Operators have to be able to move quickly and strike where an enemy least expects it while us Grunts have the duty of taking and holding terrain which means we’ll be in direct engagements with the enemy and additional protection has its benefits, we don’t have to be able to move quickly on foot for the most part.
Yeah, on the other side, soldiers are holding positions and are more linkly to get HE rounds by mortars or artillery next to em - wich is why it makes sense to get a more full protection onto em. If Operators get such a fire, a lot of things went wrong before.
You were born on April 1 1999 wtf do you know about combat i was born April 3 1992 therefore ive played far more FPS games than you people should listen to my combat experience than to you i have fought in ALL of rhe Call of Dutys including WW2 not to mentiob rhe battlefiled franchise so GTFO stolen valor boy
as of now, with inception of FPV-drones and quadrocopters with explosive payload - speed is useless and frag protection is needed more then ever. If enemy you are fighting have at least some fighting chance and is not of some backwater tribe with old rifles as only weapons - frag protection is the musthave.
worth noting that soldier vests are getting smaller, the soldier in the thumbnail is wearing the MSV Gen II which is 25 lbs fully loaded, with magazines and plates compared to the IOTV which would be 40 lbs full kitted out. The MSV was also issued (to me, at least) with a kevlar combat shirt which aids in protecting otherwise exposed areas. In truth, lighter plate carriers are comfortable and fundamentally better than IOTVs, and as technology progresses and plates become lighter and more protective, as well as cheaper, body armor is getting smaller across the board.
@@attilaabonyi8879 Modularity. Before the MSV was developed and issued, the US Army had two vests that combat soldiers would wear, the IOTV which was a large, cumbersome tactical vest which broke down into several padded kevlar segments, commonly called "soft armor", and the "chicken vest", which is a kevlar soft vest which resembles the soft armor on the inside of a flak jacket. The MSV (Modular Scalable Vest) can do both - the outer layer is a tactical vest which clips together, the inner layer is a chicken vest which velcros together. In the full tactical configuration, you slip your ballistic plates into the chicken vest, insert the chicken vest inside the tactical vest, and clip the tactical vest together. Worth noting that the MSV is made by civilian tactical gear companies, so it is definitely an SOF-inspired design, if not SOF approved
Yes, you read my mind! This is something that would definitely be worth adding to the video, but I thought about it after the video was ready. We can actually observe that compared to the old 6B-23, MTV, IOTV and Mehler ST (I think that's what the Bundeswehr armored vest is called), the new body armor have come very close to the form factors of plate carriers
The standard Infantryman has the mission of taking and holding ground so the amount of fire they will face is higher than the other units that use smaller and lighter vests/armor. Special Ops units must be able to move quickly and they rarely get into firefights with an enemy, they’re supposed to break contact with an enemy so they do carry more ammunition for this purpose (on some missions).
Conventional military = more shrapnel risk = more soft armor coverage Special operations = fast targeted attacks + higher fire fights = light hard armor Police response teams = more gun fire risk + short engagements = heavy hard armor
@@MarcillaSmith SF only applies to Green Berets. Any other special unit is special operations and as a female, you never dealt with special forces ever.
Short answer: The army uses heavier and less mobile equipment with a lot of explosion protection, since their priority is general military combat, and special forces use light, mobile equipment because they must perform quick operations that do not involve general military combat.
so for SOF, it's especially made for fast tactics like forays/raids and recon while in generic military style, it's made for more protection from possible injuries present in the battlefield itself
I thought so, sof and SF green berets needs to be light to move faster and easier for the high speed operations they do. Even a video on the 75th rangers RASP said the need to be light to probably perform the fast direct action raids they specialize in. I wanna do that one day though.
Most testimony from Marines in Fallujah says that guys were wearing as much kevlar as they possibly could during combat. Kevlar coverage makes the difference between a nick in your vest that you don't even notice, and a life threatening frag injury.
We're also currently in a shift in mindset in terms of armour. During the early GWOT era, most militaries were obsessed with the idea of having as much protection as possible, so naturally rigs became large and encompassed much of the body. Same with helmets. Nowadays, more people gravitate toward more streamlined carriers as it's impractical to completely armour up every part of your body, as it's usually uncomfortable and more awkward to move and one of the key instruments to winning an engagement is having a maneuvering element to close the distance and eliminate a target. The IOTV type rigs are mostly leftovers from an old mindset and nowadays, comfort and mobility are becoming as much of a consideration as protection. SOF units tho usually get more say in their gear and can adapt with differing mindsets more quickly as they have their own group of people (i.e NAVSPECWAR) dedicated to testing equipment tailored specifically to special operators vs standard infantry who has to rely on their particular branch to test and source anything, as well as any other duties that that particular branch may do. It doesn't help that often times, a branches funds are not just dedicated to the infantry kit and have to go to other avenues, such as logistics, vehicle maintenance, medical services, etc.
I think that weight is also a concern. During the wars in in Iraq and Afghanistan, esp. in Afghanistan, the military brass soon realized that giving the troops heavy armor all around in an effort to protect them, it weighed and slowed them down and made them (potentially) more vulnerable to attacks and less able to chase down a fleeing enemy. I think that there was also a rise in knee and back injuries due to the increased weight. The sad thing is that the military, at least in the US , seldomly reduces a soldier/Marine's loadout by much. Almost every time the military finds a way of reducing the wight of a piece of kit, they end coming up with something else or more of something they already carry which ends up negating any savings in weight from the reduced weight of the new piece of kit.
That protection is coming back but lighter. We were spoiled because we fought an unconventional war for 20 yrs. Ukraine is showing us why that soft armor is important
It's kind of the same thing that happened with the 'knight's' armor. It started out with chainmail, they developed plate, they made the plate better, and got it to cover the whole body.. And then we invented guns. And suddenly the metal armor didn't stop an ubiquitous weapon. So the armor on the legs got discontinued because you needed to more agile. Then the armor on the upper limbs. Then finally all you had left was a metal chestplate - if that, which itself got discontinued at the end of the first world war. Then we found out, hey, this layered fabric stuff (modern gambeson) is pretty good at stopping bullets! So we made more of it, and began uparmoring our soldiers. Then we realized 'We could a plate with this, and it'd stop even more!'. So we added plate to the gambeson. And now we're realizing that too much weight slows the combatant down. So we're easing off the armor, but improving the things it's good at, the roles it needs to fulfill. It's kind of a human cycle in history to uparmor, uparmor, ween back, experiment, improve, then up armor, up armor.. Same thing happened with tanks. We made heavier and heavier armor until the shells got too powerful, and then we realized controlled explosions could be a form of armor itself - so the tanks got lighter, and lighter, as more focus was put on mobility, size of weapon, and ability to resist injury.
You do have a point. It's always the special units that gets the initial distribution of new gear and equipment, and it slowly spreads out into lower combat and support units as manufacturing and budgetting permits. Same applies with weapon systems when they undergo trials. I see the arguments of shrapnel versus direct fire, but I also see some inconsistency in the fact that operators are also as likely (if not more) to face shrapnel in combat than their more standard counterparts, which reduces the strength of the argument. Naturally, there will always be a trade-off between protection and mobility. But personally, if I were to own my own body armor, I'd go for something smaller to maximize mobility while protecting critical areas. Which was the case when I got tired of large dudes pulling strings and fighting over small IOTV's for themselves, while leaving me with the bulky large ones that doesn't actually makes sense even from a protective standpoint.
one thing to consider is that SOF often are early adopter, while on regular infantry, most of the times due to mass number required, they adopt something much slower. During rearmament here during early war on terror year, i saw some previously unarmored unit get fully equiped by plate carrier sooner (bypassing IOTV style) while some infantry still in progress of phasing IOTV out.
id say because SF usually has the element of surprise and typically choses where and when their engagement takes place, so armor isnt as essential as mobility and reducing signatures. while the average soldier is far more likely to be the one engaged first from any direction, even indirectly, while sitting in a trench or on patrol; so more of their body should be covered.
another reason to wear more armor as a SWAT operator is that in addition to shrapnel, soft armor will protect against pistol rounds. In the US the average criminal which they would encounter daily is much more likely to be armed with a pistol than with a rifle, so the increased soft armor coverage would provide real benefit.
It's a balance of speed and protection. Also keep in mind operators are likely to be more highly specific mission focused and have more transportation methods. Infantry will have a need for greater long term sustainment and using what you can carry for days or weeks at a time. Then there is maritime and parachute/airborne considerations.
