Sign in or 
Share this
Ballistic Armor
Bulletproof vests, bullet resistant vests, flak jackets, ballistic vests, tactical vests, plate carriers. Many names and twists on body armor. In the modern setting, body armor almost always refers to a garment designed to stop bullets.
In an ideal world, you'd take distance and shelter over personal armor, but body armor has become an essential part of the infantryman's kit, and they are a legitimate concern in a disaster situation. A good way to look at body armor is to compare them to seat belts; uncomfortable, but handy when you do need them, as much you hope you never will. Armor is just a stopgap measure when something goes wrong. It won't prevent an accident from happening, and it can't replace common sense.
Early Body Armor Designs
Before the invention of nitrocellulose and smokeless powder, a majority of firearms utilized black powder, resulting in relatively low velocity and dirty function. They were by no definition "weak": large caliber lead ball would deform on impact and cause terrible wounds. However, a number of contemporary armor designs were effective in deflecting musket fire.
Leather helms and vests, if thick enough, could possibly deflect a glancing musket strike, but were primarily effective against edged weaponry. However, a heavy enough steel chest-piece could stop the slow moving slugs. In fact, newly produced armor was proofed by being shot with a gun, the dent being left as proof. These were the earliest true "bullet-proof" vests.
Heavily layered garments of cotton and silk were said to reasonably effective as well, although this changed considerably when smokeless powder weapons, with much higher velocity projectiles, were introduced.
Development of similar armor to the armored suits of old continued well into World War One, monstrous suits of heavy steel and leather seen by both sides. They were tested by machine gunners and other stationary users, but were not issued in any significant numbers on any front. World War Two also saw a resurgence in such armor, issued to pilots, tankers and artillerymen. Such designs are placed under the"flak vest" portion of this article; though they are technically not flak jackets, they served much the same purpose.
Flak Jacket / Flak Vest
A flak jacket or flak vest is is often used as a generic term for a modern bullet-resistant vest, However, the original garment was a heavy, steel lined apron of sorts, designed to stop shrapnel from explosive shells. In World War Two, they were predominantly worn by waist gunners and similar exposed air crew, although vehicle crews were occasionally issued armor. The term flak actually comes from Flugzeugabwehr-Kanone, a German term that literally mean anti-aircraft fire.
In the same war, the Russians used a very simplified "vest", the SN-42. Literally two steel plates stamped together, it had a partial groin protector but lacked any sort of covering material. Although it would not stand up to rifle bullets, it would effectively stop pistol fire at longer ranges. Combat engineers and mechanized infantry utilized the SN-42 in urban combat, where the nine-millimeter MP38 / MP40 was the weapon of choice for their German opponents. The British, Germans, even the Japanese, had equivalent, and often very similar designs.
The Americans chose to pursue plastics for body armor material, issuing in limited numbers laminated nylon vests in the Pacific front at the end of World War Two, and in the Korean War. During the Vietnam War, they issued perhaps the most iconic example of a flak vest, the M1955 and M69 (see left). It used twelve layers of ballistic nylon, and weighed several pounds less than it's predecessors, but still only protected against fragments.
The most modern, and perhaps final iteration of the true flak vest was the US PASGT (Personnel Armor System for Ground Troops) vest. Despite utilizing Kevlar and having a slightly heavier package than the M69 flak vest it replaced, the package was not designed to stop even handgun rounds. There have been reports of the PASGT vest doing just that, but the vest was phased out before any significant testing could take place.
Bulletproof Vest / Bullet Resistant Vest / "Soft Armor"
The difference between "bullet-proof" and "bullet resistant" is a matter of liability. Resistant implies that the vest will only withstand a certain kind and quantity of bullets before failing, where, bullet-proof can be made out to imply total resistance.
However, the now predominant term "bulletproof vest" did not become common until the advent of lightweight, woven fibers. Richard Davis innovated the field of body armor in the seventies by selling soft, Kevlar vests capable of defeating handgun rounds. When he first marketed his product, he had to sew each vest together manually, but eventually established the successful Second Chance company. Davis became particularly well known for his habit of testing the ballistic strength of his product while wearing the vest in question, often with a .44 Magnum pistol, one of the most penetrating handgun rounds.
Kevlar has become the iconic material for body armor, to the point where games and media tend to call any sort of bullet resistant garment "Kevlar". However, a number of other materials, based on the same Aramid fiber and others, have been used with reasonable success.
Instead of using a material too heavy for the bullet to penetrate, the fiber spreads the impact force over a wider area, to reduce penetration to a large degree. However, there needs to be enough give to properly disperse the impact force, otherwise the materiel will compress and offer significantly less ballistic protection.
If someone placed a vest against the ground, a wall or similar hard surface, the bullets the garment is rated for would likely punch right though, as the material is pinched between the incoming projectile and a backer with no give. For this reason, ballistic testing is always conducted with roma clay, animal corpses or ballistics gelatin. Hard inserts are placed in front of the soft armor for the same reason.
