- Also spelled:
- armor
- Also called:
- body armour
- Related Topics:
- helmet
- bulletproof vest
- chain mail
- cuirass
- plate armour
In the 1980s the U.S. Army developed the Personnel Armor System for Ground Troops (PASGT), which was composed of a newly designed Kevlar helmet and a Kevlar vest. Although the vest weighed 9 pounds (4 kg), slightly more than the M-1969 vest it replaced, it provided superior protection against shell fragments. In 2003, coinciding with the beginning of the Iraq War, the army replaced the PASGT with the Interceptor Body Armor, or IBA, system. The IBA consists of an “outer tactical vest” made from layered Kevlar, which provides protection against shell fragments and most handgun bullets as large as 9 mm, and two ceramic “small arms protective inserts,” or SAPI plates, which can be inserted into the vest to provide additional protection. Altogether the full system weighs some 16 pounds (7.25 kg), but it provides protection against 7.62-mm full-metal-jacket rifle bullets—a level of protection that earlier versions of body armour could not provide.
The basic IBA system protects the body’s most vital organs from injury, and the Kevlar helmet protects the head. Add-on components include a groin protector, a throat protector, and upper-arm protection. To counter a growing threat from improvised explosive devices and armour-piercing bullets, the U.S. military produced enhanced SAPI plates, enhanced side ballistic inserts, and deltoid and axillary protectors for the outer tactical vest, thus providing a greater area of body coverage and protecting against more-potent projectiles.
In the British armed forces body armour has gone through a similar evolution. Steel helmets, which had been standard-issue since World War I, were replaced in the 1980s by the first of a series of helmets fabricated of nylon. In the late 1980s a lightweight Combat Body Armour (CBA) was introduced, consisting of a vest with soft ballistic filler capable of protecting against fragments and 9-mm pistol rounds. The Enhanced Body Armour (EBA) version could be reinforced with ceramic plates for greater protection against higher-velocity projectiles. In response to combat conditions in the Afghanistan War, where troops found themselves fighting more often on foot than in armoured vehicles, the Osprey Assault body armour system was introduced. That advanced system used slimmer ceramic plates and was to be worn with a new helmet design that allowed greater range of movement in prone firing positions.
The use of IBA- and Osprey-type systems significantly reduced torso wounds and saved many lives in combat, but protection came at the cost of decreased mobility and increased weight (and therefore decreased comfort and stamina) for individual soldiers. A complete set of enhanced IBA with all inserts and add-on components weighs more than 33 pounds (15 kg), and the Osprey Assault kit weighs only slightly less at almost 28 pounds (12.5 kg)—perhaps acceptable for the driver of a cargo truck but a considerable burden for an infantryman patroling on foot in the extreme heat of a Middle Eastern or South Asian summer. Some infantrymen complain that too much body armour is detrimental to fighting lightly armed and mobile guerrillas. Nevertheless, the benefits in most cases outweigh the disadvantages, so that body armour will likely remain part of the soldier’s kit for the foreseeable future.
Peter Mansoor