of fire to keep the barrel from overheating. (The Bradley FV uses a chain gun.) And if you built the gun into the suit, you'd get tons of anime nerds signing up for the Army...

  213. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by Bob+Uhl · · Score: 1

    Those stories typically come from 18th and 19th century sources--hardly to be trusted (these are the same folks who talk about 30 or 40 pound swords!). They may have been caught up in the Enlightenment sense of superiority, or simply confused by looking at tournament armour, some of which is so heavy that getting up would be difficult. But tournaments were fought under high-safety rules, whereas battles were fought under rather different constraints (if you can't get up in a sport, you just lose the game--in a battle, you lose your life).

  214. field expedient aquisition by maddogsparky · · Score: 1

    Many of the tools in the soldier's arsenals are from things the grunts started doing in the field (moreso in war zones) that caught the eye of the higher-ups.

    My dad became the first* certified "chainsaw carpenter" in the army when an officer saw him using a chainsaw to cut timers for building constructed by his engineering battalion. Prior to that, all they were issued were hand saws (not even electric). Within a short time (a couple years), the chainsaw was standard equipment for field construction. (*others probably used chainsaws as well, but he was the one that was seen and asked to create an official class for certifying others in use of a chainsaw during building construction).

    In the news more recently, soldiers have been using silly string to detect trip wires when entering buildings. I suspect that solicitations for development of a military version of silly string (i.e. more expensive and in a camo-colored container) has already begun.

    I can easily see some maverick unit trying this stuff out after a few too many of their buddies get hurt. What is $15k out of pocket to an attorney, business owner, etc. who is a member of a National Guard unit that got activated? As it is, the guys in Iraq are paying out of their own pocket to "up-armor" their standard-issue Hummers.

    On second thought, those Haliburton truckers on convoy duty in Iraq might beat them to the punch.

    --
    science is a religion
  215. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by khallow · · Score: 1

    Now that you mention it, that does have a ring of familiarity to it. I seem to recall the author's amused condension at the hapless knights.

  216. Re:WOW! Could it live up to his hype? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    One interesting snippet though is that bulletproof vests are not knife resistant and knife-resistant vests are not bulletproof.


    And neither can resist my patented gun that shoots knives!