However, even if the vest stops the bullet entirely, the wearer can still receiving bruising and internal injuries as the vest gives under the bullet. There have been cases where a slow moving, heavy projectile, such as a shotgun slug, did not achieve very much penetration, but caused enough internal damage and shock to kill the target regardless.
Richard A. Armellino marketed a concealable vest with his American Body Armor company around the same time as Richard Davis, and pioneered the field of body armor with a steel trauma plate in his vests. It is debated whether Davis or Armellino produced the first successful all-Kevlar vest, but that is beyond the reasonable scope of this article. The protection his trauma plate offered for the "cardiovascular triangle", where a directed impact can cause heart failure or lung collapse, became standard in the concealed vest industry.
In addition to vests, there are bullet resistant coats, suitcases,
even laptops and backpacks with Kevlar panels. One of the more interesting designs is a suitcase that unrolls into a full size blanket, to cover a standing person from gunfire. These are predominantly manufactured for the executive protection business
Modern vests are rated according to the rounds they will stop, with a Roma clay or ballistics gelatin backing, to prevent compression of materiel and a resulting alteration of performance.. The United States NIJ (National Institute of Justice) standards are:
I
This will stop a .38 special round or similar low powered round. Now obsolete, most flak vests fall under this rating.
II-A, II, III-A
II-A being lightest, and III-A thickest, this range of body armor will stop most varieties of handgun rounds, and shotgun slugs or pellets. For specific rounds tested, check out this link. Level II is roughly twenty layers or Kevlar, and III-A around thirty, the latter the highest grade of ballistic protection offered by soft body armor.
III, IV
Level III can absorb 7.62x51mm NATO or .308 Winchester rounds, level IV can stop armor piercing .30-06 Springfield rounds.
This kind of protection is beyond woven fiber, and one has to utilize hard plates.
Stab Proof / Stab Resistant Vests
The covering on most vests is quite capable of deflecting knife cuts. Kevlar itself is commonly used in gloves and cut-resistant clothing. There is a so called "ice pick" test, utilizing a blunted ice pick to test protection offered by a vest. With a smooth enough exterior, the ice pick will not penetrate. However, soft armor is not designed to stop knife stabs, or sharp objects in general.
Hypothetically speaking, a hard plate could interfere with a knife stab, but they aren't particularly feasible on a concealable vest.
There are specialized vests made to handle stabbing, "stab proof / stab resistant" vests. The materials used are similar to those of ballistic soft armor, but there is often a copper wire lining, or chain-mail like structure to catch a blade. Such structures are not conductive of stopping bullets, however.
Tandem vests combining ballistic and stab protection do exist, but they're often quite bulky. Some soft vests have pockets for not only trauma pads and hard plates, but stab proof inserts, though obviously offering limited coverage.
Stab proof vests look identical to a bullet resistant vest. While the bullet-resistant vest is more common in the US, one will find that in regions with less firearms, that Police and Security services tend to prefer stab resistant vests.
Hard Plates / Ballistic Inserts and Plate Carriers
As early as the Vietnam War, ceramics were used to absorb direct small arms fire.
The "chicken plate" was designed for helicopter pilots, who were not sufficiently protected by standard flak jackets. Unlike their nylon counterparts, these aluminum oxide plates were able to stop rifle fire at one hundred meters, in addition to handgun rounds and shrapnel.
A ceramic insert's ballistic performance has to do with the hardness of the material. When a bullet comprised of relatively soft metals such a copper and lead strike a target, the ceramic shatters and destroys the bullet. There is a similar effect when firing supersonic bullets into water. When the water doesn't give immediately, the bullet will consistently rip itself to pieces.
However, the plate was worn in a plate carrier, a vest designed to contain ballistic plates, which may or may not offer any ballistic protection by itself. The T65-1 and T65-2 didn't protect against shards of ceramic and shrapnel, so, ironically, the pilots often wore it in tandem with the flak jacket it was meant to replace.
A plate carrier can come in a number of forms. It may simply be a soft vest with pockets for ballistic inserts, a stripped-down chest harness, or a modular vest with MOLLE webbing. Generally, the consensus is that an armored vest is different than a tactical vest or LBV (Load Bearing Vest). as the latter only serves to carry equipment.
The earliest designs simply carried a plate, and had to be worn in tandem with a load bearing system. For the US, the first ceramic vest took form in the ISAPO (Interim Small Arms Protective Overvest), a plate carrier worn on top of the PASGT flak vest. The ALICE web gear was then worn on top of the two armor vests, creating an incredibly bulky package.
The subsequent attempt, used in the invasion of Iraq was the "Interceptor Body Armor" system, which incorporated the kevlar layers into the plate carrier itself, as well as PALS / MOLLE webbing for various pouches. Later vests, like the USMC specific MTV (Modular Tactical Vest) or the Army IOTV (Improved Outer Tactical Vest) slimmed the overall size of the armor even further. Most military armor allows for the add on of groin, deltoid and neck fragmentation protectors, as well as smaller ceramic plates for side protection.
When a vest combines ballistic fiber with a hard plate, the plate is always placed on the outside of the material to prevent failure inducing compression. They're generally stored between the outermost layer of the vest, where web gear is mounted, placed in front of the soft armor.
