Thread 64139979

How would early Soviet body armor designs fair against American civil war-era weapons, including late smoothbore percussion caps and early rifled muskets?
>6b1: The protective composition of the vest consists of mosaically arranged hexagonal plates made of “soft” aluminium alloy AMg7ts, packed in a Avizent fabric vest with a quilted cotton lining. The slightly convex aluminum plates had a thickness of 6.4 mm (chest), 5.3 mm (belly) and 4.1 mm (back). Its weight was, depending on the size, 5.1-5.3 kg.
>SN-42: Originally made of 2 mm steel and weighed 3.5 kg (7.7 lb.) Following the adoption by the Wehrmacht of 9mm cartridges with mild steel core, the thickness was increased to 2.6 mm for the chest plate. This redesign received the name SN-46.

Also curious if anyone thinks the ssh-40 steel helmet would have been capable of directly stopping any projectiles from this era and if so at what range. I imagine it could probably defeat buck loadings from smoothbores, I'm not sure how a minie ball's velocity scaled with range though.

>>64139979 (OP)
They aint stopping shit, I thought those vest were only for flak

>>64139985
>thirdie reading comprehension
The SN-42 could stop lead-core 9mm.

>>64139985
the steel bib was actually benchmarked against SMG rounds, not fragmentation
2.6mm of mild steel can stop a 9mm round at 100mm, so it would have decent performance against

it would provide decent protection against a musket, nonetheless
a 9mm round travelling at 350m/s vs a 14mm round travelling at 300m/s fired from a 1861 springfield
while the larger musket ball will deliver more energy, its noticeably slower and delivering its energy over a wider area, so it would stand a decent chance of stopping

the soviet 6b1 is, for all practical purposes, a first gen kevlar vest in performance with a titanium strike plate
being hit by a musket ball would be comparable to being hit by a shotgun slug
it would be extremely painful but survivable
the inclusion of a rigid element in the vest would probably help a lot in reducing blunt force trauma

>>64139979 (OP)
Making a wild ass guess based on pic related I would say early soviet body armor would only be able to protect against civil war era rifle muskets from ranges greater then 100 meters to 200 meters. These weapons are 100 year older then the civil war yet they produce enough energy that at 100 meters they have more energy then 7.62x25 tokarev have at the muzzle (some having twice the energy).

https://www.quora.com/Can-the-Soviet-SN-42-body-armor-really-stop-the-straight-7-92mm-Mauser-shot-at-150m-or-just-the-Soviet-bluff
SN-42 2mm thick version can only protect against 7.62x25 fired from a ppd at 40 meters. 2.6mm at 10 meters but both will be penetrated by a mosin round from 300.

SSh-40 should stop most revolver and pistol black powder rounds at close range. It can stop modern 9x19 mm rounds. Infact one SSH-40 tested by oxide stopped a 357 magnum round https://youtu.be/U-CRlKtZzPE?t=248

>>64140414
Energy isnt directly related to armor penetration, though it does affect blunt trauma through soft armor

While a musket carries a lot of energy, it is a very slow projectile, travelling at the speed of a .38
And a soft, wide, round mushrooms heavily against armor

The effect would likely be similar to being hit by a lead shotgun slug, which is survivable with level II armor

>>64140662
>Survivable
Will it break ribs? I think it will.

>>64140666
In soft armor, it can break bone
Though this is still preferable to death

In rigid armor, it can often do very little
Often being so hard that the projectile simply shatters

>>64140048
2.6mm of mild steel can stop a 9mm round at 100mm
I have a hard time believing that an unhardened plate that thin could stop a 9mm from an smg barrel even at a 100m. But I might just be retarded

>>64140662
>Energy isnt directly related to armor penetration
Correct but having alot of energy will allow inefficent designs (soft lead, large round ball) outperform more efficent designs (steel arrow head with hard stubby tip) by energy alone.

