Sensor-laden helmets could measure shock from explosions

While we've seen lots of research revolve around battlefield-ready vests, new sensor-studded helmets could be headed to Iraq in order to "measure the shock from explosive devices." Due to mounting concern and a thirst for knowledge about traumatic brain injury (TBI), the US Army awarded Simbex -- the same company involved with Virginia Tech's data gathering helmets -- a contract to further develop technology for use in combat headgear. Furthermore, the firm hopes to "develop an automatic data-collation system" that could potentially relay information to bases or medics via RFID. It was noted, too, that the Army plans on testing Simbex's design along with "several alternative technologies," and the method that proves most useful could be deployed "as early as December of this year."

[DickHardknocks @ Sep 19th 2007 10:37AM]

would it not be more prudent to spend the money to equipt the soldiers with armor that is immune to certain levels of explosions and gunfire - rather than just check to see how much force the explosion carries?

If we develop nonomaterials (which use an electrical impulse to make themselves harder than steel) yet are thin and wearable, we would have "bulletproof" soldiers - armor that would easily stop shrapnel too.

[Mike @ Sep 19th 2007 11:04AM]

I think the benefits come from better understanding the types of shocks that the soldiers are being exposed to so that they CAN build better armor and helmets. Just tossing more armor at the problem may not be the solution.

The other benefit is being able to understand how a particular soldier was injured so that medics know better how to treat them when they pick them up. Compare it to your mechanic plugging in your car to do a system's check. With something like this (imagine the entire uniform able to relay this information) they might be able to speed up medical treatment by sending a full injury history from the field to the hospital.

[I LOVE THE CAPS LOCK KEY @ Sep 19th 2007 11:16AM]

"develop an automatic data-collation system" that could potentially relay information to bases or medics via RFID"


I believe the idea here is so when medics find an unconscious injured person and no one is around to tell what happened, the RFID system will help explain how he was injured then he can get the proper treatment.

And yes, they are working on better body armor.

[paul34 @ Sep 19th 2007 3:23PM]

While that's true, we need to study things first so that we can better understand it.

Remember, bigger isn't always better. Just ask the domestic car makers.

It took a lot of research and a lot of money, but it is now possible to build very strong cars that are both relatively light and not lard-like in porportions and implementation.

The easiest answer isn't always the best answer. Who knows, all this research may one day lead to a "helmet" design we never would have thought of... but that works thousands of times better than today's head-buckets.

[Harkonian @ Sep 19th 2007 6:18PM]

Would it not be more prudent to spend the money developing a rational foreign policy that would be immune to certain levels of governmental stupidity - rather than continuously meddling in foreign governments?

[Quote]would it not be more prudent to spend the money to equipt the soldiers with armor that is immune to certain levels of explosions and gunfire - rather than just check to see how much force the explosion carries?[/Quote]

[danielbasil @ Sep 19th 2007 11:57AM]

I wonder what it would register if the early adopters wore these during the $200 price drop announcement. See? You can make an iphone comment about ANYTHING.

[ohne hosen @ Sep 19th 2007 12:12PM]

It measures shock, but can it measure awe?

[nilweed @ Sep 19th 2007 12:15PM]

Fast forward 10 years into the future... This just in:

The U.S. government's $200B research plan to measure effects of explosions on the human head and body has determined that explosions near the human head or body can be harmful or fatal. Senator Ida Hitthat is now lobbying for funding to provide armor to U.S. soldiers to protect against the effects of explosions.

[Asher69 @ Sep 19th 2007 1:01PM]

"Senator Ida Hitthat..." that has to be the funniest thing I've seen all day! Thanks! (But the "...does it measure awe" comment came in a VERY close second!)

...and true, it does seem we spend an awful lot of our money on research into things which would seem like regular old common sense to most people. Then again, if it WERE regular old common sense to most people, we probably wouldn't need all the extra research funding. How's that for mental gymnastics?

[James @ Sep 19th 2007 12:38PM]

The problem with armor, like so many other things in this conflict, is that the numbers are asymmetric: if we spend a hundred billion on extra armor, the enemy just spends an extra hundred thousand or million on more explosives. The (cheap) bigger bang nullifies the benefit of the (expensive) more advanced armor -- this is true of both body and vehicle armor.

I'm not saying we shouldn't spend the money, but the situation really sucks and we need to focus on alternative means like advanced detect-and-defeat systems that stop the bombs from going off with soldiers around in the first place.

[jroc @ Sep 19th 2007 1:34PM]

Those soldiers out there are bin laden with alquada problems.

[Sam @ Sep 19th 2007 2:47PM]

I would actually like to see this technology go into football helmets, to track player concussions.

[Twitchy @ Sep 19th 2007 7:07PM]

So...where do the beer cans go?