-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Body Armor
- Thread starter Fly Navy
- Start date
- Status
skidkid said:
I remember reading something from Afghanistan, coming from prisoners we took, about how they would shoot our soldiers, see them fall, and then see them get right back up and keep shooting. Said it completely demoralized them, knowing they couldn't kill us so easy.
Bulk is still a big problem though. I would wear the front chickenplate while flying, but never the back. I figured being the Michelin Pilot presented more of a hazard during egress than the risk of taking a shot in the back.
jboomer said:
The seat was already armored. If the bullet made it through the flight controls and the armored seat, it's already been a really bad day.
There were some unintended consequences of the new emphasis on body armor. The older version of body armor that we wore my 1st float had nylon/elastic shoulder straps and was very comfortable. The newer version we deployed with after 9/11 had straps made of kevlar the same thickness of the torso material. This was very unconfortable, and also very difficult for AH-1 guys in particular (so they told us), as the armor would scrunch up for certain body types, pushing up on the helmet, and make it particularly difficult for the front seat guy on the TSU. Some enterprising F/E guy rounded up a few of the older versions for them.
Apparently they are presently field testing Armored chaps. They impede movement like no other, but I can see where some poor grunt driving trucks up and down roads with mines in them could really like the idea. Protects the vital stuff, Femoral artery, groin, ect and stops just below the knees. Ill try and find a picture.
Not sure if this is being supplied or what, since I have been away from the fleet for a few years. ZGX: Did you have the PASGT over there?
http://www.gentexcorp.com/helmetsystems/usmc.htm
This advanced helmet system, designed for the U.S. Marines Corps, provides superior performance to the current-issue PASGT helmet.
The base material is a state-of-the-art para aramid material in a unique construction with strict tolerances. This combination results in substantially increased ballistic protection, while reducing weight.
A redesigned suspension/retention system allows for several adjustments to achieve a snug and extremely comfortable fit. The addition of a nape strap to the four point retention makes the helmet very stable even when using add-on night vision goggles or other optical devices. Gentex Helmet Systems is making ‘fight smarter, not harder’, a practical reality.
Holy Crap, this guy is a MOTIVATOR!!! Give him one!
I am glad the Marine Corps didn't go with the Army Combat Helmet.
As you can see it is substantially smaller in size and offers less ear and neck protection. I guess the upside is that it offers a higher brim that keeps the helmet out of the way when firing a rifle. Also, not sure what it offers ballistically, I know it is under a lot of heat now, and the troops being issued it don't like it (supposedly).
http://www.gentexcorp.com/helmetsystems/usmc.htm
This advanced helmet system, designed for the U.S. Marines Corps, provides superior performance to the current-issue PASGT helmet.
The base material is a state-of-the-art para aramid material in a unique construction with strict tolerances. This combination results in substantially increased ballistic protection, while reducing weight.
A redesigned suspension/retention system allows for several adjustments to achieve a snug and extremely comfortable fit. The addition of a nape strap to the four point retention makes the helmet very stable even when using add-on night vision goggles or other optical devices. Gentex Helmet Systems is making ‘fight smarter, not harder’, a practical reality.
Holy Crap, this guy is a MOTIVATOR!!! Give him one!
I am glad the Marine Corps didn't go with the Army Combat Helmet.
As you can see it is substantially smaller in size and offers less ear and neck protection. I guess the upside is that it offers a higher brim that keeps the helmet out of the way when firing a rifle. Also, not sure what it offers ballistically, I know it is under a lot of heat now, and the troops being issued it don't like it (supposedly).
ZGXtreme
Corporal of Grunts
The Army and Air Force are getting that model shown above. It is smaller around the edge providing more vision and it is easier to shoot in the prone with as the kevlar doesn't hit your neck pushing the front lip down into your vision.
The Marine Corps and Navy are using a new kevlar that is the same size and has the same coverage as the old one we were using in OIF 1. The difference is the new model provides more refined armor protection, has a new pad and chin stra assembly and is lighter.
When you think about it, the extra coverage is worth it and it is definitely a plus in the weight category. But personally I would have preferred to be issued the Army version despite its' lack of coverage. When in a firefight you aren't thinking about your body armor... all you want is the greatest SA.
The Marine Corps and Navy are using a new kevlar that is the same size and has the same coverage as the old one we were using in OIF 1. The difference is the new model provides more refined armor protection, has a new pad and chin stra assembly and is lighter.
When you think about it, the extra coverage is worth it and it is definitely a plus in the weight category. But personally I would have preferred to be issued the Army version despite its' lack of coverage. When in a firefight you aren't thinking about your body armor... all you want is the greatest SA.
Future Herc Driver
About to start Tac phase in the Herc.
Here is a link to those new Kevlar shorts. I think these are the ones you are talking about.
http://www.af.mil/photos/story_photos.asp?storyID=123009971
http://www.af.mil/photos/story_photos.asp?storyID=123009971
- Status