Frag Out! Magazine
Issue link: https://fragout.uberflip.com/i/1000484
developed several experimental models: T-34, T62E1, and T64 that were slightly modeled on the Japanese "armored vest". The final M12, created for the purpose on invasion of Japan, was standardized in June 1945 and even implemented for production in the planned quantity of 100,000 units. However, after the use of the nukes, the invasion of Japan was unnecessary, so the production was ceased. M12 was designed to protect the upper torso, with an aluminum chest plate and ballistic nylon filler of the whole surface of the vest. The vest was about 6 kilograms and, among others, included optional groin protection. Thanks to that, the US infantrymen, who had fought for dozens of years without the slightest torso protection, could theoretically have finally something to protect against fragments. Several vests were developed after the war, and they seemed more practical than Army M12. USMC still tried to improve the idea of vests with Doron panels combined with ballistic nylon, while the Army focused on vests without any rigid pads. This is how M1951, M1952, M1952A, and M1955 were created. In 1966, Army M1952A was upgraded with collar and became the most classic "Armor, Body, Fragmentation Protective Vest with 3/4 Collar". At the end of the Vietnam War it was modified into M69, fastened with a Velcro. All those vests had one common feature. They were inconvenient, restricted the user's movements, and were pretty thick. It caused issues when it came to adjust them to the rest of personal equipment, including cold weather clothing. In the hot climate of Vietnam, the situation did not improve at all, since the vests caused overheating and posed additional burden, while their efficiency was still insignificant. The critical points of the vest included the central part of the chest, where the fastening was located, because soldiers tended to unfasten it for ventilation, as well as the sides that could be adjusted with cords (they also were loosened because of poor air flow). At the same time, after WW2, the development of artillery went on and, over time, the ballistic inserts designed back in the 1950s was becoming less and less efficient under the circumstances of the modern battlefield. EQUIPMENT