broadsword damage to battledress

[Mongoose Pete]

We are talking a TL14 armored exo-skelleton against a TL4 weapon. Armor designed against being penetrated by sharp-nosed rifle bullets that make a sword point look dull, designed to withstand concussion, without the need for vents (It's a vac-suit). It's a walking APC and like an APC it should be immune against a weapon relying on a single man's strength for effect. YMMV but for me any other outcome would be a sign of a badly balanced game.

What with the ideas of 2" thick protection and invulnerable armour being banded around, I think people need to take a step back and consider basic body mechanics.

You cannot have every surface of your body protected with 2" and still maintain adequate freedom of movement. What I mean by adequate is the ability to run, squat, etc without impediment which is necessary for firearm combat where running speed and the ability to take cover are paramount. Areas such as where your upper arm meets your chest, and the inside of the upper thighs simply don't have the space to sandwich in 2+2=4" of protection. Take it from a guy who fights in medieval armour, in my full plate legs I 'waddle', not run. And having your upper arms binding/forced outwards by chest armour means that trying to fire a rifle two handed would become very awkward.

Just take a look at modern space suits. They are thick to provide micrometeor protection, vacuum integrity and thermal control. They are extremely difficult for astronauts to move in them whilst still Earth-side. Imagine trying to fight in one!

So from an engineering perspective even with advanced materials, battle dress is going to have to sacrifice armour thickness on the inside of the arms and thighs. These will be areas open to vulnerability, since you'll be hard pressed to squeeze in the thermal control and vacuum proof layers at a manageable thickness and still have freedom of movement. Michelin Man anyone? Joints as previously pointed out will be points of weakness too.

I have no problem with mounting the exo-skeleton articulators on the outside of limbs, and covering them with a significant thickness of armour plating. But an armoured suit designed for cold vacuum will be by necessity full of weak spots which will be capable of taking damage from
a skilled broadsword user. I'm not saying the BD user is at any great risk, but no armour can be invulnerable.

Another thing to note is that hits do not need to penetrate to damage the wearer. If the neck of battledress has up-down mobility or can tilt side to side, a powerful head hit could cause whiplash without doing anywhere near enough to penetrate. Similarly, if the limbs have significant freedom of motion they could be strained or sprained without damaging the battle dress in the slightest.

Very true. Inside a 2mm thick 4kg and very well padded stainless steel helmet I have taken head shots which have caused minor concussion and dented the helm. Forget the broadsword, face someone wielding a great axe (same TL?) in BD and I can see an good chance of that hurting, and causing knockbacks.

The other thing people haven't taken into consideration is the vulnerability of the backpack housing all the hydraulics for the actuators, the power system and heat exchange units. The last will be very susceptible, since thermal radiation needs to be at the surface to operate, and heat build-up in a vacuum suit whilst under combat stress may be very fast. Of course it could be built internally.

Finally, no matter what the armour design there will be some external way for access into the suit. Clips, levers, taps, etc. No suit will designed with only internal locks, since in an A&E situation, where the wearer is incapacitated, medics still need to get inside. It will be a mechanical design so you can still get in even after/during EMPs. So those would be vulnerable in combat too.

Oh, and have you ever thought that the broadsword might be wielded by an opponent who's wearing strength augmenting powered armour too?

 

[Myrm]

Sorry to correct here but the Abrams reported taken out by an RPG was not. If you read the stories written by several men who were there the M1 took an rpg hit very low and at at upward angle that penetrated the lower armour on the engine compartment. This causes an oil leak.
The tank continued on mission having reported it was overheating.
It was decided to push on and it eventualy stopped. At this point it was abandoned and stripped of sensitive items.

So - an RPG hit penetrated the tank and did enough damage to M-kill it......sorry - to me thats taking it out - the tank is off mission and abandoned from the RPG hit. Im not suggesting that this is common, just that it is possible.

I know the picture is after all the secondary material fired into it, but I cited the report as an instance of an RPG can kill a modern tank,and an M-kill is a kill.

The Defense Update page states clearly 'Successful attacks are scored at stationary targets, primarily from side or rear attacks, at the less protected parts of the tanks.' so I do not think that that is at odds to your more detailed description anyway. Wiki cites it as a recoiless rifle round actually, but trawling the assorted military sites RPG is what crops up most.