>>64087925
Offensively stupid reformer-tier take. Increased ballistic resistance means that faster and bigger frag that would otherwise be lethal can be stopped. Far from a "marginal class" of threat profiles. Protection from mid-long range rifle caliber hits was a concern as far back as the fucking 70s too, and last I checked that's still a common battlefield threat that composite helmets have proven themselves to be superior against.
>The penetrating threats that kevlar stops that steel wouldn't are a marginal class in the case of helmets; the fact that kevlar generally suffers huge backface deformation from those threats, means that the real benefits are tiny since backface deformation kind of fucking sucks when the backing is inelastic skull.
Not true. Even a late 80s-manufactured PASGT is capable of stopping handgun calibers with nonlethal deformation. Modern helmets have come a long way and something like the Busch AMP-1 can take repeated 9mm hits at point blank with negligible deformation. Aside from defective helmets, only ultralight helmets explicitly made for special forces suffer from excessive BFD.
Steel helmets also either deform to a harmful degree or are penetrated and create additional spalling.
>So you helmets with a fucking storage life that you can't even use as a cooking pot anymore.
Storage life is a meme for rigid aramid armor like helmets. They will last several decades at the least if kept in even the bare minimum storage conditions, which is to say not outdoors, overheated, or wet. Like inside any building fit for human habitation.
Using steel helmets as cooking pots is retarded to begin with because that would ruin the heat treatment, and other than the M1, few historical steel helmets could be used as water vessels at all because of the vent and screw holes. There is zero loss in capability between steel helmets and kevlar in their ability to be used to carry water. All of this shit is literal fuddlore.
