Understanding Spall Vs. Fragmentation(2023)
Posted4 months agoActive4 months ago
tacticon.comOtherstory
calmneutral
Debate
0/100
BallisticsMilitaryTerminology
Key topics
Ballistics
Military
Terminology
Article explaining the difference between spall and fragmentation in the context of ballistics.
Snapshot generated from the HN discussion
Discussion Activity
Light discussionFirst comment
33m
Peak period
1
0-1h
Avg / period
1
Key moments
- 01Story posted
Sep 16, 2025 at 8:13 PM EDT
4 months ago
Step 01 - 02First comment
Sep 16, 2025 at 8:46 PM EDT
33m after posting
Step 02 - 03Peak activity
1 comments in 0-1h
Hottest window of the conversation
Step 03 - 04Latest activity
Sep 16, 2025 at 8:46 PM EDT
4 months ago
Step 04
Generating AI Summary...
Analyzing up to 500 comments to identify key contributors and discussion patterns
ID: 45269985Type: storyLast synced: 11/17/2025, 2:08:32 PM
Want the full context?
Jump to the original sources
Read the primary article or dive into the live Hacker News thread when you're ready.
- They don't reliably stop high-velocity lead-core rounds. M193 from a 20" barrel is known to readily penetrate steel rifle plates, and lead-core .223/5.56mm like M193 is literally the most common rifle threat in America. Such plates will also fall to .270 Win, .22-250, and many other common hunting cartridges.
- They're extremely heavy. 8-9 pounds with coating, on average? That's heavier than most ceramic Level IV plates that will stop every threat you're likely to encounter, absolutely reliably.
What's interesting, given this is HN, is that the technology to make steel rifle plates -- exactly like today's -- has existed since roughly the 1910s. Nobody did it, in large part because it wasn't a good idea back then. (Rifle calibers tended to be heavier -- like the German 7.92×57mm -- and medical science wasn't as advanced, which further militate against steel rifle plates.) It's still not a good idea today, especially in light of superior alternatives.