Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Not sure if this is the right place...but is the form-fitting armor worn by Sisters, Howling Banshees, Guardians, etc. practical/workable IRL?

Would an example of form fitting be like the Cyrsis Armor suit?

 LORD_PANTERA wrote:
Would an example of form fitting be like the Cyrsis Armor suit?

I meant IRL. Would modern soldiers, both male and female, be outfitted with form-fitting armor? Power Armor is certainly workable - strength-enhancing, fully-sealed, radiation and environmentally-shielded, self-contained - what I'm inquiring about is what the Sisters and other female warriors wear...armor which emphasized their feminine attributes.

Modern soldiers? No. There's all sorts of practical reasons for it to not be a good idea.

But given several thousand years of material and technological advances, combined with either archais adherance to religious ritual or supreme arrogance in your own abilities, with armour becoming as much a status symbol or a piece of mobile artwork as something to actually protect you in battle? Who knows?

 insaniak wrote:
Modern soldiers? No. There's all sorts of practical reasons for it to not be a good idea.

Which is impractical, form-fitting or powered (sorry, I brought up powered armor in my last post, so I'm a bit confused to which you're referring as impractical)? And the reasons are?

"Emphasising their feminine attributes" - considering how the armour looks like, I can only guess this is referring to the breastplate?

Some people have argued that it would act like a "bullet trap", yet considering how the trajectory of armour piercing ammunition actually works once it hits an object*, and how easily the risks of ricocheting rounds can be reduced (neckguards and reinforced plating on "focal points"), I am withholding my own final judgment and believe that many opinions regarding this subject are resulting more out of hearsay rather than a proper analysis.

*: Armour-piercing ammunition does not simply ricochet off a surface when hitting a steep angle but rather "burrows" into it and doing a slight curve until either penetrating entirely, getting stuck or exiting with reduced kinetic force.
Non-armour piercing ammunition has a much greater chance to ricochet - but obviously also has less tendency to penetrate whatever section of the armour it would be directed at, assuming it doesn't simply fly off into the surrounding environment.

A much greater risk might exist for bladed weapons thrust at this section of the armour, for the blade might indeed be directed towards the "heart" section of the breastplate as if you'd move a knife along a wall.
That being said, in real life people don't usually run around with swords, and even in 40k "bullet traps" are the least of a warrior's concern when facing an opponent with a power sword, for the power field wouldn't care much for this anyways. Chainswords in turn are not thrusted but slashed with, again being a non-issue.

 Lynata wrote:
"Emphasising their feminine attributes" - considering how the armour looks like, I can only guess this is referring to the breastplate?

The rear armor of Howling Banshees is very feminine, at least in DoW II...never seen Imperial Armor from the rear.

A much greater risk might exist for bladed weapons thrust at this section of the armour, for the blade might indeed be directed towards the "heart" section of the breastplate as if you'd move a knife along a wall.
That being said, in real life people don't usually run around with swords, and even in 40k "bullet traps" are the least of a warrior's concern when facing an opponent with a power sword, for the power field wouldn't care much for this anyways. Chainswords in turn are not thrusted but slashed with, again being a non-issue.

No, soldiers don't run around with swords...but they are armed with daggers and other stabbing weapons.

Ideally from a biomechanical major that's worked on experimental "powered armor" for lab project's standpoint, this has actually come up for debate quite a few times. The operator of a suit of armor ideally wants to be as unencumbered as much as possible while balancing protection

Less weight = more free floating and actually less power needed to power the suit but your trade off is potential for lift power and armor protection.

Old school knights in armor and samurai essentailly had their armored suits tailored to their exact specifications. Wear a pair of pants that have been properly tailored feels like a second skin vs baggy cargos which might be tougher, it does make it harder to run.

Armor density and curviture is also a big factor. To stop a .50 bullet like from mondern anti-tank rifles, you need almost 3 inch thick steel. That weighs some 600 lbs for a piece that's about the size of a car door. Even with invention of ceramic plates which weigh a fraction of steel plates, it'd still be really hard to make suits skin tight. You really need something harder than the incomming projectile to properly deflect or defeat the shot and flexible skin tight materials of today simply lack that ability. There's some ideas floating around of using ferromagnetic fluids and state changing materials to help absorb the impact but that is just theoritical right now.

Tadashi wrote:The rear armor of Howling Banshees is very feminine, at least in DoW II...never seen Imperial Armor from the rear.

