{"id":582,"date":"2022-11-29T22:26:00","date_gmt":"2022-11-29T22:26:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/gunowner-news.com\/?p=582"},"modified":"2022-11-29T22:26:00","modified_gmt":"2022-11-29T22:26:00","slug":"wwi-body-armor-plate-mail-in-the-trenches","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/gunowner-news.com\/?p=582","title":{"rendered":"WWI Body Armor: Plate Mail in the Trenches"},"content":{"rendered":"


\n<\/p>\n

\n

By Tom Laemlein<\/a><\/p>\n

At the outset of the Great War, old-world planning ran head-on into the realities of modern technology. Vast numbers of men were thrown into the grinder, and the losses were staggering. Scrambling for solutions, military planners looked backward for one possible answer: armor. With WWI body armor, military leaders looked for a tactical advantage while the men in the trenches looked for any edge to stay alive. In today\u2019s article, Tom Laemlein looks at the trench armor developed during this time and judges its effectiveness. \u2014\u00a0Editor<\/em><\/p>\n

\n<\/picture>
This U.S. body armor shield was designed by Hamilton De Forest of New York. It bears a passing resemblance to modern bulletproof vests. It was one of the most lightweight WWI designs. Image:\u00a0NARA<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Outback Origins of WWI Plate Armor<\/h2>\n

In June of 1880, in the outback of Victoria, Australia, infamous bushranger Ned Kelly brought the idea of body armor back into the mindset of modern military planners. During a 15-minute shootout with police, Kelly wore a bush-forged and crafted suit of armor (weighing almost 100 pounds) and exchanged fire at close range with multiple officers.<\/p>\n

\"ned\n<\/picture>
Body armor becomes part of the military discussion due to the criminal Ned Kelly. \u201cNed Kelly\u2019s Last Stand\u201d by James Waltham Curtis, circa 1880. Via the Library of Victoria,\u00a0Australia<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Kelly\u2019s armor effectively protected his head and upper body, but his arms and legs were exposed, and eventually he was knocked down by a pair of shotgun blasts that struck his legs. Kelly\u2019s opponents were bewildered and frustrated by the ineffectiveness of their firearms, while the outlaw appeared in the morning mist almost as an apparition, strangely impervious to bullets.<\/p>\n

As the bullets found the uncovered areas of his body, Kelly lost a considerable amount of blood, and the weight of his armor became difficult to manage. Each round that struck the improvised armor plate delivered a massive punch to Ned\u2019s head or torso. When he was finally subdued it was found that Kelly had suffered more than 20 wounds. Even so, he survived to be tried and then hanged for his crimes. His body armor became an instant legend and was the subject of much discussion in international military circles. The medieval concept of body armor had been reborn in the modern world.<\/p>\n

\"body\n<\/picture>
US troops testing various styles of body armor including German armor worn by the man at the right. Note the French \u201cPolack visors\u201d on the experimental helmets worn at left and right. Image:\u00a0NARA<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Kelly\u2019s body armor was crude, but nonetheless ingenious. The forged iron plates were said to be 6mm thick, capable of turning away the commonplace rounds of the time. The hits to the armor caused significant bruising and lacerations, as well as concussive effects. Despite this, Kelly was able to stay in the close-range fight for a surprising length of time.<\/p>\n

Did WWI Soldiers Wear Body Armor?<\/h2>\n

Yes. A variety of plate and other armors were used in World War I.<\/p>\n

\"us\n<\/picture>
A U.S. soldier demonstrates the American light body armor that includes shoulder-arm-hand protection. The soldier wears the U.S. experimental helmet No. 5. Image: Author\u2019s\u00a0collection<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

The rapid advances of military science in the late 19th<\/sup>\u00a0century included a new look at body armor. The idea of making a foot soldier impervious to enemy fire has always been a goal, and the consequent impact on the morale of the assault troops is an obvious by-product.<\/p>\n

But there is always a cost, and with body armor it is measured in pounds. It is a frustrating equation: the greater the protection, the greater the weight. Too much weight and the infantryman turns into more of a statue than a soldier. Not enough protection and the body armor idea becomes a pointless exercise.<\/p>\n

\"making\n<\/picture>
Body armor plates under construction at Hale & Kilburn during 1918. Apparently, a large amount of the protective gear was made, but not issued to combat troops. Image:\u00a0NARA<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

As the great powers approached an impending conflict in the early part of the 20th<\/sup>\u00a0century, there were multiple new threats to the infantryman: high-powered rifles and machine guns, and modern explosive artillery ammunition that continued to grow in caliber and shrapnel effect. When World War I raged, artillery and machine guns would do the overwhelming amount of the killing. Some saw body armor as a smart way to minimize casualties.<\/p>\n

Choosing Risk?<\/h2>\n
\"german\n<\/picture>
The WWI German helmet carrying the additional armor protection \u2014 usually worn by snipers and sentries. Image:\u00a0NARA<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

In \u201cHelmets and Body Armor in Modern Warfare\u201d by Bashford Dean (Yale University Press 1920), the author and his team went to great lengths to study and measure the effectiveness of body armor (including helmets):<\/p>\n

\n

The results of our inquiry will show: (1) That the helmet has been adopted as part of the regular military equipment of many nations. (2) That helmets and body armor have been found, in broad averages, of distinct advantage to the wearers. (3) That body armor, in spite of the protection which it affords, finds little favor with the soldier. For numerous reasons, he would rather take his chances of injury. (4) That effort should be made, none the less, to demonstrate more clearly the protective value of body armor, to improve its material and design, and to reduce to a minimum the discomfort which will always be experienced by its wearer, in a word, to meet the objections to the use of armor which have been brought up on the sides both of theory and of practice.<\/p>\n

In a report from Colonel Walter D. McCaw, who has reviewed (June 30, 1918) the latest data at the Service de Sante, the following percentages are given:<\/p>\n