Bullet proof vests in the Chinese military

solarz said:

Yes, that's right.

Also, I don't think that the idea that you can "take it off when you don't need it" is quite right. Body armor costs upward of 1400$ each. Equipped on over a million soldiers, that's 1.4 billion dollars. Not a small expenditure. In addition, vests have a shelf life of only a few years, so that money will have to be re-spent every few years. The idea that it's "better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it" is not enough to justify that kind of expenditure.

Click to expand...

well, better start cutting on those Audis

money is not of the question, the government is bleeding bazillions on some projects, and you don't need to equip all 1 million troops with them, at least those elites in the Northern GAs, showing that PLA do equip and train its frontline troops with body armors

rather than cost, i think the main reason is priority like cn_habs said, and that the PLA is not expecting to fight a high intensity conflict any time soon in the near future

paintgun said:

well, better start cutting on those Audis

money is not of the question, the government is bleeding bazillions on some projects, and you don't need to equip all 1 million troops with them, at least those elites in the Northern GAs, showing that PLA do equip and train its frontline troops with body armors

rather than cost, i think the main reason is priority like cn_habs said, and that the PLA is not expecting to fight a high intensity conflict any time soon in the near future

Click to expand...

Cost and priority is the same thing. It's not a question of "can we afford this", but rather "is there something better we can do with this money"?

Let's face it, no amount of body armor is going to win a war when your fighter jets can't stand toe-to-toe with the other guys. The government may be bleeding "bazillions" in other projects, but those projects have far greater strategic value than body armor.

i'm not sure how Audis or excess lending and spending have higher priorities over soldier lives

let's just say we agree to disagree on these matter :
1. the priority of equipping body armors and protection levels for PLA ground troops
2. the overall importance of body armors for soldiers

paintgun said:

i'm not sure how Audis or excess lending and spending have higher priorities over soldier lives

let's just say we agree to disagree on these matter :
1. the priority of equipping body armors and protection levels for PLA ground troops
2. the overall importance of body armors for soldiers

Click to expand...

"Audis" and excess spending is part of the inefficiencies of the system. Removing those is an entirely different matter from prioritizing budget. You can't say, "we need more money on a project, so let's just become more efficient". The real world doesn't work that way.

Honestly, the best way to save soldiers' lives is still to not get into wars. Failing that, the second best way is to win those wars as quickly as possible.

---------- Post added at 01:15 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:09 PM ----------

Think of it this way: would body armor have made much difference for the Iraqis when they faced the might of the US Army?

Thought I read it somewhere that a large portion of US armed forces' bullet proof vest is actually manufactured in China?

Sometime ago I read that American battlefied casulties survival rate had improvied drastically from Vietnam to the Gulfwar. On the assumption that China is equally under resourced, perhaps they can work on that as well.

cn_habs said:

I think the lack of body armor is the direct result of PLA strongly prioritizing the navy and air force over the army in the past couple of decades. Most infantry still wear those outdated helmets.

Click to expand...

Good point. The army is too heavily neglected. We can still in a lot of 60s-70s equipment hanging around in large numbers. Quite heartbreaking considering the 100 billion+ US dollar annual budget.

---------- Post added at 12:19 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:13 PM ----------

solarz said:

Yes, that's right.

Also, I don't think that the idea that you can "take it off when you don't need it" is quite right. Body armor costs upward of 1400$ each. Equipped on over a million soldiers, that's 1.4 billion dollars. Not a small expenditure. In addition, vests have a shelf life of only a few years, so that money will have to be re-spent every few years. The idea that it's "better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it" is not enough to justify that kind of expenditure.

Click to expand...

1.4 billion is not a lot of money for China. Plus, there are only a handful elite combat ready units. It costs a lot less to just equip those guys. Let's say they equip only 200,000 of them, which is a huge number for Western countries, it's still only 200-300 million. I'm sure China's annual accidental loss and retirement of equipment worth more than this.

On top of that, human lives are becoming more and more valuable in China, literally speaking, ca$ee$h speaking. Can you imagine how much compensation would be needed if a soldier accidentally dies? Those things happen all the times in training, due to shrapnel, shock-waves, or even accidentally cut by machetes after tripping himself. A cheap vest could save you a lot of money.

Vini_Vidi_Vici said:

1.4 billion is not a lot of money for China. Plus, there are only a handful elite combat ready units. It costs a lot less to just equip those guys. Let's say they equip only 200,000 of them, which is a huge number for Western countries, it's still only 200-300 million. I'm sure China's annual accidental loss and retirement of equipment worth more than this.

On top of that, human lives are becoming more and more valuable in China, literally speaking, ca$ee$h speaking. Can you imagine how much compensation would be needed if a soldier accidentally dies? Those things happen all the times in training, due to shrapnel, shock-waves, or even accidentally cut by machetes after tripping himself. A cheap vest could save you a lot of money.

Click to expand...

Ehh... not to sound callous or anything, but a dead soldier is a hell of a lot cheaper than a crippled soldier.

Like mentioned above, most of the PLA's budget goes toward the "game changers" like Navy, Airforce, and 2nd Artillery. The infantry's budget is probably a lot tighter.

solarz said:

Ehh... not to sound callous or anything, but a dead soldier is a hell of a lot cheaper than a crippled soldier.

Like mentioned above, most of the PLA's budget goes toward the "game changers" like Navy, Airforce, and 2nd Artillery. The infantry's budget is probably a lot tighter.

Click to expand...

But those basic equipment are just as important as the big items. I'm sure it's better to have your soldiers looking like Navy SEALs than looking like the Sudanese PLA or a blood/cribs gangbangers from LA. LOL

Vini_Vidi_Vici said:

But those basic equipment are just as important as the big items. I'm sure it's better to have your soldiers looking like Navy SEALs than looking like the Sudanese PLA or a blood/cribs gangbangers from LA. LOL

Click to expand...

YOu can go to the photo threads to see that PLA troops look very professional.

Also, I think it's a myth that every US soldier is equipped with body armor. Look at these reports:







As the last piece indicates, in 2006, the US govn't was still scrambling and trying to get body armors into the hands of soldiers 3 years after the war started. even at that time in 2006, they were still trying to justify letting every soldier have body armor.

So don't blame China, which is not fighting anybody at the moment or in any foreseeable future, for not issuing body armor to its soldiers.