Interceptor Body Armor

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Interceptor body armor)
Jump to: navigation, search
Interceptor Multi-Threat Body Armor System
Interceptor body armor.png
The IBA in its various color schemes and camouflage patterns, from left to right, in "M81" woodland camouflage, coyote tan, desert camouflage, the Universal Camouflage Pattern, and Afghan police grey. These IBA vests are not equipped with the optional deltoid and side panel protectors.
Type Body armor
Place of origin United States of America
Service history
In service April 2001 – 2017 (U.S.)
Used by United States Navy (primary)
U.S. Army (historical)
U.S. Marine Corps (historical)
U.S. Air Force (historical)
See Users for other foreign military/law enforcement users
Wars

Global War on Terrorism

War in Yemen
Production history
Designer DARPA
Designed April 1998
Manufacturer Point Blank Body Armor (inaugural manufacturer), UNICOR (current manufacturer, since 2008)
Produced July 1998 – present (production to cease in April 2020)
Variants Universal Camouflage Pattern, coyote tan, woodland, desert, grey
Specifications
Weight 16.4 lb (7.4 kg) (with SAPI plates used; everything in Interceptor)[1]
3.8 kg (8.4 lb) (Outer Tactical Vest)[1]

The Interceptor Multi-Threat Body Armor System (IBA) is a bullet-resistant vest that was used by the United States Armed Forces from the late 1990s to the late 2000s. The IBA and its design replaced the older standardized fragmentation protective Personnel Armor System for Ground Troops (PASGT) body armor system that was introduced in the early 1980s.

The IBA system consists of its core component: the outer tactical vest, which can optionally be worn with a throat protector, groin protector, and bicep protector. The latter three auxiliary protectors are removable from the main vest, which can be worn alone.

The IBA was designed in the late 1990s as a replacement for the PASGT vest; it comes in a variety of color schemes and camouflage patterns. It was used by most of the U.S. military's branches during much of the 2000s, and was even seeing limited use as late as 2015 among some National Guard units.

Beginning in 2007 the Improved Outer Tactical Vest began to replace the IBA in the United States Army's service and since then it has been mostly replaced in its inventory, with the exception of a few IBAs still in service with the Army National Guard and U.S. Army Reserve. The U.S. Marine Corps has replaced the IBA with the Modular Tactical Vest (MTV) and Scalable Plate Carrier (SPC), although the IBA is still used by the U.S. Navy for sailors aboard its warships as of 2017. Though the IBA has been mostly replaced in U.S. military service, it is still used by the militaries of some other countries that have diplomatic relations with the U.S., such as Ukraine and Moldova. As such, the IBA, which has been in production since the late 1990s, it scheduled to be produced by the U.S. until 2020, for sale to foreign customers.

Overview[edit]

Basic system[edit]

The IBA system consists of an Outer Tactical Vest (OTV) and two Small Arms Protective Insert (SAPI) ballistic plates. The OTV features a carrier shell, and three main ballistic panel inserts (left and right side panels, and a rear back panel), which are made with a finely woven Kevlar KM2 fiber. These two parts of the vest are both bullet and heat resistant. The soft ballistic panels are produced in five different sizes (S-XXL), which are installed into their respective pocket on the OTV carrier shell.

The Interceptor armor also has a PALS webbing grid 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. While not specifically designed for it, the loops can also easily attach All-purpose Lightweight Individual Carrying Equipment (ALICE)-based equipment, 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 person to safety in an emergency.

Originally the IBA system weighed 16.4 pounds (7.4 kg),[2] with the vest weighing 8.4 pounds (3.8 kg), and two plate inserts weighing four pounds (1.8 kg) each. This is lighter than the previous Ranger Body Armor fielded in Somalia which weighed 25.1 pounds (11.4 kg).

Due to the increased dangers of improvised explosive devices, newer versions of the vital plates and components have been developed. The Enhanced Small Arms Protective Inserts (ESAPIs) and Enhanced Side Ballistic Inserts (ESBIs) have become available, along with the Deltoid and Axillary Protector System (DAPS). These new systems are becoming the standard for forward deployed troops. The E-SAPI plates offer increased protection from 7.62mm armor-piercing ammunition. The ESBIs is an attachable MOLLE ballistic panel with a pouch for a 8x6 side-SAPI, for protection of the side of the torso/under the arm. DAPS consists of two ambidextrous modular components, the Deltoid (upper arm) Protector and the Axillary (under arm) Protector, and provide for additional protection from fragmentary and projectiles to the upper arm and underarm areas. With the IBA, E-SAPI plates (10.9 pounds), ESBIs (7.75 pounds), DAPS (5.03 pounds) and with the neck, throat and groin protectors installed the armor is significantly heavier at 33.1 pounds (15 kg).