Good point.

For the Sisters of Battle, I suppose it is a matter of interpretation, as the rears of their official miniatures are always covered by robes (which may or may not have protective capabilities of its own, depending how you'd judge its materials).

The Daemonifuge comic delivered some fanservice in that regard.

Tadashi wrote:No, soldiers don't run around with swords...but they are armed with daggers and other stabbing weapons.

Aye, I even recall having read of a bayonet charge by NATO troops (I think they were British?) in Afghanistan just years ago.
Now, in the age of firearms such situations would occur only rarely, but if it comes down to it, it'd all depend on what the material the armour is made of can endure, and what quality the bladed weapon is of.

Form fitting armor would sound like the sort of thing that private military companies would invest in. Armor tends to change every time it is found to be useless against a certain weapon or hazard, form fitting armor would be a personal taste thing.

 insaniak wrote:
Modern soldiers? No. There's all sorts of practical reasons for it to not be a good idea.

The US armed forces has recently started issuing female-optimized body armor. Not form-fitting as in make it obvious it's a woman but with shorter upper torso plates so the generally smaller women can actually move properly. The general purpose armors made it very difficult for smaller women to ride comfortably in a vehicle, or do some pretty important moves in the field like bend over to pick up a dropped weapon etc.

 sudojoe wrote:


Armor density and curviture is also a big factor. To stop a .50 bullet like from mondern anti-tank rifles, you need almost 3 inch thick steel. That weighs some 600 lbs for a piece that's about the size of a car door. Even with invention of ceramic plates which weigh a fraction of steel plates, it'd still be really hard to make suits skin tight. You really need something harder than the incomming projectile to properly deflect or defeat the shot and flexible skin tight materials of today simply lack that ability. There's some ideas floating around of using ferromagnetic fluids and state changing materials to help absorb the impact but that is just theoritical right now.

What if we apply the 40k version - thick ceramite (ceramic composite analogs which should provide both physical and radiological protection) plates which should be heavy and cumbersome if not for the electrically-motivated metal fiber bundles beneath the armor plating which replicate the effect and design of muscles? Don't know if we can do the latter though...another problem would be the power source and environmental systems. The power cells might be advanced versions of our modern day H-Fuel Cells, but compartmentalizing the environmental systems may prove difficult. The helmet with a personalized sensor suite shouldn't prove too difficult though, it might actually be the easiest part to design. The control interface would also be problematic - I doubt we could replicate or even want to replicate the Black Carapace. Probably something akin to that skinsuit-type interface Amberley Vail was wearing...

Or the Halo version - titanium alloy plating with reflective coating. That one required an AI and cybernetic interface though, and a micro-fusion plant to properly operate...we don't have the capability for either. Not sure how it enhanced strength either.

No, it doesn't make any sense at all. No matter what it's made of armor is a series of thick plates, and it's never going to be thin enough to be skin-tight enough to be sexy. There's just no point in following every curve and detail when you can just make a solid plate instead. Sure, rigid body armor for women might have slightly more space in the chest and wider hips, but that's not really what most people mean by "form fitting".

Now, if the question is "could sufficiently advanced body armor give non-zero protection and still be sexy", then sure, it could. However it would still be inferior in protection to sensible body armor. This might be fine in 40k where you have screaming idiots with chainswords running around and "sensible" was abandoned 30,000 years ago, but in the real world nobody is going to be stupid enough to do it.

 Lynata wrote:
Aye, I even recall having read of a bayonet charge by NATO troops (I think they were British?) in Afghanistan just years ago. Now, in the age of firearms such situations would occur only rarely...

Maybe they were too close or too boxed in for gunfire to be effective...in jungle/urban combat (the Philippine Army trains hard for both) melee combat is just as likely as ranged. I just asked my grandfather - when its up close and personal, guns are useless. Daggers, bayonets, or bolos are more reliable and useful.

...but if it comes down to it, it'd all depend on what the material the armour is made of can endure, and what quality the bladed weapon is of.

Anyway, ceramic composite is supposed to be as effective as metal but only at a fraction of the weight, so I suppose valid factors would include the strength of the dagger/melee weapon's composition against the endurance/durability of the armor plate, the force behind the blow, the angle of the strike, and probably other factors I can't think off.

Tadashi wrote:What if we apply the 40k version - thick ceramite (ceramic composite analogs which should provide both physical and radiological protection) plates which should be heavy and cumbersome if not for the electrically-motivated metal fiber bundles beneath the armor plating which replicate the effect and design of muscles? Don't know if we can do the latter though...

