Lifesaver or Dead Weight? Soviet Infantry Armor in WW2

[@MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized]

You can follow Dr. Jens Wehner on Instagram, where he posts photos from air planes etc.: instagram.com/jagdfliegen/ Want to see more interviews with experts? Consider supporting me on Patreon or Subscribestar, these supporters make trips like this possible. Additionally, you will get early access (no ads) and other features, more info here: » patreon - www.patreon.com/join/mhv » subscribe star - www.subscribestar.com/mhv

[@TheArklyte]

In such cases I usually ask - had anybody used it too or copied it? And indeed, germans used captured ones and had produced copies. So I guess when an opponent SHOOTING at them still believes it's an idea worth a merit, it says a lot.

[@AKUJIVALDO]

@@TheArklyte because Russians used 7.62x25 submachine guns massively. If mainstream would be rifles like in 1940, no German would bother with producing those breastplates.

[@TheArklyte]

@@AKUJIVALDO If mainstream would be rifles like in 1940, no German would bother with producing intermediate round rifles either. If machine guns weren't mainstream, then no one would bother with tanks. And if nobody bothered with muskets, crossbow would still be in use. But that's not how technological progress works;)

[@AKUJIVALDO]

@@TheArklyte naw, you talk BS. You bring causation up as correlation.

[@TheArklyte]

@@AKUJIVALDO so I mistake causation and correlation why copying the logic of your answer? And that puts us where exactly?;)

[@olivergentschog]

I think the shape of the armor around the neck is for protection against fragments of bullets which fracture after impact and deflect upwards. Because otherwise they would hit your throat and that can´t be good for you. You can even see this feature in medieval armor where it was used against arrows which deflected from the breastplate. Great Video as always!

[@blacktemplar2323]

Tods Workshop has a Video where they shoot a medieval breastplate with a longbow where you can see this in effect.

[@whitephosphorus15]

Also in modern body armor, especially ones using steel plate.

[@henrik3291]

Very insightful comment, was going to mention the medieval armor thing myself. Another aspect of this is how the gunshield of the panthers were redisgned as the projectiles deflected from them down on the top armor.

[@VosperCDN]

Absolutely for spall/fragmentation going up into the soldiers neck; as pointed out by others, this is visible in historical armours. As for the holes along the top edge, I submit it would be for a collar of some sort (padded, leather, etc), for the comfort of the solder, so he's not having the metal edge rubbing against his skin.

[@DTOStudios]

I would also argue its more artillery shrapnel or grenade blasts than bullets. Artillery caused the most casualties in WW2, and the close combat the Soviet SMG shock troops were involved in grenades would probably have been the weapon of choice on both sides. The armor may not be able to stop rifle rounds, but if it could stop or deflect pistol caliber rounds from MP40's, and artillery shrapnel and grenade fragments, then everyone would want it and in close urban fighting it would be very effective. Plus I image the psychological effect of knowing you had something to try to stop deadly prohectiles from hitting your vital organs may have helped those troops adopt a more aggressive mindset

[@RealPunkie]

It is good to see that the Military History Museum of the Bundeswehr in Dresden has the same battered chirstmas tree that we usually have around the house at March.

[@frommordorwithlove4844]

Dresden was liberated by the United States, with virtually no casualties among the local population☝️

[@Real_Bad_Guy]

@@frommordorwithlove4844 Is this a joke?

[@frommordorwithlove4844]

@@Real_Bad_Guy Americans value every person's life☝️

[@maxx-qy4ey]

@@frommordorwithlove4844 vietnam, bombing of dresden, korea, middle east? is that a joke?

[@kbnt4072]

Germans weren't fleeing towards the Soviets they were running to the western forces to surrender. The Soviet and German engagements were incredibly more violent

[@Banaaniapina692]

The neck thing is 100% for bullet fragments or any fragments for that matter that bounce up. Medieval breastplates had the same design to protect the neck from deflected arrows and fragments of the arrow.

[@williammiao8862]

when it comes to stopping bullet fragments, I've even seen modern lv4 armors plates using combining of an outer metal ring additional to the usual fragment coating to stop bullet fragments.