There are a number of issues with ceramic plates, however. As you'd expect, they are very expensive, and can easily cost as much as the vest itself. Ceramics are extremely heavy, and a full set can add twenty or more pounds to a loadout, on top of increasing the heat retention while wearing the loaded vest.
There have been cases where users left the rear plate out of the vest to reduce the staggering weight, exposing their backs to rifle fire in the process.
The sides of a plate carrier can have twice as much Kevlar on designs with overlap, but they are still relatively exposed to fire unless they have additional plates. Some vests come with a pouch to accept the miniaturized plates, but there are a number of external options, such as mounting the plate via MOLLE webbing, or hanging a plate carrier pouch over one shoulder, and under the other (this type of carrier, manufactured by Blackhawk Industries, can even be used as frontal and rear armor if needed).
In addition, there are a variety of soft extensions, made to cover the groin, neck, shoulders against shrapnel and handgun rounds, however, these are rarely rated for rifle rounds, and are completely soft armor accessories.
One very direct issue with ceramic plates, is that their protection is short lived. Where Kevlar will take rounds until it eventually falls to pieces, plates are only expected to survive two or three rounds before their structural integrity is compromised, even when struck by a lesser round than they're rated for.
An example of ceramic plates in common usage would be the US SAPI and ESAPI inserts. Silicon carbide and Boron carbide is used in Small Arms Protective Inserts with a spectra (another type of aramid fiber) "spall backer"; it stops shards from the impact cutting into the wearer. The Enhanced SAPI plates use Boron Carbide solely; it is the harder material of the two.
There has been another type of hard plate, standardized by CRISAT (Collaborative Research Into Small Arms Technology).The CRISAT plate is a 1.6 millimeter titanium plate, backed by twenty layers of Kevlar. It was developed during the Cold War by NATO as a standard to test small arms against, as it was the armor believed to be utilized at the time by the Soviet Union. Today, Russia utilizes ceramic plate inserts, but the CRISAT plate is still used as a ballistic standard for testing new weapons, notably PDWs (Personal Defense Weapon) such as the FN P90 and H&K MP7.
Dragon Skin
Dragon Skin is a development of ceramic armor technology, said to deflect full magazines of rifle rounds, hand grenades, and possibly even Tomahawk missiles. Or so the mall-ninjas claimed, seemingly after a certain episode of a television series hosted by a bald ex-Navy S.E.A.L.
One must note the discreet adoption of Dragonskin by numerous contractor units, the CIA, and the Secret Service, along with a number of private Special Forces personnel, around the same time the US military thoroughly rejected the armor system.
Dragonskin utilizes silicone discs, somewhat like the full sized ceramic plates used to deflect rifle rounds, interconnected like the scales on a lizard, giving the concept it's name. Pinnacle Armor produces three variants, rated for NIJ Level III, IV,and an unofficial V.
Dragonskin has several advantages over conventional plate carriers. As it uses a number of "scales" rather than a single plate, a round striking the vest will only damage the discs it impacts, without destroying the structural integrity of the entire package. It's multiple hit capability, and resilience against concussive blast have been lauded. The discs also grant greater flexibility than any solid plate, allowing coverage of most of the vest material, instead of the relatively flat sides of it. However, the tradeoff is cost, not only of the system but the non-modular system, which requires the entire insert be replaced rather than a specific side or panel like conventional armor.
It is impossible to give a certain summary of the system's real flaws and advantages, but the controversies can be highlighted.
Testing by a number of private companies as well as the military, has been reportedly flawed. One glaring example: the US military stated that the Dragonskin system weighed too much, adding twenty pounds to a completed Interceptor package. However, one must note that they compared a medium Interceptor vest to a extra-large Dragonskin vest, with vastly differing amounts of coverage.
By design, the scales are flexible in their inter-locking pattern. When the armor is curved, the scales angle slightly and decrease in overlap. The edges of discs are thinner than their centers, as well, contributing to a less durable striking surface. It seems that this was a point of difference among the tests conducted with the Dragonskin system, whether the companies used a flat surface, that would overlap the scales for maximum protection, or a slight curve, simulating the curvature that the body armor would actually be worn with.
It is perfectly feasible to penetrate the vest if firing from an angle taking advantage of the gap in the overlap, where a ceramic plate would remain the same shape regardless of how it was worn.
One final concern is that the system was rejected on grounds of it's durability in extreme climate. While the temperatures were stated to be in the range of 120 degrees F, method of heating, duration of this test was not made publicly available by the military.
The alleged issue was the scales falling apart and sinking to the bottom of the vest in extreme temperatures, compromising ballistic performance. On the contrary, a private test was conducted by a Dr. Gary Roberts in 2006, where two vests were left in 120 degree heat for ninety minutes before being shot multiple times on varying angles with 5.56x45mm, 7.62x39mm and AP .30-06 Springfield.
There was no penetration in the same SOV-2000 Dragonskin vest tested by the US Military, nor the AMI control vest. An interesting note is that the SOV-2000 is a Level III vest, not rated for the AP .30-06 that a Level IV can handle.
