Side SAPI plates. Good or bad?

2018-03-11T12:52:06-04:00

There has been debate for years whether side SAPI plates are detrimental to certain injuries in the field. I imagine most argue that they’re good because hell, more body armor.I have treated multiple cases of shrapnel and GSW wounds where projectiles have entered the body through or under the arm above the SAPI and ricocheted around in the patient’s body off of the SAPI plate. Thoughts?

Response by MAJ Bryan Zeski made Mar 11 at 2018 1:07 PM

2018-03-11T13:07:36-04:00

I can't say I've really seen much debate. Not getting penetrated by small bits of lead is usually a good thing.

Response by CPT Aaron Kletzing made Mar 11 at 2018 1:24 PM

2018-03-11T13:24:19-04:00

I had them when I was in, and I guess they did help me feel a little safer on deployment. Though they could be cumbersome to move with, I was willing to trade that for safety.

Response by SFC Stephen King made Mar 11 at 2018 1:42 PM

2018-03-11T13:42:13-04:00

I am all for them especially if in the gunner position.

Response by SMSgt Thor Merich made Mar 11 at 2018 3:33 PM

2018-03-11T15:33:25-04:00

More armor is always better, in my mind. Discomfort (of heavy armor) is just a state of mind anyway.

Response by SGM Erik Marquez made Mar 11 at 2018 4:11 PM

2018-03-11T16:11:44-04:00

LT Private RallyPoint Member I do not have a purple heart because of a side SAPI plate... So I vote keep them

Response by LT Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 11 at 2018 5:19 PM

2018-03-11T17:19:38-04:00

I tend to agree. The “minimalist” plate carriers are dangerous. Especially when 200lb guys wear the small or extra small.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 11 at 2018 5:25 PM

2018-03-11T17:25:59-04:00

Any body armor is good, in my days we only had a OD fatigue jacket. I did see the flak jacket, but in the infantry pounding the ground, we never got issued it. So we all used the next best thing, a hole in the ground. 11B is for me. Salute!

Response by CPO Glenn Moss made Mar 11 at 2018 5:28 PM

2018-03-11T17:28:26-04:00

Well, this is coming from someone who has never worn body armor, so take this for what it's worth.

Which means what I'm about to write, plus a dollar, is enough to get you a cup of coffee at MdDonalds.

Seems to me that if a person would have suffered injuries from gun shots while wearing body armor, then they would have suffered injuries while NOT wearing body armor as well. Arguing over the severity of the injuries usually tends to leave out that little bitty thing called "statistics" with respect to the injuries that ARE avoided or mitigated by the armor.

While there is always room for improvement, people would do well to remember a few things. Most important, no system of armor is going to be perfect...ESPECIALLY personal body armor. You can pack a soldier in a tank and STILL end up with him killed simply because tank armor isn't 100% proof against everything, either.

Body armor is designed for specific protection purposes, while still allowing the wearer to actually WEAR it around continuously, while still performing his duties unhindered. I know this even though I've never worn any, because I'm an engineer. That's how things are built...with the intent to meet specific purposes. This means body armor has some pretty serious limitations to over come in performing its primary function.

Arguing that something like this is "detrimental" reminds me of the arguments people like to make about wearing seatbelts...arguments that even my wife bought into at one time. "I'd rather be thrown clear in an accident than wear a seatbelt and (be trapped, be injured/killed, etc.).

It's just as much a BS argument as all the seatbelt naysayers have. For every 1-in-a-million example of a certain instance in which something could be bad or worse, there is an overwhelming stack of evidence which says you're statistically FAR better off with than without.

AGAIN...that said, I've no personal, practical experience wearing body armor. I'm certainly open to comments to people who HAVE such experience.

Meanwhile...I'll continue to wear my hardhat, safety glasses, steel toed shoes, and hearing protection in the shipyard, even though I know none of this will protect me from a crane dropping a 75 ton load on my head in the drydock.

Response by SGT Aric Lier made Mar 11 at 2018 6:01 PM

2018-03-11T18:01:29-04:00

its a different age and a different war, who am I to judge? I preferred to patrol in a soft cap and left all my gear behind. LBE's were noisy even when taped up.I seen the body armor before getting out..... it was the first thing CIF accepted back.

Response by SPC Casey Ashfield made Mar 11 at 2018 7:31 PM

2018-03-11T19:31:10-04:00

If anything, I would like to see side plates improved. Something a bit more functional than a smaller brother version of the front/back plates, strapped to the side with nylon. Maybe a flexible level IV alternative that wraps around the torso instead of having gaps between 4 plates.

I have a personal dog in this fight regarding side SAPI plates. One of the men I served with was a 240B gunner and got hit with a one in a million shot where the bullet entered in a gap between his side and main plates. With the adrenaline running in his system he kept saying he wasn't hit or maybe he knew he was a goner. In either case he kept fighting and laying down suppressing fire. He bled out and died within minutes.

