Author Topic: Extra Armor Could Have Saved Many Lives, Study Shows  (Read 1364 times)

Offline Staga

  • Parolee
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5334
      • http://www.nohomersclub.com/
Extra Armor Could Have Saved Many Lives, Study Shows
« Reply #30 on: January 08, 2006, 10:44:01 AM »
btw I can't see them thinking about making troops to wear mineproof equipments but additional armor covering bit more than standard vest.
If you know how much does it weight and how much it'll limit the ability to move please tell us too.

That's why troops should decide themself; if the mission needs good movement and agility then leave the armor to the barracks but if it's just standing at the road block or in the hatch of a humvee then some extra weight isn't that big deal especially if it could save your life.

Feel free to disagree but IMHO the decision should be left to the troops; they know best the circumstances in the field.

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
Extra Armor Could Have Saved Many Lives, Study Shows
« Reply #31 on: January 08, 2006, 10:53:21 AM »
staga... I have said many times that the only thing the government should do is raise an army.  An army is neither democrat or republican...

War is costly and wasteful of money and lives.   War is historically a record of the wrong equipment and supplies and bad decisions... all second guessed by people looking the whole thing over after it has happened allready.

No.. I don't think the troops should be able to decide what equipment they use... not at first anyway.  How would they know?   Veteran outfits should get a little more slack.  Most combat outfits do have more choice in equiment or... have in the past..  at least in the field.   Wearing a boonie hat instead of a kevlar helmet might work better in some situations for instance in the field.  You can't give the option tho or you might see huge increases in casualties.... you can "look the other way" with some veteran field outfits.

New troops should not be able to decide what equipment they will take.

Offline Staga

  • Parolee
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5334
      • http://www.nohomersclub.com/
Extra Armor Could Have Saved Many Lives, Study Shows
« Reply #32 on: January 08, 2006, 10:58:20 AM »
Ah so now it's "New troops should not be able to decide what equipment they will take"?

How about giving that option to the troops who have already served in Afghanistan or in Iraq?

btw do you think an officers who has been in army for 10-15 years doesn't know what's best for his troops?

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
Extra Armor Could Have Saved Many Lives, Study Shows
« Reply #33 on: January 08, 2006, 11:04:53 AM »
Well... I don't think it is possible for the military to be structured the way you like...

The best we can achieve is the historical comprimise....  new troops loaded down with every thing that someone like silat comes up with and being snickered at by the vets and old vets stripping down and re equiping for the field while those in charge look the other way.

Probly letting everyone decide right off the boat would not work out too well.

lazs

Offline ROC

  • Aces High CM Staff (Retired)
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7700
Extra Armor Could Have Saved Many Lives, Study Shows
« Reply #34 on: January 08, 2006, 11:45:15 AM »
We have the ability to win this war without shedding a single drop of friendly blood or civilian blood.  We are so radically technoligically advanced, we can locate and find each enemy combatant and remove them from existance, giving them the promise of martyrdom they so strongly desire.

But, we can't.  We are a Nice Country.  We can't send snipers over, that wouldn't be fair.  We can't send covert opps, the poor guys wouldn't stand a chance.  No, we need to send over our troops over with rules and conditions and be civilized.  We need to play by the same rules Libs use to fight crime.  Beat up the Cops, they were mean to the criminals.  We need to squirm and wiggle and wring our hands over the Cost of the war and how many homeless we can't feed because we are in this war.  Guess What, you want to complain about the Cost? Things Get Cut!  They don't have Body Armor??  YOU Cut The Money Lew!  You did this.  This nation didn't want a huge army, that would Scare our Neighbors in the world.  Cut the Military, Close em up, shut em down.  We lost McClellan and Mather here in Sacramento.  How many bases were axed?  How many times do we hear Your Left Whining about the Cost of the War?  Then you have the Gall to Complain that they didn't have Armor?  You Took The Resources Away!  No Armor, OK, give them armor, we need to meet your budget, what do we Take Instead?  Who are YOU to make that determination?  WE Want the biggest, baddest, most butt kicking military On The Planet so No One messes with us.  We could easily have this, hell we have it now IN SPITE of your left leaning weak kneed pansy assed Liberal friends trying their darndest to make Kofi happy.  

But with all the cuts and restrictions, with all the crying about Our Men and Women who Volunteered to go, and are Volunteering to GO BACK, we have lost fewer people Voluntarily over the past few years than we lost when those dirty SOBs fell 2 towers in 1 single day.