Thats actually not true (for bullets). Most armies still still issue large kevlar soft type IIIA armor to their soldiers. Most of the spec ops around the world use type III or IV steel hard plates with plate carriers. So on average a spec ops soldier has better protection and better mobility than an average soldier.
@@XortiXz Only rich countries or top elite unites use ceramics. Ceramics are more expensive and they need to be carefully handled. They can shatter. Steel armor doesn’t shatter when dropped on stuff. Also its cheaper and easy to produce.
@@thekraken1173i have ceramic plates myself, dropped them, thrown them across, they dont break as easily as you think, though if handled roughly not a great idea
The main reason is because the plate itself won’t get any bigger if you have a bigger plate carrier, therefore you can save a lot of weight and bulk buy streamlining it down to just cover the plates. Also soft armor.
People need to stop giving the advice that pc is better. Just as armored humvees in later Afghanistan and Iraq, body armors saved countless lives. If you are don't have the mission requirements like the sf(mountainous terrain without transportation)as a average Joe,get your bodyarmor and stay freakin static or you will regret it. Much more grunts died due to fragmentations and ieds shrapnels than bullets.
Yeah, or even normal battlefield shit like mortars and artillery. Look to Ukraine... Of cause, if you're some kind of high distance scout operator that broke through the lines, the armor would most likly be a problem - it's kind of useless, cause if you get some kind of mortar fire, you're done anyway. But sitting in the damn trenches, I would allways go for full protection.
This is so open to requirements of the mission or area you’re in. The USMC did a bunch of testing in the pacific islands a few years ago. Specifically the Philippines. And during their extensive testing, body armor was abandoned. And the switch was quickly made to load bearing vests. It’s simple too hot and humid to function long term with body armor on in the jungle. It was causing a horrendous amount of heat casualties. More than were taken even in simulated combat. You can read the report on it. It’s interesting. But plates certainly aren’t necessary at all times in all places. In the jungle they specially stated that there is so much natural cover that simply laying prone makes you hard to shoot. And that fights take place at point blank range, where plates are of dubious value
@@Rokaize Well, this makes sense in an insurgent situation - wich was pretty much the situation, the USMC saw as most likly in those years. I would argue, that it can not hold up to the expieriences of the Ukraine war, were we saw the come back of trench warfare and the Artillery as the main factor on the battlefield, as well as a great threat of suicide drones, drone bomblets, etc... I would argue, that body armor got way more important for survivity - but on the other hand, we talk about mass fightings and it might get an economical question if it's not cheaper to loose more people than to buy body armor for every soldier in this scale of battle... Wich is a bit cynical, for sure - but that's war I guess ;)
@@bugfisch7012 Well yeah Ukraine is a situation where wearing. Body armor is basically mandatory. Especially soft armor. Many Russian and Ukrainian soldiers wear armor that covers their whole torso and with a groin pad of Kevlar as well. But this makes sense, they’re in a war where it’s a lot of sitting in trenches and riding in vehicles. Where artillery is the killer of 9 out of 10 people. In the mild summers of Ukraine having as much protection as possible makes sense. In the jungles of some pacific island, with 110 degree temperatures with 95% humidity. And a ton of rain. With mud and other natural features that are extremely difficult and exhausting to navigate, then body armor is seriously more of a threat to you than the enemy is. You’re just going to pass out
@@Rokaizethere are good enough platforms that are as scalable "down" as they are "up". The inclusion of side plates and groin protectors to a PC (not throat protection, no one ever wants to wear that for any extended period of time) and soft armour backers really doesn't make it a mutually exclusive choice you have to make anymore.
Soldiers are expected to participate in sustained contact with the enemy. Operators are not. Operators are expected to operate hard and fast so the tradeoff of protection for mobility is made.
You also have to think logistics. SOF will always have the best logistics in the game, so they don’t have to worry about carrying anything except what they need since the supply train is always right there. Regular soldiers on the other hand may not get that resupply every day like SOF guys will, so when they go out they’ve got to carry a lot more on them.
I think you got it reversed my man SOF guys will go quiet awhile with out supply. If you have the air all day you get some drops. Grunts will get that supply when the jobs done. You have to think SOF is going in behind the lines often. Grunts are the line.
this vid was actually pretty accurate imo. I'm surprised with the amount of understanding of the nuanced details of how modern body armor works and how it was presented in a succinct way, like that plates are the only thing stopping most rifle bullets and most soft armor that covers more is only level 3 and below and in a military setting is mainly for stopping fragmentation. Good job knowing that, i've seen some military guys not even know that.
When I was in the Marines we used IOTVs in training and plate carriers in country. Drove us nuts with the switch up last second. But definitely liked the carriers over the IOTV. Better mobility with the same protection.
Man, I have a lvl 4 rig, but same time I have buddy who got a Purple Heart after he got hit with a svd, 7.62/54 rimmed black tip, his lv4 ceramic plate is what got pushed into his heart. Somehow survived.
Sounds like either a defective plate or a pre-2010 ESAPI Modern plates wont injure the wearer beyond a bruise unless a round is fully capable of penetrating or carries so much energy it rips the backer off from the front. Thing that is weird here is army units vests have integrated soft armor and the whole way the MIL-STD system for armor works is the bullet resistance is determined by a round penetrating the plate but getting stopped in a soft armor backer. Eitherway This sounds like an extremely unlikely to happen case.
On my last deployment we were allowed to wear personal plate carriers as long as the fit our issued plates. I used a crye Spc and my issued lbt. Something to note is that the lbt is not large. We did get issued iotvs from rfi but that was because some dumb officer in the task force didn’t realize that we could put sides plates in the issued lbt plate carrier
Swat units also use heavy body armor. Sometimes heavier than soldiers, because they offer more small caliber rounds protection in more areas, such as upto common civilian hold 9mm smg and 44mm.
That and police units like SWAT teams don't have to wear their kit for very long when compared to a grunt in the field, nor do they have to worry about humping all of that weight up and down steep hills or through a desert. They just have to go a handful of yards from their truck or van to whatever building they have to enter.
@@Riceball01 That is true. Heat is the main issue wearing these heavy kevlars in places like middle east, more dudes getting carried out due to sunstroke than getting wounded in the first place. If they have cooling system in the future, I'm sure soldiers would be more than happy to use heavier kits.
It really boils down to the different missions. One is performing Direct Action and the other is performing Patrols. Mission always dictates what equipment you take.
The comparison between federal law enforcement and soldiers isn’t really fair because LEO use plates for active shooter situations (generally over quickly) and soldiers use plates and soft armor for rounds and fragments (they can be in the situation for a extended period). Overall great video! Maybe compare US army and SF military but not LEO.
I wore the IOTV most of my career as a grunt. The furthest I’ve made it to was the Gen IV. Honestly the shits always heavy regardless of what you’re wearing. I did get to use a JPC for a couple of months as a test for big army. The JPC was dope but when carrying full load, radios, batteries, and so much more it doesn’t really matter. I was just happy that shoulder my m4 was easier with a gen iv and jpc. The old iotvs sucked for shouldering your weapon.
Special Forces= US Army Green Berets (They literally wear a SPECIAL FORCES tab) Rangers, CAG, MARSOC= Special Operations Forces. DEA is neither SF nor SOF. Hope you've learned something today 🙂
SF guys are going up very specific targets. General infantry guys are going against all of them. Very specific targets have guards that shoot at you, occasionally have nades and RPGs ready. General targets have everything from tank and air suppprt, which means youre just as likely to get got by a 9mm as you are a 1mm rock going 2000fps from a cannon shot or bomb being dropped chipping of a pice of concrete or stone with your name on it. SF guys also have to be able to get out as fast as they get in, less they be surrounded and killed by a QRF. Every 300lbs saved is another fully combat kitted out guy they can put on the bird. As a general infantry corpsman, I, personally, weighed about 500lbs with my 2 week loadout. When I was Recon, I never even came close to that unless we were moving a heavy weapons company or comms group somewhere... interesting. PJs always weigh 500lbs. Your back pain is not service related. Have a nice day.
4:35 yeah, everyone saw how heroic were FSB operators _WAITING_ outside for 2 hours in their full armor when someone wanted to 'blow the place up' in krokus 👌🤣
In the United States Army depending on your unit, you can just buy and run whatever plate carrier you want to, so it’s more up to individual preference really.
