Infantry Combat Equipment (non-firearm): Vests, Body Armor, NVGs, etc.


AZaz09dude

Junior Member
Registered Member
Although 1) is this the back of the plate or the front? Based on the printing my guess is back. But the discolored spots could mean this was the strike face and those are fragments of the round
Definitely the back. The original source showed both the soft and hard inserts still inside of their sealed plastic bags. Discolouration is probably from dust/residue/wrinkles that accumulated over its years of storage.



2) why rate their plates to stop ammo unique to them? It reminds me of Zimmerit treatment on mid to late WWII German tanks. Okay fine it will stop magnetic mines but only Germany issued Magnetic mines.
3) is this supposed to show the strength of the plate or weakness of the ammo? And does it state beyond 5.8mm what type hardened penetrator core tungsten or softer training ammo?
As for 5.8, well the Chinese 5.8 has superior armour penetration capabilities compared to 5.56 NATO and Russian/NATO 7.62, so if it can stop 5.8, it can also stop all standard rounds from other major militaries.

I would guess that the plate was designed specifically to stop 5.56 and 7.62, but would need additional support from soft Kevlar to stop 5.8.
Likely DBP-87/95, as per GJB 4300 standards.

Nothing wrong with that, it seems perfectly adequate for simulating the generic small caliber high velocity rifle round. If it stops DBP-87/95, it's probably going to stop 7N6M or M855/A1.

Now what I'm more interested in is the weight and material composition of the plate.
 

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
This is a ceramic plate, so those are not hit marks.
A bullet hitting a ceramic plate disintegrates. it doesn’t vaporize. That metal has to go some place. Fragments will often be left of the jacket and core on the surface of a strike face.
Farther more at 10mm or even 50 meters there should be visible deformation of the face of the plate unless the round in question was frangible. In which case it’s pulverized and again will leave flecks of metal across the face. High velocity glitter balls.
This surface is hard to figure what we are looking at.
If this is the back of the plate then it shows minimal deformation and those are just discoloring if the front then no signs of impact which even against this level of armor there should be a blemish and possible flakes.
Which is why I think back.
Edit it is the back and just discoloration.

As for 5.8, well the Chinese 5.8 has superior armour penetration capabilities compared to 5.56 NATO and Russian/NATO 7.62, so if it can stop 5.8, it can also stop all standard rounds from other major militaries.
First based solely on Chinese claims. There has yet to be independent testing.

I have seen video of a 20 inch barreled AR15 firing at commercially available Russian plate with M885A1 ammo and it holds up. But that’s a steel core, M855A1 is anti barrier ammo not AP. It’s meant to punch through car doors and soft barriers.
You had to add Standard because you like I doubt that the PLA has the latest AP rounds from across the world on hand.
And things are given to change.
Remember the “Other major militaries” are not sitting around playing penuckle.
When the Chinese and Russians introduced level 4 plates the US and NATO already had the same on hand.
So everyone is working on better AP, and new standard rounds to.
The US for a time flitted was moving back to 7.62x51mm as standard and seems pretty sure that something between 6.5-7.62 with a hardened core would do the job and still be light enough to field as infantry weapons. The Russians seem to be reintroducing 7.62x54R to their squads. Heck they seem to also have taken a liking to 7.62x51 NATO.
We look around the world and the big Battle rifle tribute bands are a rising star SCAR H, Tavor 7,MSBS-7.62N, SR25, HK417, MPT 76, even the Chinese small arms makers. And then we have emerging odd balls not just the Russian standard 7.62x54R MG but now .338Norma MG and battle class rules in .300wm and .338 Norma.
EA4A632E-B72D-4419-8C9F-A943E7978EE6.jpeg

I would guess that the plate was designed specifically to stop 5.56 and 7.62, but would need additional support from soft Kevlar to stop 5.8.
Or they don’t make stand alone plates.
Like the Chinese the US has issued hard plates on top of soft armor after a time they added the soft to the hard and made stand alone plates. This plate may simply be that the PLA being conservative feels that soft carrier with hard plate is better against potential fragmentation and bullets than just one or the other. You also generally want some soft to try and cushion deformation if the rear of the plate. If hit hard enough the armor deforming in the back can kill.

What ever the case everything in science seems to say this is it this is how high it goes. This is the end game of personal armor. We might be able to make it lighter more comfortable but no more protective without encasing future soldiers in powered armor.
 

Josh Luo

Senior Member
Registered Member
I think that's a catch here. The M855A1 (unlike original M855) has superior armor penetration than Chinese ammo. Not sure if the Chinese body armor could stop the new M855A1 at 50 yards or less (house-to-house fighting scenario). Also, I am not sure if the "steel-core 5.8mm" labeled on the armor plate refers to DBP-87 or DBP-10. Both are steel-core ammo for Type 95 rifle, but DBP-10 is vastly superior in penetration and ballistics than DBP-87, albeit at slightly lower muzzle velocity.
 

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
I think that's a catch here. The M855A1 (unlike original M855) has superior armor penetration than Chinese ammo. Not sure if the Chinese body armor could stop the new M855A1 at 50 yards or less (house-to-house fighting scenario). Also, I am not sure if the "steel-core 5.8mm" labeled on the armor plate refers to DBP-87 or DBP-10. Both are steel-core ammo for Type 95 rifle, but DBP-10 is vastly superior in penetration and ballistics than DBP-87, albeit at slightly lower muzzle velocity.
M855A1 has a higher pressure curve and better balance than SS109 the basis of M855A1 but it’s not an AP round.
It’s a steel core round for barrier fighting.
This is a level III plate.
 

