Iron Man 3

It definitely looks like the newer suit design, so hopefully the other WarMachine armor is intact somewhere and he makes an appearance. I can see Rhodes forced into using the Patriot armor as a "symbol" of the US/USAF and not being too fond of it. I don't think the design is TOO bad but I hope he ditches it for the old armor.
 
i know its a movie but how does the mark 3 survive a tank round, and the mark 7 survive alien laser weapons, but the suits get blown up so easy lol

It's the firecracker principle.

You hold a firecracker in an open palm. It explodes. You suffer from burns. It's painful, but not that serious. At most, you may need stitches.

Close your fist around that same firecracker, though, and you can kiss your hand goodbye when it goes boom.

Why?

Explosions are omnidirectional and get progressively weaker as they propogate. In an open palm, most of the explosive force hits empty air. In a closed palm, nearly all of the explosive potential hits the hand, and the force is at (or very near) its maximum potential.

Same principle applies to the suits. He probably could have placed ten times the amount of explosives on the exterior, and all it would have done would be to blow the armor through the wall and maybe scratch the paint. However, because the explosion started inside the suits and propogated outwards from there, the suit encountered huge amounts of explosive force on its reletively unprotected interior.

Think of it like an Abrams tank. An Abrams can run over an IED and probably the worst thing they have to worry about is a thrown track. However, you pop the hatch and drop a single fragmentation grenade inside, and the tank can be considered mission-killed.
 
It's the firecracker principle.

You hold a firecracker in an open palm. It explodes. You suffer from burns. It's painful, but not that serious. At most, you may need stitches.

Close your fist around that same firecracker, though, and you can kiss your hand goodbye when it goes boom.

Why?

Explosions are omnidirectional and get progressively weaker as they propogate. In an open palm, most of the explosive force hits empty air. In a closed palm, nearly all of the explosive potential hits the hand, and the force is at (or very near) its maximum potential.

Same principle applies to the suits. He probably could have placed ten times the amount of explosives on the exterior, and all it would have done would be to blow the armor through the wall and maybe scratch the paint. However, because the explosion started inside the suits and propogated outwards from there, the suit encountered huge amounts of explosive force on its reletively unprotected interior.

Think of it like an Abrams tank. An Abrams can run over an IED and probably the worst thing they have to worry about is a thrown track. However, you pop the hatch and drop a single fragmentation grenade inside, and the tank can be considered mission-killed.

Agreed. The suits aren't meant to repel attacks from the inside.
 
It's the firecracker principle.

You hold a firecracker in an open palm. It explodes. You suffer from burns. It's painful, but not that serious. At most, you may need stitches.

Close your fist around that same firecracker, though, and you can kiss your hand goodbye when it goes boom.

Why?

Explosions are omnidirectional and get progressively weaker as they propogate. In an open palm, most of the explosive force hits empty air. In a closed palm, nearly all of the explosive potential hits the hand, and the force is at (or very near) its maximum potential.

Same principle applies to the suits. He probably could have placed ten times the amount of explosives on the exterior, and all it would have done would be to blow the armor through the wall and maybe scratch the paint. However, because the explosion started inside the suits and propogated outwards from there, the suit encountered huge amounts of explosive force on its reletively unprotected interior.

Think of it like an Abrams tank. An Abrams can run over an IED and probably the worst thing they have to worry about is a thrown track. However, you pop the hatch and drop a single fragmentation grenade inside, and the tank can be considered mission-killed.

Lol i know. I am a combat engineer in the army (demolition expert). I was just making conversation
 
Lol i know. I am a combat engineer in the army (demolition expert). I was just making conversation

Well, a question was asked, and I answered it in good faith. Besides, the answer was not only for you, but for others who might be wondering the same thing.

Oh, and thank you for serving, brother. I did so myself.
 
Well, a question was asked, and I answered it in good faith. Besides, the answer was not only for you, but for others who might be wondering the same thing.

Oh, and thank you for serving, brother. I did so myself.

Nice what was your mos? Branch?
 
Well you must have been intelligent to join the air force lol

I was thinking of doing the same but id loose my rank (SSG/E6) (Army). Plus i get to run around and shoot things and blow stuff up.

And thanks for your service


NOW BACK TO IRON MAN 3!!
 
Overloaded arc reactor set to blow, perhaps taking inspiration from Vanko in iron man 2?


Okay you point out something that bothered me in IM2. Why does Tony Stark keep armor with arc reactors around his house? Any armor he wears uses the one in his chest. Without the reactor Rhodes couldn't have stolen the suit.

Just never made sense to me.
 
This is Happy on the ground, that's not him in the suit. While Tony implanted Pepper with an arc to save her in the Invincible Iron Man series, I doubt they'd do something like this.

My take on the glow: if you see his left shoulder, there's the same blue glow, so my guess is both spots are blood that are being hit with a neon light's reflection or some such.

Does Happy DIE?!?!?!?! NOOOO
 
Okay you point out something that bothered me in IM2. Why does Tony Stark keep armor with arc reactors around his house? Any armor he wears uses the one in his chest. Without the reactor Rhodes couldn't have stolen the suit.

Just never made sense to me.

Bugged me too!
When he made the "special" new element in IM2, it was for his CHEST reactor. which in turn powered the suit....
 
Yeah, after the first one he had was stolen and luckily Pepper saved the original, I can't imagine he didn't think it was a good idea to have a few backups. :D

And now with the the preview showing his suit can move without him in it, its got to have a built in power supply. Could have been a precursor to the extremis idea of IM3 along with allowing Rhodes to be War Machine too and ontop of it being backup/extra power supply
 
On the exploding armor, I was under the impression that the armor when "Unpowered" would actually be easy to damage. If I remember from the comics it was the application of the "repulser field" that made the armor stiffen. I'm remembering the comic where Tony and Rhodey are in a sabotaged shuttle and Rhodey's thought bubble stated that until the armor was powered is was as thin as paper and could even be torn like it. The comic is the one where both of them armored up but Rhodey's was dmaged and the re-entry into earths atmosphere gave Rhodey burns all over his chest. So if the armor's were unpowered they could easily be penetrated by various weapons.
 
Was that fairly far back in the comics? I remember something like that, but don't recall that exact story. The suits in the movies are made of a gold titanium alloy if I recall correctly, which would be what I thought the main protection for the suit was. But there could be an extra layer of protection provided by the power unit itself, somewhat like a forcefield. and if that is down/turned off could make them more vulnerable. I had not thought of that but does make sense and could be an explanation.
 
Was that fairly far back in the comics? I remember something like that, but don't recall that exact story. The suits in the movies are made of a gold titanium alloy if I recall correctly, which would be what I thought the main protection for the suit was. But there could be an extra layer of protection provided by the power unit itself, somewhat like a forcefield. and if that is down/turned off could make them more vulnerable. I had not thought of that but does make sense and could be an explanation.

On the exploding armor, I was under the impression that the armor when "Unpowered" would actually be easy to damage. If I remember from the comics it was the application of the "repulser field" that made the armor stiffen. I'm remembering the comic where Tony and Rhodey are in a sabotaged shuttle and Rhodey's thought bubble stated that until the armor was powered is was as thin as paper and could even be torn like it. The comic is the one where both of them armored up but Rhodey's was dmaged and the re-entry into earths atmosphere gave Rhodey burns all over his chest. So if the armor's were unpowered they could easily be penetrated by various weapons.

Just a thought; if the armor requires power to be tough, won't the armor crush itself when Tony and Jarvis blacked out when travelling into the black hole/space at the end of avengers?
 
Back
Top