Remember reading that a lot of DEVGRU guys would go on missions without their plates in the last years of Afghanistan. Some would have one plate in the chest carrier, but left the back empty
I heard that its because operators have learnt to recover any damage by taking cover for long enough, so their armor only need to cover vital areas to prevent one shot kill situations
Imagine a medieval knight with full scale armor and then think of a horseman with light body armor preferably leather, soft armor, and a Turkic traditional shortbow. It is of course way flexible and maneuverable than the medieval knight. Though it can also be said that the horseman should be aggressive and have a higher pace than the knight. Horseman depends on its momentum to evade, attack and sometimes retreat. It is the matter for SpecOps, too. Having the maneuverability is important for the elite troops since they are not completely depending on heavy armor and they need to stay aggressive with minimum energy against an enemy contact. Plus, SpecOps are basically shock troops. They are the attackers and not defenders.
I have a "juggernaught" style plate carrier. I think I might get rediculous by using steel plates on the inside of the plate pouches, but also making small, specifically shaped plate carriers of my own to sort of hang on the outside of the plate carrier from the laser cuts. If i can get the right materials I might even expand the carrier itself to be a full suit. I think that would be pretty sick, and useful for defensive or vehicle based situations where a vehicle of some kind is being more heavily utilized.
The real reason is because special operation command tend to relax rules to make their operators become more adaptable to mission requirements and also they are smaller units designed of unconventional warfare and conventional forces like regular soldiers are forced into synchronized patterns due to their large numbers of keep unit cohesion by making them all follow the same rules and keep up a standard
Simple Answer. Soldiers are not exactly the kind to go on operations required of quick and swift action. This is where special operation units come in, trained to be elite killers who can also move very quick.
Back in my time we carried no body armour, but we were trained to be fast , nimble, and dash and zig zag, crawl in and out of a firing position before getting back up and take advantage of the time it takes to get a bead on you.. a common saying was 'Speed is your armour', but we did get flack jackets in Northern Ireland... now am showing my age..
Short answer: Speed and violence of action are their own protection. High-cut helmets and low-profile plate carriers allow for better maneuverability and speed. So, if you are in a unit that relies on rapid tactics then you can receive an operational net gain by wearing the minimum viable protection. For these people being slowed down can be a death sentence. If you are in a standard unit then dressing high-speed is a liability.
It's because of their purpose/specialty. Special Forces go light because they are mainly incharge of Reconnaissance, Intelligence, and Quick and Precise Assaults, while operating in smaller number/units. They need to go fast so they go with lighter gears. Not only that, they do patrols and recon for long ranges by only foot or smaller vehicles Meanwhile main infantry goes with more heavier and larger armor, and armored vehicles, because their main focus as the infantry is to seize, destroy, and capture heavily fortified or guarded positions. They operate in huge numbers. And seizing or capturing key positions requires you more armor as more threats will be handed in their way. But nothing is obsolete. The gear would still depend based on the mission.
For SF guys concern a plate carrier is way easier to adapt to mission than a more traditional armored vest. Placards, back panels, zip on pouches, hangers not even to mention you can't conceal a whole armored vest without looking like the michelin man. Plate carriers are just more comfortable. It's been a debate since Vietnam with flak vests vs VBA or nothing. As for shrapnel soft armor will help with low velocity low energy shrapnel like from a hand grenade. But anything roughly bigger than 75mm it's luck. 80mm mortar shrapnel can penetrate a bmp and 155 shells can launch shrapnel up to and past 5000 fps and can by random size and weight. So it's sorta questionable what the soft armor will realistically protect from outside of frag past 100 feet or so. TLDR; Someone did a risk assessment about rifle protection being only in the plate and decided that the mobility gains by dropping 15 lbs of kevlar was worth the risk for mobility, adaptability and comfort for less frag protection for the sides and stomach. Which one is better? It depends and it's not super clear and frag protection is complicated and not straight forward.
Police units are at risk of being hit by low caliber pistol rounds at close range. So therefore they choose soft body armor that covers most of their body. Operators are more at risk of rifle wounds, and require high speed in CQC, hence smaller rifle rated armor, regular soilders are far more at risk of shrapnel wounds, and rifle rounds. Therefore they use plate armor on the torso, back, and sides, and light shrapnel protection wherever they can get it.
Special Operations forces are most often used in very high speed offensive operations where speed and mobility provide greater advantage than heavier armor.
Well it has always been the idea that Special Operations Forces using different/special gear to differentia themselves from regular military, the Green Beret headgear and Ranger Body Armor being a few examples.
I've worked with nearly all of the common Special Operations units that the US military has to offer (haven't worked with the Marine Raiders though). The real difference is just the average size of the men wearing the carriers. A large plate is only marginally wider than a medium plate, but is substantially longer. I'm 6'0 and I run a medium plate because any longer and if I tried to situp the plate would jab into me. I'm also very broad and so almost any plate carrier that fits me length wise barely covers me horizontally. This is true for many others in the SOF community. Also, most conventional guys have less choice in what they can wear. If you get issued something too big, you just have to deal with it.
Something I've noticed on Russians in Ukraine is that it's quite popular for them to switch their issued 6B45 armour with a private purchase plate carrier, but they will then often add on additional groin, neck, and shoulder protection.
Special Forces don't have to stand in a trench for months expecting constant explosions. Simple as. I'm wondering when we'll see statistics of High Cut Helmets vs Full Helmets regarding protection from artillery and its use in stagnant trench conflicts like we're seeing reemerge again.
In a nutshell: Soldiers are geared to survive hits to better avoid the unpopular death count. Operators are about inflicting direct casualties and are geared to facilitate better killing capabilities and moving to avoid being hit while closing in for kills. TLDR: Soldiers survive and operators kill.
its more that if enemy artillery and mortars are shooting your operators, you are useing your operators wrong. regular infantry being shot at by mortars and artillery is unavoidable.
Special forces are better funded and usually get armor that is lighter in weight while equal or better in terms of protection. Also the need to operate autonomously means you shed every ounce of weight you can.
Same thing goes to the differences between FAST helmet and ECH Helmet. FAST helmet is ideal for special operation and low intensity conflict that's why it was favoured by special forces, while ECH Helmet were more suitable for high intensity conflict and conventional warfare such as trench warfare, so it is primary used by conventional soldiers.
A lot of regular forces are switching over to high cut FAST helmets recently. I guess it has more to do with the proliferation of active hearing protection and communication equipment down to the individual infanteer than anything else.
Soldiers dig in. spec ops keep moving. That's why spec ops go for lighter armor. Unless a spec ops unit is designed for harder breach and clear tactics with a focus on slower movement (GIGN for example).
It's all about the right tool for the job. If you have standard military training and have to hold the line in a trench or patrol an area that shouldn't be contested for days or weeks on end, it's unrealistic to maintain a high level of alertness. Chances are you aren't oriented toward the eventual threat so having full coverage body armor makes a lot of sense. In the same way if you're in special forces with several times the training in the art of war, you'll be too valuable to man the trench. You know how to maintain a high state of alert and are constantly calculating the highest threat direction along with your team. Both are warriors and both are essential, but they are distinct as well.
The video shows US Federal Police authorities mostly not elite military groups. Plate carriers for Police is just dumb. These are whanna be SF guys trying to play soldier. As a retired Police officer I argued against this crap within my agency for our teams. Soft body armor stops handgun rounds not just shrapnel. SAPI plates and hard armor stops rifle bullets. The SWAT guys drop the wrap around soft armor and put plates in carrier that provide minimum cover protection. Police are killed by handgun rounds mostly, not shrapnel or rifle bullets. Military personnel are killed and injured by rifle rounds and shrapnel.
Well i think soldiers are fights with unknown, I mean they have tasks for Patrol, guarding outpost, scout / recon, etc But the operators are fights enemy that known by intel from HQ so they can measure the equipment to use
This can almost be called a compliment, after comparing my accent with Ivan Drago and other great guys like Peter Stromae and John Malkovich, who often play brutal Russians 😂
The majority of it comes down to what is essentially “cost vs. benefit”, the task(s) being undertaken, the doctrine of the particular country, etc. Also, the most dangerous component of artillery (and other explosives) is not shrapnel or heat, but over-pressure. Depending upon the composition of the shell, its explosive yield and a handful of other factors, an individual can avoid being struck by shrapnel and still suffer catastrophic injuries (which as of this very moment, we, as humans, have no protection against). In extreme cases and with thermobaric weapons, the targets can actually suffocate as the precious oxygen all living things require for survival is essentially subtracted from the affected area by the chemical conflagration of the weapon. I’m not saying armor is useless, it certainly has restricted the mortality rates of soldiers since its inception. I was just pointing out an important aspect of explosive ordnance that is all too often overlooked, ignored or misunderstood.
