As the Army shifts its operational focus from Iraq to Afghanistan, the equipment needs of its soldiers have changed dramatically. Where Iraqs battlefields were almost exclusively urban, Afghanistan is a rural country with few real cities. Iraq is astoundingly flat and stiflingly hot during much of the year; Afghanistan, is almost entirely mountainous, with a harsh winter climate.
Troops patrol Iraqs cities in heavily armored vehicles on an extensive road network that used to be thickly seeded with IEDs. Afghanistan has few real roads, and troops patrol by foot up and down primitive mountain trails and along narrow ridgelines chasing elusive Taliban fighters.
For Afghanistan, its all about lightening the soldiers load, Brig. Gen. Peter Fuller, commander of PEO Soldier, told a group of reporters at Ft. Belvoir, Va. Fuller had on display a wide range of new clothing, equipment and weapons, all lighter versions of the kit soldiers took to Iraq. Iraq was how do you stay cool. Afghanistan is how do you stay dry and warm and every kid out there should have lighter body armor, Fuller said.
As the Iraq war progressed, the Army added layer upon layer of armor until soldiers soon resembled a bomb disposal technician. The up-armoring made sense as the number one killer in Iraq was IEDs, problem was, all that armor meant troops were not very mobile, which was okay, because they didnt really move around on foot all that much. In the mountains of Afghanistan, where IEDs are comparatively rare and brief, sharp, small-unit firefights against an elusive opponent are more common, all that body armor becomes a dangerously immobilizing burden. For Iraq, body armor was oriented to a soldiers frontal arc, to provide protection as they barged into buildings and cleared rooms of suspected insurgents. In Afghanistan, troops are safer if they are lighter and more mobile and able to use the ground and natural features for cover.
With the tactical demands of the new battlefield foremost in mind, the Army is moving to shave almost 20 pounds off a soldiers load by shedding the neck, groin, shoulder and side protection of the current body armor with a lightweight armor plate carrier. Lt. Col. Robert Myles, product manager for Soldier Survivability, made it clear that the plate carrier is exactly what it sounds like, it carries the Armys ESAPI ballistic plates front and rear, its not an armored suit. The Army is fielding 500 of the 15 pound Modular Body Armor Vest plate carriers, currently used by Special Operations Command, to soldiers deploying to Afghanistan in the next few weeks.
The Army thinks its soldiers need a bit more protection than the special operations MBAV provides, Myles said. So, the service is putting a collection of new industry provided plate carriers to the test, including the MBAV and a plate carrier currently used by the Marines. Later this month, soldiers from the 82nd Airborne Division and 173 Airborne Division will spend two weeks in Yuma, Az., because the terrain there closely resembles Afghanistan, testing seven different vests, doing road marches, running and simulating small unit firefights. Based on soldiers feedback, the Army will then select their own plate carrier, and initiate fielding up to 100,000 plate carriers beginning later this summer. All of the vests being considered carry the same ballistic plates.
Its not only in body armor that the Army is looking to shave pounds. The service is developing a new, lightweight version of the venerable M240B 7.62mm machine gun, a soldiers favorite, called the M240L, acheiving a nearly 7 pound weight savings by using lightweight titanium instead of steel (lightweight titanium is so scarce that it takes nearly 12 months from ordering to get the new machine gun). The Army is also moving from brass bullet casings to stainless steel which is 20 percent lighter bullet to bullet, considering that a 30 round M4 mag weighs one pound, lighter ammo can make a big difference. Brass is also getting scarce and more costly while stainless steel is cheap and plentiful. Soldiers also get new lightweight tripods for the machine guns.
The venerable M2 .50 cal heavy machine gun (if youve ever seen an M2 fired its probable more accurate to call it a lightweight cannon) is also getting the weight loss treatment. The new XM806 Lightweight .50 Caliber Machine Gun that is currently in development weighs 64 pounds less than the M2 and is more accurate to boot.
{ 21 comments… read them below or add one }
I feel a lot better about combat in Afganistan. This seems much more like conventional (even if it’s not) than iraq ever was. Glad they’re putting a bit of thought into how their soldiers work too =)
Izz’at Multicam?
