Body Armor Rushed To Troops

[Mark Tyson]

Body Armor Rushed To Troops

American Forces Press Service

November 1, 2003

FORT BELVOIR, Va. – A soldier with the Army's 10th Mountain Division was knocked down by small arms fire, got up, and continued his mission.

Hit again by enemy fire, the infantryman got up a second time and continued his mission.

He's still alive, thanks to the new Interceptor body armor being worn by soldiers and Marines in Iraq and Afghanistan, according to Army Brig. Gen. James R. Moran, program executive officer of Program Executive Office Soldier here.

The Army and Marines are rushing to get enough body armor into Iraq and Afghanistan by December for everyone who needs it, as fast as it comes off the assembly line.

"Body armor is saving lives," Moran emphasized. "There have been dozens and dozens of instances where body armor has saved lives of individual soldiers. We're producing that as quickly as we possibly can."

Army Col. John Norwood, PEO Soldier's project manager for soldier equipment, said all soldiers in Iraq will have body armor by December.

"The feedback we've received from individual soldiers is that body armor is very effective, and it's a very highly valued item over there," he said. "The senior leadership of the Army has made a decision that for Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom, all soldiers, civilians and contractors will have body armor available to them. The specific mission requirements are tailored by the unit commander."

Accounting for two armor plates for each Marine in the ground combat element, the Marines plan to field 94,056 plates for active forces and 39,284 for reserve forces, a Marine Corps spokesman said. Interceptor body armor is made up of two modular components: the outer tactical vest and small-arms protective inserts, or plates.

The new body armor, which is unisex, is equipped with removable throat and groin protectors, as well as front and back removable plates, which can stop 7.62 mm rounds. It weighs 16.4 pounds; each of the two inserts weighs 4 pounds, and the outer tactical vest weighs 8.4 pounds. The previous body armor, the flak jacket, weighed 25.1 pounds. "The (Interceptor body armor's) lighter weight provides more mobility to the soldier in the upper body," Norwood said.

Only the most technically advanced material is used to make body armor for the military, Norwood noted. "We're always looking at what are the latest advances in technology to get the latest materials integrated," he said. "The outer tactical vest consists of a Kevlar weave that's very fine and will stop 9 mm ammunition. Webbing on the front and back of the vest permits attaching such equipment as grenades, walkie-talkies and pistols.

"The small-arms protective inserts are made of a boron carbide ceramic with a spectra shield backing that's an extremely hard material," Norwood continued. "It stops, shatters and catches any fragments up to a 7.62 mm round with a muzzle velocity of 2,750 feet per second.

"It's harder than Kevlar," Norwood noted.

Moran said Marine Corps Lt. Col. Rick Adams is the liaison officer to PEO Soldier for the Marine Corps. "We're trying to work together to work smartly on fielding equipment for Marines and soldiers," Moran said.

"Everything we do is joint, since soldiers are part of the joint environment," the general noted. "If our soldiers are more combat effective on the battlefield, they make the joint force more combat effective."

Getting body armor to combat zones by December is part of the Army's "rapid fielding initiative," Moran said. He said the initiative, which treats soldiers as part of the system, is saving soldiers' lives, improving the quality of their lives and improving their combat effectiveness. "And we're doing it immediately," the general noted.

Norwood said the Army always is looking for new technological opportunities, and is soliciting small businesses for new ideas. "One of the vendors recently started looking at a way to embed ceramic balls into the small-arms protective insert in order to decrease weight and improve ballistic protection," he said.

"Our goal is always to make body armor lighter and more available to the soldiers," Norwood added. "We try to maximize the two biggest constraints -- the weight vs. the ballistic protection. It's a constant trade-off. You can get more ballistic protection, but it usually costs you a larger penalty."

He said the helmet works in conjunction with the body armor. It's fitted so it provides an equal amount of protection. The way it's worn is tailored to the mission the wearer has to perform.

"Individual soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines or Coast Guardsmen all need to be looked at as part of the overall system that they're using to perform their mission," Norwood said. "So all service members are part of a larger system. That concept can't help but benefit other services."

Norwood said military body armor is similar to that used by police Special Weapons and Tactics teams. "But we have specifications for the inserts that have to meet specific size, weight and ballistic protection criteria," he noted. "I don't know what police requirements are, but our requirements are very stringent."

