For good reason. Armour performance, as opposed to "armour standards" are classified. The OA that defines the standards is quite properly not up for discussion in open sources.
However, anyone with any understanding of body armour could make some well informed estimates.
Correct. It is the OA that supports the "Specification," - and that is what informs the policy. However a substantial part of that policy is based on risk mitigation balanced against trade offs.There is only one reason why the the "full Monty" of body armour needs to the worn and that's because ops data confirms a significant reduction in KIA / WIA.
Thanks to the "Nimrod Case" there is very little appetite for taking risk right now.
Bookmarks