Welcome to the ‘Body Armor’ Category

FEATURE: Rising crime spurs demand for body armor in China

Tuesday, July 10th, 2007

An 18-year-old youth in Beijing recently won 5 million yuan (about $604,000) in a sports lottery.

Known only as ”Mr. Yang,” however, his identity was withheld by the media for fear of exposing him to the capital’s criminal fraternity, ever on the alert for promising kidnap victims.

This is one small sign of changing times and social mores in China, as violent crime soars in answer to late paramount leader Deng Xiaoping’s declaration a decade ago that ”to get rich is glorious.”

This, in turn, is breeding a growing awareness of the need for better personal protection, which is doing wonders for the profit margins of the Shanghai-based Dongwei Body Armor Co.

”Business is better than it’s ever been,” beams a salesman surnamed Chen. ”The rise in sales is definitely connected to the growing public security problem.”

Dongwei’s bullet-proof vests, designed by top Chinese scientists, are claimed to protect the wearer from bullets fired from pistols and even machine guns. Besides, outfitting security guards and policemen, Chen also supplies nervous businessmen who have become more concerned about their own safety.

For 2,000 yuan, the worried executive can buy a little peace of mind in the snappy Execuvest waistcoat, one of Dongwei’s best sellers.

”There are more robberies than ever before, and many famous cases have been reported that heighten public awareness of the dangers of life today,” Chen explains.

Few have been bloodier than the case of 34-year-old gangster Zhang Jun, whose murderous trail climaxed with eight deaths in a bungled bank robbery in Changde, Hunan Province, last year, that resulted in both bank guards and innocent customers being gunned down.

That incident seemed to spawn copycat attacks. Three months after Zhang’s career came to an end with his arrest and subsequent execution, gunmen in the Jiangxi provincial capital of Nanchang killed three people as they robbed a bank of 500,000 yuan.

Meanwhile, in Nanjing, a German business executive, his wife and three children were knifed to death when an attempted burglary of their suburban villa went badly wrong. The would-be robbers turned out to be poor farmers.

In many cases, the killings seemed to occur because the robbers operate on the principle of removing any possible witnesses who might later be able to identify them.

The kidnapping of rich businessmen, or their children, also often end badly, as the kidnapers either panic if there is a delay in obtaining the demanded ransom, or, even if they get the money, decide to kill the victim in a witness elimination policy.

Guo Si, an editor at China Public Security Magazine, described the phenomenon as the end of China’s innocence.

”Society is less safe now, but this is inevitable,” she said. ”Before, when everyone was poor, there was nothing to steal from one another. But, now, the country is more developed and people have grown richer…”

Guo leaves her sentence unfinished, but the meaning is clear enough in the advertisements for crime-busting technology that pack her glossy bimonthly. The dream of a simple egalitarian society has evaporated. The gap between rich and poor grows wider.

According to the Public Security Ministry, 894 police officers were slain in the line of duty between 1949 and 1977 — about 32 a year. The average figure is now over 400 a year, and in both 1998 and 1999, more than 500 policemen were killed.

In the past, when controls on society were much tighter and spies were everywhere, it was almost impossible for an ordinary citizen to do anything without being observed.

Now, there are massive population movements, with millions of impoverished peasants moving to the cities in search of better jobs. It has become harder to monitor them and their activities in the huge, impersonal urban conglomerations.

At the same time, economic reforms are creating a widening gap between rich and poor and creating a temptation for the latter to cut corners to acquire wealth.

There is also a diminishing sense of respect, or fear, of the public security authorities than in the past.

In a typical case, producers of fake Volkswagen components in the city of Yixin, Jiangsu Province, beat off police and assorted antifake investigators with the aid of powerful water hoses. One investigator was knocked black and blue as most of the confiscated fakes were retaken by their makers.

In a similar case in Guangdong Province, street traders beat up police and reclaimed the fake goods the latter had just confiscated from them.

