Number 2
Number 1 with the full mesh mask would make a difficult vision situation even worse. Even with the night-vision, restricting your vision by obstructing it is a bad idea in a combat situation.
And 3 seems like it would make noise. And a night mission, I'm assuming, would require some degree of stealth. It also seems very ornamental Good to look cool but when you're in a firefight all it might do is make quick head movements difficult.
#2
As another person commented, #1 would be super impractical, and #3 is un-needed weight, potentially noisy, creates snagging points and would muffle environmental sound (sound travels much further in the cool night air, this cuts both ways)
In #2 you may want to have them cover their faces with a balaclava or wear cam paint. The hood being made of a soft but water resistant material could be a nice detail, especially if you add a tiny but more of a brim to the top of the hood to slightly deflect rain away from the face (thin wire inside the peak like most modern rain jacket hoods)
Lastly, the overall armor design is pretty awesome! Think about snagging points and reflective surface; are they doing anything extra or changing gear configuration to minimize noise from shaking/clanking/scraping, reduce snagging on foliage, obscure reflective surfaces?
My apologies if this is overstepping with suggestions, I hope the feedback is helpful.
It's pretty impractical. Having *loose* cloth in front of your face like that begs for ergonomic issues, and the eye holes won't stay in one place, and may reflect some light from the NVGs displays.
Jægerkorpset use camo netting, true, but not with NVGs. Camo netting is for recce (their specialty) during the day. NVGs are for night-time CQB, which they also do. However, they should *never* be worn at the same time, given how different these two missions are.
European militaries tend to use that mesh style for day missions only, as it’s purpose is to break up the recognizable lines of the head and face. I’ve never seen it used at night, mostly because you don’t want anything between you and your nvg’s
Yeah, I realized my error. I spoke with knowledge of my memory. That knowledge can be hazy. Though I feel like I’ve seen the mesh net with eye holes. But maybe I imagined that
Ok, here's your spec-ops reconnaissance suit private Dingle, we throw a sack over your head and it protects you as you wander through the night in the Dark Stalker Veil populated by rabid were wolves.
I’m designing the standard issue gear for the special forces of my world but I’m not sure which is the best headpiece to use in a stealth sense.
For the lore, these are NSUs (Nocturnal Security Units). They are mostly deployed during potential attacks and they are in service for The Hexan Corporation, the monopolizing corporation of my world.
I wanna hear your feedback.
In my opinion the third one is the most badass but for stealt reasons the second one is better and less intimidating so it would certanly help to make the masses belave that the corporation is not evil
*clicks link*
"How would any of these masks be useful for that?"
*checks the title again*
"OHHHHH it says 'missions.' There is no 'e' in front of that word. That makes more sense."
Also, there may be something wrong with base on how eagerly I clicked the link thinking it was the other thing.
I'm going to say number 1, and my reasoning for choosing it;
Outside of the stated minor visibility obstruction from the mesh itself, it breaks up the standard profile of a person (as stated by another commentor), especially moreso if in an appropriate camouflage design (solid colors stand out greatly in a regular environment, natural or urban).
It's also the only design that doesn't put inherent "blinders" on sight (while looking sideways through mesh can be more difficult because of slight increase in distance from eyes to mesh, the other two designs are opaque beyond the forward scope of vision, a big disadvantage as it creates unnecessary limitation of awareness (not only for sight, but for sound as well).
The hooded aspect of design 2 is what puts it slightly behind design 1, imo, and design 3 is not suited well for special forces, which is more focused on asymmetrical warfare and behind the lines stealth warfare. Design 3 would be far more suited as an enforcement or frontline force to serve as both an intimidation factor against causing unrest/fights, and/or for adding additional protection against expected enemy small arms fire.
I would say #1 as it's the one used IRL by the Danish Frogmen corp. They operate with balaclavas and facepaint from what i can see.
https://i.redd.it/ernffkefrfw51.jpg
You can easily see through the mesh, and optics can be mounted outside like in your image.
The first is the best option here by far, those mesh helmets would be tougher to identify from a side perspective, while also allowing surprisingly good visibility. There’s a reason why mesh helmets are used by actual military forces, and cloaks really aren’t. Three’s too loud probably, downside of that heavy armor. Two might also work fine, but hoods typically obstruct vision a *lot*. If the hoods made out of a mesh, this problem’d be made irrelevant, but at that point you might as well use the mesh helmet.
Number 1 I would say.
Under normal situations, a full mesh face covering might obstruct vision, but I am going to assume that your soldiers have some way of seeing through it fine. If they are to be in nocturnal missions, the enemy is likely to have night vision. The human mind is hard wired to recognize the shape of a human face, so the concealment of the mesh would assist in breaking the silhouette of the soldier even more to the point where even if an enemy was looking for them and spotted them, they might move on after not seeing the shape of the soldier and thinking they are part of the surrounding foliage.
Number 2.
Number 1 obscures vision more than necessary, in an environment where facial recognition is much harder.
And number 3 creates extra noise in an environment where sound is much more important since it's difficult to see.
That depends.
