help me understand ballastic armor...plate carriers

[mtnrider]

I think this is the thread you are looking for...

https://www.ar-15.co/threads/110033-...light=mick-boy

.

[johngraves2]

OK so I have done tons or reading now and have a question i cant really find an answer for any where.

If you have a steel level III stand-alone plate in front of level IIIA soft inserts you do not have any more ballistic protection, but you do have a little more blunt force trauma protection?

[275RLTW]

OK so I have done tons or reading now and have a question i cant really find an answer for any where.

If you have a steel level III stand-alone plate in front of level IIIA soft inserts you do not have any more ballistic protection, but you do have a little more blunt force trauma protection?

Correct (and more weight)

[ZERO THEORY]

There seem to be more of them available down here in the Springs.

That's 'cause Fort Carson is a stone's throw away.

[Mick-Boy]

Thanks for the correction coloccw.

Sorry if it seemed I hijacked this thread, I know nothing of the topic and am very interested in it. I know you all know a lot about it so hopefully it will help the OP with his questions as well.

Sent via the Samsung GALAXY S4, by AT&T.

If you want to get into the nitty gritty, there is a forum dedicated to body armor and helmets over at lightfighter.net.

My opinion is that the armor you wear (or don't wear) is a choice each individual should make after a little personal and threat analysis.

What's the armor going to be used for?
How much armor do you need?
Does mobility or protection take precedence to accomplish your goal?
Are you fit enough to maintain mobility wearing a full armor package?
What kind of threats do you expect to face? (Most likely? Most deadly?)
What's your budget?
Etc.

Obviously most of these questions don't matter for most military units or LE departments. They'll have a policy in place that dictates what is to be worn and when you need to wear it.

For the individual citizen; sit back and think through what you need. Not what the SEAL teams are wearing. Not what some guy on the internet told you to get.

Do your research and find something that meets your needs and budget. You'll be a lot better off in the long run.

[buckshotbarlow]

idiot question here...after reading this ^^^^^

General shtf situation, something light and mobile, got a 20 section farm we're going to relocate 2. Figure the mzb aspect...
For plates, i'm looking something like this...Now what the hell does all this mumbo jumbo mean?
http://www.ebay.com/itm/BALLISTIC-PL...item3f267dd715

My first and foremost thought is, i'm not a military guy, but want the capability to be protected.

My goals are:
Weight
Multi hit stoppage capability....7.62x51 ball, figure around 50-100yd engagement distance.
KISS principle
Plate budget of 400$

I know there have been a couple links to some plates, but I can't find SHIT in stock for what you guys have posted.

[Mick-Boy]

NIJ is the National Institute of Justice. They have a rating system to specify what the armor will protect against. Here's an easy explanation for what they mean.. And because I'm a big believer in going to the source, here's a PDF of armor ratings from the NIJ.gov site.\

SA - Stand alone (the plate doesn't need any soft armor backing to meet the rating it's labeled with)
ICW - In Conjunction With (the plate needs to be backed up by IIIA soft armor to meet the rating that it's labeled with)

I would strongly advise against buying hard armor off of ebay.

Below is a post Dr. Gary Roberts made in a stickied thread in the Body Armor forum on LF.net. It was posted in 2009 and he's updated the thread with new information since then but it's a good place to start.

In order to provide protection against rifle threats in active shooter incidents and other high risk encounters, a large local LE agency is exploring a trial program of issuing Level III rifle plates & simple plate carriers for uniformed Patrol Officers to quickly don over their uniforms and concealed Level IIIa soft armor. Individual officer would also have the option of personally purchasing a plate system. Final plate selection is likely to be based on a combination of cost, weight, durability, and most importantly the ability to successfully defeat several common threats, including: 5.56 mm 55 gr M193 FMJ, 62 gr M855 FMJ, and 45 gr LeMas Land Warfare JSP; 7.62 x 39 mm 123 gr M43 type FMJ and 124 gr M67/8M2 type FMJ, 7.62 x 51 mm 147 gr M80 FMJ, 12 ga Federal Cartridge 1 oz slug (LEF127 RS).

As part of the procurement process, we tested six different Level III plates, from five vendors: Armored Mobility Incorporated (AMI) TAC3S single curve, Diamond Back Tactical (DBT) LTC27400 single curve, DefenseTech (DT) Defend-X IM-LCP-LIII triple curve, MSA/Paraclete (MSA) DHP3-1012 (cat #10098941) triple curve, and two triple curve plates from Tencate--a LE SAPI hybrid plate (TenH) and a compressed Dyneema plate (TenD) that is essentially identical to the previously tested AMI SAPI3 plate.

All plates tested were 10 x 12 inches. Plate weights varied due to design and construction differences:

AMI: 7.5 lbs--3 mm steel over compressed Dyneema
DBT: 6 lbs--8 mm aluminum oxide backed by what appears to be resin reinforced Kevlar
DT: 4.5 lb--Dyneema composite
MSA: 6 lbs--Aluminum oxide backed by compressed Dyneema, Gold Flex, and closed cel foam
TenH: 4.25 lbs--Aluminum oxide backed by compressed Dyneema and closed cel foam
TenD: 3.25 lbs--Compressed Dyneema

The plates was inserted into a 1000 denier Cordura plate carrier over Level IIIa soft armor panel (Twaron backed by Dyneema) and secured against a life-size curvilinear torso replica made of Perma-Gel. All shots were made at a perpendicular angle to the plate, with no oblique hits. Three shots of each rifle ammunition type were fired, with the desired shot placement to be one shot into each corner of a 3” equilateral triangle. In order to reduce the potential for AOA issues, the 5.56 mm and 7.62 x 51 mm shots were made at 25 yards using a 5.56 mm 20” barrel AR15 and a .308 26” barrel Remington 700. The available 7.62x39 mm and 12 ga weapon-ammo combinations proved to have insufficient accuracy to ensure accurate shot placement at 25 yards, so testing of these systems was conducted at 3 yards using a 16” barrel 7.62 x 39 mm AKMS and a 12 ga. 18” barrel Remington 870.

