Saw this on Yahoo! earlier and found it interesting.  I can definately understand where they're coming from and this is one of those double edged sword type dilemmas.  Open to opinions!

Marines Refusing Armor

Hey that's a cool article. I'm all for supporting my brothers, but since this is not AR related you are probably going to get flamed and your post moved.

Thanks for the link though, it's good to know they have the protection if they choose to wear it. I don't think it should mandatory though.



Gene






oh &   IBTL.

This is the AR technical discussions forum, next time put something like this in general discussions.

I can see where they're coming from.  When I was in the infantry, our mantra was "travel light, freeze at night."  It's a fine line between too much protection and too little.  If they wear an extra 10 lbs of armor, they might be ditching 10 lbs of other stuff.  Ten lbs could save a life, if a bullet happens to hit in that area; it could also mean running just a fraction slower, which causes you to be in the wrong place at the wrong instant anyway.  Ten lbs could also mean a couple SAW drums, a bunch of extra magazines and ammo, extra first aid equipment, etc. - things they could also really use in a firefight.  

I think use of the plates may eventually become mandatory, under the guise of a "force protection" issue.  

Quoted: Saw this on Yahoo! earlier and found it interesting.  I can definately understand where they're coming from and this is one of those double edged sword type dilemmas.  Open to opinions! Marines Refusing Armor

Cliff Notes Verison
Some Marines are not wearing the sleeve armour because it gets in the way of killing people.

Quoted: Quoted: Saw this on Yahoo! earlier and found it interesting.  I can definately understand where they're coming from and this is one of those double edged sword type dilemmas.  Open to opinions! Marines Refusing Armor Cliff Notes Verison Some Marines are not wearing the sleeve armour because it gets in the way of killing people.

Eh?

Some Democrat out there will try and make the armor mandatory.... especially considering they were complaining about the lack of armor in the first place.  

Armor is nice but too damn heavy.

I think what they are talking about are the side armor plates that integrate with the vest.

ETA - We weren't issued front and back plates the first time.  The second tour we all wore them.  We were happy to have them - they save lives.

Side  plates I think I can deal with, but the damn sleeve things are just ridiculous.  Its hard enough to shoot with IBA on.. the sleeves just make it harder.  THe need to redesign the vest so it has a little pocket near the shoulder for the stock of your rifle to fit into.

1.  Note the source.
2.  Note the quotes.

"Marines Declining Extra Body Armor"

"Many Marines, however, believe the politics of the issue eventually will make the plates mandatory."

"Marines said only three or four wore the plates after commanders distributed them last month and told them that use was optional."

B.S.  
In the Corps people do what they are told.  Armour is not fashion.  It is a part of the uniform, which the Corps tells you to wear.

3. Now this is the killer.

"Some Marines have chosen to wear the plates, particularly those in more vulnerable jobs such as Humvees turret gunners or those who frequently travel on roads plagued by roadside bombs.

Oh now Marines are choosing.

Now from another source that may be a bit more reliable we have the following quote.

"Marines leaving the wire wear chest and back SAPI plates, along with the new side plates. Groin protectors, collars and neck protectors are required at all times, in addition to ballistic eye protection and fire-retardant gloves. Marines manning machine guns in humvee turrets also wear ballistic protection for shoulders, arms and legs."

Marine link


The sleeves are the issue regardless of what a Jackass from the AP writes.

ETA: Journalists makeup stuff all the time to make stories.  The stories start with a little bit of truth and then the rest is to get a byline or sell newspapers.

ETAA: I stand by original statement.

Cliff Notes Verison
Some Marines are not wearing the sleeve armour because it gets in the way of killing people.

We never wore the DAPS. We were already loaded down like mules and the DAPS got in the way.

I know 1/187 wears them though.

This is the AR technical discussions forum, next time put something like this in general discussions.


This is a tactical gear forum.  What drugs are you on?

Quoted: This is the AR technical discussions forum, next time put something like this in general discussions.

