ENGR0011 Vidic 2:00
L04
BODY ARMOR: NOW IN WOMEN’S SIZES
Vincent Fagerstrom (vpf1@pitt.edu)
INTRODUCTION: IF THE SHOE FITS,
WEAR IT
When studying at college, it is easy to lose sight of
your roots. Events and people that affect the way you act,
think, and believe. Everyone has reasons or excuses as to
why they lost track of their beginnings. For me, I was so
caught up with school work and exams that I lost touch of
old friends that were as close as brothers to me. A couple
weeks ago I went back home for my high school’s
homecoming and got to spend time with my brothers from
high school. While we were all together in my friend’s
back yard, one of my best friends decided to tell us all his
life changing decision: he was joining the marines. I was
stunned. How could this man I’ve grown alongside with
be joining the marines? Even though this man standing in
front of me could tie me in a pretzel, a bullet is one strong
foe. While I cannot fight by his side on the battlefield, I
promised to help make him safe in any way I could. I
realized the best path a chemical engineer could take to
help soldiers was to focus on body armor. After all, the
first fundamental canon in the National Society of
Professional Engineers (NSPE) Code of Ethics states,
“shall hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of
the public.” [1] On top of that, one of the main canons of
the American Institute of Chemical Engineering (AIChE)
states that Chemical Engineers should use “their
knowledge and skill for the enhancement of human
welfare.” [2] After some research, it became glaringly
evident that while the evolution of body armor has come a
long way, one form of body armor development has been
lacking.
“In February 1946, Army Chief of Staff Gen. Dwight
D. Eisenhower directed the preparation of legislation to
make the Women’s Army Corps a permanent part of the
Army.” [3] Luckily for our soldiers, body armor has been
improved greatly since 1946. Up until recently, however,
there were no alterations between armor for male and
female soldiers. While their combat efficiency is equal to
males’, their physique is quite different. Back in 1946,
this issue wasn’t necessarily a top priority because of the
low number of women in the military. But in 2009,
“Women accounted for 15.5 percent of the total Army.”
[3] These brave women are risking their lives for the
safety of their country, and deserve every bit of protection
that their male counterpart. The engineers of today
recognize this and have been working on a solution to
find a better fit for women soldiers. These engineers are
using the basic concepts of current body armors and
altering the shape and designs of the armor, making it
more compatible with female soldiers. Both the sets ethics
University of Pittsburgh, Swanson School of Engineering
October 9, 2012
1
included in a career in engineering and the morals of
being a human support the further development and
funding of armor designed for females. Not only this, but
the research of these sets of ethics, along with the
research involved in the writing of this essay, are a key
component to strengthening my understanding and
passion for engineering and to make sure my moral
compass is set in the right direction. While developing a
better fit for female soldiers might cost time and money, it
is definitely worth the cost.
BODY ARMOR TODAY
The current model of armor that the US Army uses is
the Interceptor Body Armor (IBA). The IBA is “the
newest generation of multiple-threat body protection,”
and “protective inserts can withstand multiple small-arms
hits.” [4] The IBA is made of two modular components.
The first is an outer tactical vest, followed by small-arms
protective inserts. The Army claims that it is the best
armor available and that it has outperformed all other
armors in various tests. The IBA is specifically designed
to protect soldiers from small arms weaponry along with
shrapnel from IEDs. “Throat and groin protectors can be
attached, and recent upgrades add protection to the upper
arm and underarm areas.” [4]
It is also relatively light, weighing in at “16.4 pounds;
each of the two inserts weighs 4 pounds, and the outer
tactical vest weighs 8.4 pounds.” [5] In fact, it weighs
almost 9 lbs. lighter than the previous model of body
armor. The IBA’s outer tactical vest is made of a Kevlar
weave that's capable of stopping a 9 mm bullet. On top of
that, is has a webbing on the front and back of the vest,
permitting attachments for other pieces of equipment. For
even more safety, the “body armor inserts made of boron
carbide” were added to the vest. [5] The boron carbide
material is extremely strong and relatively light. This is a
major component of why the Interceptor is so much
lighter than the previous flak model. Not only this, but the
boron carbide ceramic material “stops, shatters and
catches any fragments up to a 7.62 mm round with a
muzzle velocity of 2,750 feet per second. It's harder than
Kevlar.”[5] The second canon in the NSPE code of ethics
states that engineers shall, “Perform services only in areas
of their competence.” [1] Since chemical engineers are
proficient in the production of chemical products, they are
more than qualified for this job. The Army claims that the
IBA will reduce the amount and severity of wounds
soldiers will experience on the battlefield. Not only does
the vest protect the soldiers underneath them, but a “study
showed that for targets closer than 150 meters, soldiers
Vincent Fagerstrom
shot better while wearing body armor than they did
without.” [5]
Overall, the use of the IBA has increased the combat
effectiveness and survivability of US soldiers. The
technology of this armor gives soldiers a step up on the
opposition; not to mention some peace of mind on the
battlefield. It is important that engineers release truthful
and untainted information, especially when the final
product is used to save lives. That is why the third canon
in the NSPE code of ethics is that engineers must “issue
public statements only in an objective and truthful
manner.” [1] Having faith in your armor is a great morale
booster, especially in stressful situations. As great as this
armor is, it is unable to protect 15.5 percent of the people
it is designed for. This 15.5 percent are the women
serving in the US Army. They are risking their lives for
this country, so they deserve just as much protection.
