New Body Armour

#1
I have a couple of questions regarding body armour?

1. Some of the Paras in Afghanistan have been pictured in the media wearing an american style molle armour system. Is this isssue or a local purchase item?

2. Is there and MOD policy on the use of privately bought body armour?

I may have missed a previous post about this, if so my apologies.
 
#2
Its new improved armour either called osprey or kestrel .One the molle type armour and the other the armour for top cover.
No idea about private purchase body armour .Anything better than issuse will be very exspensive .I would guess you would be laughed
at continuesly unless it actually saves your life .
 
#3
woody said:
Its new improved armour either called osprey or kestrel .One the molle type armour and the other the armour for top cover.
No idea about private purchase body armour .Anything better than issuse will be very exspensive .I would guess you would be laughed
at continuesly unless it actually saves your life .
And if you happen to fall foul and end up the pearly gates, will the army pay out as it where and would your insurance, as you where not wearing issued kit. Even though it was better than the issued thing?

Any takers?
 
#4
Yes_Sir! said:
woody said:
Its new improved armour either called osprey or kestrel .One the molle type armour and the other the armour for top cover.
No idea about private purchase body armour .Anything better than issuse will be very exspensive .I would guess you would be laughed
at continuesly unless it actually saves your life .
And if you happen to fall foul and end up the pearly gates, will the army pay out as it where and would your insurance, as you where not wearing issued kit. Even though it was better than the issued thing?

Any takers?
The US Army has recently banned privately-purchased armour for this very reason.
 
#5
Just as anside. There was an incident in Basra where a WR was hit by an surface laid IED laid with maybe 20 minutes notice. The driver, gunner and commander were hit by frag and injured. The gunner, wearing the good old Mk6 was killed, the driver, wearing the current German army issue helmet under a Desert Cam cover survived. The WIS report piously noted that they were unable to determine if the German helemt offered better protection. Admintedly it's difficult to judge if the two lads respective positions had anything to do with it. BUT it did make me wonder.....
 
#6
Other kit might offer better protection, however, your NOK will get the sqaure root of nothing in payout if you become a casualty when wearing non-issue kit.
 

Mr Happy

LE
Moderator
#7
k613 said:
Other kit might offer better protection, however, your NOK will get the sqaure root of nothing in payout if you become a casualty when wearing non-issue kit.
Boll*cks.

The yanks, as a threat to keep their soldiers in line started banging on about only issue armour and NOK pay outs, the idea being that its an army of one and all that. You NOK pay out is not based on whether the army CBA is on, off or up your jacksee. Its to do with whether you are dead or not.

People on this site should only post if they know something, not because their rumour control gene is running on overdrive.

besides, any CBA on the market for more than 50 quid is probably better than the 'old' issue CBA and I'd rather survive than worry about payments of 10K or whatever it is up to now for folks back home. Once again YOUR ISSUE CBA IS NOT PART OF THE CONDITIONS OF INSURANCE - its not tricky to locate on your policy. BTW (I think that recklessly endangering yourself might be, but they still paid H Jones I bet).

Lastly, I chgecked this when I bought my personal CBA because I wanted something that stopped 7.62 short. And its for sale if you are interested.
 
#8
http://www.arrse.co.uk/cpgn2/Forums/viewtopic/p=674649.html#674649

It been discussed before the new body armour is similar to the yanks and offers greater protection so I have heard. The ruling on your own body armour is that your not suppose to wear its like the fact your only wear issue boots on assault courses. If your get your own body armour thats your own decision hell if it saves your life whose complaining.
 
#11
Hi Y'all
Just back from telic after having worked with yank soldiers
i can reassure you the new osprey stuff is by far the better armour
the new plates are bigger, thicker, lighter and offer better protection.
according to the sops it can stop 5x 7.62 long before it fails.
and they even tried it against 50 cal, and it stopped it!
i don't fancy having the behind plate trauma after that though...
as for people using there own stuff i'd say its a bad idea, you can't
guarentee the effectivness, and medics these days are trained how to
remove all coalition types of armour not civvi stuff.
 
#16
stopping a .50 pistol round maybe, but .50 rifle round i somewhat suspect has a whiff of manure about it. Can't speak from experience as have never been shot by anything bigger than a bb pellet but have put 1/2 inch rounds through various objects and most did a poor job of slowing it down, the bugger even goes through fairly thick rolled steel!
 
#17
I have written this on other messages but always think that repeating myself is time well spent on this subject. As some have said it’s the behind armour trauma that is the problem with stopping .50. If body armour was all about stopping bullets from penetrating life’s pretty easy. You can stop anything. The question is do you want to carry the weight? What will be the effects behind the armour? What increase in thermal load will result from covering up big chunks of the torso?

As for using your own kit it’s a case of buyer beware. If it fails there’s little chance of you being around to ask for a refund. The current British Stuff, including ECBA (we haven't issued CBA for years and years) is as good as it gets for ballistic performance in a plate that is not fragile under normal use. There may even be lighter stuff on the way.

As I have said before the normal soldier will never be able to trust or interpret body armour manufacturers’ performance claims. The main reason for the Yanks clamping down is that manufacturers were selling them armour that failed the US Army minimum tests. Without boring the pants of everyone; reading the same test data from two different manufacturers does not even let you make a judgement. The British Army does not trust any manufacturer and shoots all plates with all types of rounds and records its own test data. An example, there are plates out there that will stop 7.62 HV Armour piecing rounds but let through slower moving 5.56 or fragments (in this case its the construction). Of course the test data that is released only says the 7.62 test leaving the buyer to assume that everything below that is covered. When they claim it stops fragments they use a simulated projectile. Who’s projectile? What was its shape? Was it tumbling? As you can see its not as simple as will it stop a certain round.

I am no insurance man, nor have I ever heard of claims being rejected because of non-issue kit on ops. However I am in a position to see the issues being tackled every day and I would, and do, only use the issue kit. Unless you have a PHD in ballistic armour or you’re a gambling man I recommend you do the same.
 
#18
A very interesting thread. I heard about a product that uses scale armour that reports to reduce blunt force trauma and is flexible. There where conflicting reports on whether it was any good at stopping rounds/shrapnel.
 
#19
The 'scale' armour comes in many different shapes and sizes. Some of it is ok and is being looked at by other nations (after some significant improvements from what was initially offered by the manufacturers). Other flexible armours have multiple layers that are not bonded so that when flexed the layers can slide past each other and therefore are flexible to a degree.

It all about compromises; hard ridged armour will shatter incoming rounds whilst others simply stop it and then redistribute all the energy to reduce behind armour blunt trauma (BABT). Often its a case of not just looking at what scores best on the performance chart but how that armour is likely to be used by the soldiers wearing it.

So while one armour might work well for one nation the tactics, training and techniques used by another may means its unsuitable. When you get into the 3 block war, asymmetric battlefield scenarios it gets even more complicated. Armour that will save your life in the morning (ie hard HV AP armour on a static VCP) will reduce your survivability later in the day (hard armour is heavy and you might be doing heli-borne lightweight ops, the weight may slow you down and make you more likely to be hit).

The future is modular armour that can be upgraded by the user to match the threat. There are things happening to address this but it’s a technology challenge that industry is having trouble matching. UK is forcing the pace by making industry front up to the challenge. The solution is not a million miles away.

Of course whilst it’s boring to talk about it the final problem is manufacturing the solution in bulk. British Forces needs lots of armour and need every plate to do its job as advertised. Quality assurance and securing raw materials (in open competition with other nations) often means that what is sometimes seen on the technology pages of the Times is not ready for mass manufacture.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top