The plate carriers the regular soldiers use are old and have not been subject to the change in doctrine of the past few years. The plate inserts themselves are the exact same plates used by both regs and spec ops. therefore, provide the same protection regardless of how the vest 'looks'. The older vests have more webbing for more equipment attachment points, but modern doctrine among vets dismiss all the extra attachments as extra weight you have to carry (with the exception of side plates) The minimalism of newer vests is designed to improve mobility while cutting down weight while providing the same protection. All the new upgrades the regular soldiers field testing at the moment are smaller vests like the Crye SPC. compare that to the magnum tac-1 which is the current service plate carrier. SF units are always going to be equipped with newer, different gear. What ends up working for them always trickles down to the regs after a decade. It's not really a question of specialization between one or the other because the kit is modular and multi-purpose anyway. But instead it's governed by cost effectiveness and overall budget of the armed forces.
@@patrikk9961 sof are pretty much always, light infantry. Also here recon guys wear light gear, many times not even using plates and assault teams (not sure how it's translated) tend to use the heavier stuff
@@thodorisevangelakos No? Light infantry only moves by walking. When was the last time you saw SF do that? They're usually mounted in light vehicles or transported in helicopters etc. If we're talking about the true light infantry doctrine (i.e. only moving around with combat gear and not also sustainment) then it's been decades since that was fielded by a major military. And that's sort of the point why SF can afford so little protection, because they'll usually have a heli on standby to pick up any wounded so they only need protection against what will easily kill them (such as rifle rated plates over the thorax). When SF do long range patrols, they'll usually not wear any armour at all because it doesn't matter whether your armour saves your life when you're still wounded with no way of getting help.
Even before finishing the video I can tell you some simple reasoning, a soldier usually participates in more direct engagement ergo they are far more likely to be debilitated or killed by shrapnel artillery etc etc, more armor also helps give more confidence to the individual soldier pushing into the shit so to speak. Whereas operators are more of a scalpel rather than a sledgehammer who try to avoid combat and achieve a specific goal, being light and covering the most vulnerable parts is generally sufficient for someone trained to several standards higher than the average infantry man, especially when the risk of injury from things like shrapnel is significantly lower. And that doesn't even take into account rucking deep into enemy territory and remaining mobile etc etc. Those are simply the basics.
Just and FYI in the American Army SF is about 5-10 years ahead of the regular army. The United States army is phasing out the ITOV variants with something called the MSV its on par with SF. until the SF dudes get energy shields.
It's a good idea, but to be honest, I'm not sure that most people will be interested in it. I mean, I try to pick topics that are interesting facts and answer the question. For this reason, I do not make any weapons or equipment out of a number of reviews, except for the video about the 3 rarest AK (but this was rather an exception, because it seemed to me a super interesting idea). In general, it's worth thinking about, maybe I'll find some interesting questions there that I can ask
Maybe use these guns titled spetznaz and fsb secretive weapons, please introduce the Ashe-12 50 cal assault rifle as well there’s little information about it too
Civilians should mostly focus on front, back, side plates that are quality You’re not gonna be doing solo raids on buildings but if mobility is what you need invest in a chest rig I wouldn’t waste your time buying slimmer plates You need to be able to carry a lot ammo & water
Mission dictates what you wear and carry. Conventional troops have less bulky plate carriers now because they are focusing back on fighting a near peer, not counter-insurgency and security operations where the biggest threat would be IEDs and VBIEDs. It doesn’t really have much to do with being SOF, except that we had a bit more freedom and funding to procure those items and use them. Infantry forces are NOT the same as they were before the conflicts in Iraq and A-Stan. Their gear has been improved.
I think it's to do with environment. Soldiers are more often out in the open and threat can come from any direction. Police SF operators tends to be clearing buildings and are only likely to get hit in the front when entering rooms, plus moving in tight quarters you don't want to be bulky.
just based on the title, the honest, simple answer is bc SF doesn't care nor needs to adhere by regular army regulation so they do what they want. With like pretty much everything not just armor and uniform lol.
fyi most normal non special forces army soldiers have the smaller plate carriers. You will get issued the bigger model but more then likely when you deploy (after 2020 at least) you will get issued the smaller one. or if your on your second term you probably bought your own. (im a normal person in the army)
Specialty crews rely on surprise to catch the enemy with their pants down so they can shoot first. Generic soldiers are treated more like bullet sponges that they send into a trap and are more likely to get hit by someone that knows they are coming.
It's a slightly insincere to claim that soft armor wouldn't protect from bullets. Yes, most soft armor cannot stop RIFLE ROUNDS, but they are indeed rated up to NIJ level III-A, which means handgun and SMG rounds up to .44 Magnum. This is also why so many police, SWAT and other SF use extra soft armor pieces during raids and such. Even a pistol shot can go through walls and doors, and a single hit to limbs = you're out of the game. These days, the Kevlar and Dyneema vests are super light weight and flexible, you barely notice them. Same applies to plates, with a full level III plates weighting mere 1kg a piece.
So the Army uses more soft Armor because Mortar fire causes Shrapnell which causes most injurys and Special forces don‘t get send into Artillery fire so they wear Plate carrier Vests for Bullets. Sometimes also Special forces like SWAT wear heavy protection because they preapere for encountering heavy fire explosives or other Stuff.
![[MV] A leap of faith...ความเชื่อใจครั้งสุดท้าย (From "Petrichor the series")](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/U1piZH2CNXA/mqdefault.jpg)
Fragmentation wounds are the #1 kinetic cause of casualties and fatalities in LSCO.
In direct action raids, reduced mobility gets you shot.
lol operators getting shot while raiding White Americans homes at 2am
@@TopDrek Womp womp (We also get raided for doing illegal shit, boohoo)
@@ulacylon-timetrio9664Who is 'we'
@@TopDrek we wuz kangz
@@TopDrek So you are saying SF are raiding houses? That is against the Posse Commitatus Act.
Operators have to be able to move quickly and strike where an enemy least expects it while us Grunts have the duty of taking and holding terrain which means we’ll be in direct engagements with the enemy and additional protection has its benefits, we don’t have to be able to move quickly on foot for the most part.
Hooah
Yeah, on the other side, soldiers are holding positions and are more linkly to get HE rounds by mortars or artillery next to em - wich is why it makes sense to get a more full protection onto em. If Operators get such a fire, a lot of things went wrong before.
You were born on April 1 1999 wtf do you know about combat i was born April 3 1992 therefore ive played far more FPS games than you people should listen to my combat experience than to you i have fought in ALL of rhe Call of Dutys including WW2 not to mentiob rhe battlefiled franchise so GTFO stolen valor boy
Any decent infantry unit is deploying with plate carriers or jpcs. Iotvs are for training units killer.
as of now, with inception of FPV-drones and quadrocopters with explosive payload - speed is useless and frag protection is needed more then ever. If enemy you are fighting have at least some fighting chance and is not of some backwater tribe with old rifles as only weapons - frag protection is the musthave.
worth noting that soldier vests are getting smaller, the soldier in the thumbnail is wearing the MSV Gen II which is 25 lbs fully loaded, with magazines and plates compared to the IOTV which would be 40 lbs full kitted out.
The MSV was also issued (to me, at least) with a kevlar combat shirt which aids in protecting otherwise exposed areas. In truth, lighter plate carriers are comfortable and fundamentally better than IOTVs, and as technology progresses and plates become lighter and more protective, as well as cheaper, body armor is getting smaller across the board.
What is the reason for it getting smaller?
@@attilaabonyi8879 Modularity. Before the MSV was developed and issued, the US Army had two vests that combat soldiers would wear, the IOTV which was a large, cumbersome tactical vest which broke down into several padded kevlar segments, commonly called "soft armor", and the "chicken vest", which is a kevlar soft vest which resembles the soft armor on the inside of a flak jacket.