Additional components[edit]

Mannequin of a U.S. Marine wearing a coyote-brown OTV and an additional corporal full protection called "Quadgard IV". This kind of protection was used by turret gunners during the Iraq War, to protect them against small arms fire and fragmentation.

To increase overall protection, separate accessories can be added to the OTV:

  • Collar device that is divided in two parts, a neck and collar protector and a throat protector
  • Groin protector.

A "Fighting Load Carrier" vest (FLC) can be worn atop the IBA to increase magazine and equipment carrying capacity, though it is not part of the IBA system proper.[3]

With the need of additional accessories to protect troops, some were produced for the ground:

  • Deltoid and axillary protection system (DAPS, pauldrons).[N 1]
  • Side plate carriers
  • Back extender
  • Upper Legs protector, a kind of kevlar short
  • Lower Extremity Body Armor (LEBA)
  • Combat diapers (for example the "Tier 2 Pelvic Protection System" that was issued to U.S. Marines in Afghanistan)[4][5][6]

Ballistic plates[edit]

The Interceptor vest was tested to stop a 9×19mm 124-grain FMJ bullet at 1,400 ft/s with minimal backface deformation, and it has a V-50 of roughly 1,525 ft/s. This means that the bullet in question must travel faster than 1,525 ft/s for it to have more than a 50% chance of penetration. (An unlikely prospect, given the muzzle velocity of a typical 9mm handgun or submachine gun). The Interceptor cannot, however, be called a Level III-A vest, since military standards do not require protection against heavy .44 Magnum ammunition. The vest will stop lower velocity fragments and has removable neck, throat, shoulder, extended back and groin protection.

Additionally, two ceramic plates may be added to the front and back of the vest, with each capable of stopping up to three hits from the round marked on the plate. For SAPI, this is a caliber of up to 7.62×51mm M80 FMJ. For ESAPI, this is a caliber of up to 30-06 M2 AP. [7] This performance is only guaranteed when backed by the Interceptor vest, or any other soft armor which meets military requirements for protection. SAPI and ESAPI are the most technically advanced body armor fielded by the U.S. military, and are constructed of boron carbide ceramic with a Spectra shield backing that breaks down projectiles and halts their momentum.

History[edit]

A U.S. Marine wearing an IBA vest while practicing with an M82A1 sniper rifle at Camp Pendleton, California in April 2001.
U.S. Marines marching while wearing IBA vests in November 2001, during the War in Afghanistan.
A linguistic interpreter in June 2002 wearing a DCU-patterned IBA in Afghanistan.
A U.S. Army mortar crew in 2006 wearing the IBA in the DCU camouflage pattern.
U.S. Navy sailors in June 2017 wearing the IBA aboard USS Green Bay in the "M81" woodland pattern.

Development and production[edit]

Materials for the Interceptor vest 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. The IBA was announced on April 13, 1998,[8] and the contract to manufacture the IBA was awarded to an Oakland Park, Florida-based company under a five-year contract in late July 1998,[9][10] and the body armor went into full production later that year.[11]

The Interceptor vest comes in a number of fabric variants. Camouflage patterns include:

Solid colors include:

The original Interceptor Outer Tactical Vest (OTV) variant first began to be issued to the U.S. Armed Forces in the early 2000s, and the first OTV carriers were first produced in the Woodland camouflage pattern (one initial contractor for the early OTVs was Point Blank, Inc). Quickly, a coyote-brown variant was made for the USMC. Marines used OTV in both woodland and coyote-brown camouflages in Iraq and Afghanistan. In the U.S. Army, the Woodland camouflage pattern was then superseded by the 3-color Desert Combat pattern, followed by the Universal Camouflage Pattern.

Later versions of the IBA vest made in the mid-to-late 2000s and the 2010s feature hook-and-loop "Velcro" fasteners on the front for nametapes and rank patches, whereas older models from the early 2000s did not.

As part of U.S. President George W. Bush’s $87 billion package for ongoing operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, $300 million was earmarked for body armor. A complete Interceptor system costs $1,585.[12] The Interceptor system's component ceramic plates currently cost about $500 each.