TEST RESULTS:

AMI: (vendor requested that one plate be used for all test shots)
3 shots M193 successfully stopped by the plate.
3 shots of M855 successfully stopped by the plate
3 shots of LeMas successfully stopped by the plate
3 shots of M43 successfully stopped by the plate
3 shots of M67 successfully stopped by the plate
3 shots of M80 successfully stopped by the plate
1 shot of 12 ga slug successfully stopped by the plate

DBT: (vendor only supplied one plate—this was totally destroyed by the nine 5.56 mm shots, so no larger calibers could be tested)
3 shots M193 successfully stopped by the plate.
3 shots of M855 successfully stopped by the plate
3 shots of LeMas successfully stopped by the plate

DT: (one plate used for 5.56 mm shots, second plate used for larger calibers)
3 shots M193 successfully stopped by the plate.
3 shots of M855 fully perforated the plate--2 were stopped by the soft armor, 1 penetrated through the soft armor
3 shots of LeMas successfully stopped by the plate
3 shots of M43 successfully stopped by the plate
3 shots of M67 successfully stopped by the plate
3 shots of M80 successfully stopped by the plate
1 shot of 12 ga slug successfully stopped by the plate

MSA: (one plate used for 5.56 mm shots, second plate used for larger calibers)
3 shots M193 successfully stopped by the plate.
3 shots of M855 successfully stopped by the plate
3 shots of LeMas successfully stopped by the plate
3 shots of M43 successfully stopped by the plate
3 shots of M67 successfully stopped by the plate
3 shots of M80 successfully stopped by the plate
1 shot of 12 ga slug successfully stopped by the plate

TenH: (one plate used for 5.56 mm shots, second plate used for larger calibers)
3 shots M193 successfully stopped by the plate.
3 shots of M855 successfully stopped by the plate
3 shots of LeMas successfully stopped by the plate
3 shots of M43 successfully stopped by the plate
3 shots of M67 successfully stopped by the plate
3 shots of M80 successfully stopped by the plate
1 shot of 12 ga slug successfully stopped by the plate

TenD: (one plate used for 5.56 mm shots, second plate used for larger calibers)
3 shots M193 successfully stopped by the plate.
3 shots of M855 fully perforated the plate and underlying soft armor
3 shots of LeMas successfully stopped by the plate
3 shots of M43 successfully stopped by the plate
3 shots of M67 successfully stopped by the plate
3 shots of M80 successfully stopped by the plate
1 shot of 12 ga slug successfully stopped by the plate

Projectile Penetration Protection: The AMI plate offered the best PPP of any of the plates tested, followed by the MSA and TenH plates; the plate with the worst PPP for the threat rounds was the TenD.

Back Face Deformation: The AMI plate offered the least BFD, followed by the MSA plate; the plate with the greatest amount of BFD was the TenH.

Spall: The AMI, DT, and TenD plates had no detectable spall; the DBT plate exhibited an extensive, excessive amount of spall.

Plate Weight: The TenD was the lightest plate, followed by the TenH and DT; the heaviest plate was the AMI.

Durability: The most durable and robust plate appeared to be the AMI, followed by the DT and TenD; the most fragile plate appeared to be the DBT.

Annual X-ray Assessment: The AMI, DT, and TenD plates do not require an annual x-ray assessment; the DBT, MSA, and TenH plates ideally should have a yearly x-ray analysis to assess for hidden cracks in the ceramic elements.

Cost: The least expensive plate was the DBT; the most expensive plate was the AMI.

BOTTOM LINE:

If 5.56 mm M855 “green tip” was NOT a threat, then the DefenseTech Defend-X IM-LCP-LIII or Tencate Dyneema (or equivalent AMI SAPI3) plates would be reasonable options, however, given the scenario that the expected threat level included all the calibers and loads tested above, including M855, then:

-- If I knew I was getting out of my vehicle and walking directly into a gunfight, whether or not I had underlying soft armor, I’d want to be wearing AMI TAC3S plates.

-- If I was going to be spending a lot of time wearing my armor, needed to have a high degree of mobility, and always wore soft armor under my plates, then I would choose the Tencate hybrid LE SAPI plates.

-- The MSA/Paraclete plates are also high on my list for LE armor, as they offer good protection, can work without soft armor, are not too heavy, and are cost effective.

From L to R: AMI, DBT , DT, MSA, TenH, TenD:

[lex137]

Good read!! I have been wanting to get a PC and some plates for it. Was looking at ar500 plates, but after reading all the info I'm not sure. Thanks Mick-Boy!! I need to go some where and try on a bunch of options and even a war belt.

[Skip]

Due to cost, cracking, care?? Why would you not got ceramic again?

Cost and care. I don't have access to an xray machine and I think that is ridiculous.

Composite is a much better solution if you are going to spend that kind of money.

YMMV

[buckshotbarlow]

Mick-Boy...u hit out of the park with that last post...thxs...that's what i'm looking for...