This occurred a few days after the central government had convened a nationally televised conference calling for a concerted effort to fight fakes. The government, it seems, can decree, but it cannot always enforce its will.

Public unease about the growing crime wave is not eased by the lurid diet of real life crime that now dominates the popular end of the published media, which has decided that murder and robbery sells better than turgid Communist Party propaganda.

Lawmakers seek new body-armor tests

Tuesday, July 10th, 2007

WASHINGTON — Lawmakers on Wednesday requested additional independent tests to determine whether standard-issue body armor for U.S. soldiers is more effective than an alternative.

At issue are conflicts between year-old test results released by the Army last month and comparisons made by NBC News and broadcast in May.

“Let’s get right down to the nuts and bolts here,” Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., ranking member of the House Armed Services committee, said at a hearing on the issue. “Which test is right? Or, maybe, are both of them right?”

NBC News tests conducted May 3 at a ballistics laboratory in Germany, and reviewed by retired U.S. Gen. Wayne Downing, showed that in simulated combat conditions Dragon Skin, made by privately held Pinnacle Armor Inc., outperformed Interceptor, the Army’s standard-issue armor.

The Army disputes those results and released a report last month contradicting NBC’s claims after the network aired a report on the matter. Senior Army officials said at Wednesday’s hearing they were confident in their own “unbiased” test results.

Lt. Gen. N. Ross Thompson, military deputy to the Assistant Secretary for the Army, said despite the wishes of Congress and Dragon Skin’s manufacturer, the Army will not conduct a side-by- side test.

However, Ross said the Army will conduct separate tests of all vendors’ body armor, including Dragon Skin, under a pending contract.

Murray Neal, Pinnacle’s chief executive, testified Wednesday that the Army misrepresented and distorted its May 2006 test results. “I’m asking for an independent test because the information coming out of the Army is fraught full of inaccuracies,” Neal said.

Hunter questioned why representatives from the Fresno, Calif.- based company, who witnessed the Army’s testing, did not raise concerns earlier if they thought the Army had conducted a faulty test. The test was performed for the military by H.P. White Laboratory, an independent ballistics center in Maryland.

Dragon Skin is provided to some special services soldiers and others can buy it with their own money if they don’t like the heavier-weight Interceptor armor.

Congressional members led by Rep. Joe Courtney, D-Conn., are requesting an independent study by the Government Accountability Office to review the Army’s testing procedures, a comparison study and review of current safety compliance rules.

Pinnacle has competed for Army contracts on body armor but lost out five times because its product did not meet specifications.

Costa Mesa, Calif.-based Ceradyne Inc. and Chandler, Ariz.-based Armor Works LLC are two companies that manufacture Interceptor.

Falls Church, Va.-based General Dynamics Corp., identified in an earlier story as a body armor manufacturer, makes armor for vehicles, not personnel.

c2007 ANG Newspapers. Cannot be used or repurposed without prior written permission.
Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights Reserved.

Lawmakers seek body-armor tests

Tuesday, July 10th, 2007

WASHINGTON — Lawmakers on Wednesday requested additional independent tests to determine whether standard-issue body armor for U.S. soldiers is more effective than an alternative.

At issue are conflicts between year-old test results released by the Army last month and comparisons made by NBC News and broadcast in May.

“Let’s get right down to the nuts and bolts here,” Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., ranking member of the House Armed Services committee, said at a hearing on the issue. “Which test is right? Or, maybe, are both of them right?”

NBC News tests conducted May 3 at a ballistics laboratory in Germany, and reviewed by retired U.S. Gen. Wayne Downing, showed that in simulated combat conditions Dragon Skin, made by Pinnacle Armor Inc., outperformed Interceptor, the Army’s standard-issue armor.

The Army disputes those results and released a report last month contradicting NBC’s claims after the network aired a report on the matter. Senior Army officials said at Wednesday’s hearing they were confident in their own “unbiased” test results.