Future Weapons, the aforementioned television series, tested the vest with an AK variant, a subsonic nine-millimeter MP5SD, an M4, and finally an M67 frag grenade. Although not without flaws, the Dragonskin pattern vest presents an interesting direction that body armor could take.
Helmets
Like body armor, the advance of firearms took protective gear out of warfare for quite a while.
It had less to do with smokeless powder, however, than the general use of muskets and massed fire as the primary method of warfare. The trend was from leather and steel helms, to ordinary hats offering no real protection. Even in the twentieth century, the armies of the world primarily used regular caps, or at most, leather helms. As soon as The Great War's first soldiers fell, metal helmets started to be issued, some nations keeping these designs well into the Cold War
.
Some of the designs born in this initial use survive today. The Stahlhelm to the left is sometimes referred to as "coal-kettle" in shape, but the most well known name is the "fritz helmet," referring to it's legendary usage by the Germans in both World Wars. While it's original design only survives today in the form of ceremonial uniform, the shape was widely copied for the synthetic designs that would eventually become the norm. Other designs, such as the American M1 "steel pot," continue to be copied and issued in some third world militaries.
Up until late in the Cold War, the norm for a helmet was a thick shell made of steel, with a removable synthetic liner and canvas or leather suspension. The chinstrap was rarely worn on most, allegedly due to fears that the heavy helmet could cause injury to the head if strapped down during an explosion.
The next step in helmets, much like body armor, was the revolutionary use of synthetics, primarily in aramid fibers. One of the most well known of these designs, the PASGT helmet, was a direct copy of the Stahlhelm's shape, and also became known as a fritz helmet. Made of tough kevlar, it could deflect most handgun rounds reliably at point blank. This level of protection has remained, even to the modern day, the standard for headwear.
Further developments went towards ergonomics and cushioning. The original flared-out shell of the Stahlhelm was designed to give greater protection against shrapnel from exploding shells. This protrusion was much more pronounced on the PASGT helmet, allowing communications gear to be worn, but it was found that it also interfered with hearing to an extent. Another issue with the PASGT was it's weight; despite lightweight material, the PASGT still weighed three to four pounds depending on size. A final, and perhaps most pronounced problem of the design was that the liner, the suspension system that kept the helmet snug on the user's head, was taken straight from the steel-pot era and did not protect the wearer very well.
Canvas and leather, while doing a good job of retaining the helmet on one's head, does not cushion impacts. A bullet that was fully stopped by the helmet can still slam the material into the user's skull, giving a severe concussion. Most PASGT helmets were modified with foam padding and extra suspension webbing to alleviate this problem. Even as it is being phased out of military service, the design is widely copied in both military and law enforcement, and the shape is common even on improved models.
Most designs like the MICH series of helmets, the British Mk 6 and numerous commercial builds are broadly similar to the PASGT, with a flared-out skirt for use with hearing protection and some limited fragmentation protection. Some have the skirt cut back for better hearing, or for lighter weight. One common factor in ballistic helmets is that they are becoming more like a motorcycle helmet, with a full harness holding the helmet on, and a liner that is crushed by blunt impact and disperses force away from the head and neck.
In an ideal world, you'd take distance and shelter over personal armor, but body armor has become an essential part of the infantryman's kit, and they are a legitimate concern in a disaster situation. A good way to look at body armor is to compare them to seat belts; uncomfortable, but handy when you do need them, as much you hope you never will. Armor is just a stopgap measure when something goes wrong. It won't prevent an accident from happening, and it can't replace common sense.
Early Body Armor Designs
Before the invention of nitrocellulose and smokeless powder, a majority of firearms utilized black powder, resulting in relatively low velocity and dirty function. They were by no definition "weak": large caliber lead ball would deform on impact and cause terrible wounds. However, a number of contemporary armor designs were effective in deflecting musket fire.
Leather helms and vests, if thick enough, could possibly deflect a glancing musket strike, but were primarily effective against edged weaponry. However, a heavy enough steel chest-piece could stop the slow moving slugs. In fact, newly produced armor was proofed by being shot with a gun, the dent being left as proof. These were the earliest true "bullet-proof" vests.
Heavily layered garments of cotton and silk were said to reasonably effective as well, although this changed considerably when smokeless powder weapons, with much higher velocity projectiles, were introduced.
Development of similar armor to the armored suits of old continued well into World War One, monstrous suits of heavy steel and leather seen by both sides. They were tested by machine gunners and other stationary users, but were not issued in any significant numbers on any front. World War Two also saw a resurgence in such armor, issued to pilots, tankers and artillerymen. Such designs are placed under the"flak vest" portion of this article; though they are technically not flak jackets, they served much the same purpose.
