(ASK) PLA body armour

Actually, there was a study that showed the soldiers who wore body armor felt emboldened and "superman-esque". Body armor only improves morale, as the soldier assumes that all things will ding ding on their Ceramic plate and they'll come home just in time for Christmas.

Well I mean, Ceramic hard plates don't cost too much and China could always just use flak vests to improve survivability against indirect fire.

I do think that the PLA should mass equip the body armour similar to the NATO forces. No body knows when China will be involved in a large scale conflict, especially with Taiwan in mind. It is probably not possible to see conflict in Taiwan in our life time (I'm only 20, which can be a long time), but there is always a possibility. Especially since Taiwan is very urbanized with lots of mountains. There will be no large scale tank and artillery battles, since the landscape will not allow such scale of conflict and also that PLA would overpower the ROC military. Majority of the conflicts would be foot soldiers clearing the cities block by block. This would require the highest grade of the thickest body armors.
Even from a fashion point of view, I would think the PLA would need body armours. When NATO forces wear body armours, they look very modern and well equipped. But when seeing PLA soldiers conduct exercises, they always look so mal-equipped, like WWII soldiers running around that could get die from a simple shot to he midsection.

Now I see there is no point to "clarify" when people are simply just "talk talk talk..."

For the last time: Please, you just throw me a scenario, and I throw you an army which EVERY PLA COMBAT PERSONNEL wearing body armor.

And that's based on current stock, no extra production needed.

End of story. - end of "insufficient body armor supply" story.

Now, if somebody kind enough, can we go back to the "what's NATO's standard, what's russian standard, and what's PLA standard" kind of more fruitful discussion?

My salt to the pot: Did USMC test (live round) of what's the result when NATO 5.56 hit thier own standard issued armor, within 100m? And I am also not sure, whether it is considered "try and true", when Taliban gunman hit US body armor with thier "crap standard" (instead of "military standard") 7.62 AK round, at (most of time) way beyond 100m?

I remember there is journalist report of a British soldier depolyed at Iraq being sustain direct AK shot to his body armor (not helmet, that's another storey), and live to tell the storey. Pity I don't remember whether it mentioned the distance of the shot.

The thing the western journalist were not covering, is that in fact that specific body armor is a Chinese made, Chinese brand body armor. At Chinese websites, there was circulated a Chinese journalist report about this some time ago, and the Chinese body armor manufacturing representative called their British (British citizenship) salse / distributor partner to confirmed the news, excited about a PR boost, bla bla... and that's how I get the "uncertain percentage of British arm force uses Chinese Body Armor" claim somewhere above.

Any info of those I mentioned?

Ironsight Sniper:

There are reports that came in from Iraq showing the advantages taken by insurgents who avoided or could not obtain body armor. Body armor isn't a free ride; it costs money, it adds weight, it increases heat.

I think it would be perfectly suitable to mechanized infantry, but for light infantry, it might not be desirable.

Red Sword:

As far as the armor quality level goes; you'd have to get more reliable information on the penetration level of the 5.8mm. It can't really be that hard, right?

Inst said:

Red Sword:

As far as the armor quality level goes; you'd have to get more reliable information on the penetration level of the 5.8mm. It can't really be that hard, right?

Click to expand...

Oh I am aware how 5.8 rounds performs, that's why I didn't ask. What I not sure, is how 5.56 NATO performs, especially when shot to NATO standard body armor within 100m.

pugachev_diver said:

Even from a fashion point of view, I would think the PLA would need body armours. When NATO forces wear body armours, they look very modern and well equipped. But when seeing PLA soldiers conduct exercises, they always look so mal-equipped, like WWII soldiers running around that could get die from a simple shot to he midsection.

Click to expand...

Hahaha, I didn't noticed you have read this thread when I reply the other one about pilot uniforms at J-20 threads of yours.

I have an "off" answer for your fashion point of view: Don't worry, we don't have recruit problem like european countries having.

And in case you didn't noticed, Chinese people consider M65 is the most handsome uniform to put on foreign sodiers, and Type 65 of Chinese uniform is the most "touching" uniform to put on PLA solders.

It's just a matter of fashion, you see.

Red___Sword said:

Oh I am aware how 5.8 rounds performs, that's why I didn't ask. What I not sure, is how 5.56 NATO performs, especially when shot to NATO standard body armor within 100m.

Click to expand...

Depends on what type of 5.56 you use. The newest 5.56 round (M885A1 EPR) can penetrate 9.5 mm of Steel from a range of 150 - 350 m, depending on which rifle you shoot it with. The standard vests we use has a sample proofed in the factories, which means that say, for every 100 vests that are made, 1 of them gets picked out and shot at. Our vests (+Ballistic plate) can withstand 5.56x45 mm NATO rounds fine. They are also tested against small-caliber sniper ammo, such as the 7.62x54R that's common to the Dragunov SVD.

IronsightSniper said:

Depends on what type of 5.56 you use. The newest 5.56 round (M885A1 EPR) can penetrate 9.5 mm of Steel from a range of 150 - 350 m, depending on which rifle you shoot it with. The standard vests we use has a sample proofed in the factories, which means that say, for every 100 vests that are made, 1 of them gets picked out and shot at. Our vests (+Ballistic plate) can withstand 5.56x45 mm NATO rounds fine. They are also tested against small-caliber sniper ammo, such as the 7.62x54R that's common to the Dragunov SVD.

Click to expand...

Wow, that's impressed, I thought vest+plate should be fine under standard NATO 5.56*45, for the rounds are made for stopping power and tissue damage instead of AP; but sustain Dragunov, that's something.

I read a some-what commercial type of artical, a type of Chinese made medium size plate, test under fire from 5.8 standard round fired from 95s within 50m, it sustained. But that plate is not widly equiped, that's why I call the artical a commercial.

Red___Sword said:

Wow, that's impressed, I thought vest+plate should be fine under standard NATO 5.56*45, for the rounds are made for stopping power and tissue damage instead of AP; but sustain Dragunov, that's something.

I read a some-what commercial type of artical, a type of Chinese made medium size plate, test under fire from 5.8 standard round fired from 95s within 50m, it sustained. But that plate is not widly equiped, that's why I call the artical a commercial.

Click to expand...

Guessing its too expensive.

tanlixiang28776 said:

Guessing its too expensive.

Click to expand...

India Ocean Escort Task Force has said being equiped this, "Tip of Spear" in English, “好钢用在刀刃上” in Chinese.