This is a tactical gear forum.  What drugs are you on?[/quote]


This was originally posted in the AR Tech forum....   it has since been moved.

thx admin for the move...sorry for posting it in the AR specific forum but i wasn't sure where i should have posted this....i guess general discussion would have been my best bet or tac gear...it was sorta late and wasn't paying attention.....thanks again!


hope you guys enjoyed the article!

Quoted: 1.  Note the source. 2.  Note the quotes. "Marines Declining Extra Body Armor" "Many Marines, however, believe the politics of the issue eventually will make the plates mandatory." "Marines said only three or four wore the plates after commanders distributed them last month and told them that use was optional." B.S.   In the Corps people do what they are told.  Armour is not fashion.  It is a part of the uniform, which the Corps tells you to wear.

So local commanders aren't given ay lattitude about what decisions they can make?  Reread that line, apparently the local command didn't make the use mandatory.
Does every Marine, everywhere do the exact same thing at all times?  Is uniformity such a holy grail that it's enforced from Henderson Hall and noplace else (though some comments about the analness of Army NCO's and officers regarding uniforms make me question this)?
And why are you spelling armor the British way?

Our BC would see us on patrol on stop and chew my ass if someone wasn't wearing one of the 15 pieces of flair outside the wire. When its 135 F outside wearing knee/elbow pads, gloves, IBA, helmet, eyepro and humping all that crap sucks. A knee pad isnt going to save anyones life, but it will speed you along towards heat stroke.

Quoted: B.S.   In the Corps people do what they are told.  Armour is not fashion.  It is a part of the uniform, which the Corps tells you to wear.

Buddy of mine in the Corps said they'd ditch the groin armor at times because it made it hard to run.

Quoted: Side  plates I think I can deal with, but the damn sleeve things are just ridiculous.  Its hard enough to shoot with IBA on.. the sleeves just make it harder.  THe need to redesign the vest so it has a little pocket near the shoulder for the stock of your rifle to fit into.

Exactly...

IBA makes sense, stops that one GPMG (PKM/M60/M240) hit that would otherwise ruin your day, etc...

But even the most physically fit soldier will still be slowed down tremendously if he is forced to become a human TANK. And body armor is usually only able to stop one or 2 full-power rounds.... So being able to get out of the line of fire is just as important - if the extra armor keeps you in the beaten zone of an enemy automatic weapon for a few seconds longer, then it just defeated it's own purpose....

Basically, the tank philosophy works for tanks - semi-metallic vehicle armor has advanced to the point where an M1 can take 30-or-so RPG hits and survive, so the extra weight of the armor is not a problem...

Untill personal body armor reaches that point, there is a serious cost to the weight penalty beyond the common-sense IBA....

Quoted: Our BC would see us on patrol on stop and chew my ass if someone wasn't wearing one of the 15 pieces of flair outside the wire. When its 135 F outside wearing knee/elbow pads, gloves, IBA, helmet, eyepro and humping all that crap sucks. A knee pad isnt going to save anyones life, but it will speed you along towards heat stroke.

It doesn't matter if it works or not, just make sure you all look the same...

I understand certainly not wanting to wear a lot of armor over arms or legs due to an extreme lack of mobility but the side protectors for example I believe should almost certainly be mandatory.  I've learned a lot about traumatic wounds and gunshot wounds and in a SHTF situation, one of the last things that I would like to endure or have to treat is a gunshot wound to a chest cavity.  The treatment options for a chest wound, especially from a rifle round (not only penetrates further but releases tremendous shockwaves much larger than handguns), are extremely limited without a full blown hospital with a team of doctors due to organ failure, bile, sepsis, internal bleeding, air pockets, and an inability to trace the path of a bullet through twists and turns while controlling bleeding.  Wounds to apendages can still be very complicated, very devistating, and very dangerous but much more simple than a chest wound.  Stop the immediate threat of blood loss, clean, remove debrit and patch it (more or less).  If I were in the situation that the marines are in, I'd probably opt out of wearing the arm/leg protection especially if I were moving around a lot but I guarantee that I'd have those side protectors in and I'd get use to them.  My favorite quote that explains away every last gun and tactical item that I have..."I'd rather have it and never need it than need it and not have it." hug.gif

If you want to know how painful a pocket of bile looks, do a google image search...not for the faint stomach.  I wouldn't want a pocket of bile inside of ME!

