Why Soldiers Carry Heavier Loads Than Ever Before, and How the Army Is Fighting to Fix It

[rangerrebew]

Why Soldiers Carry Heavier Loads Than Ever Before, and How the Army Is Fighting to Fix It
Kyle Mizokami


Despite technological advances, the load ordinary soldiers carry in 2018 is probably greater than it’s ever been. The U.S. Army is hoping to help with that somewhat by introducing a new, lighter protective vest designed to stop bullets and shrapnel. The new Modular Scalable Vest weighs 20 percent less than previous vests, a feature badly needed by U.S. troops weighed down by their own equipment.

The vest, as reported by Military.com, comes in at just 25 pounds—five pounds less than the Improved Outer Tactical Vest it is scheduled to replace. The armor, which deployed with the Army’s 1st Security Force Assistance Brigade to Afghanistan in February 2018, is reportedly receiving good reviews from troops in the field. Not only is the armor lighter it is also narrower, thanks to a loosening of what the service called “conservative” standards in how much deformation it will accept in armor caused by small arms fire.

https://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/why-soldiers-carry-heavier-loads-than-ever-before-and-1829852983

[Suppressed]

Does "narrower" mean thinner?

[thackney]

Does "narrower" mean thinner?

Sounds like less body coverage, less wide.

https://www.military.com/kitup/2018/10/09/army-eyes-narrower-body-armor-shave-weight.html

..."We have to make sure we are not putting soldiers at undue risk when we free up space that was formerly covered by body armor," he said, describing how officials then looked at data compiled about the type of hits soldiers have taken in combat.

The results showed that a more streamlined cut would result in a "negligible" risk to soldiers....

[GtHawk]

Sounds like less body coverage, less wide.

https://www.military.com/kitup/2018/10/09/army-eyes-narrower-body-armor-shave-weight.html

..."We have to make sure we are not putting soldiers at undue risk when we free up space that was formerly covered by body armor," he said, describing how officials then looked at data compiled about the type of hits soldiers have taken in combat.

The results showed that a more streamlined cut would result in a "negligible" risk to soldiers....

Man I sure hope that 'negligible risk' doesn't mirror the money saving decision Kennedy's wonder boys made when they nixed chrome lined barrels in the first M-16's.

[Cyber Liberty]

Sounds like less body coverage, less wide.

https://www.military.com/kitup/2018/10/09/army-eyes-narrower-body-armor-shave-weight.html

..."We have to make sure we are not putting soldiers at undue risk when we free up space that was formerly covered by body armor," he said, describing how officials then looked at data compiled about the type of hits soldiers have taken in combat.

The results showed that a more streamlined cut would result in a "negligible" risk to soldiers....

Why do I get the gnawing suspicion the "officials" who looked at the data aren't the soldiers who get shot at?