Honestly, I think we are a lot closer to creating fibre bundle muscles rather than some superstrong alloy comparable to ceramite - simply because the former is actual science and the latter is a made-up material.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pneumatic_artificial_muscles
http://www-personal.umich.edu/~ferrisdp/pneumatics.html
http://www.spiegel.de/international/robo-soldiers-pentagon-to-develop-super-suits-a-459381.html

Tadashi wrote:The control interface would also be problematic - I doubt we could replicate or even want to replicate the Black Carapace. Probably something akin to that skinsuit-type interface Amberley Vail was wearing...

We already have a working control interface for the powered exoskeletons and artificial limbs that already exist today. This isn't science-fiction anymore. The common method seems to be electrodes that register the "signals" our body sends to the muscles and translating them into commands for the machine.
Ironically, with artificial muscles it may be even easier, as the machine just needs to copy these signals 1:1 rather than re-interpreting into commands suitable for servo-controlled joints with limited mobility.

@Lynata

Perhaps RL powered armor would have a mix of MJOLNIR (titanium alloy w/ reflective coating, cybernetic interface with or without AI assistance) and Power Armor (with electrically-motivated fiber bundles for muscles). The sensor suite with HUD interface would be easy to adapt - which leaves advanced fuel cells or miniaturized fusion drive and a compartmentalized environmental system to develop.

Touching on the part where a riggid upper body makes it hard to move, pick up things, etc. I can't help but remember descriptions for medieval (and other warfare melee combat). Stab them in the feet/legs and then bash their heads. For powered armour of the type the Imperium uses (obviously not the Eldar type as described in Path of the Warrior) it would seem that agile manouvres and footwork to protect from tipping over would be hard. While a human may have problem gathering sufficient strength to shift a Space Marine's central point of mass outside the rather small area offered by the feet, I'd imagine that marine on marine un-armed* combat may devolve around who can trip who over.

* or rather where the weapons aren't stabby enough to penetrate the necessarily weaker areas near the joints or abdomen. Unless it's a sergeant (or higher ranked) in which case simply punching his unprotected face would work wonders.

 Tadashi wrote:
Not sure if this is the right place...but is the form-fitting armor worn by Sisters, Howling Banshees, Guardians, etc. practical/workable IRL?

When it comes to the Eldar armour, I'd say very practical. It's all fake-science so just reading their description they seem to have all the benefits of thick kevlar without even the limitations modern hip-hop clothes offer (and obviously it has no issues that kevlar has when it comes to longevity). Seems they've taken Star Trek uniforms and said "this material absorbs blows much better than kevlar, and doesn't even chafe you-know-where!" Aspect Armour is just Guardian mesh with armour plates added where you don't need the armour to bend.

 Mahtamori wrote:
.... it would seem that agile manouvres and footwork to protect from tipping over would be hard.

Not really...the automated systems and nervous interfaces solve that problem.

Have you guys seen Dragon skin? That can stop a full clip of AK rounds at almost point blank range. I know its not form fitting, but if we have the tech to make effective armor (maybe not cost effective) today, how far off can we be from form fitting effective armor?

I think as far as armor for women, what you would see would be a flat breast plate tha angels out over tr breast area and back in towards the stomach. Not a breast plate that individualizes each breast. We're not talking Viking Valkyries here.

I also think you would find (contrary to 80, heav metal magazine and cartoon) that most female warriors of the 40th millennium would probably not be well endowed in the upper region. Unless you worship slaanesh I can't see a set of D's being anything but a hinderance on the battlefield.

Appologies for spelling errors, the iPhone frequently makes them while inhibiting your ability to re-insert the cursor where you want it.

 Tadashi wrote:

 Mahtamori wrote:
.... it would seem that agile manouvres and footwork to protect from tipping over would be hard.

Not really...the automated systems and nervous interfaces solve that problem.

...which isn't going to solve the problems you face when someone is actively trying to make you fall. Additionally nervous interfaces and automated systems doesn't really help you make a manoeuvre which the armour is designed for you not to make (power armour is a large suit of rigid plates, rigid plates protect better. Period).