The MSV (Modular Scalable Vest) can do both - the outer layer is a tactical vest which clips together, the inner layer is a chicken vest which velcros together. In the full tactical configuration, you slip your ballistic plates into the chicken vest, insert the chicken vest inside the tactical vest, and clip the tactical vest together.
Worth noting that the MSV is made by civilian tactical gear companies, so it is definitely an SOF-inspired design, if not SOF approved
Yes, you read my mind! This is something that would definitely be worth adding to the video, but I thought about it after the video was ready. We can actually observe that compared to the old 6B-23, MTV, IOTV and Mehler ST (I think that's what the Bundeswehr armored vest is called), the new body armor have come very close to the form factors of plate carriers
The standard Infantryman has the mission of taking and holding ground so the amount of fire they will face is higher than the other units that use smaller and lighter vests/armor. Special Ops units must be able to move quickly and they rarely get into firefights with an enemy, they’re supposed to break contact with an enemy so they do carry more ammunition for this purpose (on some missions).
@@echohunter4199 In the US Army, infantry have done close range assaults since 1991
Conventional military = more shrapnel risk = more soft armor coverage
Special operations = fast targeted attacks + higher fire fights = light hard armor
Police response teams = more gun fire risk + short engagements = heavy hard armor
its simply funding and bad acquisition decisions...
IDK what they do nowadays, but some guys I knew in the 90's who were SF said they called their plate carriers, "the G's," whatever that means.
@@MarcillaSmith SF only applies to Green Berets. Any other special unit is special operations and as a female, you never dealt with special forces ever.
@@Capture_Torture_Liberalshe could have meant security forces
@@1guy1controller63 he? Marcilla... LOL
Short answer: The army uses heavier and less mobile equipment with a lot of explosion protection, since their priority is general military combat, and special forces use light, mobile equipment because they must perform quick operations that do not involve general military combat.
so for SOF, it's especially made for fast tactics like forays/raids and recon while in generic military style, it's made for more protection from possible injuries present in the battlefield itself
I thought so, sof and SF green berets needs to be light to move faster and easier for the high speed operations they do. Even a video on the 75th rangers RASP said the need to be light to probably perform the fast direct action raids they specialize in. I wanna do that one day though.
@@snakejr9428 grind hard to be able to become one of the best team players
Most testimony from Marines in Fallujah says that guys were wearing as much kevlar as they possibly could during combat. Kevlar coverage makes the difference between a nick in your vest that you don't even notice, and a life threatening frag injury.
We're also currently in a shift in mindset in terms of armour. During the early GWOT era, most militaries were obsessed with the idea of having as much protection as possible, so naturally rigs became large and encompassed much of the body. Same with helmets. Nowadays, more people gravitate toward more streamlined carriers as it's impractical to completely armour up every part of your body, as it's usually uncomfortable and more awkward to move and one of the key instruments to winning an engagement is having a maneuvering element to close the distance and eliminate a target. The IOTV type rigs are mostly leftovers from an old mindset and nowadays, comfort and mobility are becoming as much of a consideration as protection.
SOF units tho usually get more say in their gear and can adapt with differing mindsets more quickly as they have their own group of people (i.e NAVSPECWAR) dedicated to testing equipment tailored specifically to special operators vs standard infantry who has to rely on their particular branch to test and source anything, as well as any other duties that that particular branch may do. It doesn't help that often times, a branches funds are not just dedicated to the infantry kit and have to go to other avenues, such as logistics, vehicle maintenance, medical services, etc.
I think that weight is also a concern. During the wars in in Iraq and Afghanistan, esp. in Afghanistan, the military brass soon realized that giving the troops heavy armor all around in an effort to protect them, it weighed and slowed them down and made them (potentially) more vulnerable to attacks and less able to chase down a fleeing enemy. I think that there was also a rise in knee and back injuries due to the increased weight. The sad thing is that the military, at least in the US , seldomly reduces a soldier/Marine's loadout by much. Almost every time the military finds a way of reducing the wight of a piece of kit, they end coming up with something else or more of something they already carry which ends up negating any savings in weight from the reduced weight of the new piece of kit.
That protection is coming back but lighter. We were spoiled because we fought an unconventional war for 20 yrs. Ukraine is showing us why that soft armor is important
It's kind of the same thing that happened with the 'knight's' armor. It started out with chainmail, they developed plate, they made the plate better, and got it to cover the whole body.. And then we invented guns. And suddenly the metal armor didn't stop an ubiquitous weapon. So the armor on the legs got discontinued because you needed to more agile. Then the armor on the upper limbs. Then finally all you had left was a metal chestplate - if that, which itself got discontinued at the end of the first world war.
Then we found out, hey, this layered fabric stuff (modern gambeson) is pretty good at stopping bullets! So we made more of it, and began uparmoring our soldiers. Then we realized 'We could a plate with this, and it'd stop even more!'. So we added plate to the gambeson. And now we're realizing that too much weight slows the combatant down. So we're easing off the armor, but improving the things it's good at, the roles it needs to fulfill. It's kind of a human cycle in history to uparmor, uparmor, ween back, experiment, improve, then up armor, up armor.. Same thing happened with tanks. We made heavier and heavier armor until the shells got too powerful, and then we realized controlled explosions could be a form of armor itself - so the tanks got lighter, and lighter, as more focus was put on mobility, size of weapon, and ability to resist injury.
Agreed @@moss8702
You do have a point. It's always the special units that gets the initial distribution of new gear and equipment, and it slowly spreads out into lower combat and support units as manufacturing and budgetting permits. Same applies with weapon systems when they undergo trials.
I see the arguments of shrapnel versus direct fire, but I also see some inconsistency in the fact that operators are also as likely (if not more) to face shrapnel in combat than their more standard counterparts, which reduces the strength of the argument. Naturally, there will always be a trade-off between protection and mobility. But personally, if I were to own my own body armor, I'd go for something smaller to maximize mobility while protecting critical areas. Which was the case when I got tired of large dudes pulling strings and fighting over small IOTV's for themselves, while leaving me with the bulky large ones that doesn't actually makes sense even from a protective standpoint.
one thing to consider is that SOF often are early adopter, while on regular infantry, most of the times due to mass number required, they adopt something much slower.
During rearmament here during early war on terror year, i saw some previously unarmored unit get fully equiped by plate carrier sooner (bypassing IOTV style) while some infantry still in progress of phasing IOTV out.
id say because SF usually has the element of surprise and typically choses where and when their engagement takes place, so armor isnt as essential as mobility and reducing signatures. while the average soldier is far more likely to be the one engaged first from any direction, even indirectly, while sitting in a trench or on patrol; so more of their body should be covered.
another reason to wear more armor as a SWAT operator is that in addition to shrapnel, soft armor will protect against pistol rounds. In the US the average criminal which they would encounter daily is much more likely to be armed with a pistol than with a rifle, so the increased soft armor coverage would provide real benefit.
@EcclesTwelve13-14 Would it not be a cost thing?
@PersonOfSandit's still pretty common to see swat wearing shoulder and groin soft armour, even shown specifically at the end in this vid
It's a balance of speed and protection. Also keep in mind operators are likely to be more highly specific mission focused and have more transportation methods. Infantry will have a need for greater long term sustainment and using what you can carry for days or weeks at a time.
Then there is maritime and parachute/airborne considerations.
Because more mobility than protection for SF/SOF operators.
Thats actually not true (for bullets). Most armies still still issue large kevlar soft type IIIA armor to their soldiers. Most of the spec ops around the world use type III or IV steel hard plates with plate carriers. So on average a spec ops soldier has better protection and better mobility than an average soldier.
@@thekraken1173 pretty sure they use ceramic unless they want fragmentation in their neck and arms
@@XortiXz Only rich countries or top elite unites use ceramics. Ceramics are more expensive and they need to be carefully handled. They can shatter. Steel armor doesn’t shatter when dropped on stuff. Also its cheaper and easy to produce.
@@thekraken1173i have ceramic plates myself, dropped them, thrown them across, they dont break as easily as you think, though if handled roughly not a great idea
@@thekraken1173yea so expect the US SF to use them since they are the cream of the crop for SF
The main reason is because the plate itself won’t get any bigger if you have a bigger plate carrier, therefore you can save a lot of weight and bulk buy streamlining it down to just cover the plates.
Also soft armor.