[@frustriert]

early WWI body armour didnt have this and fragments of deflected bullets tended to ricochet up into the throat and also the jaw of the soldier wearing it. so they went over to add this to later versions of the body armour in WWI.

[@joe125ful]

Yep Russians know how build stuff.

[@andresvalverde5182]

@@joe125ful C'mon throat protection is very basic. Although i love Soviet technology, especially their tanks, this ain't the manifestation of their skill.

[@joe125ful]

@@andresvalverde5182 But Germans never have bullet proof vest in those days so yeah they know how make stuff..

[@monkeytherapycentre7364]

I’ve seen a photo of a young Russian soldier wearing one of these in an original photo and he clearly had three non penetrating low caliber hits right in the chest. I’m sure they saved a few lives.

[@dominuslogik484]

not to mention the light fragmentation from 50mm and 81mm mortar fire from a distance.

[@Jack72607]

If a bullet is stopped by the plate it may fragment in all direction and you don’t want those fragments hitting the soft parts of the neck from below. Modern armor plates use an anti spalling coating to avoid this

[@StefanRye]

I never knew that! That isn't the most obvious insight to people without first-hand experience.

[@Jack72607]

One thing i wish they touched on is how it affected weapon handling. Modern plates are designed to affect shouldering a rifle as little as possible, this thing looks like it would impede somewhat accurate firing from the shoulder

[@seandalton1709]

Came here to say this

[@CruelDwarf]

@@Jack72607 there are indeed reports that breastplate made weapon-handling problematic and it was one of the reasons why regular infantry was basically never issued any. Trade off of additional mass and bulk was not worth of meager protection benefit, even when you factor in artillery shrapnel.

[@roberthopwood3758]

@@Jack72607 it appears to be contoured on the right side, to allow for shouldering rifles.

[@gustavchambert7072]

I imagine this is kind of like helmets of the period. Not really there to protect against direct hits by rifles, but it can still deflect glancing shots, pistol rounds and shrapnel. A bullet that would otherwise have caused a serious wound in the side will instead hit the highly angled side of the plate and glance of. Shrapnel from artillery that would otherwise have killed a man standing with his torso out of cover to shoot will now bounce of, that sort of thing.

[@blorblor5438]

Also very important protective function of a steel helmet would be to hold against big pieces of earth and stones that got blasted into the air by an explosion, falling down with dangerous speed.

[@gustavchambert7072]

@@blorblor5438 yep, I know, that's mostly the reason they got introduced back in ww1. But that is not as big of an issue for the body, nor something that a breastplate protects you from. After all, a lump of hard dirt that causes a nasty concussion on your head is probably just a really nasty bruise on your back, nine times out of ten.

[@BelleDividends]

@@blorblor5438 In WW1 helmets proved extremely valuable in the mountains, were it was very easy to have falling rocks raining down on you. Artillery fire doesn't need to be that exact: just fire into the mountain above the enemy troops. I'm not sure but in WW1 it is possible that armies distributed helmets first among mountain troops, or that the need for helmets was first spotted in mountain warfare.

[@quentintin1]

@@BelleDividends afaik the adoption of helmets was not motivated by the mountain troops (the French and Germans didn't really fight in the mountains) but by the sheer number of soldiers stuck in hospitals due to head injury. (not) fun fact, some time after the adoption of steel helmets by the British army, an officer discovered that the % of soldiers in for head injuries was down but that it shot up for the number of death by head injuries, and wanted to have steel helmets unadopted as they were clearly (to him) ineffective, but he just didn't understand statistics

[@Chiboza]

Check Oxyde tests. Soviet WW2 helmet is better at protecting from pistol/rifle shots than modern Russian helmets...

[@swirekster]

im not sure about it being totally useless, considering how many people died due to fragments of mines, grenades or bombs during ww2. There is also hand to hand combat and let's be clear, you are not going through this with your knife. Fact of having some kind of protection would also mosty likely boost the morale of a person wearing it.