IBA vests are still being made today, primarily for the U.S. Army, which then in turn sells them to foreign countries and international customers under the "Foreign Military Sales" (FMS) program. They have been made by convict labor provided the UNICOR company since 2008 and are scheduled to be made until April 2020.[13][14] IBA vests in the woodland and desert camouflage patterns and coyote brown color scheme were being made as late as early 2014.[15][16][17][18][19]

Replacement[edit]

U.S. Army[edit]

On May 10, 2006, the U.S. Army announced it was holding an open competition for companies to design an entirely 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.[20]

Aside from replacing the SAPI vital plates with the improved E-SAPI plates, the body armor vests have also been redesigned, improved and enhanced with the introduction of the Improved Outer Tactical Vest, or "IOTV" (which began to be issued to ground combat units from mid-to-late 2007), in the U.S. Army.

U.S. Marine Corps[edit]

After initially using the OTV as their main body armor system, the U.S. Marine Corps developed a completely new armor system, the Modular Tactical Vest, which was their primary body armor system in Iraq. 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.[21] The MTV provides greater coverage, superior weight distribution, and additional features including as a quick-release system. Some U.S. Navy ground force personnel (such as the Seabees and Hospital Corpsmen) use the Modular Tactical Vest. Other Navy personnel on Individual Augmentee assignments use the Army's body armor systems.

Not adapted for the mountainous environment of Afghanistan, the Modular Tactical Vest (MTV) was replaced by the Scalable Plate Carrier (SPC), a lighter alternative, which is their primary body armor system for Afghanistan.

Since January 2009, the U.S. Marine Corps is seeking for replacements for both MTV and SPC that are commonly issued. The MTV has received top ratings by many U.S. Marines; although a few Marines have complained about minor elements of it and an updated version will soon be released which deals with these elements.[22] The Improved Modular Tactical Vest (IMTV) and Improved Scalable Plate Carrier (ISPC) are the new models. "The IMTV will be the main body armor system for Marines, the Corps plans to order about 70,000 of the improved plate carriers, far more than the estimated 10,000 to 14,000 plate carriers in use today".[23]

Effectiveness[edit]

An Interceptor vest with additional side SAPI plates and neck protector in 2005, with a set of full-body armor in the background.

Discussion[edit]

Body armor is always a compromise: mobility and comfort (and with it speed and stamina) are inevitably sacrificed to some degree when greater protection is achieved. This is a point of contention in the U.S. armed forces, with some favoring less armor in order to maintain mobility and others wanting as much protection as is practical. Troops who primarily ride in vehicles generally want the highest practical level of protection from IED's and ambushes, while dismounted infantry often make the case that impaired mobility can prove just as fatal as inadequate armor.

The debate is especially valid in the Iraq war, when comparing lightly equipped insurgents with U.S. troops routinely burdened with upwards of 100 lbs. of weapons, ammunition, armor, food, water, and other assorted equipment. Many troops have complained that under such conditions, they are simply unable to pursue their guerrilla opponents. Side armor has been sent to Iraq in increasing amounts, but many troops do not 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.[24]

Controversies[edit]

On 4 May 2005 the U.S. Marine Corps recalled 5,277 Interceptor combat vests made by DHB's Point Blank unit after news reports about the vests' inability to stop 9mm 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 U.S. Army's Aberdeen Proving Ground in Maryland failed to fully comply with ballistics standards.

A U.S. Marine Corps forensic study obtained by DefenseWatch criticizes the Interceptor OTV body armor system. "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.[25]

Alternatives[edit]

Private purchase of commercial body armor is not authorized by the U.S. Army. A spokesman voiced concerns in 2004 about armor that had not been "tested, certified or approved" by the Army.[12] In 2005, the DoD under severe pressure from Congress after the recalls, authorized a one-time $1,000 reimbursement to soldiers who had purchased civilian body armor and other gear.[26] In 2006 they gave orders not to wear anything but military issued body armor because of fears that inadequate armor could be purchased, mainly body armor that had inadequate blunt force trauma protection.[27]

Users[edit]

