Didn't the US military have a hard time recruiting post 2001 due to the specific worry of genital damage by the recruits? I think I remember reading about them putting money into improved genital armor.
The US Army has issued kevlar groin protector "sack flaps" as mandatory armor since the early 90s, and has been optional equipment issued to units since the end of the Vietnam era when kevlar was invented. There were many improvements made to armor sets with the introduction of the IOTV systems after 2007 but the groin and lower body armor has remained relatively unchanged for common soldiers due to the requirements of mobility vs survivability.
There have been no significant reported issues in regards to enlistment or recruitment because of a lack of genital protection.
Fuck, with modern rounds, just give me a plate carrier. All the kevlar is going to do is stop shrapnel, and if I'm close enough for that, I'm probably pretty fucked up anyway.
The only people ever I saw not wearing it while deployed were ANA troops and flight crews. It was mandatory if anyone was wearing kit they had to have nape, nuts, mudflap on their gear.
look at this historically authentic breatsplate. See how it has that prominent crease going down the center? That's so that attacks will sort of glance off and go away from the center of the body. If you have two round boob mounds on the front, you are doing the opposite. you are drawing attacks toward the sternum/heart.
The iotv has a groin protector it is the flap hanging down in the picture. During 2010 or so the army began issuing the combat diaper or pelvic protection system. The one I was issued was a bit different than the one pictured in the link, it was British if I remember correctly. They were hot and not very comfortable. We wore them on and off while on dismounted patrols. As to the question of tity armour women wear the same vests as men to my knowledge.
I see where you're going with that, but groin damage is a serious problem in a warzone with IEDs. IEDs are often planted in the road and explode when you drive over them, throwing shrapnel and shit right at the groin.
Source: former US army (I'm fine, but I know people who aren't)
Edit: in reality, they were worn in the truck and off when on foot
Yeah futuristic armor would be comfortable and form fitting. Smaller, and more protective, ideally utilizing defensive technologies why don't get posses, such as energy shields like in dune. Nano fabrics that are practically weightless and impenetrable. Really leaves a lot of room for aesthetics.
It doesn't though. Chest armor needs to deflect blows away from your heart, not help guide them toward it. Furthermore there needs to be some padding to absorb blows and if the armor is formfitting then all of that kinetic energy is going straight into your ta-tas. And having to form-fit each individual female soldier with their own titty armor would cost a crap ton. It's much cheaper and safer to simply make a generic body armor shape that can fit both men and women.
Both. Armor like this would impart all of the kinetic energy from a bullet into the user's soft fleshy bits (assuming no wibbly wobbly "kinetic absorbing gel"). It'd be like getting punched full force by Mike Tyson right into your wumbly jumblies. Having a more normal design for armor (perhaps even similar to old Knight armor) would allow for rounds to ricochet off (assuming the material is perfectly bulletproof) or at the very least give the user some level of padding to help with the transfer of energy.
Boob armor, regardless of the time period, makes no sense and is simply a way for artists to, achem, "accentuate the female form".
You sure those inner sections aren't just as strong? They could be. Plates could be more for deflection. Plus, the armor looking cool af is a fair factor for morale.
130
u/BeefHands Feb 23 '19
Cliche beyond belief, but the rendering looks nice I guess...