Flank armor's protection

Cadet Seaman said:
Maybe. Or maybe people have had the whole "bulletproof vest" mentality too long.

You'd need a soldier walking around in an EOD suit to have all around protection.

Well I'll play the devil's advocate here. I don't know the specifics of the report in question or even if it's real, but let's just go with it.

I mean, say that the report comes back and says that 100 guys where shot with 7.62 while wearing the body armor. 50 of them live because the vest stopped it. 50% of the people who would have died are now still alive, that's pretty damned good right? But say another 40 people died because they where shot in, say, the shoulder. And all you have to do it put this 1/2-LB attachment to the shoulders and all those other 40 people would still be alive too.

So under that theoretical situation it would seem the IBA is failing pretty bad because you could save 90% of your casualties if you just made one small fix!
---------

I'm just playing devil's advocate, but what is important to say is that it's always a ballance. Just because people with IBA on die doesn't mean it isn't doing it's job; but by the same token saying "well what we got is perfect and we can't wear full 100lb suits everywhere we go" is also an incorrect response.
 
Whispering Death said:
Well I'll play the devil's advocate here. I don't know the specifics of the report in question or even if it's real, but let's just go with it.

I mean, say that the report comes back and says that 100 guys where shot with 7.62 while wearing the body armor. 50 of them live because the vest stopped it. 50% of the people who would have died are now still alive, that's pretty damned good right? But say another 40 people died because they where shot in, say, the shoulder. And all you have to do it put this 1/2-LB attachment to the shoulders and all those other 40 people would still be alive too.

So under that theoretical situation it would seem the IBA is failing pretty bad because you could save 90% of your casualties if you just made one small fix!
---------

I'm just playing devil's advocate, but what is important to say is that it's always a ballance. Just because people with IBA on die doesn't mean it isn't doing it's job; but by the same token saying "well what we got is perfect and we can't wear full 100lb suits everywhere we go" is also an incorrect response.

True, but the Army and MArines issue shoulder and croutch protectors, it's up to the soldier to wear it.
 
I have mixed feeling on the whole idea of body armor. An Infantryman uses stealth, suprise, and absolute shock to achieve victory on the battlefield. This whole idea of creating a virtual "tank" around an infantyman seems wrong to me. Might as well be in the armor branch.

I can see the benefits to the troops I guess. Just seems like we are trying to recreate the knights of old.
 
Well, this is the only bad ting about allied troops, they always go into battle in heavy gear while the rebels just wear their normal clothes to war, which is more comfortable!
 
Cadet Seaman said:
Well in CAP/USAFAUX we aren't issued body armor to every person we may have it in supply, but I have a set of my own. Depending on what our AO is we get issued NBC gear and other such stuff.

Why would CAP ever need body armor?
 
Insight said:
Why would CAP ever need body armor?

Beats me, some squadron's have it in supply. I guess it's because AFROTC gives us alot of their old stuff, and when we aquire it we can't throw it away, it's da rules.
 
Back
Top