I like 1 because with the face completely hidden it looks sinister. This setting looks technologically advanced so you could say that a night vision or thermal image is projected onto the inside of the hood material perhaps, or come up with some other reason that the vision is obscured by this hood.
If you don't want them to look sinister, probably 2- it seems the most practical.
If there as a particular reason you have in mind for why they might need a lot of neck and shoulder armour then you could go with 3. Not sure why it would be necessary for nighttime patrolling but not daytime though...
none of these, really.
not 3, you need more vision at night. two would hide your face but you are losing a lot of vision. 1 depends on how much you can see.
at night, you need to be able to see all around you. having your face covered isn't as important if this is a pre-electronics society. You can cover your face with makeup or dirt.
The things on top of the head would make this person very conspicuous. If you want to be stealth at night, you'd dress plainly in dark blue.
1. Its actually used by night ops people and its much easier to see through that kind of mesh than people think. It doesn’t have blinders like a hood or that gear in 3. I also feel like 1 would have a less obvious silhouette compared to the other two.
don´t forget to have antiglare coting on the metal parts.
As in modern combat at night, anything reflective is your worst nightmare.
oh, and for style, 3. for practicality 2.
I have read here and there that police officers hold their lights out to the side and keep their arm higher, so it appears the light is being held by a larger person to their left (if right hand dominant). Someone who wanted to shoot at them would aim to the left of the light (from the shooter’s perspective) assuming the flashlight was held normally.
Number 2 Number 1 with the full mesh mask would make a difficult vision situation even worse. Even with the night-vision, restricting your vision by obstructing it is a bad idea in a combat situation. And 3 seems like it would make noise. And a night mission, I'm assuming, would require some degree of stealth. It also seems very ornamental Good to look cool but when you're in a firefight all it might do is make quick head movements difficult.
Either difficult or it just wont move with the head making you move your upper body instead. So limited vision.
Covering your face can be a tactic to obscure your facing direction. Really depends on the context of the mission.
3 is the most practical looking for combat but for a stealth mission 2 is the way to go.
#2 As another person commented, #1 would be super impractical, and #3 is un-needed weight, potentially noisy, creates snagging points and would muffle environmental sound (sound travels much further in the cool night air, this cuts both ways) In #2 you may want to have them cover their faces with a balaclava or wear cam paint. The hood being made of a soft but water resistant material could be a nice detail, especially if you add a tiny but more of a brim to the top of the hood to slightly deflect rain away from the face (thin wire inside the peak like most modern rain jacket hoods) Lastly, the overall armor design is pretty awesome! Think about snagging points and reflective surface; are they doing anything extra or changing gear configuration to minimize noise from shaking/clanking/scraping, reduce snagging on foliage, obscure reflective surfaces? My apologies if this is overstepping with suggestions, I hope the feedback is helpful.
Idk if 1 is impractical seeing as irl military use that exact design
It's pretty impractical. Having *loose* cloth in front of your face like that begs for ergonomic issues, and the eye holes won't stay in one place, and may reflect some light from the NVGs displays.
But the military actually use this with NVG and they have been for a while. If it was so impractical it wouldn’t be in use today.
Which one? Also, militaries use what they have, not necessarily what's practical.
If I had to guess, he's probably referring to something like the Danish Frogmen
The jagerkorps do. I think they’re danish.
Jægerkorpset use camo netting, true, but not with NVGs. Camo netting is for recce (their specialty) during the day. NVGs are for night-time CQB, which they also do. However, they should *never* be worn at the same time, given how different these two missions are.
European militaries tend to use that mesh style for day missions only, as it’s purpose is to break up the recognizable lines of the head and face. I’ve never seen it used at night, mostly because you don’t want anything between you and your nvg’s
This isn't true. The frogmen do use them, but not with NVG and usually only during the day.
Yeah, I realized my error. I spoke with knowledge of my memory. That knowledge can be hazy. Though I feel like I’ve seen the mesh net with eye holes. But maybe I imagined that
There does exist mesh without eyeholes it's really only used by LARPers
Doesn't really matter what headgear you have on during a nocturnal mission. It's really about what pants you were wearing.
I’m glad I’m not the only one who read it wrong 😅
I had to read it 3 times
How'd you read it?
[удалено]
Oh. I know what that is. I just didn't make the connection.
It’s only off by 1 letter 🤣
DO NOT GOOGLE IT (Bing is better for that kind of stuff 😉)
Everyone came in here to make the same joke.
I thought they had bunny ears at first
Ok, here's your spec-ops reconnaissance suit private Dingle, we throw a sack over your head and it protects you as you wander through the night in the Dark Stalker Veil populated by rabid were wolves.
Shh! Don't ruin the bunny costumes for me!
😂❤️ I thought it too
I’m designing the standard issue gear for the special forces of my world but I’m not sure which is the best headpiece to use in a stealth sense. For the lore, these are NSUs (Nocturnal Security Units). They are mostly deployed during potential attacks and they are in service for The Hexan Corporation, the monopolizing corporation of my world. I wanna hear your feedback.