You want the military to not lose a life?  Let Them Work and Get Off Their Backs!  Shut the hell up about wire taps, we know where they are, let us GET THEM instead of whining about How we get them.  You want them to stop shooting at our soldiers?  Let them Stop Them.  Don't complain about the cost of the war then have the Gall to whine that they don't have the resources.  Don't even Think about comparing No Armor to lack of caring for the soldiers.  You know Damn Well that if "We" had our way, they would be so shockingly powerful that this war would have been over years ago, we would have rooted them all out, laid waste to them, and been on our way back to our concerns.  YOU don't Want that, it's too messy.  So let the pro's do their job unrestricted by political BS for crying out loud.  This line of argument and reasoning is just a Total Joke.
ROC
Nothing clever here.  Please, move along.

Offline Tumor

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4296
      • Wait For It
Live from Bagram
« Reply #35 on: January 09, 2006, 06:24:06 AM »
Ok

  I've done two tours this year.... first at Baghdad, and currently at Bagram.

  On body armor.  I've yet to see (at either location) a single soldier going in or out the wire without body armor.  My own observations lead me to believe there's something stinky about any statement referring to troops not having the appropriate and required equiptment.  I would imagine the problem might localized and "could possibly" be traced back to a lazy S-4 officer, but hey, thats just me. Here in Afghanistan, I LIVE outside the wire... and have yet to observe any lack of body armor (although I thought I was going to have to shoot someone to get a pair of decent mountain boots).

  The stuff we have works... I'm sure most have seen the films floating around the internet, and I've seen the results of an IED incident in which 1 guy out of 3 decided to billy-badass his butt around without his armor... not pretty.  The stuff we have is also major pain in the butt to wear.  It's bulky, hot, uncomfortable, weighs something like 30lbs, and sometimes, (occasionally) folks just aren't going to put it on unless someone is around to make them. Yes indeed... we have the greatest fighting force in the world, but that doesn't mean there aren't a few knuckle-draggers in the ranks.

  IMHO... we are WAY behind where we could be with body armor.  When we aren't (or weren't) at war, we "could" have been preparing, but we don't do that do we?  When Rummy was questioned publicly on the up-armored HMMWV issue, he answered using the average U.S. of Amuricin's peacetime thought process.  The "flak-vest" that was so prevalent prior to 01 (and in my case, at least back to 1986) was a complete joke and anyone and everyone with an IQ above 10 knew it.  That's allot of time to fix an apparent problem.  Now we have what we need, it's just a pain to wear.  I'm sure "they" could, or maybe are, working on thinner, lighter ballistic plates and figuring ways to make it wear in such a way your not dehydrated and suffering from back pain come Miller time, but it's not THEIR fault they're late, it's ours.

Tumor
"Dogfighting is useless"  :Erich Hartmann

Offline Tumor

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4296
      • Wait For It
Extra Armor Could Have Saved Many Lives, Study Shows
« Reply #36 on: January 09, 2006, 06:30:28 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by lazs2
Well... I don't think it is possible for the military to be structured the way you like...

The best we can achieve is the historical comprimise....  new troops loaded down with every thing that someone comes up with and being snickered at by the vets and old vets stripping down and re equiping for the field while those in charge look the other way.

Probly letting everyone decide right off the boat would not work out too well.

lazs


I took the heavy plates out of the huge jacket-like vest they came with and stuck them in a nice little made-to-fit contraption that works out rather nicely.  Don't have near the fragmentation protection but the major organ areas are protected.  Get some wierd looks from the guys at the gates when I roll out but haven't heard a word. :)
« Last Edit: January 09, 2006, 06:33:39 AM by Tumor »
"Dogfighting is useless"  :Erich Hartmann

Offline mauser

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 541
Extra Armor Could Have Saved Many Lives, Study Shows
« Reply #37 on: January 09, 2006, 11:54:06 AM »
Thanks Tumor for your post, and for being there .  

Body armor is continually being developed, but whatever is developed will take a while to get down to those who need it.  I've heard about ceramic scale armor, spider silk, and nano-tech among others.  The bottom line will always be, the bottom line - $$.  

Is that a plate-carrier you're talking about?  I've read folks have different ways of dealing with the weight of the plates and yet maintaining some overall torso protection via soft armor.  Are you registered at Lightfighter.net?  It's a forum where lots of your brothers-in-arms hang out and is dedicated to sharing experiences with gear.

Offline rshubert

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1462
Extra Armor Could Have Saved Many Lives, Study Shows
« Reply #38 on: January 09, 2006, 12:08:51 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by rpm
I mean it's a stupid study. Of course more armor will prevent injuries. That is not the root of the problem. It lies in the entire process of getting the armor on the soldier.

It starts with poor planning, not having put it in standard issue to begin with. Then the procurement process has it's own tangled web of red tape to weave thru. Then testing, retesting and redesign followed by more testing. Next funding drags it's feet thru Congress with pork being flung onto the bill like dead on a cart during the plague.

Finally, it begins production and makes it into the field... 2 years later.


One thing you must think about is wearability, which can't be calculated or estimated.  They gotta put it on somebody to test it over time.  More ceramic=more weight, and the troops are already carrying quite a load.