In the test study "For show or safety" they ballistically tested two breastplates that were claimed to be 17th century, BP-1 which had a weight of 5.48 kilo and BP-2 weight of 2.42 kilo

BP-1 had a thickness from 7.5mm in the middle to 6-5mm and then 2-3mm at the edges would have been able to stop all the muskets in >>64140414 from 30meters.

BP-2 was determined to be a 18th century replica. It had an average thickness of only 1.75mm with very small deviation of 0.3mm in thicknees. It was infact thinner in the middle while thicker at the edge which ment it was made from a single even plate that was later bent, stretched and formed into a breastplate. It would only be able to stop two of the muskets at 100 meters that BP-1 would stop at 30.

The SN-42 is either 2mm or 2.6mm thick steel, The 6B1 is 6.4mm -5.3mm -4.1mm thick aluminum plates. Both are made from more modern material then 17th century steel plate, they also probably have less impurites yet they are much thinner. They would probably stop all 1700 rifle muskets from 100 meters but would die at 30 meters and closer.

Civil war era musket are all rifled and most fire the minie ball. I dunno how much better a springfield 1861 firing a minie ball in terms of velocity and engery is compared to a 1700 flintlock musket, but I think it would higher.

>The effect would likely be similar to being hit by a lead shotgun slug, which is survivable with level II armor
I would rather have lvl3a just for the extra layers of kevlar. Depending on what model of kevlar vest you should be able to stop rifle muskets firing minie balls if is equal to a interceptor vest kevlar panel.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4qSVOZfp3R4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xi35DqbchA

>>64139979 (OP)
Very, very good.

>>64139985
Steel helmets of the era including the Soviet SSh-40 which would be used with it could reliably stop 9mm at near point blank and they were thinner. Most helmets were hardened, but given that the vest is almost twice as thick as I wouldn't be surprised if mild steel would work past 100m, maybe even closer.
>>64140048
>it would be extremely painful
You're a big guy

>>64139979 (OP)
They would probably stop it the bullets are large and made from soft lead, smaller harder bullets have a creater chance of getting through body armour

IMO not ahope and I own a lot of muskets and a lot of body armour (western). I would not expect a pritchett ball or mine, snider etc to get though a lvl 2 kevalr vest, although it may well break ribs bruise etc

A Springfield Model 1861 fires a .58 caliber Minié ball weighing 500 grains (32 grams) at a velocity of 950 fps, which equates to about 1000 ft-lbs of energy.

The 6B1 ballistic vest was only rated to stop 7.62x25mm Tokorev rounds such as those fired by a PPSH at a distance of over 50m, which have around 527 ft-lbs of energy at the muzzle. The SN-42 could stop 9x19 rounds out of a MP-40, which have around 414 ft-lbs at the muzzle.

The Minié ball has twice the energy as both of those rounds and would go right through.

>>64140988
SSh-40 is pretty thin and flimsy. The Czechoslovak copy of it couldn't stop a 9 mm Lugerpistol round fired from ~5 meters away if it hit more or less squarely on and I have serious doubts that a wartime Soviet original was somehow magically more durable when made in a hurry in a factory behind Urals lacking a roof.

>>64141130
That being said, I don't doubt that the soviet breastplate CAN stop 9 mm Luger rounds as it is noticeably thicker than the helmet while using similar steel and heat treating.

>>64141121
What would the energy be at 100 meters for a 58.caliber minie ball from a springfield?

>>64141130
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dR2yZ3skw1w
Might just be case of poor hardening, this ssh-40 took 9x19 and 45acp fine.. Mike B has done two test on the SSh-60 which is a post ww2 helmet. One died to a 9x18 makerov while the other ate 9x19 and 45acp. With millions of helmets you are bound to have some with poor hardening.

>>64140048
>>64140048
>>64140048
>>64140048
>it would be extremely painful

>>64140048
>it would be extremely painful

You're a big guy.

>>64141130
>The Czechoslovak copy of it couldn't stop a 9 mm Lugerpistol round fired from ~5 meters away if it hit more or less squarely on
Sounds more like a QC problem than a design deficiency, the SSh-68, WWII M1s from one manufacturer, and at least some Vietnam M1s had the same problem due to poor metal quality and/or hardening.
On the opposite end, I've seen at least one test where an SSh-40 stopped (regular) 9mm and .45 ACP, which would put it on par with other contemporary helmets.

