Kevlar boxers win wars... or do they?

"ACESandEIGHTS" (acesandeights) 12/08/2014 at 11:59 • Filed to: None

0

12

Interesting read: until the the 21st Century, People's Liberation Army soldiers didn't have elastic underwear—they had to tie a knot in the rope that held up their one-size-fits-all drawers. As recently as the 1980s, helmets weren't even standard issue: "equipment for the weak."

Chinese soldier is outfitted with "the equivalent of two iPhones'" (several hundred dollars), whereas U.S. soldier wears a mid-range automobile's ($50K USD) worth of gear.

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

Party-vi > ACESandEIGHTS 12/08/2014 at 12:07

3

That $50,000 is considered a "mid-level car" upsets me.

ACESandEIGHTS > Party-vi 12/08/2014 at 12:08

1

Too high? It's definitely too high for me. I feel like an indentured servant whenever I sign on anything around or above $30K.

R Saldana [|Oo|======|oO|] - BTC/ETH/LTC Prophet > ACESandEIGHTS 12/08/2014 at 12:13

2

These numbers are largely out of proportion thanks to war profiteering. The exceptional costs of Us military equipment is due to the lobbyists and shady double dealing politicians making a buck off of every piece of gear each soldier wears.

In the Marine Corps, we literally got the hand me downs. Every time the Army, Air Force and Navy would get updated equipment the Marine Corps would get the outgoing kit.

In Afghanistan, many of us got fed up with the bullshit and BYOK (Bring your own kit).

Fraud, waste and abuse is actually the better agency title for the Defense Financial and Accounting Bureau.

The per unit cost of a "Joint Tactical door breaching kit" (10lb sledgehammer) was around $75 in 2011. Consider how many are purchased, how many never make it downrange and disappear before they make it ot their units.

spanfucker retire bitch > ACESandEIGHTS 12/08/2014 at 12:16

0

That kind of thinking has not entirely died out in the Chinese military. Although China is the largest exporter in the world of body armor, very few of its soldiers are provided with bulletproof jackets. "Some leaders think that it is too indulgent to wrap soldiers with too much equipment," the article quotes a PLA logistics instructor, Cui Xianwei, as saying.

I don't know whether to laugh or to cry at this sentiment. Body armor is considered "too much equipment?"

blacktruck18 > ACESandEIGHTS 12/08/2014 at 12:19

0

Not everyone in the U.S. military gets all the expensive stuff. Yes everyone has Kevlar helmets. But, the Kevlar underwear is only given out when you are deploying to a combat zone and only troops that spend most of their time dismounted (Infantry, Scouts and the like) get the built in commo stuff. If you mainly in a vehicle when outside the wire or never leave the FOB you don't get most of the super expensive stuff.

ACESandEIGHTS > R Saldana [|Oo|======|oO|] - BTC/ETH/LTC Prophet 12/08/2014 at 12:20

1

I don't doubt it, sure. When you look at the price of real estate in the Washington metro area, you can see the amount of government graft.

Though the fact that the US was wearing kevlar on its heads before the Chinese even wore helmets says something. They make pains in the article to point out that that's not even necessarily a negative thing, that the Chinese believe too expensive a kit makes too soft a soldier. What it might be saying is there's many a defense rep pushing those night vision goggles on a unit which doesn't need it.

Speaking of which: how much is too much? I talked to a soldier in the last few weeks who said "thanks to our tech, we own the night." Until it gets sand in it or gets dropped I imagine, right? How many hours can those things be in the field before they fail?

ACESandEIGHTS > spanfucker retire bitch 12/08/2014 at 12:22

1

To them. Buy a soldier armor that costs more than you'll pay him over his career? They've got plenty more where he came from.

ACESandEIGHTS > blacktruck18 12/08/2014 at 12:22

0

I didn't know they existed. I think I want some.

Snooder87 > ACESandEIGHTS 12/08/2014 at 12:30

1

Heh Kevlar boxers. Such a simple and yet brilliant solution.

R Saldana [|Oo|======|oO|] - BTC/ETH/LTC Prophet > ACESandEIGHTS 12/08/2014 at 12:33

0

I never had NODs fail on me, either on my head, weapon system (had a FLIr scope), or my camera for documenting raids and weapon caches. But then again, the Marine Corps is a branch that truly focusing on preserving your gear for as long as possible. The only time it is acceptable to lose DoD gear (weapons, vehicles, etc) is during a chain reaction compound blocked ambush in which your Afghan national army attachment have taken massive casualties, your vehicles have been immobilized by IEDs and are subsequently burning up with the extra ammo, water, and chow cooking off inside.

If you lose or otherwise destroy any gear while on active duty in the Corps, you get penalized for it and often times have to pay for it yourself (especially if your command does not like you.).

blacktruck18 > ACESandEIGHTS 12/08/2014 at 12:42

0

I wore them once they were itchy as fuck. Never wore them again.

Tapas > ACESandEIGHTS 12/08/2014 at 15:05

0

I think a huge reason for the disparity is cost of same/similar equipment in the two countries.

The difference in cost of equipment would be less if China sourced their gear from American companies.

Things don't cost nearly as much for Chinese military - where I wouldnt be surprised if had government owned defense companies making/sourcing a large portion of the gear with cheap labor.

The US private military industrial complex has very few players and a lot of lobbyists that help secure overpriced contracts through back room deals. (This is not to say China doesnt have corruption)