Soldier Body Armour - FPV, BRP, shoulder pads & throat protectors (Merged Thread)

[MAC-]

I am the medic for the group, and I know the guy sent home. We are filling out the paper work for the proper CoC. This is why I am looking for the document that was done by the americans.

It showed that battle injuries did not decrease despite all the extra protection and in fact it increase NBI.

As far as what is better then our armour, Im not sure what is. But there are ceramic plates that have greatly increased ballistic protection and are actually a bit lighter then our own, problem is the cost. Plates that stop AP 7.62 x 54 at 0 meters.

 

[McG]

... there are ceramic plates that have greatly increased ballistic protection and are actually a bit lighter then our own, problem is the cost.

Beyond cost, what other trade offs come with your better plates?  Do they cover the same surface of the body, do they cover more, or are they lighter because they cover less?  Do they have comparable durability to regular wear?  How are they effected by environmental conditions (heat, cold, humidity, etc)?

There are elements of our military that have chosen different plates than most of us wear (they may still have something different - I don't know).  They made this choice knowing that some performances were sacrificed for increases in other performances, and they made this choice recognizing that their threats were different than what the average Battle Group member needed to worry about.                           

Plates that stop AP 7.62 x 54 at 0 meters.

Do we need that level of protection?  If the enemy is in a position to put his muzzle into your chest before shooting, then your problems are probably bigger than the type of vest & plates that you are wearing.

So write your complaints down, had it over to your Med Tech and they can pass it on to the Bio-Science Officer.  Send it up your CoC command as well.

If there is a concern with the performance of an item of kit, that should be pushed through a UCR.

 

[ArmyGuy99]

MAC-

Trust me the extra protection on the arms IS necessary, and you won't notice your plates after about a week.  Our Armour system is completely different from the American system, and I am not sure if you can compare the two.  Although, I would be interested in reading it and seeing where it leads.

Perhaps, depending on where you are, you could talk to your American counterpart?

Talk with your bio-science officer if you get the chance or converse over e-mail, I know ours was really good and had a great open mind.  I know I brought the decrease ROM issue up with her more than once.

The more constructive feedback we can give them and the DRDC the better our gear will get.

Good Luck and keep safe.

 

[ArmyGuy99]

Well a quick Google Search for "American PPE Study" returned 161,000 results.  I scanned 3 studies, one by the American Army, one by the Marines, and one from a southern Univerisity

And they all advocated more armour not less.  The Army and Marine Studies attributed NBI not to the increase in weight but to lack of training properly.  They both advocated always training with Full Body Armour and Plates, and to maintain a high state of physical fitness to compensate for the increase demand on the body.

IMHO it's not the weight of the armour, but the increased weight of our Chest Rigs, LBV etc.  I know that mine wieghed more than my Body Armour.  And that I never trained with my full gear load out until I got overseas.  I did notice (in the first few months) that guys had their rigs packed to the max (incl me) with ammo, and kit.  And then after a few patrols/convoys, they changed their load out and got more specific and lightened the load a little.  I know once I did that things got a lot easier. 

Although my Med Bag never to seemed to get lighter  :-[

Marine Study
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3912/is_201009/ai_n55486149/

US Army Study
ftp.rta.nato.int/public/PubFullText/RTO/MP/.../MP-HFM-181-P02.doc

In silico investigation of intracranial blast mitigation with relevance to military traumatic brain injury (that's one where we got our face shields from)
http://www.google.ca/#hl=en&biw=1503&bih=607&q=American+military+PPE+Study&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=&fp=1&cad=b

Google Results
http://www.google.ca/#hl=en&biw=1503&bih=607&q=American+military+PPE+Study&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=&fp=6a0673dc5c3f3912

 

[MJP]

IMHO it's not the weight of the armour, but the increased weight of our Chest Rigs, LBV etc.  I know that mine wieghed more than my Body Armour.  And that I never trained with my full gear load out until I got overseas.  I did notice (in the first few months) that guys had their rigs packed to the max (incl me) with ammo, and kit.  And then after a few patrols/convoys, they changed their load out and got more specific and lightened the load a little.  I know once I did that things got a lot easier. 

* hijack*

That is good example of were leaders should have been stepping in too ensure their troops were overburdened.  Most guys will self regulate but there will always be the one or two either through lack of knowledge or inflated abilities that will push the boundaries.  Although my experience is dated (2004 and 2006) the same thing happened to my platoon overseas.  We as Sect Commanders became ruthless in ensuring troops were only carrying the essentials.  But we also made sure in work up that guys were carrying realistic loads to ensure that they and in some cases their kit could stand up to the rigors.

* hijack ends*

 

[MAC-]

I'm glad you mentioned the word "scanned" when referring to these articles because they had absolutely nothing to do with having more armour. Obviously you did not even look through it.

Quote:
The use of body armor was associated with decrements in cardiovascular, balance, strength and functional field test performance. The decrease in aerobic capacity was not expected.

It does go on to say that proper build up training is essential to be efficent later.

Even with pushing a memo with studies attached to CoC and bio science officer, I kept getting the same general answer: If it saves one life it is worth it.

But if it inhibits someone from being effective at there job thus potentially saving anothers life... Never even thought of

My personal opinion is it should be leave it to the soldiers to decide what PPE to wear. They are smart enough to know that eyewear is necessary but the other crap is just hindering performance.

 

[KevinB]

Mission drives the gear, someone exposed in a hatch needs more PPE than a troop inside.

As the enemy generally does not have a great amount of IDF capability, dismounts generally should be less armoured.

 

[Infanteer]

After wearing the vest for 7 months.... I would have really loved the brassard kevlar vice the buckle shoulder piece. There's really no point in a shoulder pad that comes apart with simple movements, especially just climbing into a Bison. I can't imagine what the pointy end had to deal with.

Agreed - I found mine easier to wear than the floppy original thing that always came undone; I actually found it comfy. 

Infact, I ordered and enforced wear of the shoulder brassards after the guy I RIPed told me two of his soldiers had arms because of them.

PS.  Realized this was a couple years old - my point still stands.  Your soldiers will get used to the brassards.

 

[PJOsborne]

I've seen pictures of the PPE brassards, but haven't seen the throat protector. Can someone steer me towards a photo?

 

[PuckChaser]

I've seen pictures of the PPE brassards, but haven't seen the throat protector. Can someone steer me towards a photo?

Pretty sure this is it (someone that's worn one can confirm/deny for me):

http://msnbcmedia3.msn.com/j/ap/afghanistan%20canada%20-1398847961.grid-6x2.jpg

 

[PJOsborne]

Puckchaser: Thanks