Interceptor body armor
(US Army photo)
Interceptor is a type of body armor fielded by the U.S. military. It is more effective than traditional bulletproof vests and is currently replacing a previous version of body armor known as Personnel Armor System for Ground Troops (PASGT). Materials for Interceptor were developed by DARPA in the 1990s and a contract for production was awarded to DHB Industries' Point Blank Body Armor, Inc by the U.S. Army Soldier Systems Center.
Technical details
The Interceptor body armor system consists of an Outer Tactical Vest (OTV) and two Small Arms Protective Inserts (SAPI). The OTV is lined with finely woven Kevlar aramid, these two parts of the vest are both bullet and heat resistant. The vest was tested to stop a 9 mm 124 GR full metal jacket bullet (FMJ) at 1,400 ft/s (426 m/s) with minimal deformation and has a V-50 of roughly 1,525 ft/s (465 m/s). This means that the bullet has to be traveling faster than 1,525 ft/s for it to have more than a 50% chance of breaking through the armor panel. These plates also come in five different sizes and go into the front and back of the vest.
The Interceptor can not, however, be called a Level III-A vest as military standard does not require protection against heavy .44 Magnum ammunition. However, both Level III-A vests and Interceptor do protect from much lighter 9mm threats in identical tests. The vest will stop other, slower-moving fragments and is also equipped with removable neck, throat, shoulder and groin protection.
Two small-arms protective inserts may also be added to the front and back of the vest, with each plate designed to stop up to three 7.62×51 NATO rounds (.308 Winchester) with a muzzle velocity of 2,750 feet per second (838 m/s). The plates are the most technically advanced body armor fielded by the U.S. military, and are constructed of boron carbide ceramic with a Spectra/Dyneema shield backing that breaks down projectiles and halts their momentum before reaching the wearer.
The Interceptor armor also has attachment loops on the front of the vest which accommodate the same type of pockets used in the Modular Lightweight Load-carrying Equipment (MOLLE) backpack/carry vest system. This allows a soldier to tailor-fit his MOLLE and body armor system to meet mission needs. While not specifically designed for it, the loops can also easily attach All-purpose Lightweight Individual Carrying Equipment (ALICE)-based equipment, MOLLE's predecessor, as well as many pieces of civilian-made tactical gear, and also features a large handle on the back just below the collar which can be used to drag a wounded wearer to safety in an emergency. The Interceptor vest comes in various different camouflage patterns, including U.S. woodland, three-color desert, and Army Combat Uniform (ACU) patterns, as well as Coyote Brown.
The Interceptor Body Armor system weighs a total of 16.4 pounds (7.4 kg), with the vest weighing 8.4 pounds (3.8 kg), and two plates inserted weighing four pounds (1.8 kg) each. This is considerably lighter than the previous body armor fielded in Somalia weighing 25.1 pounds (11.4 kg) that most troops complained was too heavy and unwieldy for combat operations.
Side-SAPIs are also available, along with the newer version of the vital plate, the Enhanced SAPI (E-SAPI). These two systems are becoming standard for forward deployed troops in OEF and OIF III. The E-SAPI plates are thicker and heavier than the normal SAPIs, but they offer increased protection from M-80 armor piercing ammunition. The Side-SAPIs protect the side of the torso under the arm. With the Interceptor body armor, E-SAPI plates (10.9 lb), S-SAPI plates (7.1 lb), and with the neck, throat and groin protectors installed the armor is significantly heavier than 16.4 pounds (7.44 kg). A combat load of ammunition and first aid kit are almost universally attached to the webbing on the vest, adding even more mass.
There is a constant trade-off, loss of mobility and comfort and more weight to carry versus increased protection. This is a point of contention in the U.S. armed forces, with some favoring mobility, and others wanting as much protection as is practical. The debate is especially valid in the Iraq war, when comparing lightly-equipped insurgents with U.S. troops routinely burdened with upwards of 60 lbs. of weapons, ammunition, armor, food, water, and other assorted equipment. Many soldiers have complained that under such conditions, they are simply unable to pursue their guerrilla opponents, while those riding in convoys generally favor the greatest practical amount of protection from improvised explosive devices (IEDs) and ambushes. Dismounted troops often make the case that impaired mobility can prove just as fatal as ineffective armor.
