A bullet striking an old style US or UK helmet would go straight through whereas a hit on the side from an angle would deflect the round away. Would a direct head on hit penetrate one of the modern Kevlar helmets.
When did the US adopt the “German” style helmet.
Incidentally, it appears to me that the old UK helmet was only good for protecting the wearer from overhead shrapnel bursts and maybe for brewing tea.
The German helmet seems much more protective especially in the neck area
The first helmets were developed in response to finding that casualties in WWI trench warfare were overwhelmingly from shrapnel wounds to the head - as to why the UK persisted with the basic shape through WWII (though modified and deepened) I can only guess that dumb inertia - which accounts for 95% of military “planning” - played some part
UK Paras or Tankers in WWII used helmets that look more like the modern UK helmet
(since a wide brim isn’t ideal if you’re chucking yourself out of a plane - or squeezing into a tank)
The latest US helmet has actually reduced the rear protection (and is smaller overall) - partly because the previous version could make firing in the prone position awkward, with the helmet getting pushed over the eyes by the collar of body armour
(not that the Beastly Hun had body armour - but there’s always a trade off between protection Vs weight/manouverablity)
Both UK and US helmets now seem to be as much somewhere to hang (sorry, - “interface with”) added bits of kit and assorted gizmos as anything else
It depends on the round involved. The 9mm, .45ACP, 5.56 and 7.62mm rounds might be defeated, depending on the range. However, the .50BMG will pretty much tear any helmet to Hell, and there are specialty rounds like the 5.7mm that exist specifically to punch holes in Kevlar and the like.
Of course helmets don’t only stop bullets. If you were to do a study, I would recon that mostly helmets prevent you hitting your head on the side of the vehicle, on the ground, on the concrete. A simple crash helmet would prevent a boatload of injuries even to everyday civilians, let alone people who live an energetic, athletic life.
A slight hijack but i heard somewhere that soliders and marines prefer to leave their helment on hooked so when their is an airburst the shrapnel will blow off the helment and not break their neck like if was attached. any truth in this?
An amusing instance of misleading statistics: when the steel helmet was first introduced, the War Office found to its horror that the incidence of head injuries increased. Eventually the penny dropped: the increase in injuries was caused by the reduction in fatalities - men getting dinged around the head were now getting reportable injuries instead of just being killed outright.
I’m not saying it doesn’t happen, but it would be highly discouraged. For what its worth, in 5 years of active duty Army service, and one year of National Guard service, I’ve never seen a soldier do it.
Well, there used to be (in the steel-pot days) a ‘concussion ball’ as part of the webbing that strapped under your chin. If a blast wave hit you, the helmet would fly off, for whatever reason.
I have not seen one since before most of you were born.