For good or ill, the pentagon buys this stuff for the long haul.  It will be tested, retested, and evaluated until the cows come home, then (maybe) procured.  It's the way the system works.


Offline Tumor

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4296
      • Wait For It
Extra Armor Could Have Saved Many Lives, Study Shows
« Reply #39 on: January 09, 2006, 12:24:38 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by mauser

Is that a plate-carrier you're talking about?  I've read folks have different ways of dealing with the weight of the plates and yet maintaining some overall torso protection via soft armor.  Are you registered at Lightfighter.net?  It's a forum where lots of your brothers-in-arms hang out and is dedicated to sharing experiences with gear.


Thanks mauser...  I suppose "Plate-carrier" would be an accurate description.  It's basically a simply designed cloth compartment for each plate held together by a couple shoulder straps, and a couple velcro straps that hold the bottom of the front and back in place.  In my particular situation, I'm more worried about a bullet than shrapnel... so there ya go.

Never heard of Lightfither.net , I'll check it out.
"Dogfighting is useless"  :Erich Hartmann

Offline Krusher

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2246
Extra Armor Could Have Saved Many Lives, Study Shows
« Reply #40 on: January 09, 2006, 01:37:12 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Tumor
Don't have near the fragmentation protection but the major organ areas are protected.  Get some wierd looks from the guys at the gates when I roll out but haven't heard a word. :)



Knowing you Tumor, the first thing I thought of when I read this was that you doubled up the armor in the groin area :)

Offline Masherbrum

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 22416
Extra Armor Could Have Saved Many Lives, Study Shows
« Reply #41 on: January 09, 2006, 08:25:00 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Delirium
Silat, I like you and all, but sometimes I really shake my head when I see some of your political postings.

As someone previously posted, its a trade off between armor and weight/mobility.

Its as silly as accusing FDR of killing our bomber and fighter pilots during WWII for not putting more armor in their aircraft. Who cares if they would of been slower and unable to manuver, statistics show everything.


My grandfather was a Marine from 43-46 and until his passing in 1998, NEVER Forgave FDR for one thing.  Sending 3 Marine Divisions to ETO.  He never cussed in his life, but when brought up, you were waiting for him to.

Karaya
FSO Squad 412th FNVG
http://worldfamousfridaynighters.com/
Co-Founder of DFC

Offline Silat

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2536
Extra Armor Could Have Saved Many Lives, Study Shows
« Reply #42 on: January 09, 2006, 10:27:08 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Delirium
Silat, I like you and all, but sometimes I really shake my head when I see some of your political postings.

As someone previously posted, its a trade off between armor and weight/mobility.

Its as silly as accusing FDR of killing our bomber and fighter pilots during WWII for not putting more armor in their aircraft. Who cares if they would of been slower and unable to manuver, statistics show everything.


Del I like you too..

Over the course of the Bush years the hypocrisy of these boards by the supporters of this admin has been legendary.

My post was sarcastic in the extreme and look at the response.

You didnt find it ridiculous when the Bush supporters on this board blamed unarmored Humvees on Clinton. Or blaming poorly equipped soldiers on Clinton and the dems. All the militarys ills have been blamed on those dems because they are not supporters of the troops.

Now that another report ( non partisan) appears after 4 years of war we see this type of response from the admins supporters... When does this admin get to take responsibility for anything?
+Silat
"The first time someone shows you who they are, believe them." — Maya Angelou
"Conservatism offers no redress for the present, and makes no preparation for the future." B. Disraeli
"All that serves labor serves the nation. All that harms labor is treason."

Offline Tumor

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4296
      • Wait For It
Extra Armor Could Have Saved Many Lives, Study Shows
« Reply #43 on: January 09, 2006, 11:54:35 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Krusher
Knowing you Tumor, the first thing I thought of when I read this was that you doubled up the armor in the groin area :)


I thought about it, but then I figure I'm deployed so much I don't get a chance to use that stuff much anyway :)

Tumor
"Dogfighting is useless"  :Erich Hartmann

Offline Tumor

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4296
      • Wait For It
Extra Armor Could Have Saved Many Lives, Study Shows
« Reply #44 on: January 09, 2006, 11:57:15 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Silat
Del I like you too..

You didnt find it ridiculous when the Bush supporters on this board blamed unarmored Humvees on Clinton. Or blaming poorly equipped soldiers on Clinton and the dems. All the militarys ills have been blamed on those dems because they are not supporters of the troops.
 


It's Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush, and Clinton's fault. :)  Don't blame the guy who's fixing it  :eek:

Tumor

P.S.  Hey Lew, email me your phone# (Yahoo addy).  Heading back out today, I'll give ya a call from there
« Last Edit: January 10, 2006, 12:04:19 AM by Tumor »
"Dogfighting is useless"  :Erich Hartmann