>>64140414
Doesn't 7.62 have something like ten times the sectional density at the tip

>>64139985
Those kinds of sub-modern vests or helmets can't stop something in a very direct 90 degree angle kind of experiment but have been found to allow some hail marys. I forget if it was a marine's flak vest or his helmet circa korea that stopped some PPSH bullets - the likelihood being either the powder was underwhelming, poorly maintained boolet, or just lucky. We gotta remember how amateur hour compared to the present metalurgy and ammo quality assurance would be back then.

Funny actually - >>64140769 anon posted the exact one I was thinking of, so it's flak. But again, think about how the ammo Quality checks for some chicom/Russian factory would be dogshit relative to the high quality ammo they'd have used for checking it in the experimental lab.

>>64144121
Let's calculate it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sectional_density
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.62%C3%9725mm_Tokarev
Using this calculator https://www.vcalc.com/wiki/sectional-density

The tokarev has a diamater of 7,85 and using a bullet that is 85 grain (5.5g) then it has a sectional density of
>0.127

And if we compare that to the flintlock musket from 1686 (M4) which has average bullet caliber of 17.5mm and average bullet weight of 30.93 g (477.3 grain)
>0.144

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.62%C3%9751mm_NATO
For comparison with M80 ball in 7.62 Nato
>(7.82 mm)
>147 gr (10 g) M80 FMJ
>0.233 sectional density

So ten times sectional density 7.62x25 tokarev vs musket? By bullet diamater then no, Tip? Maybe but I dont know how to calculate that, But if we compare muzzle energy and known penetration stats (+ estimated penetration) then
>7.62x51 M80 ball
>(3,470 J)
>According to tactical effectivness of small arms 2014 by nammo then M80 ball can penetrate 3.5mm Nato plate (mild steel) at 550 meters.
>penetrates 3/8 inch (9.5mm) mild steel at 50 yards (45 meters) but fails at 1/2 inch (12.7mm) https://youtu.be/CxCc_M2fvSg?t=226
Should be able to penetrate 10-11mm of mild steel at the muzzle

>a musket with only 1752 J was noted in alan william book "the knight and the blast furnance" to still have enough power to penetrate 1mm of mild steel at 100 meters
(M4) flintlock musket with muzzle energy of 3774 J should be able to penetrate a plate no more then 2mm of mild steel at 100 meters and 3-5mm of mild steel at the muzzle.

>7.62x25 tokarev
>600 J - 700 J depending on round
>constantly penetrates ww2 era steel helmets at close range (less then 10 meters) and defeat some soft armor below lvl3A.
>penetrated SN-42 (2mm thick version) at ranges less then 40 meters when fired from PPD.
Should be able to penetrate 2-3mm mild steel at the muzzle. 1mm of mild steel consistently at ranges up to 100 meters.

Okay now what would happen if say any army (we can say Imperial Russia due to size but lol we know they're less competent) was magically able to produce Tokarevs and ammunition for them, but these could not be in any way used for anything but firing the Tokarev. How could an army adapt with this increased rate of fire with a reduced range. Would they have lines of pistol wielders firing into the enemy and destroying them? Adapt some kind of stormtrooper attacks?

>>64146018
Tokarev pistol is rather lacking for a main service weapon, having a fixed sight ranged for 50 meters and no default option for a stock makes it less optimal compared to for example the Mauser C96.

Against smootbore musket equiped infantry you could maybe beat in a straight up line fight. Smoothbore muskets have a low enough effective range that the tokarev equiped line can get in range, go prone/crouch and stay that way during the whole fight while the musket line have to stand up during the fight so they can reload effectively. Any bayonet charge would easily be repulsed by volume of fire alone and if they stand and fire they will die to the tokarev side by volume of fire alone.

