Armoured glass

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Armored glass is usually referred to as bullet resistant.
Glass is actually one of the harder substances found in the industrial field, even harder than a metal armor plate.
Many might find it hard to believe that initially (undamaged), armored glass should be more effective at stopping high caliber rounds than the armor metal plate behind the seat.
The problem is that it would lose effectiveness with each shot it absorbs.
It might stop the first round or two but under fire it would quickly degrade its effectiveness. How quickly the effectiveness degrades depends on range and caliber size.
I don't think stopping a single 20mm round would be trouble, HE or AP. Realistically, the armored glass was probably absorbing several shots before any got through.
As for retaining visual integrity, forget it, not during WW2 anyways. Better than trying to fly with a bullet in your head.

This also brings up Flak Jackets.
I'm not sure exactly what they're made of but they didn't do a particularly good job at protecting the pilot/crew from bodily harm.
My grandpa said it was better at keeping a guys guts in one place.
 
Last edited:
Thanks chaps, some interesting information. I had not considered a multiple hit possibility I must admit.
Maybe, the idea was to offer some protection and that was deemed enough. I say this as the perspex and alloy cockpit side offered no protection.
Now, can you help with this:

On bomber aircraft, where the turrets partly fitted with armoured glass? I have looked at the later marks of Flying Fortress in particular .They fairly bristle with guns.
Hope you can help
Cheers
John
 
Same on British aircraft. In fact, many gunners on Lancasters removed the centre panel on the rear turret, to afford a better view.
 
Armoured glass/bulletproof (or as others have said....bullet resistant) was prevalent in the war. Most RAF aircraft had glass comprising multi layers with thin see thru acetate sheets between. The Spitfire and Hurricane had similar designs....one 5/8th inch thick inner layer, with 2 x 1/4 inch one side and 3 x 1/4 inch the other side....thick, heavy and optically perfect.

The side parts were thin perspex and of no use as others have said. The idea of the armoured centre glass was to angle it (reduce drag) with benefit of lessening the angle presented to a bullet (and there fore energy to be dissipated).
The P39 had an armoured screen fitted in an inner stainless steel shroud....the Lanc had armoured screen, only about 0.5 inch thick.....B17 had armoured front and side screens. Some gun turrets had an internal slab of layer glass in a separate frame (i.e. Liberator, B17 rear turret).

One truly fully armoured cockpit was the IL2 Sturmtovik (sorry not got my spelling head on!!)....often called a bath tub.
 
Airframes said:
As to 'bullet proof' - in the true sense of the word, no. As to affording some protection - to an extent. It might stop the full force of a projectile, but would still 'scab off'
Click to expand...
Not wholly true; when Stanford Tuck had his first sheet of armoured glass fitted to his Spitfire, during Dunkirk, it stopped a round from a 110's gunner, which would have taken Tuck's head off. He was totally unscathed.
Edgar
 
I agree Edgar, but of course range, angle etc will also determine whether a round penetrates, is deflected, or perhaps cause internal 'scabbing'. As an example, John Cunningham received facial injuries when the windscreen of his Mosquito was hit, as fragments of the armoured glass flew into the cockpit.
 
I don't know if anyone meantioned this exactly, but Eric Brown commented that the optical quality of later captured Luftwaffe aircraft armoured glass was of much inferior quality to early war examples. Inplying that as the war situation worsened the quality control suffered.
 
Armoured glass is made up of laminate glass isn't it?
The same sort of idea as self sealing fuel tanks, ie the round energy is absorbed by the laminate.
So, would armoured glass be able to absorb multiple hits or is it a one hit protector I wonder?

I have to say that I still marvel at the WW1 planes, canvas and wood and a small screen usually covered in oil !!

Cheers
John
 
Mustang nut said:
Concerning armoured glass I have read in a few places fitting armoured glass reduced the speed of the airplane by a few MPH, which doesnt seem logical to me. Does it reduce speed and if so why. Or is it the generalk fitting of armour radios and other ancilliaries that produce this reduction.
Click to expand...

Early Spitfires for one had their performance cut by adding armoured glass, as the glass was EXTERNALLY mounted. Tests showed that the armoured windscreen cost the Spitfire Mk I about 6 mph in performance.

It was fitted to the Mk I through Mk Vb. From the Mk Vc onwards, the glass was an integral part of the cockpit frame.
 
Jabberwocky said:
Early Spitfires for one had their performance cut by adding armoured glass, as the glass was EXTERNALLY mounted. Tests showed that the armoured windscreen cost the Spitfire Mk I about 6 mph in performance.

It was fitted to the Mk I through Mk Vb. From the Mk Vc onwards, the glass was an integral part of the cockpit frame.
Click to expand...
The internal armour was designed for the cancelled Mk.III, and was fitted during the Mk.II/V production run in April 1941, not just on the Vc.
Edgar
 
Readie said:
Armoured glass is made up of laminate glass isn't it?

So, would armoured glass be able to absorb multiple hits or is it a one hit protector I wonder?

Cheers
John
Click to expand...

Think of auto windshield glass only much thicker and with more layers. Second hit close to first and there would be very little protection. Second hit a number of inches away (and the windscreens weren't very big) and while the glass in one or more layers may be cracked it is still there and the plastic laminate material still has to be torn. Bullet may change direction and/or turn sideways as it penetrates.
 
Shortround6 said:
Think of auto windshield glass only much thicker and with more layers. Second hit close to first and there would be very little protection. Second hit a number of inches away (and the windscreens weren't very big) and while the glass in one or more layers may be cracked it is still there and the plastic laminate material still has to be torn. Bullet may change direction and/or turn sideways as it penetrates.
Click to expand...

Thank you SR6.
 
Readie said:
Armoured glass is made up of laminate glass isn't it?
The same sort of idea as self sealing fuel tanks, ie the round energy is absorbed by the laminate.
So, would armoured glass be able to absorb multiple hits or is it a one hit protector I wonder?
Click to expand...

Or if the glass wasn't intended for anything more than protecting the pilot from flying debri, such as after shooting at it.
This is probably where ordinary canopy glass might fail.
I just wonder why then they stick some installations inside the canopy. I'm only guessing, but i would think it had a more significant purpose than
that.
 
post76 said:
Or if the glass wasn't intended for anything more than protecting the pilot from flying debri, such as after shooting at it.
This is probably where ordinary canopy glass might fail.
I just wonder why then they stick some installations inside the canopy. I'm only guessing, but i would think it had a more significant purpose than
that.
Click to expand...

I'm dreadfully sorry, but I can't follow your drift with this post....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back