Over the weekend, a Pentagon study on troop body armor and its effect on casualties made big AP news.
Most torso wounds that killed Marines in Iraq might have been prevented or minimized by improved body armor, a Pentagon study found.
The unreleased study last summer by the Office of the Armed Forces Medical Examiner looked at 93 fatal wounds from the start of the war in March 2003 through June 2005. It concluded that 74 were bullet or shrapnel wounds to shoulders or areas of the torso not protected by ceramic armor plating.
[…]
According to a summary of the study obtained by The Associated Press, the 93 Marines who died from a primary lethal injury of the torso were among 401 Marines who died from combat injuries in Iraq between the start of the war and last June.
Autopsy reports and photographic records were analyzed to help the military determine possible body armor redesign. A military advocacy group, Soldiers for Truth, posted an article about the study on its Web site this week. On Friday evening, The New York Times reported in its online edition that the study for the first time shows the cost in lives lost from inadequate armor.
The study found that of 39 fatal torso wounds in which the bullet or shrapnel entered the Marine’s body outside of the ceramic armor plate that protects the chest and back, 31 were close to the plate’s edge.
“Either a larger plate or superior protection around the plate would have had the potential to alter the final outcome,” the report concluded.
Murdoc at Murdoc Online dissected the piece with a post where the title says it all about how increased armor could reduce casualties: So could carpet bombing and free-fire zones (hat tip to the Officer’s Club).
There are limits. You need to be able to put your arms down. Otherwise laying there like a slug might be your only defense.
Long-time readers of MO will know that I’ve been critical of the armor situation in the past. And I’ll continue to be critical in the future until absolute perfection is attained and US troops in combat zones are totally protected from every possible threat. But these stupid headlines and sensationalizing of a military study intended to improve our capability doesn’t help anyone.
Well, let me correct myself right here. Sensationalizing this story, making it sound like negligence or inability to cope with enemy tactics is killing troops does help some. They’re called the “enemies of America”. And not all of them are not American. So many in the media seem so focused on the “good old days” of media glory that they appear unable to report on military matters in a meaningful way.
Today, the military responded by pointing out that it is trying to find the proper armor that allows the best balance between troop safety and troop effectiveness.
Protecting troops is a top priority, but weighting them down with so much body armor that they are practically unable to move is not the answer to the continued deaths and injuries among armor-wearing deployed forces, military officials said Wednesday.
The Army and Marine Corps are rushing to buy and deploy improved body armor that provides more protection for the sides of the torso, which enemy sharpshooters have targeted as a weak point in U.S. troops’ body armor configurations.
But military officials, called before the Senate Armed Services Committee to discuss the status of the improvements, said they have not yet found a perfect balance between fully protecting troops and weighing them down so heavily that they cannot accomplish their missions.
Sen. John Warner, R-Va., the Armed Services Committee chairman, said he was satisfied the services had the money and authority to get the necessary gear and understood the limitations.
“Everything that can be done is being done,†Warner said.
Full body armor, with all the associated plates and extra protection, can weigh up to 125 pounds, a particularly heavy load in the extreme climates of Iraq and Afghanistan, he said.
While at Texas A&M, I took a survey level course in American military history under the esteemed Dr. Joseph G. Dawson III. Many aspects and lessons of that class have stayed with me through the years, but one little piece of trivia stands out in my memory. Dr. Dawson pointed out that the average weight of arms and equipment carried by American troops into battle during the Revolutionary War was around sixty pounds. The average weight of the same carried by the typical American soldier in Viet Nam was … sixty pounds. I do hope that puts into a little perspective that 125-pound figure for full body armor. Oh yeah, don’t forget to add in weapons and ammunition. And rations and water. And needed communication devices. Yes, the troops could be encased in a cylinder of kevlar, but balance must be managed or the troops become worthless little knights, relatively safe from shrapnel and bullets but slow, ineffective and still prone to other dangers like RPGs.