People need to stop giving the advice that pc is better. Just as armored humvees in later Afghanistan and Iraq, body armors saved countless lives. If you are don't have the mission requirements like the sf(mountainous terrain without transportation)as a average Joe,get your bodyarmor and stay freakin static or you will regret it.
Much more grunts died due to fragmentations and ieds shrapnels than bullets.
Yeah, or even normal battlefield shit like mortars and artillery. Look to Ukraine...
Of cause, if you're some kind of high distance scout operator that broke through the lines, the armor would most likly be a problem - it's kind of useless, cause if you get some kind of mortar fire, you're done anyway.
But sitting in the damn trenches, I would allways go for full protection.
This is so open to requirements of the mission or area you’re in.
The USMC did a bunch of testing in the pacific islands a few years ago. Specifically the Philippines. And during their extensive testing, body armor was abandoned. And the switch was quickly made to load bearing vests. It’s simple too hot and humid to function long term with body armor on in the jungle. It was causing a horrendous amount of heat casualties. More than were taken even in simulated combat.
You can read the report on it. It’s interesting. But plates certainly aren’t necessary at all times in all places. In the jungle they specially stated that there is so much natural cover that simply laying prone makes you hard to shoot. And that fights take place at point blank range, where plates are of dubious value
@@Rokaize Well, this makes sense in an insurgent situation - wich was pretty much the situation, the USMC saw as most likly in those years. I would argue, that it can not hold up to the expieriences of the Ukraine war, were we saw the come back of trench warfare and the Artillery as the main factor on the battlefield, as well as a great threat of suicide drones, drone bomblets, etc...
I would argue, that body armor got way more important for survivity - but on the other hand, we talk about mass fightings and it might get an economical question if it's not cheaper to loose more people than to buy body armor for every soldier in this scale of battle... Wich is a bit cynical, for sure - but that's war I guess ;)
@@bugfisch7012 Well yeah Ukraine is a situation where wearing. Body armor is basically mandatory. Especially soft armor. Many Russian and Ukrainian soldiers wear armor that covers their whole torso and with a groin pad of Kevlar as well. But this makes sense, they’re in a war where it’s a lot of sitting in trenches and riding in vehicles. Where artillery is the killer of 9 out of 10 people. In the mild summers of Ukraine having as much protection as possible makes sense.
In the jungles of some pacific island, with 110 degree temperatures with 95% humidity. And a ton of rain. With mud and other natural features that are extremely difficult and exhausting to navigate, then body armor is seriously more of a threat to you than the enemy is. You’re just going to pass out
@@Rokaizethere are good enough platforms that are as scalable "down" as they are "up". The inclusion of side plates and groin protectors to a PC (not throat protection, no one ever wants to wear that for any extended period of time) and soft armour backers really doesn't make it a mutually exclusive choice you have to make anymore.
Small plate carriers- When you don't expect getting shot, but still want to be safe.
Soldiers are expected to participate in sustained contact with the enemy. Operators are not. Operators are expected to operate hard and fast so the tradeoff of protection for mobility is made.
Yes
You also have to think logistics. SOF will always have the best logistics in the game, so they don’t have to worry about carrying anything except what they need since the supply train is always right there.
Regular soldiers on the other hand may not get that resupply every day like SOF guys will, so when they go out they’ve got to carry a lot more on them.
I think you got it reversed my man SOF guys will go quiet awhile with out supply. If you have the air all day you get some drops. Grunts will get that supply when the jobs done. You have to think SOF is going in behind the lines often. Grunts are the line.
That can’t be right. Think what SOF had to do in Laos, Vietnam, and Cambodia.
this vid was actually pretty accurate imo. I'm surprised with the amount of understanding of the nuanced details of how modern body armor works and how it was presented in a succinct way, like that plates are the only thing stopping most rifle bullets and most soft armor that covers more is only level 3 and below and in a military setting is mainly for stopping fragmentation. Good job knowing that, i've seen some military guys not even know that.
Says "Special forces" show marines and other sof in the video, barely showed any green berets
When I was in the Marines we used IOTVs in training and plate carriers in country. Drove us nuts with the switch up last second. But definitely liked the carriers over the IOTV. Better mobility with the same protection.
Man, I have a lvl 4 rig, but same time I have buddy who got a Purple Heart after he got hit with a svd, 7.62/54 rimmed black tip, his lv4 ceramic plate is what got pushed into his heart. Somehow survived.
Sounds like either a defective plate or a pre-2010 ESAPI
Modern plates wont injure the wearer beyond a bruise unless a round is fully capable of penetrating or carries so much energy it rips the backer off from the front.
Thing that is weird here is army units vests have integrated soft armor and the whole way the MIL-STD system for armor works is the bullet resistance is determined by a round penetrating the plate but getting stopped in a soft armor backer.
Eitherway This sounds like an extremely unlikely to happen case.
On my last deployment we were allowed to wear personal plate carriers as long as the fit our issued plates. I used a crye Spc and my issued lbt. Something to note is that the lbt is not large. We did get issued iotvs from rfi but that was because some dumb officer in the task force didn’t realize that we could put sides plates in the issued lbt plate carrier
It’s all about mobility… Some operations need you to move quicker than others.
Swat units also use heavy body armor. Sometimes heavier than soldiers, because they offer more small caliber rounds protection in more areas, such as upto common civilian hold 9mm smg and 44mm.
That and police units like SWAT teams don't have to wear their kit for very long when compared to a grunt in the field, nor do they have to worry about humping all of that weight up and down steep hills or through a desert. They just have to go a handful of yards from their truck or van to whatever building they have to enter.
@@Knight-SgtReyes Would you rather be shot, or just carry 5 extra pounds, high-speed?
@@Riceball01 That is true. Heat is the main issue wearing these heavy kevlars in places like middle east, more dudes getting carried out due to sunstroke than getting wounded in the first place. If they have cooling system in the future, I'm sure soldiers would be more than happy to use heavier kits.
@@Knight-SgtReyeshe prolly meant more coverage
44mm goes wild dude, you mean .44 magnum?
It really boils down to the different missions. One is performing Direct Action and the other is performing Patrols. Mission always dictates what equipment you take.
The comparison between federal law enforcement and soldiers isn’t really fair because LEO use plates for active shooter situations (generally over quickly) and soldiers use plates and soft armor for rounds and fragments (they can be in the situation for a extended period). Overall great video! Maybe compare US army and SF military but not LEO.
Thanks for the clarification. The fact is that in my country, any guys with cool equipment and tuning are considered special forces
At first i was reluctant, thinking you wouldn't know the subject, but i was wrong. Very well wraped up!
I wore the IOTV most of my career as a grunt. The furthest I’ve made it to was the Gen IV. Honestly the shits always heavy regardless of what you’re wearing. I did get to use a JPC for a couple of months as a test for big army. The JPC was dope but when carrying full load, radios, batteries, and so much more it doesn’t really matter. I was just happy that shoulder my m4 was easier with a gen iv and jpc. The old iotvs sucked for shouldering your weapon.
Good vid keep it up man👍
Special Forces= US Army Green Berets (They literally wear a SPECIAL FORCES tab)
Rangers, CAG, MARSOC= Special Operations Forces.
DEA is neither SF nor SOF.
Hope you've learned something today 🙂
Incredibly helpful information. Thank you for taking your time to make this video, mate.
SF guys are going up very specific targets.
General infantry guys are going against all of them.
Very specific targets have guards that shoot at you, occasionally have nades and RPGs ready.
General targets have everything from tank and air suppprt, which means youre just as likely to get got by a 9mm as you are a 1mm rock going 2000fps from a cannon shot or bomb being dropped chipping of a pice of concrete or stone with your name on it.
SF guys also have to be able to get out as fast as they get in, less they be surrounded and killed by a QRF. Every 300lbs saved is another fully combat kitted out guy they can put on the bird.
As a general infantry corpsman, I, personally, weighed about 500lbs with my 2 week loadout.
When I was Recon, I never even came close to that unless we were moving a heavy weapons company or comms group somewhere... interesting.
PJs always weigh 500lbs.
Your back pain is not service related. Have a nice day.
4:35 yeah, everyone saw how heroic were FSB operators _WAITING_ outside for 2 hours in their full armor when someone wanted to 'blow the place up' in krokus 👌🤣
In the United States Army depending on your unit, you can just buy and run whatever plate carrier you want to, so it’s more up to individual preference really.
