USMC Body Armor

DFS · January 4, 2002, 11:36 PM

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

USMC03 · January 5, 2002, 09:47 PM

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

Jhp147 · January 5, 2002, 10:06 PM

The article is called Full Spectrum Battle Equipment and Modular Integrated Communication Helmet, by yes, Mr. Rogers.
Page 60, October 2001 issue.

vitiaz · January 6, 2002, 03:57 AM

The FSBE body armor is made by PointBlank...fwiw.

corsair · January 7, 2002, 07:18 PM

Does anyone know is Mission Specific gear available to the general pop. or is it currently produced for USMC?

PM 7 · January 7, 2002, 08:29 PM

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!

Pat Rogers · January 7, 2002, 09:39 PM

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.

Joey · February 1, 2002, 01:56 PM

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.

Pat Rogers · February 1, 2002, 02:54 PM

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.

Joey · February 1, 2002, 04:04 PM

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.

Pat Rogers · February 1, 2002, 04:23 PM

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.

Joey · February 9, 2002, 08:25 PM

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.

Pat Rogers · February 9, 2002, 08:39 PM

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!

gjcocksedge · February 10, 2002, 12:52 AM

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

Pat Rogers · February 10, 2002, 07:24 AM

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

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

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.

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

January 7, 2002, 09:39 PM	#7
Pat Rogers Member in memoriam 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

February 1, 2002, 02:54 PM	#9
Pat Rogers Member in memoriam 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

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

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?

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!

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.

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.

February 1, 2002, 04:23 PM	#11
Pat Rogers Member in memoriam 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

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.

February 9, 2002, 08:39 PM	#13
Pat Rogers Member in memoriam 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.

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

February 10, 2002, 07:24 AM	#15
Pat Rogers Member in memoriam 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