Lion - we can't all help it, you know. :p Some girls are just naturally gifted up there no matter how much exercise we do (Although, I say 'we', but I'm not one of them. ^^

Anyway, the Sisters' battle-corsets are silly and if the Imperium was real, they wouldn't wear them. If you look at the artwork, they aren't even part of the armour - they're cloth or leather over the top of something else.

As far as Eldar armour goes, the stuff literally works off hope and good wishes, so they can do what they bleeding well like!

Furyou Miko wrote:Anyway, the Sisters' battle-corsets are silly and if the Imperium was real, they wouldn't wear them. If you look at the artwork, they aren't even part of the armour - they're cloth or leather over the top of something else.

Which is exactly why they are not silly.
Apart from the ornamental role with which you can justify just about anything in a regime like the Imperium, "dust cover" serves to lengthen a suit's lifetime and minimises maintenance. And that's before we assume that this material has protective qualities of its own, reinforcing the underlying plates.

It'd be like calling accessories such as the shemagh or goggle pouches "silly" just because they appear not to protect the soldier directly.

I don't really know, or care. They look nice. The idea of Female warriors is a stretch of the mind itself, so they need something to reassure the gamer that they're actually using models of women.

I think it would be hard to make custom tight fitting armor for every single sister. Seems like sisters all have the same body type and appearance though, haha.

 Tadashi wrote:

 Lynata wrote:
Aye, I even recall having read of a bayonet charge by NATO troops (I think they were British?) in Afghanistan just years ago. Now, in the age of firearms such situations would occur only rarely...

Maybe they were too close or too boxed in for gunfire to be effective...

As I recall that was exactly the issue - the Brits got under fire while crossing a water-filled ditch and the enemy were close, under 100 meters away. Raising your head for a look would have been bad, trying to get up to to see a target and aim for it would have been bad. So the guy in charge asked some of his men to fix bayonets and follow him in a charge while the rest then could get up and support them with gunfire.

A Gurkha soldier also got the second-highest British service medal for a bayonet charge in Afghanistan quite recently. 15-20 Taliban attacked his 4-man watchpost, he spent 400 rounds of ammo, 17 grenades and then decided to bayonet charge the remaining enemy because he wanted to take a few more with him before they got to kill his wounded squaddies.

Form fitting also doesn't make sense for the waste area. If you look at medieval armour, it has a beer gut shape to better deflect blows, while a thin waste would be easier to penetrate.

Spetulhu wrote:A Gurkha soldier also got the second-highest British service medal for a bayonet charge in Afghanistan quite recently. 15-20 Taliban attacked his 4-man watchpost, he spent 400 rounds of ammo, 17 grenades and then decided to bayonet charge the remaining enemy because he wanted to take a few more with him before they got to kill his wounded squaddies.

Gurkhas are insane and badass. The stories you hear about them ... sheesh.

Mr Nobody wrote:Form fitting also doesn't make sense for the waste area. If you look at medieval armour, it has a beer gut shape to better deflect blows, while a thin waste would be easier to penetrate.

And then people invented the mace.

The way our tech is developing, I'm pretty sure we'll invent the invul save before better armor saves that approximates imperial standards for thin form fitting armor. bulky armor, we'll get pretty close to imperial standard pretty quickly. Probably power armor as standard for troops in 50-80 yrs.

Field technology is still fairly developing but I forsee some good stuff down the pipeline in the next 20 years.

 Lynata wrote:

Spetulhu wrote:A Gurkha soldier also got the second-highest British service medal for a bayonet charge in Afghanistan quite recently.

Gurkhas are insane and badass. The stories you hear about them ... sheesh.

 Mahtamori wrote:

 Tadashi wrote:

 Mahtamori wrote:
.... it would seem that agile manouvres and footwork to protect from tipping over would be hard.

Not really...the automated systems and nervous interfaces solve that problem.

...which isn't going to solve the problems you face when someone is actively trying to make you fall. Additionally nervous interfaces and automated systems doesn't really help you make a manoeuvre which the armour is designed for you not to make (power armour is a large suit of rigid plates, rigid plates protect better. Period).

And yet Astartes and Sisters make it work. Its not the weapons that make the warrior, its the person wielding them.

Tadashi wrote:And yet Astartes and Sisters make it work. Its not the weapons that make the warrior, its the person wielding them.

Granted, anything works in fiction. Looking at Space Marine armour, their massive breastplate would limit arm mobility by a considerable degree.

That being said, I would assume that - with some training - people could get used to it and just start to move differently. Medieval knights grew accustomed to heavy armour as well, after all.