The Firing Line Forums
Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > S.W.A.T. Magazine

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old January 4, 2002, 11:36 PM   #1
DFS
Member
 
Join Date: December 20, 2001
Location: Calif.
Posts: 44
USMC Body Armor

I understand that there is a article concerning the body armor that the USMC is now using. Does anyone have it and can they please send it to me? Thanks
DFS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 5, 2002, 09:47 PM   #2
USMC03
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 21, 2001
Location: Southern Colorado
Posts: 14
I was also looking for the same article I believe that it was authored by Pat Rogers. If someone could also send me a copy I would appriciate it.



Semper Fi
Jeff
USMC03 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 5, 2002, 10:06 PM   #3
Jhp147
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 27, 1999
Location: Texas
Posts: 597
Info

The article is called Full Spectrum Battle Equipment and Modular Integrated Communication Helmet, by yes, Mr. Rogers.
Page 60, October 2001 issue.
__________________
Sometimes...days are just something you get through.
Jhp147 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 6, 2002, 03:57 AM   #4
vitiaz
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 158
The FSBE body armor is made by PointBlank...fwiw.
__________________
Molon labe
vitiaz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 7, 2002, 07:18 PM   #5
corsair
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 10, 2000
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 145
Does anyone know is Mission Specific gear available to the general pop. or is it currently produced for USMC?
corsair is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 7, 2002, 08:29 PM   #6
PM 7
Junior Member
 
Join Date: August 12, 2001
Location: Ga.
Posts: 3
My understanding is that Matt Johnson, who was making the Mission Specific gear has gone to work for Eagle. I hope Eagle comes out with a line based on his products. SOE is working similar set-up also . Hope this helps!
PM 7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 7, 2002, 09:39 PM   #7
Pat Rogers
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 31, 2001
Posts: 303
Mission Specific

Matt does indeed work for Eagle, a match made in heaven!

Right now there is a patent issue for any PALS pouches. SPP apparently holds the patent, and other makers are prohibited from selling MOLLE type pouches to other than military.

We'll see what happens.
__________________
S/F

Pat sends
www.eagtactical.com
Pat Rogers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 1, 2002, 01:56 PM   #8
Joey
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 28, 1999
Posts: 437
I've been issued the point blank FSBE vest. The one I have is rated level III and has level IV plates. It's a real nice vest but extremly thick with the plates. However, on the other hand it's lots lighter than my old ranger vest with steel plates. The vest does rub my kneck rather bad after wearing for long periods but it's nothing I can't live with.

I have a SOE vest that I wear over the FSBE and that really bulks you up and makes it hard to access the vest's pouches.

But then again for that level of protection in a light vest it's well worth it.
Joey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 1, 2002, 02:54 PM   #9
Pat Rogers
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 31, 2001
Posts: 303
FSBE

Joey,

I'm at a loss here. Who do you work for/ with?
The original FSBE's were all to Force guys, with a verrrryyy few going to others for T&E.
Is yours a commercially sold vest?

For blackside the pouches are attached to the FSBE carrier.
The body armor is not normally worn for greenside, so an LBV/ LBE is worn only on top of you.

The current operation has expanded Force's role somewhat, to include vehicular patrols. The RACK is the school solution and part of Lessons Learned.

In any event, good luck with your vest- i hope it is never tested.
__________________
S/F

Pat sends
www.eagtactical.com
Pat Rogers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 1, 2002, 04:04 PM   #10
Joey
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 28, 1999
Posts: 437
USAF Security Forces, the vest was new directly from Point Blank as replacement for our old style body armor. I lucked out and got one of the few they recieved to T&E. Seems our purfumed princes was us to go with a "second chance" style of armor instead.

You got me wondering, I'm going to do some more research and see if I can verify that the vest is indeed the FSBE like I was told. I've never looked for a label or other markings as I got the vest on a extremly busy day.

Some troops wear their pouches directly attached to the vest, but I don't wear it all the time so I just "bulk up" and wear my SOE vest over the top of the body armor.
Joey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 1, 2002, 04:23 PM   #11
Pat Rogers
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 31, 2001
Posts: 303
FSBE

Got it!

Does the vest fit over the top or open in front?????

If it is FSBE, it will be a 2 piece vest, with a cut away device on the lower portion of the front panel. (The reason that we don't advocate a seperate LBV is that it will negate the quick disconnect feature.)

I just checked with Natick- there are no plans for FSBE to go to other then Force as an interim, though an upgrade is in the works for USSOCOM.

You may have the standard infantry interceptor vest if it is a front opener.
__________________
S/F

Pat sends
www.eagtactical.com
Pat Rogers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 9, 2002, 08:25 PM   #12
Joey
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 28, 1999
Posts: 437
Boy I feel stupid. Should have known better tan to take the supply guy at his word

Turns out the vest they were calling the FSBE is infact the interceptor

I stand corrected.
Joey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 9, 2002, 08:39 PM   #13
Pat Rogers
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 31, 2001
Posts: 303
FSBE

Joey,
No reason to feel stupid. It wouldn't be the first time that a supply sgt/officer was unable to correctly identify something in his store.

The Interceptor provides exactly the same ballistic protection in a package that is bulkier and much less comfortable.

But it is still probably better then RBA you previously were issued!
__________________
S/F

Pat sends
www.eagtactical.com

Last edited by Pat Rogers; February 9, 2002 at 08:59 PM.
Pat Rogers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 10, 2002, 12:52 AM   #14
gjcocksedge
Junior Member
 
Join Date: January 9, 2002
Posts: 5
Pat,


Hey, take it easy on us supply types


We have to keep it interesting in order to keep ourselves amused and we strive to ABSOLUTELY CONFUSE everyone else.




Grace
__________________
Live, Love, Laugh
gjcocksedge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 10, 2002, 07:24 AM   #15
Pat Rogers
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 31, 2001
Posts: 303
Supply Types

Grace,
Somehow i don't think that you would have made that mistake.
But then, you are a Marine...
__________________
S/F

Pat sends
www.eagtactical.com
Pat Rogers is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:56 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Page generated in 0.09714 seconds with 7 queries