Response by SPC Mike Lake made Mar 11 at 2018 10:07 PM

2018-03-11T22:07:15-04:00

They save lives for one and I had them and never had no issues

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 12 at 2018 12:57 AM

2018-03-12T00:57:26-04:00

Personally I'm not a fan, but, at the end of the day the argument is over mobility vs protection. I prefer mobility.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 12 at 2018 3:20 AM

2018-03-12T03:20:57-04:00

I've been a medic for 16 years and I've never heard of any debate over whether side SAPI plates are detrimental to certain injuries in the field LT. Body armor is always being improved and most of the time, each variation is better than the last in terms of protection. You could make the argument that added weight and restricted body movement isn't always worth the additional protection, but the more surface of the body you cover with a material that can stop a bullet or shrapnel, the better in terms of mortality rates on the battlefield.

Response by SGT David T. made Mar 12 at 2018 8:19 AM

2018-03-12T08:19:18-04:00

It depends. If mobility is more important, then bad. If protection is more important then good. Everything is situationally dependent. If I am dismounted then perhaps mobility would be more important. If mounted then protection might be. I don't think there is a one size fits all answer here. Everything is a trade off.

Response by SPC David Willis made Mar 12 at 2018 9:21 AM

2018-03-12T09:21:02-04:00

My train of thought hasn't ever been about ricochets but rather mobility. At a certain point being slow but well armored is worse than being quick but unarmored. I wonder how the invasion of Normandy would have gone if everyone storming the beaches had a 40lb vest on while jumping from the boat into the water.

Response by CSM Richard StCyr made Mar 12 at 2018 9:42 AM

2018-03-12T09:42:33-04:00

Other than the added weight I had no problem with them. Our guys placed concrete, operated heavy equipment and did vertical construction with them and we had no issues from a capability loss stand point. I would say that they reduced you time on the 440 sprint though......Halt, Halt, Fuck you bang!

Response by SGT Tom Recupero made Mar 13 at 2018 1:49 AM

2018-03-13T01:49:57-04:00

Went in 04-05, never had side sapi, they were pretty heavy, wouldn’t have wanted to put on anymore weight

Response by SGM Bill Frazer made Mar 13 at 2018 1:22 PM

2018-03-13T13:22:54-04:00

It might be nice- but lot of cons- added weight, lack of mobility, harder to get close to the ground, etc. Look at your medieval history- once fully plated knights came out, folks with much lighter armor, learned how to stop them, once mobility was lost they were easy pickings.

Response by SFC Wayne Theilen made Apr 4 at 2018 10:04 AM

2018-04-04T10:04:16-04:00

Well if the bad guys stop shooting at us. Then get rid of them. Until then I think we should keep them.

Response by SPC Nicholas Bettinger made Apr 12 at 2018 1:30 AM

2018-04-12T01:30:04-04:00

Its better to have it and not need it, then need them and not have it.

Response by 1SG Clifford Barnes made Apr 15 at 2018 9:03 PM

2018-04-15T21:03:48-04:00

Keep them

Response by COL Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 15 at 2018 10:00 PM

2018-04-15T22:00:43-04:00

They are good but might require a different configuration for wear.

Response by TSgt Cory Harrington made Apr 27 at 2018 8:00 AM

2018-04-27T08:00:45-04:00

we used to have a wrap around zippered vest, and don't understand why we got away from the concept. the chance of getting hit from the obliques is just as good as front or back. need to make them up closer to armpit to fill that gap

Response by SGT Christina Barron made May 6 at 2018 12:16 PM

2018-05-06T12:16:07-04:00

I am ambivalent about side SAPI plates. I know they save lives. But, requiring them could also cost lives, I believe, if they end up adding too much weight to the load the Soldier wears. Case in point: When I was ordered to wear side SAPIs, I could barely shuffle. In no way could I come close to any sort of movement that in any way resembled a run. If I had been ordered to wear them and gotten into a firefight, I would have been a detriment to my unit, as I wouldn't have been mobile. Luckily, I was in an aviation Bn my first deployment, and was in a supporting role in my second. And, I never got in a firefight in either. My conclusion: side SAPIs for infantry and others whose job will make them the most likely to need them, and make sure the Soldiers are strong enough to wear them and be mobile. But no side SAPIs for supporting roles, as that's just more sensitive equipment to lug around and keep track of.

Response by CW3 Kevin Storm made May 8 at 2018 12:29 PM

2018-05-08T12:29:48-04:00

Having worn body armor for too many years that I could care for, I will say this, if it stops a bullet or a piece of shrapnel, it is a good thing. If you have a dumbass commander who feels you need tow ear it morning noon, and night for training, he/she should be slap side the head with those plates. many of who guarded nukes and or other things during the cold war had lighter body armor back then. But we had commanders who wanted us to sleep in damn things, play volley ball and run in them. Now most of us are at the VA waiting for knee replacements, back surgery, and other things.

