Plastic helmets fail tests - Army News | News from Afghanistan & Iraq - Army Times

Plastic helmets fail tests

Test versions of the Army’s new plastic helmet have failed to protect against bullets and blunt force attacks. Some prototypes couldn’t stop bullets, others couldn’t withstand blunt force, and some failed on both counts.

Officials would say only that all five of the test helmets, made by four companies, failed in either ballistic or nonballistic testing. The nonballistic tests examined the impact of blunt force trauma to the helmets from blast waves, rolled-over vehicles and fragmentation.

The failures have set the program back, postponing Army plans to field the new helmet this year.

Creating a lightweight helmet that will stop a rifle round is difficult, experts say.

“This has been an acknowledged risky schedule, but we think the potential benefits to come out of the enhanced combat helmet warranted the assumed risk, and we were pushing everybody to their limits on this one — industry, our engineers, and even our own team,” said Lt. Col. A.J. Pasagian, head of the Marine Corps’ infantry combat equipment program at Marine Corps Systems Command. “We acknowledged that risk up front. We didn’t make it, but we are going to go back to [the second round of developmental testing] in the next four to six months.”

Now it’s back to the development phase for the Enhanced Combat Helmet, a Marine-led program designed to choose a new, more durable, lightweight plastic alternative to today’s Kevlar head gear.

The plastic helmets, which the Army also plans to field, are made with an ultrahigh molecular weight polyethylene, which is used commercially in everything from artificial hip replacements to police body armor. The heavy-duty plastic works well in body armor, because the armor is relatively flat. It becomes vulnerable when molded into a more circular, helmet shape and is also harder to manipulate, Pasagian said. He declined to detail the prototypes’ failures any further, citing “operational security” and “acquisition sensitive” material. However, he said all the companies will have to do “enormously better” to meet the requirements laid out by the Army and Marines.

Though the Army’s PEO Soldier organization participated in setting the requirements and monitoring the testing, an Army spokesman directed all inquiries to the Marines, who have the lead in the program.

Pasagian declined to say what kind of rounds, or how many, were used during the ballistic testing, but Army Lt. Col. Jon Rickey, head of Program Manager Soldier Protective Equipment, told Army Times in August that the service would like a helmet that could stop a 7.62mm round — the caliber of ammunition used in the AK47 assault rifle favored by insurgents in Afghanistan and Iraq. The requirements for both the Corps and Army state that the new combat helmet must provide at least 35 percent more protection against fragmentation and handgun and small-arms fire.

Once the plastic helmet is developed, the services plan to initially purchase 238,500 of them; the Army expects to field 200,000 of them.

The test failures mean the services will not meet initial goals to begin fielding in early 2010, and a new timeline is not yet available, Pasagian said.

The ECH would be a significant upgrade over the existing Advanced Combat Helmet adopted by the Army in 2002 and the Lightweight Helmet fielded by the Marines about a year later. If successful, it would be the first time in nearly three decades that Marines and soldiers will not wear helmets made primarily of DuPont’s Kevlar, although some modified version of Kevlar remains on the table, Pasagian said.

It is even possible that the final helmet would be a partnering of the heavy-duty plastic with Kevlar, Pasagian said.

The same four companies are still vying for the production contract. Corps officials have discussed the test results with each one, suggesting a new blend of materials to better meet requirements. A new contract will not have to be awarded to continue the developmental testing, Pasagian said.