Everyone doesn't get the same body armor, Norwood said. For example, Army Special Forces body armor has slight variations from what's fielded generally throughout the Army. Specifications for body armor for Marines and for Navy and Air Force special operations personnel will differ, depending on specific requirements for their mission, he said.

Sound Off.....Do you think this armor will save lives? If so, why didn't they have it before we invaded Iraq? Join the discussion.

 

[PeteyPete]

It's deplorable that our soldiers were sent out to Iraq to fight w/out the most basic of protection. I'm no Democrat, but i commend Congressman Ted Strickland for bringing light to the subject and potentially saving many more American soldiers by exposing this farce. We're supposed to have the best trained, most equipped military in the world, but we can't supply our front line troops w/ body armor? If i can go on ebay and get some SAPI plates, i'm sure the DOD, with all it's resources and influence, can get their hands on some. The silence from Republicans on this issue has been deafening, they should have been right on the fore of this issue.

 

[BryanP]

Hit again by enemy fire, the infantryman got up a second time and continued his mission.

"It stops, shatters and catches any fragments up to a 7.62 mm round with a muzzle velocity of 2,750 feet per second.

Hmm. Start looking for the resurgance of the Main Battle Rifle. 7.62Nato, 30.06, 7.62x54R, and 8mm Mauser rifles will be in demand.

 

[OEF_VET]

Interceptor Body Armor is not new. I was issued it while in Kosovo during 2000 and again in Afghanistan in 2002. Unfortunately, the demand is currently outweighing the supply. We have so many soldiers deployed in so many locations, and I doubt the IBA budget was ever big enough to buy enough for every servicemember in the Active, Reserve and Guard at once.

Remember, we have people in Bosnia, Kosovo, Iraq, Afghanistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, the Philippines, and many other locations who absolutely must have this gear. Not only do the units there need it, the units getting ready to deploy need it, as do the units who just left. That's an awful lot of body armor to go around.

The military isn't responsible for the lack of body armor, the people who decide the budget are! So, instead of complaining that the Army isn't doing enough for our servicemembers, call your Congress-people and tell them that they aren't doing enough for them!

Frank

 

[BryanP]

call your Congress-people and tell them that they aren't doing enough for them!

Although I agree with you, I can already hear the response. "The DOD has a huge budget, how they allocate that budget is up to them. If they want body armor for everyone they can have it, they just have to give up something else."

As a friend of mine once put it "I can have anything I want, I just can't have everything I want."

Bryan

 

[striker3]

Before OIF, at least in the Marine Corps, all combat units had the Interceptor armor. I personally had it issued to me back in 2000 shortly after I joined my unit. I guess that the reasoning was that the front line troops needed them more since the rear echelon would not be engaged in as heavy fighting.

Somebody should have told our enemies that they had to play by our rules. Seems they never got the memo that they had to fight along a consistent front! We sure fooled ourselves good, didn't we? :banghead:

 

[Double Naught Spy]

Quote:
FORT BELVOIR, Va. – A soldier with the Army's 10th Mountain Division was knocked down by small arms fire, got up, and continued his mission.

Hit again by enemy fire, the infantryman got up a second time and continued his mission.

He's still alive, thanks to the new Interceptor body armor being worn by soldiers and Marines in Iraq and Afghanistan, according to Army Brig. Gen. James R. Moran, program executive officer of Program Executive Office Soldier here.

Why didn't somebody teach that boy to use cover?!!! What part of continuing the mission involves taking out the guy who keeps shooting you? Apparently not the part of the mission this soldier was engaged in.

PeteyPete, our soldiers are are hugely better armed than their Iraqi opposition and are the best armed in the world. Of course, it is not hard to be better armed than a guy in torn trousers, torn shirt, tennis shoes with no socks, carrying an AK-47 with just one magazine and using a Fiat as a battle wagon.

 

[Gmac]

"Torn shirt ,torn pants, tennis shoes with no socks, AK 47 with one magazine etc.," Hmmm, torn black pajamas,tire tread sandals, AK 47 with one magazine, bicycle for transportation ( water buff for officers) sounds like deja vu all over again! B.T.D.T. RVN 69-70

 

[JimJD]

BrianP said:

Hmm. Start looking for the resurgance of the Main Battle Rifle. 7.62Nato, 30.06, 7.62x54R, and 8mm Mauser rifles will be in demand.

Yup, reminds me of the days of plate armor for knights, etc.
The plate got thicker, heavier, etc. as the weapons got stronger.
But at least we have some awesome tech behind it these days.