Flak Jacket / Flak Vest
A flak jacket or flak vest is is often used as a generic term for a modern bullet-resistant vest, However, the original garment was a heavy, steel lined apron of sorts, designed to stop shrapnel from explosive shells. In World War Two, they were predominantly worn by waist gunners and similar exposed air crew, although vehicle crews were occasionally issued armor. The term flak actually comes from Flugzeugabwehr-Kanone, a German term that literally mean anti-aircraft fire.In the same war, the Russians used a very simplified "vest", the SN-42. Literally two steel plates stamped together, it had a partial groin protector but lacked any sort of covering material. Although it would not stand up to rifle bullets, it would effectively stop pistol fire at longer ranges. Combat engineers and mechanized infantry utilized the SN-42 in urban combat, where the nine-millimeter MP38 / MP40 was the weapon of choice for their German opponents. The British, Germans, even the Japanese, had equivalent, and often very similar designs.
The Americans chose to pursue plastics for body armor material, issuing in limited numbers laminated nylon vests in the Pacific front at the end of World War Two, and in the Korean War. During the Vietnam War, they issued perhaps the most iconic example of a flak vest, the M1955 and M69 (see left). It used twelve layers of ballistic nylon, and weighed several pounds less than it's predecessors, but still only protected against fragments.
The most modern, and perhaps final iteration of the true flak vest was the US PASGT (Personnel Armor System for Ground Troops) vest. Despite utilizing Kevlar and having a slightly heavier package than the M69 flak vest it replaced, the package was not designed to stop even handgun rounds. There have been reports of the PASGT vest doing just that, but the vest was phased out before any significant testing could take place.
Bulletproof Vest / Bullet Resistant Vest / "Soft Armor"
The difference between "bullet-proof" and "bullet resistant" is a matter of liability. Resistant implies that the vest will only withstand a certain kind and quantity of bullets before failing, where, bullet-proof can be made out to imply total resistance.However, the now predominant term "bulletproof vest" did not become common until the advent of lightweight, woven fibers. Richard Davis innovated the field of body armor in the seventies by selling soft, Kevlar vests capable of defeating handgun rounds. When he first marketed his product, he had to sew each vest together manually, but eventually established the successful Second Chance company. Davis became particularly well known for his habit of testing the ballistic strength of his product while wearing the vest in question, often with a .44 Magnum pistol, one of the most penetrating handgun rounds.
Kevlar has become the iconic material for body armor, to the point where games and media tend to call any sort of bullet resistant garment "Kevlar". However, a number of other materials, based on the same Aramid fiber and others, have been used with reasonable success.
Instead of using a material too heavy for the bullet to penetrate, the fiber spreads the impact force over a wider area, to reduce penetration to a large degree. However, there needs to be enough give to properly disperse the impact force, otherwise the materiel will compress and offer significantly less ballistic protection.
If someone placed a vest against the ground, a wall or similar hard surface, the bullets the garment is rated for would likely punch right though, as the material is pinched between the incoming projectile and a backer with no give. For this reason, ballistic testing is always conducted with roma clay, animal corpses or ballistics gelatin. Hard inserts are placed in front of the soft armor for the same reason.
However, even if the vest stops the bullet entirely, the wearer can still receiving bruising and internal injuries as the vest gives under the bullet. There have been cases where a slow moving, heavy projectile, such as a shotgun slug, did not achieve very much penetration, but caused enough internal damage and shock to kill the target regardless.
Richard A. Armellino marketed a concealable vest with his American Body Armor company around the same time as Richard Davis, and pioneered the field of body armor with a steel trauma plate in his vests. It is debated whether Davis or Armellino produced the first successful all-Kevlar vest, but that is beyond the reasonable scope of this article. The protection his trauma plate offered for the "cardiovascular triangle", where a directed impact can cause heart failure or lung collapse, became standard in the concealed vest industry.In addition to vests, there are bullet resistant coats, suitcases,
even laptops and backpacks with Kevlar panels. One of the more interesting designs is a suitcase that unrolls into a full size blanket, to cover a standing person from gunfire. These are predominantly manufactured for the executive protection business
Modern vests are rated according to the rounds they will stop, with a Roma clay or ballistics gelatin backing, to prevent compression of materiel and a resulting alteration of performance.. The United States NIJ (National Institute of Justice) standards are:
I
This will stop a .38 special round or similar low powered round. Now obsolete, most flak vests fall under this rating.
II-A, II, III-A
II-A being lightest, and III-A thickest, this range of body armor will stop most varieties of handgun rounds, and shotgun slugs or pellets. For specific rounds tested, check out this link. Level II is roughly twenty layers or Kevlar, and III-A around thirty, the latter the highest grade of ballistic protection offered by soft body armor.
III, IV
Level III can absorb 7.62x51mm NATO or .308 Winchester rounds, level IV can stop armor piercing .30-06 Springfield rounds.
This kind of protection is beyond woven fiber, and one has to utilize hard plates.
Stab Proof / Stab Resistant Vests
The covering on most vests is quite capable of deflecting knife cuts. Kevlar itself is commonly used in gloves and cut-resistant clothing. There is a so called "ice pick" test, utilizing a blunted ice pick to test protection offered by a vest. With a smooth enough exterior, the ice pick will not penetrate. However, soft armor is not designed to stop knife stabs, or sharp objects in general.