Ukrainian soldiers (right) wearing the IBA in October 2015
Afghan police grey OTV, front view
Afghan police grey OTV, rear view
Afghan police grey OTV, detail of the label
  •  Afghanistan: The Afghan National Police forces are issued a grey IBA.[28] The Afghan military is issued with IBAs.[29][30]
  •  Azerbaijan[31]
  •  Brazil: Worn by the Brazilian Marines as of 2014.[citation needed]
  •  Burundi: Used by the Burundian Army as of September 2014.[32]
  •  Georgia: In the late 2000s, Georgian soldiers were issued the IBA in DCU camouflage and a domestically-produced woodland camouflage pattern similar to MARPAT, which are being phased out and replaced by indigenously-produced body armor.[33]
  •  Iraq: The Iraqi military uses the DCU-patterned version of the IBA in addition to an "M81" woodland-patterned one.[34]
  •  Lebanon: The U.S. delivered IBA vests to Lebanon in 2009.[35]
  •  Moldova: The U.S. delivered IBA vests to Moldova in 2009.[35] Versions in woodland camouflage are used by the Moldovan Special Forces and the Moldovan 22nd Peacekeeping Battalion.[36]
  •  Pakistan: In use by the Pakistani Air Force as of 2007.[citation needed] The U.S. delivered additional IBA vests to Pakistan in early 2009.[37]
  •  Philippines: The U.S. delivered IBA vests to the Philippines in 2009.[35] They are in the "M81" woodland camouflage pattern and are worn by the Philippine Army.[citation needed]
  •  Saudi Arabia: Saudi Arabian soldiers wear the coyote brown variant of the IBA.[citation needed]
  •  Turkey: The U.S. delivered IBA vests to Turkey in late 2008.[38]
  •  Ukraine: In use as of October 2015;[39] 2,000 vests were delivered from the U.S. in 2014 and were tested.[40]
  •  United States: The U.S. Army and U.S. Marine Corps began being issued the IBA in 2001.[41][42] Since then, it has been replaced with the IOTV for the U.S. Army and the MTV and SPC for the U.S. Marines. The U.S. Navy still uses the IBA aboard its warships, as of June 2017.[citation needed]
  •  Yemen: The U.S. delivered IBA vests to Yemen in 2010.[43]

See also[edit]

Notes[edit]

  1. ^ The U.S. Marine Corps adopted a similar system called Armor Protection Enhancement System (APES) around 2004-2005. This one was really uncomfortable and didn't offer a really good protection. The Oklahoma State University (OSU) Design, Housing and Merchandizing Department led by D.H. Branson developed a full protection system that covers both arms and legs called Quadgard that quickly replaced the APES made by Point Blank Body Armor. Around 4800 sets of the Quadgard IV were sent in Iraq to be used (mainly) by turret gunners inside humvees during convoy patrols.

References[edit]