Lt. Gen. N. Ross Thompson, military deputy to the Assistant Secretary for the Army, said despite the wishes of Congress and Dragon Skin’s manufacturer, the Army will not conduct a side-by- side test.

However, Ross said the Army will conduct separate tests of all vendors’ body armor, including Dragon Skin, under a pending contract.

Murray Neal, Pinnacle’s chief executive, testified Wednesday that the Army misrepresented and distorted its May 2006 test results. “I’m asking for an independent test because the information coming out of the Army is fraught full of inaccuracies,” Neal said.

Hunter questioned why representatives from the Fresno, Calif.- based company, who witnessed the Army’s testing, did not raise concerns earlier if they thought the Army had conducted a faulty test. The test was performed for the military by H.P. White Laboratory, an independent ballistics center in Maryland.

Dragon Skin is provided to some special services soldiers and others can buy it with their own money if they don’t like the heavier-weight Interceptor armor.

Congressional members led by Rep. Joe Courtney, D-Conn., are requesting an independent study by the Government Accountability Office to review the Army’s testing procedures, a comparison study and review of current safety compliance rules.

Pinnacle has competed for Army contracts on body armor but lost out five times because its product did not meet specifications.

Costa Mesa, Calif.-based Ceradyne Inc. and Chandler, Ariz.-based Armor Works LLC are two companies that manufacture Interceptor.

Falls Church, Va.-based General Dynamics Corp., identified in an earlier story as a body armor manufacturer, makes armor for vehicles, not personnel.

c2007 ANG Newspapers. Cannot be used or repurposed without prior written permission.
Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights Reserved.

NIJ PUBLISHES FACT SHEET ON BODY ARMOR

Wednesday, June 27th, 2007

The National Institute of Justice published a fact sheet on body armor in response to testing of equipment that failed to meet its specified claims.

NIJ has determined that vests with Zylon may not provide the intended level of ballistic resistance.

Inf.: www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bvpbasi/docs/ BVP_ProgramFactSheet_08_18_05.doc.

U.S. Adopts New Policy For Grading Body Armor, Plans Frequent Reviews

Wednesday, June 27th, 2007

The National Institute of Justice has adopted new minimum interim standards for bullet-resistant body armor vests that would become effective Sept. 26.

NIJ through extensive testing found that certain vests were subject to serious deterioration that made them less effective over time, and, in some cases, totally ineffective.

But NIJ recommended that officers continue to use defective armor until replacements are available.

To accelerate the process, the Justice Department has expanded its grants to state and local police for the purchase of vests to replace those found to be ineffective.

NIJ said the interim standards would apply until the completion of random tests on vests submitted by manufacturers to assure they are in compliance.

NIJ said it would probably issue advisory notices as the reviews continue.

Former Attorney General John Ashcroft ordered a study of the effectiveness of the vests in the summer of 2003 when a Forest Hills, Pa., officer wearing a vest was shot and seriously wounded. The assailant’s bullet penetrated the front panel of a second Chance vest made with Zylon.

NIJ suspended certification of body armor with Zylon on Aug. 24.

NIJ and the National Institutes of Standards and Technology jointly conducted studies into the durability of Zylon and found that it failed to meet the standards that the manufacturer’s promotional material claimed.

The National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center also conducted tests.

Among the three testing agencies, technicians fired various types of bullets ranging from handguns to assault weapons into about 100 different types of vests.

During the past 18 months, the federal government and numerous law enforcement agencies have filed litigation against second Chance. The company has filed for bankruptcy and reached a tentative agreement to pay nearly $30 million to settle claims.

Under the interim standards, NU found that 12 manufacturers had products that achieved various minimum levels of protection.

NIJ has identified four levels of threat for body armor covered under the interim regulations that the 12 manufacturers comply with.

* Threat Level II requires armor must protect against .357 magnum JSP loads with 158 grains traveling at a velocity of 1,400 feet per second and 9-millimeter FMJ loads with 124 grains at velocity of 1,175 feet per second.