Remember reading that a lot of DEVGRU guys would go on missions without their plates in the last years of Afghanistan. Some would have one plate in the chest carrier, but left the back empty
You forgot soft armor protect against anything smaller than a rifle.
I heard that its because operators have learnt to recover any damage by taking cover for long enough, so their armor only need to cover vital areas to prevent one shot kill situations
Imagine a medieval knight with full scale armor and then think of a horseman with light body armor preferably leather, soft armor, and a Turkic traditional shortbow. It is of course way flexible and maneuverable than the medieval knight. Though it can also be said that the horseman should be aggressive and have a higher pace than the knight. Horseman depends on its momentum to evade, attack and sometimes retreat. It is the matter for SpecOps, too. Having the maneuverability is important for the elite troops since they are not completely depending on heavy armor and they need to stay aggressive with minimum energy against an enemy contact. Plus, SpecOps are basically shock troops. They are the attackers and not defenders.
I have a "juggernaught" style plate carrier. I think I might get rediculous by using steel plates on the inside of the plate pouches, but also making small, specifically shaped plate carriers of my own to sort of hang on the outside of the plate carrier from the laser cuts. If i can get the right materials I might even expand the carrier itself to be a full suit. I think that would be pretty sick, and useful for defensive or vehicle based situations where a vehicle of some kind is being more heavily utilized.
The real reason is because special operation command tend to relax rules to make their operators become more adaptable to mission requirements and also they are smaller units designed of unconventional warfare and conventional forces like regular soldiers are forced into synchronized patterns due to their large numbers of keep unit cohesion by making them all follow the same rules and keep up a standard
Simple Answer. Soldiers are not exactly the kind to go on operations required of quick and swift action.
This is where special operation units come in, trained to be elite killers who can also move very quick.
Back in my time we carried no body armour, but we were trained to be fast , nimble, and dash and zig zag, crawl in and out of a firing position before getting back up and take advantage of the time it takes to get a bead on you.. a common saying was 'Speed is your armour', but we did get flack jackets in Northern Ireland... now am showing my age..
Short answer: Speed and violence of action are their own protection.
High-cut helmets and low-profile plate carriers allow for better maneuverability and speed. So, if you are in a unit that relies on rapid tactics then you can receive an operational net gain by wearing the minimum viable protection. For these people being slowed down can be a death sentence.
If you are in a standard unit then dressing high-speed is a liability.
1 word: Shrapnel. Be it Artillery or IEDs. If you're operating out of vehicles, the extra armor like the IOTV can save a lot of lives.
It's because of their purpose/specialty. Special Forces go light because they are mainly incharge of Reconnaissance, Intelligence, and Quick and Precise Assaults, while operating in smaller number/units. They need to go fast so they go with lighter gears. Not only that, they do patrols and recon for long ranges by only foot or smaller vehicles
Meanwhile main infantry goes with more heavier and larger armor, and armored vehicles, because their main focus as the infantry is to seize, destroy, and capture heavily fortified or guarded positions. They operate in huge numbers. And seizing or capturing key positions requires you more armor as more threats will be handed in their way.
But nothing is obsolete. The gear would still depend based on the mission.
For SF guys concern a plate carrier is way easier to adapt to mission than a more traditional armored vest. Placards, back panels, zip on pouches, hangers not even to mention you can't conceal a whole armored vest without looking like the michelin man. Plate carriers are just more comfortable. It's been a debate since Vietnam with flak vests vs VBA or nothing.
As for shrapnel soft armor will help with low velocity low energy shrapnel like from a hand grenade. But anything roughly bigger than 75mm it's luck. 80mm mortar shrapnel can penetrate a bmp and 155 shells can launch shrapnel up to and past 5000 fps and can by random size and weight. So it's sorta questionable what the soft armor will realistically protect from outside of frag past 100 feet or so.
TLDR; Someone did a risk assessment about rifle protection being only in the plate and decided that the mobility gains by dropping 15 lbs of kevlar was worth the risk for mobility, adaptability and comfort for less frag protection for the sides and stomach. Which one is better? It depends and it's not super clear and frag protection is complicated and not straight forward.
Police units are at risk of being hit by low caliber pistol rounds at close range. So therefore they choose soft body armor that covers most of their body. Operators are more at risk of rifle wounds, and require high speed in CQC, hence smaller rifle rated armor, regular soilders are far more at risk of shrapnel wounds, and rifle rounds. Therefore they use plate armor on the torso, back, and sides, and light shrapnel protection wherever they can get it.
SOF is light swift moving, while infantry are more conventional, including frontline battle with massive equipment, defending stationary positions..
Special Operations forces are most often used in very high speed offensive operations where speed and mobility provide greater advantage than heavier armor.
Well it has always been the idea that Special Operations Forces using different/special gear to differentia themselves from regular military, the Green Beret headgear and Ranger Body Armor being a few examples.
I've worked with nearly all of the common Special Operations units that the US military has to offer (haven't worked with the Marine Raiders though). The real difference is just the average size of the men wearing the carriers. A large plate is only marginally wider than a medium plate, but is substantially longer. I'm 6'0 and I run a medium plate because any longer and if I tried to situp the plate would jab into me. I'm also very broad and so almost any plate carrier that fits me length wise barely covers me horizontally. This is true for many others in the SOF community.
Also, most conventional guys have less choice in what they can wear. If you get issued something too big, you just have to deal with it.
Speed operators usually have to move much quicker and use operators are in and then out
Something I've noticed on Russians in Ukraine is that it's quite popular for them to switch their issued 6B45 armour with a private purchase plate carrier, but they will then often add on additional groin, neck, and shoulder protection.
Special Forces don't have to stand in a trench for months expecting constant explosions. Simple as. I'm wondering when we'll see statistics of High Cut Helmets vs Full Helmets regarding protection from artillery and its use in stagnant trench conflicts like we're seeing reemerge again.
In a nutshell: Soldiers are geared to survive hits to better avoid the unpopular death count.
Operators are about inflicting direct casualties and are geared to facilitate better killing capabilities and moving to avoid being hit while closing in for kills.
TLDR: Soldiers survive and operators kill.
its more that if enemy artillery and mortars are shooting your operators, you are useing your operators wrong. regular infantry being shot at by mortars and artillery is unavoidable.
Welp, the needs, dangers and priorities of covert missions vs a fully fletched war differ like day and night.
Damn son you answer questions before we even ask them ,thank you
Special forces are better funded and usually get armor that is lighter in weight while equal or better in terms of protection. Also the need to operate autonomously means you shed every ounce of weight you can.
airsofters and tacticool people: this isnt halo 😂
soldiers: i dunno, they have their purposes, more protection is nice
The vest the german soldier at 1:07 is wearing isn't the new MOBAST system. It's an older vest model.
Simply put it's a difference in the mission between special forces an regular infantryman.
well you definitely dont wanna climb mountain with body armor
Same thing goes to the differences between FAST helmet and ECH Helmet. FAST helmet is ideal for special operation and low intensity conflict that's why it was favoured by special forces, while ECH Helmet were more suitable for high intensity conflict and conventional warfare such as trench warfare, so it is primary used by conventional soldiers.
A lot of regular forces are switching over to high cut FAST helmets recently. I guess it has more to do with the proliferation of active hearing protection and communication equipment down to the individual infanteer than anything else.
Most Special Forces operators are also soldiers.
Speed is life. The best armor you can get is not getting shot at all
Depends on the threat/mission
Think about it like this; If SF/SOF is a sports car, then conventional forces is a bulldozer.
Soldiers dig in. spec ops keep moving. That's why spec ops go for lighter armor. Unless a spec ops unit is designed for harder breach and clear tactics with a focus on slower movement (GIGN for example).
Stealth and comfort go hand-in-hand. I wouldn’t want to scratch my butt to give off my position.
It's all about the right tool for the job. If you have standard military training and have to hold the line in a trench or patrol an area that shouldn't be contested for days or weeks on end, it's unrealistic to maintain a high level of alertness. Chances are you aren't oriented toward the eventual threat so having full coverage body armor makes a lot of sense. In the same way if you're in special forces with several times the training in the art of war, you'll be too valuable to man the trench. You know how to maintain a high state of alert and are constantly calculating the highest threat direction along with your team. Both are warriors and both are essential, but they are distinct as well.