Against rifled muskets firing minié ball the tokarev line is gona die before they get into effective range, they can start firing from 400 yards+ and demolish the tokarev line and be safe from any return fire( shooting with pistol at 400 yards with fixed sights lmao). Even for skirmishing the rifled musket equiped skirmisher is gona outrange the tokarev equiped skirmisher significantly. John Sedgwick for example got snipped by confederate sharpshooters from 1000 yards.

But during really shitty weather or rain the side with the tokarev is gona be impossible to stop for any army that rely on paper catridges and muzzle loading since they quickly wont have any functional guns while the tokarev side will function unless they are underwater.

>Adapt some kind of stormtrooper attacks?
Yeah, probably.

>>64139985
>flak, or shards of steel flying at great speed, are somehow less dangerous than lead balls flying at likely slower speeds

>>64139979 (OP)
What was the vdv armor that had thin plates of titanium?

>>64147181
There is no specific body armor made for the vdv. It is just that since the vdv are "elit" they have a higher priority for body armor distribution versus other formation like a random motorised infantry division based in sibera.

>>64147059
Interesting.

>>64141224
for you

>>64139979 (OP)
If you're wearing a modern day ballistic helmet, a 58 cal minie within a 100 yards would crush your skull, it will push the helmet in like 5 inchs
Steel helmets would probably have better ofs athere no meant to absorb energy, probably woud dent the helmet bug not as significantly as the keval helmet.

>>64148712
have you sobered up yet?

>>64148712
>If you're wearing a modern day ballistic helmet, a 58 cal minie within a 100 yards would crush your skull, it will push the helmet in like 5 inchs
This is true for older Kevlar helmets but it depends. A lot of modern ones have better resistance to deformation and there's cases of composite helmets preventing lethal deformation from higher energy hits than a .58 muzzleloader. It's unlikely but not impossible.
>Steel helmets would probably have better ofs athere no meant to absorb energy, probably woud dent the helmet bug not as significantly as the keval helmet.
Unless it deflects the bullet I doubt it. Steel helmets (average ones, not counting things like the retard thick Chinese steel PASGTs or Soviet Sfera) tend to crack or be penetrated when they're pushed past the point at which they can deform, and they usually can't reliably stop anything more powerful than 9mm or .45 ACP. A .58 rifle would probably make short work of the vast majority of steel helmets at 100 yards.

>>64139979 (OP)
1930s body armor would stop a minie ball

>>64150246
>This is true for older Kevlar helmets but it depends.
80s era PASGT was clasiffied IIIa
it if it can stop a .357 magnum round without killing the wearer, it can probably stop a musket ball with an acceptable amount of TBI

the older steel M1 helmet was only rated for .45 at 30m but 9mm could penetrate it at 100m
a musket ball has the velocity of .45 but with much more energy, so it does stand a good chance to penetrate

>>64150300
>80s era PASGT was clasiffied IIIa
It's basically equivalent to NIJ IIIA but it's a bit of a misnomer since the original US military contract helmet never got that official rating, even if it met the standard. The PASGT is also exceptional among contemporary composite helmets until the late 90s, most of which were barely better than steel helmets in ballistic resistance if they were better at all.
>the older steel M1 helmet was only rated for .45 at 30m but 9mm could penetrate it at 100m
The M1 was found to be able to stop .45 ACP from a 1911 at under 10m (25 feet), though this rating was retroactive rather than an intended feature of the design. Resistance to 9mm at the same range certainly isn't an impossible prospect and depends on the quality of manufacture. Both US and European made M1s have been proven to be able to stop 9mm at near point blank but some US shells get penetrated.

>>64150300
>PASGT was clasiffied IIIa
pretty sure a 9mm will zip right through that

>>64150407
>pretty sure a 9mm will zip right through that
even the vest was rated at 9mm at point blank
the helmet ended up being more durable than the vest and could stop .357

>>64150407
Does everyone just use overpressure AP 9mm in the world you live in?
Even nominally expired PASGT shells from the 80s and 90s will stop 9mm ball at near point blank with negligible deformation.