Anyone remember that issue of popular science or mechanics that covered a special Marine unit that was using the new armor?
I remember they had removable plates for the knees, arms, etc.
It's about time we are getting that stuff to our troops!

 

[Jeff White]

OEF_VET said;

The military isn't responsible for the lack of body armor, the people who decide the budget are! So, instead of complaining that the Army isn't doing enough for our servicemembers, call your Congress-people and tell them that they aren't doing enough for them!

Sorry Frank, but you're wrong. In this case the problem rests solely on the services. The Army has never bought enough of items like body armor to equip the entire force. They bought enough Interceptor body armor for contingency operations, not to equip a large force. It's almost like they never imagined they'd go to war with the entire Army. The same thing happened in the first Gulf war with Strella Suppression kits for aircraft. During Desert Sheild a big part of the rotary wing fleet was restrricted to a certain latitude in Saudi because they weren't fitted with the kits. The kits had only existed since the early '70s, yet we never put them on most of our aircraft. I guess they never though they miht actually have to go in harms way with them.

Things like body armor and Strella Suppression kits are not things the Army will spend money on in peacetime. That would take funding away from other new projects. It took nearly 10 years to field kevlar helmets through the entire force. As a former Redleg you should be familiar with the three different digital systems in use, none of which can talk to the other.

Interceptor entered the system in 1998. There is no reason why every soldier shouldn't have one. The Army isn't near as large as it was in the '80s. When a decision is made to procure a new item of equipment we should be able to field it throughout the force in a reasonable amount of time.

The Marines made the M16A2 standard in 1982 and it didn't take long before all Marines had them. The Army made it standard in 1985, and they still have M16A1s in deployable units.

The fact is our leaders never expect to deply the entire army at once. I guess they never read the SHTF threads here, but the idea of deploying more then a division anywhere is foreign to them. That's why the make the procurement decisions that they do.

Jeff

 

[Waitone]

Our media Chicken Littles give unintended praise for the body armor by breathlessly complaining about the uncharacteristically high percentage of wounds resulting in brain damage or amputations. Anyone who graduated 6th grade could figure out the reason, but I guess that is asking for too much of our "journalists."

I've see a few articles and a broadcast or two focusing on the nature of causalties. Since Dubya has banned photogs of caskets I guess the next best propaganda pic is a bilateral amputation or severe brain damage casualty.

Look for the newest scandal--unprotected warriors because we obviously have a crisis on our hands.

 

[Jeff White]

waitone..ask and you shall receive....

Newhouse.com
October 28, 2003

G.I.s Relearn An Old Lesson: Their Helmets Aren't Bulletproof

By David Wood, Newhouse News Service

Jesus Vidana was walking combat patrol in Baghdad when his platoon started taking sniper fire and a rocket-propelled grenade exploded nearby. Jagged, red-hot shrapnel sliced through his helmet and into his head, and he fell senseless.

Vidana was wearing the Kevlar combat helmet, commonly called the "K-pot." Its use is mandatory for U.S. soldiers and Marines on and off combat duty.

At daily risk from snipers' bullets, firefights, car bombs, RPG attacks, land mines and roadside bombs, GIs in Iraq are relearning an old lesson: Heavy, hot and cumbersome, K-pots provide some protection -- but they're not bulletproof or even shrapnel-proof.

Vidana, 25, survived the attack on April 8. But he is lucky. U.S. military medical experts say most of those who suffer penetrating head wounds die, and die quickly.

"When we got Marines with head wounds, they were universally fatal," said a combat surgeon, Navy Capt. Lynn Welling, who led a shock trauma platoon with the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force during the assault on Baghdad last spring. "That's one thing we've got to work on," he said in a recent interview.

Indeed, while there have been dramatic advances in the technology of killing, including satellite-guided bombs and "brilliant" munitions that hunt preprogrammed targets with dart-filled "bomblets," progress in protecting infantry soldiers against the low-tech risks common in Iraq today has been modest.

New body armor using ceramic plates has reduced injuries to soldiers' torsos, officials said. And a newer version of the Kevlar helmet, said to offer some protection against lighter 9 mm rounds, has been given to some special operations soldiers.

But officials said even the newer version of the Kevlar provides little protection against the heavy AK-47 automatic rifle fire common in Iraq, and they stressed that there is no "bulletproof" helmet on the horizon.

