Team Infidel
Forum Spin Doctor
San Antonio Express-News
April 13, 2008 By Sig Christenson, Express-News Military Writer
Saving GIs from the threat of burns has been one of the most vexing problems for American commanders since the insurgency mushroomed in Iraq.
Army and Brooks City-Base researchers say they've got an answer — a uniform that looks very much like the fatigues worn throughout the war but one that offers far better protection against bombs and missiles.
The new "fire-resistant" uniform is in the late stages of development and could be shipped to Iraq and Afghanistan later this year. Brooks also has devised a fire-resistant pullover shirt worn underneath a Kevlar vest in addition to working with the Army on the new uniform.
Brooks' "combat shirt" has a light, breathable fabric at the torso where vests press against the chest. Its fire-resistant sleeves are heavier than the older button-down shirts worn by airmen, and far more protective.
"You talk about a breakthrough, it is a breakthrough," said Maj. Jason Hale, a leader of the Brooks team. "We've had firefighters that have been wearing fire-protective gear for a long time, but it's bulky and it's cumbersome, and you couldn't wear that type of gear on a 12-hour convoy mission in Iraq."
Fire-resistant fatigues are already in use. More than 200,000 Fire Resistant Army Combat Uniforms were developed by the Army and sent to Iraq and Afghanistan last summer. Army and Brooks researchers have crafted a uniform with a new fire-resistant fabric. It will be used by troops in both services.
The Army says it believes the fire-resistant fatigues have saved lives, though how many isn't clear. Army Maj. Clay Williamson, assistant product manager for fire-resistant clothing for the Army at Fort Belvoir, Va., said burn injuries have fallen, but no details will be known until a medical study of the matter is completed.
The Army's "FRACU," as it's called, costs twice as much as the old $78 fatigues, but troops in the war zone get them free. The version the Air Force has in the works will be similar but have a different acronym — FRABU, for Fire Resistant Airman Battle Uniform. Brooks' Hale said airmen headed to Iraq and Afghanistan likely will get the uniform, though distribution could be limited by job specialty.
Brooks collaborated with private industry as well as the Air Force Research Laboratory in Ohio and a fire-research unit at Tyndall AFB, Fla. The Brooks team evaluated material and test data, then shared its results with the Army. It also used the Army's previous work in developing its first fire-resistant uniform, saving years of research time and money as well.
"It's just better for everyone if we do things jointly anyway," Brooks' Hale said. "The more we standardize, the better it is for us, the better it is for industry."
The standard-issue "FR" fatigue for the grunt in a Humvee, if a revolutionary development, cannot prevent burns. Though certainly better at protecting troops than the old uniforms, the degree of protection depends on the severity of the fire.
"The uniforms that we're talking about are fire-resistant," the Army's Williamson said. "It will stop the flame from getting to your skin for a period of time to allow you to escape from a situation."
The Army's project began about two years ago after commanders in Iraq and Afghanistan war zones saw a rise in burn injuries — typically caused by increasingly lethal roadside bombs and rocket-propelled grenades, both staples of insurgents. Brooks said its researchers got involved last year after learning of the Army's project. Their reason: Airmen now do jobs once done by soldiers, including convoy escort duty.
Army and Brooks researchers working to improve the fatigues that were fielded last year are saying little about their first collaborative effort. Several companies are competing to produce the FR uniform in development, but officials won't elaborate.
They say the uniform will be as good as the one now in use — if not better — and that they're moving as fast as they can to get it to the troops in the field.
"We want to make sure they get a product that performs, that actually protects them," Brooks' Parker said, "and we have to make sure we do a thorough evaluation to ensure we do that."
April 13, 2008 By Sig Christenson, Express-News Military Writer
Saving GIs from the threat of burns has been one of the most vexing problems for American commanders since the insurgency mushroomed in Iraq.
Army and Brooks City-Base researchers say they've got an answer — a uniform that looks very much like the fatigues worn throughout the war but one that offers far better protection against bombs and missiles.
The new "fire-resistant" uniform is in the late stages of development and could be shipped to Iraq and Afghanistan later this year. Brooks also has devised a fire-resistant pullover shirt worn underneath a Kevlar vest in addition to working with the Army on the new uniform.
Brooks' "combat shirt" has a light, breathable fabric at the torso where vests press against the chest. Its fire-resistant sleeves are heavier than the older button-down shirts worn by airmen, and far more protective.
"You talk about a breakthrough, it is a breakthrough," said Maj. Jason Hale, a leader of the Brooks team. "We've had firefighters that have been wearing fire-protective gear for a long time, but it's bulky and it's cumbersome, and you couldn't wear that type of gear on a 12-hour convoy mission in Iraq."
Fire-resistant fatigues are already in use. More than 200,000 Fire Resistant Army Combat Uniforms were developed by the Army and sent to Iraq and Afghanistan last summer. Army and Brooks researchers have crafted a uniform with a new fire-resistant fabric. It will be used by troops in both services.
The Army says it believes the fire-resistant fatigues have saved lives, though how many isn't clear. Army Maj. Clay Williamson, assistant product manager for fire-resistant clothing for the Army at Fort Belvoir, Va., said burn injuries have fallen, but no details will be known until a medical study of the matter is completed.
The Army's "FRACU," as it's called, costs twice as much as the old $78 fatigues, but troops in the war zone get them free. The version the Air Force has in the works will be similar but have a different acronym — FRABU, for Fire Resistant Airman Battle Uniform. Brooks' Hale said airmen headed to Iraq and Afghanistan likely will get the uniform, though distribution could be limited by job specialty.
Brooks collaborated with private industry as well as the Air Force Research Laboratory in Ohio and a fire-research unit at Tyndall AFB, Fla. The Brooks team evaluated material and test data, then shared its results with the Army. It also used the Army's previous work in developing its first fire-resistant uniform, saving years of research time and money as well.
"It's just better for everyone if we do things jointly anyway," Brooks' Hale said. "The more we standardize, the better it is for us, the better it is for industry."
The standard-issue "FR" fatigue for the grunt in a Humvee, if a revolutionary development, cannot prevent burns. Though certainly better at protecting troops than the old uniforms, the degree of protection depends on the severity of the fire.
"The uniforms that we're talking about are fire-resistant," the Army's Williamson said. "It will stop the flame from getting to your skin for a period of time to allow you to escape from a situation."
The Army's project began about two years ago after commanders in Iraq and Afghanistan war zones saw a rise in burn injuries — typically caused by increasingly lethal roadside bombs and rocket-propelled grenades, both staples of insurgents. Brooks said its researchers got involved last year after learning of the Army's project. Their reason: Airmen now do jobs once done by soldiers, including convoy escort duty.
Army and Brooks researchers working to improve the fatigues that were fielded last year are saying little about their first collaborative effort. Several companies are competing to produce the FR uniform in development, but officials won't elaborate.
They say the uniform will be as good as the one now in use — if not better — and that they're moving as fast as they can to get it to the troops in the field.
"We want to make sure they get a product that performs, that actually protects them," Brooks' Parker said, "and we have to make sure we do a thorough evaluation to ensure we do that."