Looking at history, why did armor fall out of favor? Lack of mobility, better techniques and weapons. So what is happening now? Look at the effects of what happened in the recent wars. Humvee blows up, we add on hillbilly armor. doesn't have the desired effect, so we move to the M1114, the 14 doesn't have enough Armor so we add more armor. Vehicle becomes so overloaded it has hard time getting out of its own way. So now we phase out the 1114 and go to bigger trucks.

Same with Body armor, it is getting better and better protected because we add more plates, but now the soldier can hardly move. Then the US, Brits and Hezbollah prove us all wrong, because the they are using man portable thermo baric missiles, which can effectively render body armor useless. The one advantage is this weapons I not yet widely deployed, but give it time, once other foes see it working why not buy it?
This goes back to the US not keep pace with technological trends in Modern Warfare. Are we training our officer corps at the lower levels to make use of these modern technologies? Not at the scale we need to be at.

References:
https://www.popsci.com/thermobaric-bombs-and-other-nightmare-weapons-syrian-civil-war#page-4

http://www.captainsjournal.com/2006/08/23/thermobaric-weapons-and-body-armor/

thermobaric-bombs-and-other-nightmare-weapons-syrian-civil-war

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made May 12 at 2018 3:14 PM

2018-05-12T15:14:15-04:00

They provide a good return on a small investment in weight and space, as long as they are mounted correctly. I've seen some Soldiers fail to attach them correctly and they hang off like saddlebags. But if you do it right, they're snug and out of the way.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made May 12 at 2018 4:10 PM

2018-05-12T16:10:35-04:00

They are definitely more than necessary

Response by SGT Scott Cain made May 20 at 2018 10:07 PM

2018-05-20T22:07:23-04:00

Anyone who says they’d rather not wear body armor has probably never been hit in the chest with a bullet... just a hunch.

Response by SSG Henry Palmer made Jun 10 at 2018 7:52 AM

2018-06-10T07:52:03-04:00

keep them

Response by Mark Jhon made Oct 8 at 2019 12:12 PM

2019-10-08T12:12:45-04:00

Off course they are the best brand i ever used. Plate carrier planet has some information about them. https://www.platecarrierplanet.com/best-sapi-plates-for-sale/

5 Best SAPI Plates For Sale in 2019 (Esapi Plates)

Check the list of these five amazing SAPI plates and try a whole new experience of armor plates this year. ESAPI training plates are also reviewed here!!

Response by CPO Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 30 at 2020 2:16 PM

2020-01-30T14:16:27-05:00

Hi LT
So, I took your comment to mean that you and your colleagues have debated the value of the side SAPI based on casualty injuries youve seen.
IMO, there may be a bit of confirmation bias happening at that upper level.
If you havent already, it may be worth it to inject into the conversation data regarding casualty injuries you have NOT seen based on the side SAPI presence.
As many others have stated, there are trade-offs for more vs less armor so situationally dependent appropriateness should be a consideration. There will always be unfortunate and regrettable moments when injuries occur as you detailed. I would submit those injuries may have been less complicated to treat but they would be still on the same patient, plus the added bonus of the shrapnel thay was stopped by the SAPI. That said, I’d wonder how many more injuries on how many additional patients would occur without the SAPI in place.
I’d certainly advocate for upgrades/alternatives that are less bulky. There are trade-offs in r&d as well tho.
Who pay$ for the end product?
Maybe why the Corps contracts us out to settle the difference?

Response by Col Casey "Radio" G. made Feb 15 at 2020 4:34 PM

2020-02-15T16:34:09-05:00

I lost my cousin in 2010 to close range small arms fire that caught him in the side where the SAPI plates should have been. Ricochet sounds terrible, but I'll stick by my stance to keep as many foreign objects out to begin with.

Response by Karan Lee made Mar 20 at 2020 7:22 AM

2020-03-20T07:22:31-04:00

Is there any possibility of shrapnel or projectiles entering the body even with the SAPI plates in place?

Response by SGT Christina Barron made Aug 20 at 2021 12:03 PM

2021-08-20T12:03:07-04:00

For me, the side SAPI plates were the proverbial straws that broke the camel's back. While I could move reasonably well in my full battle-rattle minus the side SAPIs, I could barely shuffle when I added the side SAPIs in my vest. I decided that the ability to move was going to keep me safer than the side SAPIs, so I left mine in my foot locker while I was deployed. But, YMMV. If you can move in them, you should keep them in.

Response by SGT Lorenzo Nieto made Oct 2 at 2021 7:03 AM

2021-10-02T07:03:13-04:00

Man I sure could have used this while be stationed in Vietnam I’m sure it would have been better than nothing.