Hypothetically speaking, a hard plate could interfere with a knife stab, but they aren't particularly feasible on a concealable vest.
There are specialized vests made to handle stabbing, "stab proof / stab resistant" vests. The materials used are similar to those of ballistic soft armor, but there is often a copper wire lining, or chain-mail like structure to catch a blade. Such structures are not conductive of stopping bullets, however.
Tandem vests combining ballistic and stab protection do exist, but they're often quite bulky. Some soft vests have pockets for not only trauma pads and hard plates, but stab proof inserts, though obviously offering limited coverage.
Stab proof vests look identical to a bullet resistant vest. While the bullet-resistant vest is more common in the US, one will find that in regions with less firearms, that Police and Security services tend to prefer stab resistant vests.
Hard Plates / Ballistic Inserts and Plate Carriers
As early as the Vietnam War, ceramics were used to absorb direct small arms fire. The "chicken plate" was designed for helicopter pilots, who were not sufficiently protected by standard flak jackets. Unlike their nylon counterparts, these aluminum oxide plates were able to stop rifle fire at one hundred meters, in addition to handgun rounds and shrapnel.
A ceramic insert's ballistic performance has to do with the hardness of the material. When a bullet comprised of relatively soft metals such a copper and lead strike a target, the ceramic shatters and destroys the bullet. There is a similar effect when firing supersonic bullets into water. When the water doesn't give immediately, the bullet will consistently rip itself to pieces.
However, the plate was worn in a plate carrier, a vest designed to contain ballistic plates, which may or may not offer any ballistic protection by itself. The T65-1 and T65-2 didn't protect against shards of ceramic and shrapnel, so, ironically, the pilots often wore it in tandem with the flak jacket it was meant to replace.
A plate carrier can come in a number of forms. It may simply be a soft vest with pockets for ballistic inserts, a stripped-down chest harness, or a modular vest with MOLLE webbing. Generally, the consensus is that an armored vest is different than a tactical vest or LBV (Load Bearing Vest). as the latter only serves to carry equipment.
The earliest designs simply carried a plate, and had to be worn in tandem with a load bearing system. For the US, the first ceramic vest took form in the ISAPO (Interim Small Arms Protective Overvest), a plate carrier worn on top of the PASGT flak vest. The ALICE web gear was then worn on top of the two armor vests, creating an incredibly bulky package.
The subsequent attempt, used in the invasion of Iraq was the "Interceptor Body Armor" system, which incorporated the kevlar layers into the plate carrier itself, as well as PALS / MOLLE webbing for various pouches. Later vests, like the USMC specific MTV (Modular Tactical Vest) or the Army IOTV (Improved Outer Tactical Vest) slimmed the overall size of the armor even further. Most military armor allows for the add on of groin, deltoid and neck fragmentation protectors, as well as smaller ceramic plates for side protection.
When a vest combines ballistic fiber with a hard plate, the plate is always placed on the outside of the material to prevent failure inducing compression. They're generally stored between the outermost layer of the vest, where web gear is mounted, placed in front of the soft armor.
There are a number of issues with ceramic plates, however. As you'd expect, they are very expensive, and can easily cost as much as the vest itself. Ceramics are extremely heavy, and a full set can add twenty or more pounds to a loadout, on top of increasing the heat retention while wearing the loaded vest.
There have been cases where users left the rear plate out of the vest to reduce the staggering weight, exposing their backs to rifle fire in the process.The sides of a plate carrier can have twice as much Kevlar on designs with overlap, but they are still relatively exposed to fire unless they have additional plates. Some vests come with a pouch to accept the miniaturized plates, but there are a number of external options, such as mounting the plate via MOLLE webbing, or hanging a plate carrier pouch over one shoulder, and under the other (this type of carrier, manufactured by Blackhawk Industries, can even be used as frontal and rear armor if needed).
In addition, there are a variety of soft extensions, made to cover the groin, neck, shoulders against shrapnel and handgun rounds, however, these are rarely rated for rifle rounds, and are completely soft armor accessories.
One very direct issue with ceramic plates, is that their protection is short lived. Where Kevlar will take rounds until it eventually falls to pieces, plates are only expected to survive two or three rounds before their structural integrity is compromised, even when struck by a lesser round than they're rated for.
An example of ceramic plates in common usage would be the US SAPI and ESAPI inserts. Silicon carbide and Boron carbide is used in Small Arms Protective Inserts with a spectra (another type of aramid fiber) "spall backer"; it stops shards from the impact cutting into the wearer. The Enhanced SAPI plates use Boron Carbide solely; it is the harder material of the two.
There has been another type of hard plate, standardized by CRISAT (Collaborative Research Into Small Arms Technology).The CRISAT plate is a 1.6 millimeter titanium plate, backed by twenty layers of Kevlar. It was developed during the Cold War by NATO as a standard to test small arms against, as it was the armor believed to be utilized at the time by the Soviet Union. Today, Russia utilizes ceramic plate inserts, but the CRISAT plate is still used as a ballistic standard for testing new weapons, notably PDWs (Personal Defense Weapon) such as the FN P90 and H&K MP7.