  1. ^ a b "Interceptor Body Armor". 
  2. ^ "Biting the Bullet". web-beta.archive.org. Archived from the original on 2017-08-30. 
  3. ^ "Wayback Machine" (PDF). web-beta.archive.org. Archived from the original on 2009-12-29. 
  4. ^ Lamothe, Dan (11 April 2012). "Journalist wear-tests "combat diaper" with Marines". Military Times. Gannett. 
  5. ^ Sanborn, James K. (18 July 2011). "New this summer: groin armor". Marine Corps Times. Gannett. 
  6. ^ "Wayback Machine" (PDF). web-beta.archive.org. Archived from the original on 2012-09-15. 
  7. ^ "Interceptor Body Armor". GlobalSecurity. June 11, 2017. Archived from the original on June 11, 2017. 
  8. ^ "Interceptor Body Armor - CIE Hub". CIE Hub. 
  9. ^ GovTribe. "Department of the Army DAAN0298D5006 To Point Blank Body Armor Inc. $173.5m". govtribe.com. 
  10. ^ "Researchers Work to Lighten the Soldier's Load: Advanced Technology Application and Design". web-beta.archive.org. Archived from the original on 2017-08-30. 
  11. ^ "Interceptor Body Armor". Global Security. July 7, 2011. Retrieved March 23, 2013. The INTERCEPTOR System went into production in 1998 under a five-year contract awarded by US Army Natick Soldier Center contracting. On 27 July 1998 Point Blank Body Armor Inc.*, Oakland Park, Fla., was awarded on July 23, 1998, $5,573,715, as part of an $82,265,250 firm-fixed-price, indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity contract for 10,475 U.S. Marine Corps Tactical Body Armor (INTERCEPTOR) Outer Tactical Vests (OTV). Work will be performed in Oakland Park, Fla., and is expected to be completed by July 6, 1999. Of the total contract funds, $5,573,715 will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. There was an announcement on the World Wide Web on April 13, 1998, and six bids were received. The contracting activity is the U.S. Army Soldier Systems Command, Natick, Mass. (DAAN02-98-D-5006). 
  12. ^ a b Burgess, Lisa (13 January 2004). "Shipment of body armor vests on its way to Kuwait, Iraq-bound troops". Stars & Stripes. 
  13. ^ GovTribe. "Department of the Army W91CRB08D0045-0015 To Unicor $42.5k". govtribe.com. 
  14. ^ GovTribe. "Department of the Army W91CRB08D0045 To Unicor $265.8m". govtribe.com. 
  15. ^ GovTribe. "Department of the Army W91CRB08D0045-0082 To Unicor $92.6k". govtribe.com. 
  16. ^ GovTribe. "Department of the Army W91CRB08D0045-0078 To Unicor $29.4k". govtribe.com. 
  17. ^ GovTribe. "Department of the Army W91CRB08D0045-0075 To Unicor $34m". govtribe.com. 
  18. ^ GovTribe. "Department of the Army W91CRB08D0045-0081 To Unicor $98.3k". govtribe.com. 
  19. ^ GovTribe. "Department of the Army W91CRB08D0045-0084 To Unicor $9.8k". govtribe.com. 
  20. ^ Bernstein, James (13 May 2006). "Army deals blow to body armor maker DHB Industries". Newsday.com. Archived from the original on 2007. Retrieved 2006-05-15. 
  21. ^ "I Want My MTV - Marines Getting New Body Armor". Defense Industry Daily. 3 November 2006. Archived from the original on 10 February 2007. 
  22. ^ Oliver, Wesley (3 January 2009). "Marines Improving Vests After Complaints: Troops complained 30 lbs. vest too heavy, restrictive". Newser. 
  23. ^ Lamothe, Dan (19 January 2009). "Corps to field two new body armor vests". Marine Corps Times. Gannett. 
  24. ^ "Troops Reject New Body Armor as Dangerous". Strategy Page. StrategyWorld.com. 26 March 2006. Retrieved 2006-05-15. 
  25. ^ "Interceptor OTV Body Armor Cost Lives, An Internal USMC Reports Shows". DefenseWatch. Soldiers for the Truth. 11 January 2006. Archived from the original on 13 February 2006. Retrieved 2006-05-15. 
  26. ^ Helms, Nathaniel R. (2006-01-14). "Army Orders Soldiers to Shed Dragon Skin or Lose SGLI Death Benefits". Soldiers for the Truth. Archived from the original on 6 January 2008. Retrieved 2009-06-29. 
  27. ^ Associated Press (2006-03-30). "Army bans use of privately bought armor". USA Today. 
  28. ^ GovTribe. "Department of the Army W91CRB08D0045-0005 To Unicor $10.9m". govtribe.com. 
  29. ^ "Afghan Army Growing, but Additional Trainers Needed; Long-term Costs Not Determined" (PDF). Report to Congressional Addressees. United States Government Accountability Office. January 2011. Archived from the original on February 2, 2011. Retrieved February 2, 2011. 
  30. ^ GovTribe. "Department of the Army W91CRB08D0045-0002 To Unicor $27.9m". govtribe.com. 
  31. ^ "Hawaii Marines serve with Azerbaijani in Haditha". 
  32. ^ "Somalia: Al-Shabaab retakes key town from African Union troops". 31 October 2017. 
  33. ^ "Republic of Georgia Introduces Body Armor Manufacturing Capability - The Firearm Blog". 2 August 2017. 
  34. ^ "Inherent Resolve". 
  35. ^ a b c GovTribe. "Department of the Army W91CRB08D0045-0006 To Unicor $902.3k". govtribe.com. 
  36. ^ 7thArmyTrainingCommand (13 November 2014). "Moldovan special forces at Combined Resolve III" – via YouTube. 
  37. ^ GovTribe. "Department of the Army W91CRB08D0045-0003 To Unicor $11.2m". govtribe.com. 
  38. ^ GovTribe. "Department of the Army W91CRB08D0045-0001 To Unicor $1.2m". govtribe.com. 
  39. ^ "Sky Soldiers welcome US chief of staff of the Army to Fearless Guardian". 
  40. ^ Поставлені в Україну зі США бронежилети “INTERCEPTOR” під час випробувань з оцінки балістичної стійкості показали відмінну протикульову стійкість при обстрілі з 7,62 мм автомату АКМ та 9 мм пістолету ПМ / Ukrainian MoD official website
  41. ^ Stern, Seth (2 April 2003). "Body armor could be a technological hero of war in Iraq" – via Christian Science Monitor. 
  42. ^ "Defense.gov News Article: Army, Marines Rushing Body Armor to Troops in Combat Zones". web-beta.archive.org. Archived from the original on 2015-09-26. 
  43. ^ GovTribe. "Department of the Army W91CRB08D0045-0010 To Unicor $281k". govtribe.com. 

Further reading[edit]

External links[edit]