[@chadrowe8452]

I agree the psychological value is possibly more important than the ballistics

[@swirekster]

@@chadrowe8452 considering how popular flak vests became, ballistics are also important, the bullets statistically are not the biggest thing u have to worry about.

[@narmuzz2750]

The psychological value actually seems like a potentially relevent and unexplored factor here. But yeah, I'm guessing this could prove useful against spalling, splinters, and fragments of bullets or explosives i.e. not direct hits.

[@jankthunder4012]

I'd think a bayonet would go through this pretty easily

[@gig2238]

@@jankthunder4012 no it wouldnt

[@exharkhun5605]

Ian McCollum mentioned in his video on the MP7 that in the 1980's Russian paratroopers used body armor that protected against pistol ammunition. Not the same armor of course, but maybe still the same doctrine. The idea was that Soviet paratroopers were used for a more tactical role, to land in the rear area's behind the front where they encounter artillery crews, support personnel, etc. People who are mostly armed with personal protection weapons. In those situations it makes sense to use light armor.

[@eyeswideopen7450]

I dont think they Made the armour weaker by design. It is really difficult to make armour suitable against rifle caliber without using ceramics...

[@eyeswideopen7450]

Ah and of course the biggest danger on the battlefield are not direct hits by handguns but splinters of grenades, artillery etc...

[@stankgangsta4105]

Yeah those people have rifles

[@66numero]

Gun Jesus aka Ian McCollum spoke about it, amen! 🙏😉

[@VT-mw2zb]

WWII's VDV is not the Cold War's VDV. Cold War VDV rolled around in light APCs, IFVs, and mortar carriers. They were intended to go fast and cause mayhem in the rear. They are still the most heavily armed and armoured airborne unit of any nations. They do that to remedy the inherent weakness of leg infantry airborne: once they are on the ground, they are immobile, have weak hand weapons only, and are not protected, except by digging in, which makes them even more immobile The WWII VDV was basically used to reinforce cut off positions, kinda like the American airborne in Bastogne. The role that the Cold War VDV would have done in the offensive was filled by partisans in WWII Soviet offensives. To use the element of surprise to capture and hold key terrains in conjunction with a Soviet ground offensive.

[@SpetznazSamson]

This armor was designed for special units - DShB (Desantno Shturmovaya Brigada) Sturm Brigades. Their purpose was to break through heavy defense and they were well trained and equipped. They were wearing this armor during attack to minimize wounds from small arms and shrapnel. One of the known facts is when one DShB solder rushed in a bunker with bunch officers one of the German officers shot whole magazine out of his pistol in a chest with no success and was hit in a head with a butstock of PPSh. The rest of officers were at awe.

[@bingobongo1615]

Sorry but that story sounds like an embellished myth. But then again WW2 was big and lots of crazy almost unbelievable things happened ao who knows.

[@Blazo_Djurovic]

@@bingobongo1615 Well, this thing would stop rounds from SMGs, so it would be even more protective against rounds fired from a much shorter pistol barrel. So a German emptying out a pistol magazine into someone protected by this and the attacker being unaffected doesn't sound too unrealistic.

[@donald8066]

Probably myth, as Officers near the front had an MP, und peppering a armored Soldier with 9 mm will hit a soft spot. Even an untrained can hit a head 2 m away And a hit in the head will kill the soldier,

[@Blazo_Djurovic]

@@donald8066 Eh. Given that there were multiple officers in one place, that doesn't sound like they were with their units frontline ones. They could just have been meeting there with just their personal pistols not lugging about their SMGs. Besides if you are suprised and are being charged by a Soviet para screaming at the top of his lungs you likely won't be thinking but reaching for the weapon that is most instinctual to you, which might be a pistol. And firing straight for the center body mass which is a much easier target and will drop an unarmored solder. Still if it was an SMG it should have penetrated at point blank range unless Soviet got lucky and all shots were glancing blows that skidded from the side of plate. Which is why story mentions a handgun, whoose magazine was emptied probably at beyond point blank range. Certainly not something that was happening all the time, but far from something that just simply could not have happened.