Dragon Skin
Dragon Skin is a development of ceramic armor technology, said to deflect full magazines of rifle rounds, hand grenades, and possibly even Tomahawk missiles. Or so the mall-ninjas claimed, seemingly after a certain episode of a television series hosted by a bald ex-Navy S.E.A.L.One must note the discreet adoption of Dragonskin by numerous contractor units, the CIA, and the Secret Service, along with a number of private Special Forces personnel, around the same time the US military thoroughly rejected the armor system.
Dragonskin utilizes silicone discs, somewhat like the full sized ceramic plates used to deflect rifle rounds, interconnected like the scales on a lizard, giving the concept it's name. Pinnacle Armor produces three variants, rated for NIJ Level III, IV,and an unofficial V.
Dragonskin has several advantages over conventional plate carriers. As it uses a number of "scales" rather than a single plate, a round striking the vest will only damage the discs it impacts, without destroying the structural integrity of the entire package. It's multiple hit capability, and resilience against concussive blast have been lauded. The discs also grant greater flexibility than any solid plate, allowing coverage of most of the vest material, instead of the relatively flat sides of it. However, the tradeoff is cost, not only of the system but the non-modular system, which requires the entire insert be replaced rather than a specific side or panel like conventional armor.
It is impossible to give a certain summary of the system's real flaws and advantages, but the controversies can be highlighted.
Testing by a number of private companies as well as the military, has been reportedly flawed. One glaring example: the US military stated that the Dragonskin system weighed too much, adding twenty pounds to a completed Interceptor package. However, one must note that they compared a medium Interceptor vest to a extra-large Dragonskin vest, with vastly differing amounts of coverage.
By design, the scales are flexible in their inter-locking pattern. When the armor is curved, the scales angle slightly and decrease in overlap. The edges of discs are thinner than their centers, as well, contributing to a less durable striking surface. It seems that this was a point of difference among the tests conducted with the Dragonskin system, whether the companies used a flat surface, that would overlap the scales for maximum protection, or a slight curve, simulating the curvature that the body armor would actually be worn with.
It is perfectly feasible to penetrate the vest if firing from an angle taking advantage of the gap in the overlap, where a ceramic plate would remain the same shape regardless of how it was worn.
One final concern is that the system was rejected on grounds of it's durability in extreme climate. While the temperatures were stated to be in the range of 120 degrees F, method of heating, duration of this test was not made publicly available by the military.
The alleged issue was the scales falling apart and sinking to the bottom of the vest in extreme temperatures, compromising ballistic performance. On the contrary, a private test was conducted by a Dr. Gary Roberts in 2006, where two vests were left in 120 degree heat for ninety minutes before being shot multiple times on varying angles with 5.56x45mm, 7.62x39mm and AP .30-06 Springfield.
There was no penetration in the same SOV-2000 Dragonskin vest tested by the US Military, nor the AMI control vest. An interesting note is that the SOV-2000 is a Level III vest, not rated for the AP .30-06 that a Level IV can handle.
Future Weapons, the aforementioned television series, tested the vest with an AK variant, a subsonic nine-millimeter MP5SD, an M4, and finally an M67 frag grenade. Although not without flaws, the Dragonskin pattern vest presents an interesting direction that body armor could take.
Helmets
Like body armor, the advance of firearms took protective gear out of warfare for quite a while.
It had less to do with smokeless powder, however, than the general use of muskets and massed fire as the primary method of warfare. The trend was from leather and steel helms, to ordinary hats offering no real protection. Even in the twentieth century, the armies of the world primarily used regular caps, or at most, leather helms. As soon as The Great War's first soldiers fell, metal helmets started to be issued, some nations keeping these designs well into the Cold War
.Some of the designs born in this initial use survive today. The Stahlhelm to the left is sometimes referred to as "coal-kettle" in shape, but the most well known name is the "fritz helmet," referring to it's legendary usage by the Germans in both World Wars. While it's original design only survives today in the form of ceremonial uniform, the shape was widely copied for the synthetic designs that would eventually become the norm. Other designs, such as the American M1 "steel pot," continue to be copied and issued in some third world militaries.
Up until late in the Cold War, the norm for a helmet was a thick shell made of steel, with a removable synthetic liner and canvas or leather suspension. The chinstrap was rarely worn on most, allegedly due to fears that the heavy helmet could cause injury to the head if strapped down during an explosion.
The next step in helmets, much like body armor, was the revolutionary use of synthetics, primarily in aramid fibers. One of the most well known of these designs, the PASGT helmet, was a direct copy of the Stahlhelm's shape, and also became known as a fritz helmet. Made of tough kevlar, it could deflect most handgun rounds reliably at point blank. This level of protection has remained, even to the modern day, the standard for headwear.
