Our Soldiers' Armor
By Jeff Emanuel Posted in Special Events — Comments (17) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
I have just spoken with a 1st ID soldier who is on his third tour of Iraq, and has become known as a human armor testing device. His first tour, he took three 7.62-mm rounds to the chest -- bruises and abrasions only. His second tour, he took four rounds to the back -- same result.
On this, his third tour, he took a sniper round to the head. His helmet protected him to such a degree that all he got out of it was a headache and a little swelling.
The injuries in all three were big enough that he received three purple hearts, but minor enough that, after a period to get his mind right again, he was quickly returned to duty and is working again as we speak.
But, you know, the troops here have no armor.
« Liveblogging the Vice President at CPAC — Comments (0) | The battle for the soul of Iraq — Comments (3) »
Our Soldiers' Armor 17 Comments (0 topical, 17 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
...it's a very fluid situation. The enemy;s tactics and weaponry changes constantly, and all of our adjustments on the armor/protection front are reactive.
More to come in a post in the near future. I have to catch a humvee out of here for a patrol.
JE
I'd rather get the details from the front line than accept the crap Hillary and company spews.
Stay safe!
Socialism doesn't work. It looks nice on paper, but it's been tried and it's failed miserably every time (usually accompanied by widespread death and suffering).
Proud member of the V.R.W.C.
Thanks for asking it:
" Is there equipment we should be providing that they don't have?"
On this point of soldier safety I want us to be relentless. Let's celebrate our achievements and yet always employ American ingenuity to find the best. We Can!
BrianH, I'm writing my reps with your simple question.
This guy's pretty amazing, although it's concerning one soldier would be in harm's way to the point where he's had not one life-threatening injury but EIGHT, including at least one certainly fatal injury avoided.
You have to wonder that at a certain point this troop should have the option to go home...I certainly think he's done his part for his country.
"The pain inflicted by your country's indifference is tenfold that inflicted by your ruthless captors."
Rep Sam Johnson on the House floor commenting on his experience as a Vietnam POW
John Ratzenberger's "Made in America". I can't remember the name of the company, but the step-by-step process was really intense and complicated. I was really impressed.
The old kevlar helmets were little good for anything but shrapnel and pistol rounds.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
The first generation Kevlar helmet stopped the 7.62mm x 39mm round used by the AK-47. There used to be a helmet or two in the 82d Airborne museum from Grenada that attested to that.
"A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition." -- Rudyard Kipling
Years and years ago. I had a friend who had a job at Picatinny arsenal. I think they were firing a 7mm round or an 8mm I don't know for sure.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
Is doing the job.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
of deflection is the most important aspect. The Kevlar is pretty dang tough though. Once I was rigging up an old Willy's Jeep with C-4 and cratering charges (a piece of demolition training orgy brought to us by 5th Group). I ran back to the safe area to detonate and said, "Oh s***" as soon as I hit the clacker... I'd left my Kevlar sitting on the hood. We carried them around all week in case Range Control showed up and now I was out like $200. We scoured the area and finally found it several hundred meters away... stoved in on one side. The material wasn't penetrated, but it would probably would have killed me. Still, we were impressed that we found it because we didn't find anything bigger than a steering column left from the Jeep.
how old the design was, but since it was new to me (honorable discharge, 1968) I was still impressed.
If the guy is on his third tour then he isn't a reservist. That is an important point when arguing about the quality of armor he is issued. In particular it was the Reservists and National Guard that had issues with getting the new armor, like the ceramic stuff, early in the war.
4 hits in the back. That's damn lucky to walk away from. I was under the impression that the ceramic plates that stop the larger rounds tend to shatter after a hit or two and dramatically reduce their effectiveness. Replacing them after a hit isn't a big deal, but 4 in a row leaves you no opportunity. That is the advantage of DragonSkin's overlapping small circular ceramic plates which not only makes it more resilient but lighter and more flexible too.
The particularly interesting part is where DragonSkin armor was being bought privately and used to such an extent that the Army had to ban the use of it. That makes perfect sense to me so FlyByNightArmor isn't risking the life of soldiers, but when official certification and politics are slowing approval for what looks to be a better design then someone needs to step in and make things right...
Here's a USA Today article that I turned up looking for a link to the banned armor, but it also covers the lack of armor issue early in the war and even an acknowledgment from the military confirming my initial point that NG/Reservists had "lesser quality" (i.e. VietNam) armor initially.
I'm just glad that what the soldier is currently wearing appears to be doing the trick.
Just for a note on some of the political backstory about armor, the Democrats have shifted from claiming that body armor was ineffective to pointing out the traumatic brain injuries that are resulting from armor that is too effective.
Here it is, in B&W. One of those *damned if you do, damned if you don't* stories, if I've ever seen one.
Another problem is that these blast-related brain injuries differ from other severe head traumas, and the complexity of treating returning troops with "closed-head" injuries is taxing an already overburdened military health-care system. There is not a neurosurgeon who works in a trauma unit anywhere in the United States who doesn't know what to do when an ambulance brings in a biker who has suffered a severe head injury in a highway accident. The standard care involves using calcium channel blockers to protect damaged nerve cells against further injury, intravenous diuretics to control brain swelling and, if the swelling becomes too great, removal of the top of the skull to allow the brain to swell without increasing neurological damage. This is what surgeons did in the case of ABC News anchor Bob Woodruff, who suffered severe brain injuries from an IED blast in Baghdad last year.
The debate has already shifted (and indeed, if you look at this article, especially in the wake of Woodruff's injuries) from being saved by body armor to being disabled by it because you weren't killed by the blast wave. Again, it's Bush's fault, an underfunded and ill-equipped VA, this horrible war causing unforseen tragedies, and so on.
Neurosurgeons being quoted by the Washington Post. Whether it was the ineffective body armor causing masses of unforseen casualties or too many troops surviving, you can be absolutely sure that there was only one person at fault in it, and Moqtada al-Sadr agrees.
Let me be a liberal for a second and ask "Can we clone him?" For real, though, he is one of the good ones.
"I'm just beginning...The pen's in my hand...Ending unplanned"
Is the armor he's wearing now better than what he had on his first tour? Is there equipment we should be providing that they don't have?
It's wonderful that what we provided worked so well, but if there's things that work even better, let get them out there.
Socialism doesn't work. It looks nice on paper, but it's been tried and it's failed miserably every time (usually accompanied by widespread death and suffering).
Proud member of the V.R.W.C.