of the vest with a side plate opening. This way, it would
curve over the chest. They also narrowed the shoulders
because the female soldiers had difficulty with the current
body armor’s design at the shoulders. When they would
place their weapon on the shoulder, there was no area for
the butt of the weapon to rest. This would make firing less
accurate, and also potentially cause damage to the arm
and body through recoil.
Although females have been in the military for a long
time, this new campaign for female designed body armor
is quite young. “The program kicked off in January 2011,
with prototypes now undergoing testing by members of
the 101st Airborne Division's 1st Brigade Combat Team.”
[6] The development of these new designs is important
and should be supported. A well-fitting suit of armor
makes a drastic difference in the combat effectiveness and
morale of the soldier. Hennessey even said, “Most of
them, when they put it on, they were like, oh, my
goodness, I need this right now. Can I have this? I could
wear this all day. It fits so well.” [7] The soldiers feel so
much safer and more comfortable with the new body
armor. So much so in fact, that a reporter “actually took a
picture of one soldier hugging her vest, she was
immediately in love with it.” [7]
ONE SIZE DOES NOT FIT ALL
Advances in body armor have come a long way since
medieval chain mail. But one common factor between all
the armor suddenly needs to change: they are for men
only. A major canon of the AIChE states that chemical
engineers must “formally advise their employers or
clients if they perceive that a consequence of their duties
will adversely affect the present or future health or safety
of their colleagues or the public.” [2] Therefore, those in
charge of the production of the IBA should inform the
army that the armor fails to properly protect female
soldiers. It would be unethical to stop making adjustments
to the armor when so many soldiers are left vulnerable.
The IBA is a fantastic achievement for body armor
development. Now all it needs to do is fit a female frame.
The IBA is not one size fits all. In fact, “the size extrasmall was too large for 85 percent of the females.” [6]
Because the armor was too big, it became much too loose
and too long. This caused the armor to have gaps and
spaces, especially under the arms. The sealing of these
gaps could be the difference between life and death on the
battle field. Not only are these gaps dangerous, but they
also negatively impacted the performance of the female
soldiers. “In some cases, women were reporting bruising
on their hip bones because the side plates dragged down
to their hips,” and “when they were sitting down, it was
riding up to their chins, because the torso was so long."
[6] These soldiers have to wear their armor for extended
periods of time, even sleep in it.
When lead designer, Lynn Hennessey, was asked if
this could be fixed by just making a smaller version of the
male version she responded, “Not exactly because, as you
know, a female has curves. So we needed to do something
to the outer shell of the armor to bring it closer to the
female body.” [7] What the designers decided to do was
to put the plate that they wear on top of it on the outside
VALUE OF WRITING ASSIGNMENTS:
DEEPER THAN THE NUMBERS
It’s easy to get lost in the numbers. As an engineering
student, trying to stay afloat amidst the sea of numbers
and equations can be a daunting task. It can take a toll on
students, and can almost feel dehumanizing at some
points. I felt like the left, logical side of my brain was
getting all the stimulation while the right sat there
decaying. Luckily for me, I took a music class so that I
could express myself and my feelings. It is one of the few
times in my week where I can truly let my creative juices
flow. As powerful as numbers and equations are, they are
not a good medium for conveying feelings. These writing
assignments are a great way to get the creative side of the
brain in motion, while also incorporating engineering
specific material. In my opinion, Tamer Ceylan, a
member of the American Society for Engineering
Education, hits the nail on the head by saying, “In
general, engineering courses are quite successful in
achieving many of their objectives but miss certain
important elements such as deep thinking on the student’s
part, free exploration of thoughts and ideas, connecting
technical subjects to students’ daily lives, and expressing
such connections in writing.” [8] By incorporating a
writing component in the curriculum, Pitt engineers get a
richer, more balanced engineering education. It is
important for engineers to be able to write about such
topics. What good is great data when you have no ability
to properly present it?