Further developments went towards ergonomics and cushioning. The original flared-out shell of the Stahlhelm was designed to give greater protection against shrapnel from exploding shells. This protrusion was much more pronounced on the PASGT helmet, allowing communications gear to be worn, but it was found that it also interfered with hearing to an extent. Another issue with the PASGT was it's weight; despite lightweight material, the PASGT still weighed three to four pounds depending on size. A final, and perhaps most pronounced problem of the design was that the liner, the suspension system that kept the helmet snug on the user's head, was taken straight from the steel-pot era and did not protect the wearer very well.
Canvas and leather, while doing a good job of retaining the helmet on one's head, does not cushion impacts. A bullet that was fully stopped by the helmet can still slam the material into the user's skull, giving a severe concussion. Most PASGT helmets were modified with foam padding and extra suspension webbing to alleviate this problem. Even as it is being phased out of military service, the design is widely copied in both military and law enforcement, and the shape is common even on improved models.
Most designs like the MICH series of helmets, the British Mk 6 and numerous commercial builds are broadly similar to the PASGT, with a flared-out skirt for use with hearing protection and some limited fragmentation protection. Some have the skirt cut back for better hearing, or for lighter weight. One common factor in ballistic helmets is that they are becoming more like a motorcycle helmet, with a full harness holding the helmet on, and a liner that is crushed by blunt impact and disperses force away from the head and neck.
John_234 |
Latest page update: made by John_234
, Dec 20 2011, 4:09 PM EST
(about this update
About This Update
Edited by John_234
272 words added 68 words deleted 1 image added 1 image deleted view changes - complete history) |
|
Keyword tags:
armour zombies defense
More Info: links to this page
|
| Started By | Thread Subject | Replies | Last Post | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| fixdeluxe1 | The point of Kevlar during the Zombie Apocalypse (page: 1 2 3) | 50 | Tuesday, 3:32 PM EDT by Ssgtcal | ||
|
Thread started: Apr 27 2010, 1:33 AM EDT
Watch
I perfectly understand the point of defense against raiders,and in general terms of security,but where do zombies fit into the picture?
I mean,they will generally NOT be aiming for biting the center-mass until the targets is down,usually with a bite to the neck or a limb,as those are more accesible.You could create pads to fit around your neck(which would be rather uncomfortable) and wrap around your wrist,but would that be enough to buy you time(your not going to stick around being bitten all day,are you).Of course you could go for the extreme options such as wearing an NBC class EOD battlesuit,but that is probably not accesible to most people. I have a Class II-A Kevlar Vest,I brought off tradme second hand for around about NZ$299.00 with little wear and tare,but it is said to only be effective against handgun ammunition,but you should be taking cover if engaging in a firefight.One word of advice,DO NOT get a false sense of indestructability from these products.
2
out of
2 found this valuable.
Do you?
Keyword tags:
armour zombies defense
|
||||
| John_234 | New Article - Ballistic body Armor | 19 | Feb 20 2010, 2:07 PM EST by XanderRich | ||
|
Thread started: Jan 2 2010, 1:45 AM EST
Watch
I spent the last few hours working on this article. Added a summary of some types of body armor. I intend to go into detail on the unconventional pieces like stab-proof vests and dragon skin, in addition to usage, fitting, and issues with improvised armor.
Thoughts thus far? |
||||
| AlexHigginbotham | response to kevlar (page: 1 2) | 21 | Jan 2 2010, 9:08 PM EST by deathseekrakodo | ||
|
Thread started: Dec 15 2009, 10:21 AM EST
Watch
Yea, pretty much poorly written. Ill add some notes.
He had it way wrong with kevlar. Not all vests will stand up well to getting shot. If you have a vest it is likely to be either the Interceptor, MTV, or Dragonskin. If you wear the interceptor or MTV and dont have the insertable (and heavy) ceramic plates, high muzzle velocity pistol amuunition and pretty much any rifle round will tear through it like swiss cheese. With the plates, it will only sustain a couple shots before the plate is destroyed and penetration is possible. Dragonskin is much more reliable in takiing multiple rounds, and it isnt as "rare" as LJ126 said. Many swat organizations and mercinaries (such as halo or blackwater) use dragonskin. Dont expect to find any on a military base though because as of now it is still banned through the army and marine corps. The MTV is a heavy piece of **** that severly limits movement, i had to wear one for 7 months, and not a second of it was fun. On top of that, even if wearing the best kevlar armor, if someone shoots you with a small round such as a 9mm or .38, it will HURT LIKE HELL. It will can bruising, it can break ribs, and it can stop you heart and cause internal bleeding. Surviving a grenade blast.... Almost comical. There are cases upon cases of people jumping on grenades, covering it with a solid kevlar helmet, then laying across it with full kevlar vest with plate inserts. The likelyhood of surviving without recieving very severe injury is slim and none. Personally on Z-day i will have no use for kevlar body armor. Kevlar tears very easily and with continued use, holes wear through the material. The only viable use i could see are the UK versions of the kevlar "stab proof" vest. I can see where thin kevlar with a thing copper wire mesh woven in (i think thats how they are made) would be pretty bite resistant, and also very lightweight.
Do you find this valuable?
Keyword tags:
armour zombies defense
|
||||
Showing 3 of 4 threads for this page
- view all