Combat use and controversy
The vest proved its protection prowess in Afghanistan and Iraq in which many U.S. soldiers were saved by wearing them[citation needed]. In particular, it is credited with saving the lives of 29 American servicemen in Afghanistan. There were delays in equipping the entire force with the Interceptor vest at the beginning of this war.
Of President George W. Bush’s $87 billion package that Congress has recently approved for ongoing operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, $300 million has been earmarked for body armor, including the ceramic plates, which currently cost about $500 each. A complete Interceptor system costs $1,585.[1]
On May 4, 2005 the United States Marine Corps recalled 5,277 Interceptor combat vests made by DHB's Point Blank unit after news reports about the vests' inability to stop 9 mm bullets. In November, 2005, the Marine Corps ordered 10,342 Interceptor Outer Tactical Vests pulled from the operating forces after media reports indicated some samples tested by the manufacturer and by the Army's Aberdeen Proving Ground in Maryland failed to fully comply with ballistics standards. In 2005, the DoD under severe pressure from Congress, authorized a one-time $1,000 reimbursement to soldiers who had purchased civilian body armor and other gear[2] but in 2006 they gave orders not to wear anything but military issued body armor fearing inadequate armor could be purchased.
A recent Marine Corps forensic study obtained by DefenseWatch slams the Interceptor OTV body armor system, claiming "as many as 42% of the Marine casualties who died from isolated torso injuries could have been prevented with improved protection in the areas surrounding the plated areas of the vest. Nearly 23% might have benefited from protection along the mid-axillary line of the lateral chest. Another 15% died from impacts through the unprotected shoulder and upper arm," the report says.[3] Side armor has been sent to Iraq in increasing amounts, but many troops don't want to wear it because it adds 10 lb to the 16 lb vest and they say the added weight could decrease mobility and get them killed in certain combat scenarios.[4]
On May 10th, 2006, the Army announced it was holding an open competition for companies to design an entire new generation of body armor "to improve on and replace" the Interceptor. The Army said it wanted ideas from companies by May 31. Congressional investigators reportedly reviewed the Pentagon's entire body armor program, including the Interceptor vest. Investigators expressed concern that the vests might not be adequate to protect troops. [5] Some thought the answer lay with the Dragon Skin body armor, but the Army claims that it did not provide adequate protection in their tests.
On July 3rd and July 11th it was announced that contracts had been given to Armorworks and Ceradyne to manufacture interceptor body armor parts and replacements, specifically the side inserts.
On September 25, 2006, the Marine Corps announced that Protective Products International won a contract for 60,000 new Modular Tactical Vests (MTV) to replace the Interceptor OTV vests.[1] The MTV provides greater coverage, superior weight distribution, and additional features such as a quick-release system.
Replacement by the Army
The Army has transitioned to the new Improved Outer Tactical Vest, or "IOTV".
Units are being issued to deploying troops for use in Afghanistan and Iraq, while the Interceptor will continue to be issued to garrison and training post troops for some time to come.
See also
- Improved Outer Tactical Vest (IOTV)
- Modular Tactical Vest (MTV)
- Personnel Armor System for Ground Troops (PASGT)
References
- ^ Burgess, Lisa Stars & Stripes January 13, 2004
- ^ truthout.org. Army Orders Soldiers to Shed Dragon Skin or Lose SGLI Death Benefits. Interceptor Body Armor. Retrieved on 2006-05-15.
- ^ sftt.org. Interceptor OTV Body Armor Cost Lives, An Internal USMC Reports Shows. Interceptor Body Armor. Retrieved on 2006-05-15.
- ^ strategypage.com. Troops Reject New Body Armor as Dangerous. Interceptor Body Armor. Retrieved on 2006-05-15.
- ^ newsday.com. Army deals blow to body armor maker DHB Industries. Interceptor Body Armor. Retrieved on 2006-05-15.
External links
This entry is from Wikipedia, the leading user-contributed encyclopedia. It may not have been reviewed by professional editors (see full disclaimer)