A helmet heavy enough to stop a bullet would be too heavy to wear. Moreover, said Steve Pinter, a former infantryman who buys soldier gear for the Army, "The force of stopping a bullet would break your neck."

Pinter acknowledged that, at least until recently in Iraq, "there's been a perception in the field that these helmets are bulletproof."

Vidana is now living at home in Los Angeles undergoing occupational therapy. "I have trouble with my field of vision," he said in a telephone interview. As for the incident in which he was wounded, he said, "I was wearing my helmet, all right, but I don't remember much about getting hit."

Finding ways to reduce the number of deaths due to head wounds is a high priority, said Air Force Lt. Col. Linda Lawrence, commandant of the school of medicine, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences in Bethesda, Md.

In Iraq, 48 percent of wounded GIs were hit in the legs and 28 percent in the arms, while spine injuries afflicted 7 percent, abdomen and pelvis wounds 9.5 percent, and face and eye injuries 9 percent, she said. These wounds, although more numerous than penetrating head wounds, usually were not fatal.

Head wounds, in contrast, were suffered by 21 percent of those injured in battle but resulted in 31 percent of combat deaths.

The other main cause of combat death was injury to the torso from bullets or shrapnel that penetrated between the ceramic plates or other gaps in the body armor. About 25 percent of GIs who died in combat suffered torso wounds so extreme they could not be saved, Lawrence said. She presented her data at a recent conference of the American College of Emergency Physicians.

Kevlar helmets, named for the material developed by DuPont, are made from fiber woven into dense fabric and soaked in resin before being hardened into a shell whose shape is reminiscent of the Nazi combat helmet of World War II.

The new version of the Kevlar helmet weighs 8 ounces less than the 31/2-pound current version and provides some additional ballistic protection.

"I wouldn't refer to it as bulletproof," said Robert Kinney, an official at the Army Soldier Systems Center in Natick, Mass., responsible for personal protection for soldiers.

Kinney said the new helmet does provide some protection from light rounds and shrapnel, depending on the velocity and angle at which the helmet is struck.

He said the Army is investing in a promising new fiber that may be lighter and stronger than Kevlar. It will take five years to develop the material, he said -- less time if the Army increases funding for the project.

 

[Matt G]

The new body armor, which is unisex, is equipped with removable throat and groin protectors, as well as front and back removable plates, which can stop 7.62 mm rounds. It weighs 16.4 pounds; each of the two inserts weighs 4 pounds, and the outer tactical vest weighs 8.4 pounds. The previous body armor, the flak jacket, weighed 25.1 pounds. "The (Interceptor body armor's) lighter weight provides more mobility to the soldier in the upper body," Norwood said.

Complete Interceptor setup: 16.4 lbs + 2{4 lbs} + 8.4 lbs = 32.8 lbs

Old flak vests weigh 25.1 lbs.


I suppose there is improved protection from the new Interceptor vests, but the net weight to the soldier has gone up over 7 1/2 lbs. Lord, I'd hate to have to hump that every day along with full kit in the hot desert sun, with a shower less often than the moon changes. I get enough worn out with my 4.5 lb Level II vest under my daily cop uniform and a 15 lb belt over it.

 

[BryanP]

It weighs 16.4 pounds; each of the two inserts weighs 4 pounds, and the outer tactical vest weighs 8.4 pounds.

Complete Interceptor setup: 16.4 lbs + 2{4 lbs} + 8.4 lbs = 32.8 lbs

Old flak vests weigh 25.1 lbs.

I suppose there is improved protection from the new Interceptor vests, but the net weight to the soldier has gone up over 7 1/2 lbs

Matt, I think you're adding it incorrectly. The way I'm reading it they're saying that 2x 4lb inserts + 1x 8.4lb outer tactical vest = 16.4lbs, or a net decrease of 8.7lbs. over the old flak vest.

 

[Andrew Wyatt]

uuh, 8+8.4 is 16.4. that's the total weight of the vest.


I find it criminal that there are SAPI plates being sold on EBAY and in the military surplus catalogs. EVERY ONE of those plates should go to combat arms people. EVERY one.

 

[David Park]

Andrew, a lot of the commercial sales ARE going to troops, because family members are buying them and shipping them to Iraq so the troops don't have to wait until December. But yes, from what I understand, military folks who sell their plates on Ebay are committing a criminal offense, because the plates are gov't property.