The video shows US Federal Police authorities mostly not elite military groups. Plate carriers for Police is just dumb. These are whanna be SF guys trying to play soldier. As a retired Police officer I argued against this crap within my agency for our teams. Soft body armor stops handgun rounds not just shrapnel. SAPI plates and hard armor stops rifle bullets. The SWAT guys drop the wrap around soft armor and put plates in carrier that provide minimum cover protection. Police are killed by handgun rounds mostly, not shrapnel or rifle bullets. Military personnel are killed and injured by rifle rounds and shrapnel.
Well i think soldiers are fights with unknown, I mean they have tasks for Patrol, guarding outpost, scout / recon, etc
But the operators are fights enemy that known by intel from HQ so they can measure the equipment to use
EASY ANSWER, Soldiers are expected to take suppressive fire force on force. Special Forces use element of surprise, fast and quick baby.
The lector sounds like NoHo Hank from "Barry" and you can't unhear it now
This can almost be called a compliment, after comparing my accent with Ivan Drago and other great guys like Peter Stromae and John Malkovich, who often play brutal Russians 😂
thumbnail looks like Nod and GDI getting along fine
The majority of it comes down to what is essentially “cost vs. benefit”, the task(s) being undertaken, the doctrine of the particular country, etc. Also, the most dangerous component of artillery (and other explosives) is not shrapnel or heat, but over-pressure. Depending upon the composition of the shell, its explosive yield and a handful of other factors, an individual can avoid being struck by shrapnel and still suffer catastrophic injuries (which as of this very moment, we, as humans, have no protection against). In extreme cases and with thermobaric weapons, the targets can actually suffocate as the precious oxygen all living things require for survival is essentially subtracted from the affected area by the chemical conflagration of the weapon. I’m not saying armor is useless, it certainly has restricted the mortality rates of soldiers since its inception. I was just pointing out an important aspect of explosive ordnance that is all too often overlooked, ignored or misunderstood.
The plate carriers the regular soldiers use are old and have not been subject to the change in doctrine of the past few years.
The plate inserts themselves are the exact same plates used by both regs and spec ops. therefore, provide the same protection regardless of how the vest 'looks'.
The older vests have more webbing for more equipment attachment points, but modern doctrine among vets dismiss all the extra attachments as extra weight you have to carry (with the exception of side plates)
The minimalism of newer vests is designed to improve mobility while cutting down weight while providing the same protection.
All the new upgrades the regular soldiers field testing at the moment are smaller vests like the Crye SPC. compare that to the magnum tac-1 which is the current service plate carrier.
SF units are always going to be equipped with newer, different gear. What ends up working for them always trickles down to the regs after a decade.
It's not really a question of specialization between one or the other because the kit is modular and multi-purpose anyway. But instead it's governed by cost effectiveness and overall budget of the armed forces.
Heavy infantry moves around in vehicles, light infantry carry their stuff on their backs. enough said
Fuck are u talking about lmao
I don’t think he gets the point, difference between heavy and light inf were never a topic on this one
@@patrikk9961 sof are pretty much always, light infantry. Also here recon guys wear light gear, many times not even using plates and assault teams (not sure how it's translated) tend to use the heavier stuff
SF are not light infantry but a totally different beast.
@@thodorisevangelakos No? Light infantry only moves by walking. When was the last time you saw SF do that? They're usually mounted in light vehicles or transported in helicopters etc. If we're talking about the true light infantry doctrine (i.e. only moving around with combat gear and not also sustainment) then it's been decades since that was fielded by a major military. And that's sort of the point why SF can afford so little protection, because they'll usually have a heli on standby to pick up any wounded so they only need protection against what will easily kill them (such as rifle rated plates over the thorax). When SF do long range patrols, they'll usually not wear any armour at all because it doesn't matter whether your armour saves your life when you're still wounded with no way of getting help.
Even before finishing the video I can tell you some simple reasoning, a soldier usually participates in more direct engagement ergo they are far more likely to be debilitated or killed by shrapnel artillery etc etc, more armor also helps give more confidence to the individual soldier pushing into the shit so to speak. Whereas operators are more of a scalpel rather than a sledgehammer who try to avoid combat and achieve a specific goal, being light and covering the most vulnerable parts is generally sufficient for someone trained to several standards higher than the average infantry man, especially when the risk of injury from things like shrapnel is significantly lower. And that doesn't even take into account rucking deep into enemy territory and remaining mobile etc etc. Those are simply the basics.
Just and FYI in the American Army SF is about 5-10 years ahead of the regular army. The United States army is phasing out the ITOV variants with something called the MSV its on par with SF. until the SF dudes get energy shields.
Mobility helps with not getting shot. Not getting shot keeps you alive. Real enemies wont aim for captain Americas shield with 100% accuracy
Great video casper. What about a video on Russian bullpup rifles? ADS, A91, Groza etc.
It's a good idea, but to be honest, I'm not sure that most people will be interested in it. I mean, I try to pick topics that are interesting facts and answer the question. For this reason, I do not make any weapons or equipment out of a number of reviews, except for the video about the 3 rarest AK (but this was rather an exception, because it seemed to me a super interesting idea). In general, it's worth thinking about, maybe I'll find some interesting questions there that I can ask
Maybe use these guns titled spetznaz and fsb secretive weapons, please introduce the Ashe-12 50 cal assault rifle as well there’s little information about it too
@@casperarms Np
Could be a logical reason why halcyon operatives wear scout armor while TRU/ETF wear frontline armor
Civilians should mostly focus on front, back, side plates that are quality
You’re not gonna be doing solo raids on buildings but if mobility is what you need invest in a chest rig
I wouldn’t waste your time buying slimmer plates
You need to be able to carry a lot ammo & water
Mission dictates what you wear and carry. Conventional troops have less bulky plate carriers now because they are focusing back on fighting a near peer, not counter-insurgency and security operations where the biggest threat would be IEDs and VBIEDs.
It doesn’t really have much to do with being SOF, except that we had a bit more freedom and funding to procure those items and use them. Infantry forces are NOT the same as they were before the conflicts in Iraq and A-Stan. Their gear has been improved.
We have plate carriers in the infantry too. You are wrong on so many points. We also do raids and mobility is just as important for regular infantry.
I think it's to do with environment. Soldiers are more often out in the open and threat can come from any direction. Police SF operators tends to be clearing buildings and are only likely to get hit in the front when entering rooms, plus moving in tight quarters you don't want to be bulky.
And Tier 1 SF Operators only wear baseball caps and cargo shorts during firefights
just based on the title, the honest, simple answer is bc SF doesn't care nor needs to adhere by regular army regulation so they do what they want. With like pretty much everything not just armor and uniform lol.
Because one expects to get shot at and the other hopes they don’t get shot at
The best armor is not getting shot in the first place
Interesting video
Where's your accent from?
fyi most normal non special forces army soldiers have the smaller plate carriers. You will get issued the bigger model but more then likely when you deploy (after 2020 at least) you will get issued the smaller one. or if your on your second term you probably bought your own. (im a normal person in the army)
Specialty crews rely on surprise to catch the enemy with their pants down so they can shoot first. Generic soldiers are treated more like bullet sponges that they send into a trap and are more likely to get hit by someone that knows they are coming.
Special forces they are meant to move fast and strike or get out. Infirmary (army) they are meant to guard and move slower then operators
That's why you have a minimum of two sets of kits.
It's a slightly insincere to claim that soft armor wouldn't protect from bullets.
Yes, most soft armor cannot stop RIFLE ROUNDS, but they are indeed rated up to NIJ level III-A, which means handgun and SMG rounds up to .44 Magnum.
This is also why so many police, SWAT and other SF use extra soft armor pieces during raids and such. Even a pistol shot can go through walls and doors, and a single hit to limbs = you're out of the game. These days, the Kevlar and Dyneema vests are super light weight and flexible, you barely notice them. Same applies to plates, with a full level III plates weighting mere 1kg a piece.
Correction: Russia uses cardboard
evidence lmao?
Its a meme. There where pictures of Body armor with cardboard in it given to units fighting in ukrain. He is refering to that.
So the Army uses more soft Armor because Mortar fire causes Shrapnell which causes most injurys and Special forces don‘t get send into Artillery fire so they wear Plate carrier Vests for Bullets. Sometimes also Special forces like SWAT wear heavy protection because they preapere for encountering heavy fire explosives or other Stuff.
@N3003Q No well i thought could you explain why
It's better to sweat 7 times than bleed 1 time.