* Threat Level UA requires protection against .40 S&W FMJ 180 grain bullets to a velocity of 1,025 feet per second and 9-millimeter FMJ RN 124 grain bullets to a velocity of 1,090 feet per second.

* Threat Level III requires armor to protect against 7.62 millimeter (308 Winchester) FMJ 150 grain bullets to a velocity of 2,750 feet per second.

* Threat Level III requires armor to protect against .44 magnum SJHP 240 grain bullets and 9-millimeter FMJ 124 grain bullets with velocity of 1,400 feet per second.

NTJ posted information on the Internet that defines the new interim standards and the levels at which 12 manufacturers have been currently approved.

NIJ cautioned that it had reached any final conclusions on the safety of the body armor, but had relied on “specific certifications from manufacturers.”

NIJ recommended that law enforcement agencies purchasing vests in future select “models that comply with these interim requirements.”

NIJ said the regulations were “promulgated on an interim basis to address recent NIJ research findings that indicate that certain body armor models previously found by NIJ to be compliant with earlier NIJ requirements…may not adequately maintain ballistic performance during their service life.”

Water cannons disperse crowd

Thursday, June 14th, 2007

MANILA, Philippines — Police used water cannons to disrupt hundreds of marchers, including a number of nuns and priests, who were attempting to assemble for prayer near the offices of President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. The protesters were on their way to San Beda College in downtown Manila for a Mass organized by a coalition of groups seeking to replace Arroyo’s government with a government of national unity.

The next day, the president-elect of the Philippine bishops’ conference issued a statement that questioned the legality of the government’s “calibrated preemptive response” to street demonstrations. Archbishop Angel Lagdameo of Jaro said the procession was “a crusade for good governance.”

Arroyo was been under increasing pressure because of charges of political corruption in her family and allegations that she tried to influence election officials.

Murders Of Officers Continue At High Levels, Body Armor Failure Is Rare

Thursday, June 14th, 2007

The FBI reported murders of officers in 2005 continued at high levels, although the 55 felonious deaths were well below the 21st Century peak of 70 in 2001.

Officers were wearing body armor in 30 of the 50 deaths due to firearms. Most wounds occurred in parts of the body other than the torso. Of nine deaths from torso wounds, only one occurred because of equipment failure. The assault weapon was a shotgun.

For officers dying from torso wounds, bullets entered through armholes, side panels and immediately above or below the area covered by a vest.

Deadly assaults on officers in the current year are continuing at the pace of a year ago.
Related Results

* Use of two new fibers could…
* Fully encapsulated hard body…
* RESEARCH TO IMPROVE SAFETY OF…
* Point Blank Body Armor.

Most Popular Articles
in News

* Black Women White Men,…
* Naked boys vs. naked…
* How do I look?…
* The gangs behind bars…

Most officers fall victim to firearms, the FBI said, noting five deaths from vehicles and 50 from guns. But two-thirds of the murders occurred during vehicle patrol.

In analyzing the relationship of body armor in the fatalities, the FBI found only one death due to vest failure in 2005 compared to four in 2004.

Law enforcement agencies have been upgrading body armor since the widespread publicity about vest failure in the death of a Forest Hills, Pa., police officer in 2003.

The National Institute of Justice adopted new minimum standards for bullet-resistant vests last year.

Most of the assailants had records of criminal violence and several were gang members. Gang assaults on police in California have become an increasing problem.

Apparently due to their criminal histories and knowledge of police procedures, these assailants fired below, above or to the side of the vests.
Advertisement

Of the identified assailants, 41 were under the age of 35 and 23 were youths between the ages of 17 and 25. Several had prior criminal records for assaulting officers and most had convictions for violent drug crimes.