AZaz09dude

Junior Member
Registered Member
I think that's a catch here. The M855A1 (unlike original M855) has superior armor penetration than Chinese ammo. Not sure if the Chinese body armor could stop the new M855A1 at 50 yards or less (house-to-house fighting scenario).
Neither M855A1 nor the DBP series are dedicated armor-piercing rounds. There's a reason why DVC-12 and M995 exist. This sort of treating a standard round as some sort of silver bullet that makes body armor obsolete needs to stop.

Also, I am not sure if the "steel-core 5.8mm" labeled on the armor plate refers to DBP-87 or DBP-10. Both are steel-core ammo for Type 95 rifle, but DBP-10 is vastly superior in penetration and ballistics than DBP-87, albeit at slightly lower muzzle velocity.
It's probably DBP-87/95, the velocity printed on the plate matches the GJB standard.
 

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
Neither M855A1 nor the DBP series are dedicated armor-piercing rounds. There's a reason why DVC-12 and M995 exist. This sort of treating a standard round as some sort of silver bullet that makes body armor obsolete needs to stop.



It's probably DBP-87/95, the velocity printed on the plate matches the GJB standard.
M855 and M855A1 will penetrate steel plate level III but not Ceramic Level III+.
They will also punch through helmets.
But here it is failing against Russian ceramic level IV
 

Dfangsaur

Junior Member
Registered Member
A bullet hitting a ceramic plate disintegrates. it doesn’t vaporize. That metal has to go some place. Fragments will often be left of the jacket and core on the surface of a strike face.
Farther more at 10mm or even 50 meters there should be visible deformation of the face of the plate unless the round in question was frangible. In which case it’s pulverized and again will leave flecks of metal across the face. High velocity glitter balls.
This surface is hard to figure what we are looking at.
If this is the back of the plate then it shows minimal deformation and those are just discoloring if the front then no signs of impact which even against this level of armor there should be a blemish and possible flakes.
Which is why I think back.
Edit it is the back and just discoloration.



First based solely on Chinese claims. There has yet to be independent testing.

I have seen video of a 20 inch barreled AR15 firing at commercially available Russian plate with M885A1 ammo and it holds up. But that’s a steel core, M855A1 is anti barrier ammo not AP. It’s meant to punch through car doors and soft barriers.
You had to add Standard because you like I doubt that the PLA has the latest AP rounds from across the world on hand.
And things are given to change.
Remember the “Other major militaries” are not sitting around playing penuckle.
When the Chinese and Russians introduced level 4 plates the US and NATO already had the same on hand.
So everyone is working on better AP, and new standard rounds to.
The US for a time flitted was moving back to 7.62x51mm as standard and seems pretty sure that something between 6.5-7.62 with a hardened core would do the job and still be light enough to field as infantry weapons. The Russians seem to be reintroducing 7.62x54R to their squads. Heck they seem to also have taken a liking to 7.62x51 NATO.
We look around the world and the big Battle rifle tribute bands are a rising star SCAR H, Tavor 7,MSBS-7.62N, SR25, HK417, MPT 76, even the Chinese small arms makers. And then we have emerging odd balls not just the Russian standard 7.62x54R MG but now .338Norma MG and battle class rules in .300wm and .338 Norma.
View attachment 52713


Or they don’t make stand alone plates.
Like the Chinese the US has issued hard plates on top of soft armor after a time they added the soft to the hard and made stand alone plates. This plate may simply be that the PLA being conservative feels that soft carrier with hard plate is better against potential fragmentation and bullets than just one or the other. You also generally want some soft to try and cushion deformation if the rear of the plate. If hit hard enough the armor deforming in the back can kill.

What ever the case everything in science seems to say this is it this is how high it goes. This is the end game of personal armor. We might be able to make it lighter more comfortable but no more protective without encasing future soldiers in powered armor.
I think if the plate in question is rated equivalent to lv 4 it should stop anything below .308AP. Intermediate cartridges should have no chance regardless of the type.
 

AZaz09dude

Junior Member
Registered Member
CCTV report on Chinese body armor


3 vests displayed: Type-04B, Type-15, and a "new type vest" that appears to be an improved Type-15 with neck, deltoid, groin, and side protection.

We also get a very good look at some plates. Both ceramic and UHMWPE(?) plates are mentioned to be in service. The weight and protective capability of the new plate is tested in comparison to an older steel plate. The new plate provides protection from both 5.8mm and 7.62x54mmR at 2.8kg, while the 4kg steel plate fails to stop 5.8mm.

This is a nice update from the previous video


A major improvement seems to be switching from the cheaper tiled ceramic arrangement to a monolithic one.

They should probably spray a thicker coat of something stronger over the plate though, as the components seem to start separating upon being hit.
 

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
Ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene
The US has been using that for Armor as well it offers reduced weight but equal protection.
 

Josh Luo

Senior Member
Registered Member
CCTV report on Chinese body armor


3 vests displayed: Type-04B, Type-15, and a "new type vest" that appears to be an improved Type-15 with neck, deltoid, groin, and side protection.

We also get a very good look at some plates. Both ceramic and UHMWPE(?) plates are mentioned to be in service. The weight and protective capability of the new plate is tested in comparison to an older steel plate. The new plate provides protection from both 5.8mm and 7.62x54mmR at 2.8kg, while the 4kg steel plate fails to stop 5.8mm.

This is a nice update from the previous video


A major improvement seems to be switching from the cheaper tiled ceramic arrangement to a monolithic one.

They should probably spray a thicker coat of something stronger over the plate though, as the components seem to start separating upon being hit.
It also said that China the capacity to produce 200,000 sets of body armor per year.
 

Top