2
Vincent Fagerstrom
In addition to this, making students research ethics
shows them the more professional and human side to the
job. These assignments give a spark to students by
furthering their knowledge and passion for engineering. It
is nice to see the finished product of all of the math and
sciences we are learning. It gives us the drive to embrace
the curriculum as tools to solve problems, not as chores to
complete with a passing grade. Thinking of homework
and exams in this way makes it much easier to put in the
time to do the job right, as opposed to just trying to get it
done. Not only this, but the writing assignments also give
students insight on what they fields the want to go into. I
had the ability to choose any topic I wanted. For me, my
experience with one of my best friends and the
experiences I’ve had with my father guided me toward
picking body armor for this assignment. The students
should let their passions lead them in the right direction.
Because without passion, it really is just a bunch of
numbers.
[3] "ARMY.MIL Features." History of Women in the
U.S. Army. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Oct. 2012.
<http://www.army.mil/women/newera.html>.
[4] Dawson, Debi. "ARMY.MIL, The Official Homepage
of the United States Army." Army Defends Interceptor
Body Armor as the Best for the Best. N.p., 22 May 2007.
Web.
09
Oct.
2012.
<http://www.army.mil/article/3298/army-defendsinterceptor-body-armor-as-the-best-for-the-best/>.
[5]
"Military." Interceptor
Body
Armor.
Globalsecurity.org, n.d. Web. 09 Oct. 2012.
<http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/i
nterceptor.htm>.
[6] Miles, Donna. "ARMY.MIL, The Official Homepage
of the United States Army." Deploying Soldiers Test New
Female Body Armor Prototype. N.p., 18 Sept. 2012. Web.
09 Oct. 2012. <http://www.army.mil/article/87464/>.
CONCLUSION: RETURN THE FAVOR
[7] Hennessey, Lynn. "Army Designs New Body Armor
For Female Soldiers." Interview by Melissa Block. NPR.
25 Sept. 2012. Radio. Transcript.
Since my father is a retired Lt. Col. in the Army, I
have always grown up in support of the military. In fact, I
was born on an Army base overseas. Even though I did
not live with my father for most of my life, I come to
understand the sacrifices soldiers give for their country.
Some of which give the ultimate sacrifice: their lives. If
these soldiers are willing to do this for their country,
civilians should be supportive of any possible way to
protect these soldiers. In addition to this, many canons in
the codes of ethics for both the NSPE and the AIChE
back the movement to the better the armor for female
soldiers. By completing this writing assignment, I have a
more complete understanding of the importance of both
engineering and the code of ethics involved with this
career path along with an increased ambition for success
in the field. This is why support of the development of
body armor designed for female soldiers is so important.
The advances in the engineering of body armor are
amazing, but they need to take the extra step and make
sure both genders of soldiers are equally protected. The
value of their lives are equal, so should the quality of their
armor.
[8] Ceylan, Tamer. “THINKING AND WRITING IN
UNDERGRADUATE ENGINEERING EDUCATION.”
Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, Illinois: American
Society
for
Engineering
Education,
2005.
<http://ilin.asee.org/Conference2005papers/P111.pdf>.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to thank my father for giving me an interest
in the military and how to protect those who serve our
country.
I would like to thank Beth Bateman Newborg for
providing me with all of the information needed to write
this essay.
I would also want to thank my floor mates for keeping me
awake enough to finish this into the late hours of the
night.
A final thanks to Hurricane Sandy for giving me a reason
to stay inside and focus on this essay.
REFERENCES
[1] "NSPE Code of Ethics for Engineers." National
Society of Professional Engineers. National Society of
Professional Engineers, n.d. Web. 30 Oct. 2012.
<http://www.nspe.org/Ethics/CodeofEthics/index.html>.
[2] "Code of Ethics | AIChE." AIChE. American Institute
of Chemical Engineers, n.d. Web. 30 Oct. 2012.
<http://www.aiche.org/about/code-ethics>.
3