Use of two new fibers could lighten body armor

Thursday, June 14th, 2007

Two new fibers are vying to one day replace the respected but heavier Kevlar, the staple of body armor for decades, as the Army strives to enhance mobility by reducing the Soldier load. Body armor is one of the more riveting individual equipment successes, especially from the ongoing conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, with reports of dozens of saved lives directly attributed to the bullet and shrapnel-halting ability of the helmet, flexible vest and rigid chest plate combination worn by troops. Even though it protects well, body armor ranks with water, ammunition and weapon as the heaviest items worn or carried by troops, according to engineers on the Ballistics Technology Team at the U.S. Army Soldier Systems Center in Natick, Massachusetts. “The Army is putting the best available armor materials into Soldiers’ armor,” said Philip Cunniff, a research mechanical engineer. “Part of our work in the Ballistics Technology Team is to develop new materials and techniques to lighten the load of those armor systems.”

Body armor technology has advanced in the past century to protect the head and torso against high-velocity handgun bullets and fragmenting munitions, such as those from artillery shells, mortar shells, mines and grenades. Lightweight small arms protection is also now available for the torso.

The nylon “flak” vest for ground troops and steel helmet from the 1960s were replaced by Kevlar vests and helmets during the 1980s in a product called Personnel Armor System, Ground Troops (PASGT). At the users’ request, performance increased with the PASGT system but weight remained about the same, according to Cunniff. The next major change was in the 1990s with an improved version of Kevlar that helped lighten the vest by 25 percent and increased ballistic protection.

The team’s objective is to reduce the weight again, this time by 25-30 percent, without losing performance. Zylon and M5 fibers show potential in meeting or exceeding that goal. Zylon, a commercially-available fiber first developed by the Air Force in the 1980s and now produced in Japan, turned in a solid performance in testing, said Cunniff. A prototype helmet made last year with Zylon was developed as part of the Human Systems Defense Technology Objective for Ballistic Protection for Improved Survivability. The Zylon helmet weighs 1.79 pounds vs. 3 pounds for the PASGT at the same protection levels. Cunniff said two possible roadblocks with Zylon are environmental degradation and the law requiring certain military products to be manufactured in the United States with domestic materials. Zylon has shown to break down with exposure to light, high heat and humidity, although Cunniff said there may be solutions to these problems.

An alternative material to Zylon is M5, an ultra-high performance fiber developed by Magellan Systems International in Bethesda, Md.

According to a mathematical model of Cunniff’s for the estimation of impact performance based on the mechanical properties of armor materials, M5 appeared to provide exceptional impact performance.

His model indicated that M5 could cut weight by at least 35 percent compared to currently available fragmentation armor at the same protection level. So far, the ballistic impact test results with a limited, relatively low-strength sample of M5 are glowing. “We shot it, and it came out better than we expected,” Cunniff said. “We found there was something wrong with the model; we underpredicted the performance of the material. Of everything we looked at, it looks like (M5) will be a really big improvement in reducing the weight of armor.” Another feature of M5 fiber is excellent thermal and flame protection. Besides helmets, fragmentation vests and composites for use in conjunction with ceramic materials for small arms protective plates, M5 fiber could also be used for structural composites for vehicles and aircraft.

Murders Of Officers Continue At High Levels, Body Armor Failure Is Rare

Friday, June 8th, 2007

The FBI reported murders of officers in 2005 continued at high levels, although the 55 felonious deaths were well below the 21st Century peak of 70 in 2001.

Officers were wearing body armor in 30 of the 50 deaths due to firearms. Most wounds occurred in parts of the body other than the torso. Of nine deaths from torso wounds, only one occurred because of equipment failure. The assault weapon was a shotgun.

For officers dying from torso wounds, bullets entered through armholes, side panels and immediately above or below the area covered by a vest.

Deadly assaults on officers in the current year are continuing at the pace of a year ago.

Most officers fall victim to firearms, the FBI said, noting five deaths from vehicles and 50 from guns. But two-thirds of the murders occurred during vehicle patrol.