Ah, yes, hence the name of the pic. Fun.
Glad to see the Army and Marines opting for more lightweight gear, body armor, and weapons.
W@hen did the Army activate the 173rd Airborne Division I thought they were just a Brigade…
doing road marches–
they should train how to march ofroad.
I hope the XM806 is just as reliable as the venerable M2. I’m not sure, but I suspect that is a higher value attribute than weight and accuracy on a vehicle mounted machine gun. I wonder what the design goals were for that project.
This article makes it sound like after seven years in Afghanistan, the Army just figured out they need to lighten the loads of the soldier. Given the Army’s bureaucratic sloth, that’s conceivable. Or the article needs to be tuned-up to put this in context and indicate this is part of on-going work.
Or, I believe, it’s an opportunity for a what would be a very interesting follow-up article on how the combat gear in Afghanistan has evolved in the last sever years. Photos included.
“…shedding the neck, groin, shoulder and side protection of the current body armor…”
- the extra protection was added because that’s where troops were getting IED injuries. It’s always a tradeoff, but less protection doesn’t sound like a good idea in the long run. You can be sure the Taliban will exploit it.
“Lightweight” XM806 vs. “Heavy” M2…
Who is gonna hump a .50? Fiddies are vehicle-transported, but sometimes fired off the tripod. The real trade-off will be the XM806 will bounce all over the place when fired dismounted, since it does not have Ma Duece’s extra mass to help dampen recoil…
So stainless steel is now cheaper than brass? A couple years ago I would have laughed at that idea but I guess with everything going on it makes sense (2 wars and the new policies regarding spend casings).
“Who is gonna hump a .50? Fiddies are vehicle-transported, but sometimes fired off the tripod.”
But the .50 is humpable and in the Corps we trained to hump .50s. It’s not a whole lot of fun but it’s quite doable, one poor schmuck gets the receiver, someone else gets the tripod, and barrel(s) go to other Marines and the ammo is split up between everyone. Now whether the grunts actually do that in practice or not I don’t know but if airwingers occadsionally practice humping a .50 I’d very well imagine that the grunts do it too and on a regular basis.
I always imagined the Taliban would use sniping attacks, as they did with Jezails against British troops waybackwhen.
In the early days of the Afghan invasion there was much ballyhoo about the “professional” AQ fighters. Are they still in play or is it standard rabble who charge in with the AK, spray & pray?
If we are fighting snipers, then they will simply snipe at exposed body parts where there is no, or reduced, protection.
Trust me, brass has been expensive for some time now, I’m currently a plumber and anything made of brass has been getting more and more expensive over the past decade. This was before the wars were even started.
As far as the comment about the less mass of the new .50 cal, if I’m thinking of the same weapon, it has a recoil mechanism built into it unlike the ma deuce, so it shouldn’t be a problem.
Lightening the required armor load is a great idea, sure, total coverage sounds great, that is until you you have to hump up and down mountains. What good is armor when you can’t move because you blew your legs out from the load you’re carrying.
Wes,
If the XM806 kept the recoil management aspect of the XM307, bouncing all over the place won’t be a problem. The .50 version of the XM307 was basically just a barrel swap, so you can see how it works by searching for the XM307 on youtube. The question is, will the accuracy, controlability and portability of the XM806 make up for the lower rate of fire? Let’s get some in Afghanistan and find out!
Stainless. Corrosion comes to mind. Just by sitting in storage.
If this helps to soldiers to manuver in Afghanistan better then go for it. But if taking away specific plates will likely cause more damage then that needs to be investigated. I’m sure that the soldiers would prefer a lighter load. But not at a cost to their well being
Yes, it looks like multicam
Watched the XM806 on youtube (FutureWeapons, actually).
Looks pretty good! As Matt said, rate of fire is S-L-O-W, but recoil looks manageable.
Curious how these lighter weapons will hold up under sustained fire. If it’s discovered that lighter barrels don’t last as long, or lighter weapons jam and misfire more under sustained fire, then troops will simply leave them at base rather than risk a weapon that will fail them in battle; defeating the purpose of all of that R&D money.
It is about time. Way past due. The technology has been there for awhile now – was time to implement it and put it into practical use.