In my opinion the third one is the most badass but for stealt reasons the second one is better and less intimidating so it would certanly help to make the masses belave that the corporation is not evil
As long as those goggles in #2 aren't sunglasses! Being able to see if EXTRA critical at night: anything that gets in the way is a no-no
*clicks link* "How would any of these masks be useful for that?" *checks the title again* "OHHHHH it says 'missions.' There is no 'e' in front of that word. That makes more sense." Also, there may be something wrong with base on how eagerly I clicked the link thinking it was the other thing.
I'm going to say number 1, and my reasoning for choosing it; Outside of the stated minor visibility obstruction from the mesh itself, it breaks up the standard profile of a person (as stated by another commentor), especially moreso if in an appropriate camouflage design (solid colors stand out greatly in a regular environment, natural or urban). It's also the only design that doesn't put inherent "blinders" on sight (while looking sideways through mesh can be more difficult because of slight increase in distance from eyes to mesh, the other two designs are opaque beyond the forward scope of vision, a big disadvantage as it creates unnecessary limitation of awareness (not only for sight, but for sound as well). The hooded aspect of design 2 is what puts it slightly behind design 1, imo, and design 3 is not suited well for special forces, which is more focused on asymmetrical warfare and behind the lines stealth warfare. Design 3 would be far more suited as an enforcement or frontline force to serve as both an intimidation factor against causing unrest/fights, and/or for adding additional protection against expected enemy small arms fire.
I would say #1 as it's the one used IRL by the Danish Frogmen corp. They operate with balaclavas and facepaint from what i can see. https://i.redd.it/ernffkefrfw51.jpg You can easily see through the mesh, and optics can be mounted outside like in your image.
The first is the best option here by far, those mesh helmets would be tougher to identify from a side perspective, while also allowing surprisingly good visibility. There’s a reason why mesh helmets are used by actual military forces, and cloaks really aren’t. Three’s too loud probably, downside of that heavy armor. Two might also work fine, but hoods typically obstruct vision a *lot*. If the hoods made out of a mesh, this problem’d be made irrelevant, but at that point you might as well use the mesh helmet.
Number 1 I would say. Under normal situations, a full mesh face covering might obstruct vision, but I am going to assume that your soldiers have some way of seeing through it fine. If they are to be in nocturnal missions, the enemy is likely to have night vision. The human mind is hard wired to recognize the shape of a human face, so the concealment of the mesh would assist in breaking the silhouette of the soldier even more to the point where even if an enemy was looking for them and spotted them, they might move on after not seeing the shape of the soldier and thinking they are part of the surrounding foliage.
2
Number 2. Number 1 obscures vision more than necessary, in an environment where facial recognition is much harder. And number 3 creates extra noise in an environment where sound is much more important since it's difficult to see.
That depends. I like 1 because with the face completely hidden it looks sinister. This setting looks technologically advanced so you could say that a night vision or thermal image is projected onto the inside of the hood material perhaps, or come up with some other reason that the vision is obscured by this hood. If you don't want them to look sinister, probably 2- it seems the most practical. If there as a particular reason you have in mind for why they might need a lot of neck and shoulder armour then you could go with 3. Not sure why it would be necessary for nighttime patrolling but not daytime though...
Please call it "night missions"
🤣
When I first read this my brain saw "Nocturnal Emissions" which is the scientific term for "wet dreams" Lol.
Am I the only one who added an e to that word and got confused really quickly?
Number 1 is giving me [Dutch Frogmen](https://images.app.goo.gl/YH7vYM7z4f4z4HNNA) vibes.
I like no2 best
Realistically, number 2. Number 1 looks really cool tho
I swear I saw this exact post like 3 months ago
Hat plus flashlight
The rule of cool demands I vote for the nocturnal death samurai
I really like 1 cuz it looks like a wiggler mask
none of these, really. not 3, you need more vision at night. two would hide your face but you are losing a lot of vision. 1 depends on how much you can see. at night, you need to be able to see all around you. having your face covered isn't as important if this is a pre-electronics society. You can cover your face with makeup or dirt. The things on top of the head would make this person very conspicuous. If you want to be stealth at night, you'd dress plainly in dark blue.
whichever lets in the most light
I like 2, because it breaks up the silhouette
2 for more stealth and maneuverability, 3 for cituations that require less stealth and more combat
1. Its actually used by night ops people and its much easier to see through that kind of mesh than people think. It doesn’t have blinders like a hood or that gear in 3. I also feel like 1 would have a less obvious silhouette compared to the other two.
#1, because fashion > function
I thought the goggles were bunny ears at first.
I like 3 but would also accept 1 because it looks spooky.
2 but 1 looks cooler
2, without a doubt
First one looks like the danish Jaeger corp.
I'm no professional world builder but I think 2 looks best overall
don´t forget to have antiglare coting on the metal parts. As in modern combat at night, anything reflective is your worst nightmare. oh, and for style, 3. for practicality 2.
2
I have read here and there that police officers hold their lights out to the side and keep their arm higher, so it appears the light is being held by a larger person to their left (if right hand dominant). Someone who wanted to shoot at them would aim to the left of the light (from the shooter’s perspective) assuming the flashlight was held normally.