In analyzing the relationship of body armor in the fatalities, the FBI found only one death due to vest failure in 2005 compared to four in 2004.

Law enforcement agencies have been upgrading body armor since the widespread publicity about vest failure in the death of a Forest Hills, Pa., police officer in 2003.

The National Institute of Justice adopted new minimum standards for bullet-resistant vests last year.

Most of the assailants had records of criminal violence and several were gang members. Gang assaults on police in California have become an increasing problem.

Apparently due to their criminal histories and knowledge of police procedures, these assailants fired below, above or to the side of the vests.

Of the identified assailants, 41 were under the age of 35 and 23 were youths between the ages of 17 and 25. Several had prior criminal records for assaulting officers and most had convictions for violent drug crimes.

Use of two new fibers could lighten body armor

Friday, June 8th, 2007

Two new fibers are vying to one day replace the respected but heavier Kevlar, the staple of body armor for decades, as the Army strives to enhance mobility by reducing the Soldier load. Body armor is one of the more riveting individual equipment successes, especially from the ongoing conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, with reports of dozens of saved lives directly attributed to the bullet and shrapnel-halting ability of the helmet, flexible vest and rigid chest plate combination worn by troops. Even though it protects well, body armor ranks with water, ammunition and weapon as the heaviest items worn or carried by troops, according to engineers on the Ballistics Technology Team at the U.S. Army Soldier Systems Center in Natick, Massachusetts. “The Army is putting the best available armor materials into Soldiers’ armor,” said Philip Cunniff, a research mechanical engineer. “Part of our work in the Ballistics Technology Team is to develop new materials and techniques to lighten the load of those armor systems.”

Body armor technology has advanced in the past century to protect the head and torso against high-velocity handgun bullets and fragmenting munitions, such as those from artillery shells, mortar shells, mines and grenades. Lightweight small arms protection is also now available for the torso.

The nylon “flak” vest for ground troops and steel helmet from the 1960s were replaced by Kevlar vests and helmets during the 1980s in a product called Personnel Armor System, Ground Troops (PASGT). At the users’ request, performance increased with the PASGT system but weight remained about the same, according to Cunniff. The next major change was in the 1990s with an improved version of Kevlar that helped lighten the vest by 25 percent and increased ballistic protection.

The team’s objective is to reduce the weight again, this time by 25-30 percent, without losing performance. Zylon and M5 fibers show potential in meeting or exceeding that goal. Zylon, a commercially-available fiber first developed by the Air Force in the 1980s and now produced in Japan, turned in a solid performance in testing, said Cunniff. A prototype helmet made last year with Zylon was developed as part of the Human Systems Defense Technology Objective for Ballistic Protection for Improved Survivability. The Zylon helmet weighs 1.79 pounds vs. 3 pounds for the PASGT at the same protection levels. Cunniff said two possible roadblocks with Zylon are environmental degradation and the law requiring certain military products to be manufactured in the United States with domestic materials. Zylon has shown to break down with exposure to light, high heat and humidity, although Cunniff said there may be solutions to these problems.

An alternative material to Zylon is M5, an ultra-high performance fiber developed by Magellan Systems International in Bethesda, Md.

According to a mathematical model of Cunniff’s for the estimation of impact performance based on the mechanical properties of armor materials, M5 appeared to provide exceptional impact performance.

His model indicated that M5 could cut weight by at least 35 percent compared to currently available fragmentation armor at the same protection level. So far, the ballistic impact test results with a limited, relatively low-strength sample of M5 are glowing. “We shot it, and it came out better than we expected,” Cunniff said. “We found there was something wrong with the model; we underpredicted the performance of the material. Of everything we looked at, it looks like (M5) will be a really big improvement in reducing the weight of armor.” Another feature of M5 fiber is excellent thermal and flame protection. Besides helmets, fragmentation vests and composites for use in conjunction with ceramic materials for small arms protective plates, M5 fiber could also be used for structural composites for vehicles and aircraft.