But if a person is wounded because the (un)lucky shot hits a place with no plate, or if they are shot because they started heat exhaustion, or heat stroke and were unable to even think rationally or move is there any difference?  By that I mean heat stroke to the point that the person no longer is thinking rationally and does not move to proper cover when he should, or that he passes out during building clearing and is wounded then.
Sort of like requiring gunners to wear goggles instead of the ballistic protective sunglasses.  Sure the goggles are thicker and give more protection, until they have so much condensation (no maount of anti-fog will stop it all, and it can get bad) that the gunner can't see the threat, or removes  them to dry them out.

The over armor, or whatever it was called that was/is being tested for gunners in Humvees is a great idea though.  Goes on over the IBA, and uses Fastex type buckles so it can be quickly removed.  I want to say that it had a hose to attach it some way to the vehicles AC.  Though that is a weakness since the AC on the 1114's is so weak as it is.

The armor sucks to wear, I hate the side plates and the E-plates, they add a ton to what is already allot when you have ammo, water, radios and frags on.

The gorilla suit is normally not worn because of heat, even in the winter it gets too hot to wear it.  Gunners sometimes will wear them but try to get them off as soon as possible.

From what I have read, the majority of deaths are due to IED's rather than gun shots.  If this is the case, how much additional protection will the side plates offer?



-K

Im Infantry in the Army over here in Iraq and we wear all that too.

Not only do we have the SAPPI plates, but now the upgraded and heavier SAPPI plates and side plates. We also have the underarm kevlar inserts for our daps and the shoulder sleeves. Gunners in vehicles also have to wear the damn vests and kevlar leggings.

Besides that we have to wear the requisite eye pro and nomex gloves.

For certain missions Ill wear the knee pads. You only have two of those so treat them well.

It all sucks, but what the hell, war sucks. Its hot, dirty, tiring work. You NEED to be in shape.

Infantry is  not for the feint at heart be it Army or Corps. If you cant take it go FOBBIT.

Body armor saves lives plain and simple.

I for one think they are able to build a much better and lighter body armor but the military has Point Blank embedded so deep in its fourth point of contact all they can see is dollar signs.

Just my two cents-

11

"Our BC would see us on patrol on stop and chew my ass if someone wasn't wearing one of the 15 pieces of flair outside the wire. When its 135 F outside wearing knee/elbow pads, gloves, IBA, helmet, eyepro and humping all that crap sucks. A knee pad isnt going to save anyones life, but it will speed you along towards heat stroke."

Yep .   That crap will piss anyone off.

I think the soldier can make his own decisions.  The side plates and daps are smart for mounted patrols and PSD convoys.  Your just rolling and waiting to be blown up.  That's it.  

If you can't sit in one place with an extra 15 lbs of armor you aren't disciplined/don't value your life and shouldn't be out there.  

On foot however, the DAPS are a heat stroke inducer, the yoke is a hindrance to mobility of the head and cuts on situational awareness, and the additional plates are probably too heavy and ungainly to wear.

If those side plates were high end ultralight 5lb standalone Level III, I would just reccomend ditching the soft armor, adding the side plates (worn under or taped to the vest) and then you'ld add maybe 5 lbs and gain a lot of protection that you could take on foot.  

I think issueing the plates is a step in the right direction (admitting two plates aren't effective enough).  Giving a joe the option of additional protection says "hey you aren't cannon fodder- we don't want you dead" That's a good message to some of these guys running route clearance and getting their buddies blown to shit.