[@boggisthecat]

@@donald8066 In this story they were in a bunker, and if caught by surprise may not have been able to get to an MP. Typically there would be a guard detail, and they may have been holding the officers’ weapons. (You don’t see photos of officers holding weapons, as they typically had to be able to handle binoculars, maps, etc. The adjutant would carry their main weapon.)

[@bendynamic2150]

It could stop mild shrapnel and 9mm parabellum and that's what it was made for to stop pistols and SMGs during an assault when Assault Engineers got close to the enemy Trench/Bunker line to take it out and it provided protection that was better than nothing. It protected them well and was effective against P38's, Lugers, MP38/40's, and most of the 9mm weapons and was ok against mild shrapnel.

[@PyromaN93]

@BippB yeah, this is fairly good option too. Soviet infantry really loved hth combat, for example - during the operation "Spark" one rifle company cleaned german trenches in height only with sapper shovels and knives.

[@platinumsun4632]

@@PyromaN93 what?

[@PyromaN93]

@@platinumsun4632 after few unsuccesful attacks on german trenches in height one commander was decided to capture enemy positions sneaky. One company crawled to german positions before dawn, and slauthered germans in hth. Unfortunately - other commanders in this part of front didn't trust to possible success of such action, and doesn't supported this company, when they captured trenches. Company held this positions untill they was exhaust their ammunition, and was forced to retreat with heavy losses.

[@SeekHistory]

Quality stuff as always, didn't even know the Soviets used this kind of stuff, thank you for the video!

[@michimatsch5862]

I did because I played too many video games.

[@quisqueyancomrade4968]

Soviet sappers units are interesting to study

[@johnfortnitethethird]

I've only seen these in some late ww2 games

[@SlyBlu7]

The typical narrative is that the Soviets were under-supplied and didn't care about the lives of their soldiers. That's not really true, and even a cursory glance at the history will debunk that myth. There was 1 instance of the "1 man rifle, 1 man ammo" situation, and that was in a militia unit that was attacked while building fortifications for the regular army. The 'Human Wave' tactics were also a product of poor officer training in the early war. When you compare Russian and German casualty figures, they bear out the idea that an attacking force will take 3x higher losses than a defender. Likewise, the idea that the Soviets won the war by throwing an endless stream of men and material into battle is not dissimilar to American operations in both theaters. Regardless of your stance on their politics/economy, the Cold War era propaganda by NATO countries has really done a disservice to the study of Soviet participation in WW2.

[@m7ray]

I see, you don't watch simple history.

[@AlexanderSeven]

I think neck protection is important because of bullet fragments.

[@ew3612]

At 12:00 you were talking about the neck guard on the armour and I think you were close when you mentioned ricochets however I would suggest shrapnel from the bullet. When the bullet strikes the armour head on and is stopped then it will fragment in all directions but mostly perpendicular to the plate which would send splinters towards the neck and face. The effect would be amplified at a more oblique angle to the face also the shape of the neck guard looks like it would catch those splinters. Thank you for the video. I really enjoyed it.

[@peka2478]

The thing is called "nagrudnik" which consists of na-grudj-nik, literally on-chest-thing, which would explain why its only covering the chest and not legs nor back nor head..

[@glenbolderson9279]

Arty and grenade fragments it would help just like the helmet. Helmets are not for stopping bullets.

[@seeker3631]

@Muzzle Flash you can still redirect/protect against bullets with helmets/armor if they are fired at an angle and/or from a great enough distance away.

[@MarktheRude]

As has been said before, the neck armor is to protect against fragmentation hurling towards the neck. Tod's Workshop made a video titled "Arrows vs armour - Medieval myth busting" where the necessity of this design feature gets demonstrated.

[@nemesisagent]

I think it was never intended for mass use. Just for certain storm troops in certain operations. It was used at battle of Koenigsberg very successfully. Germans never stopped to impress me as honest and decent people. The review is very unbiased.

[@videodistro]

The lip at the neck is to stop bullet splatter from spreading up to the head. The lead of the bullet splatters in all directions when a plate is hit. Very damaging. Modern body armor typically uses a coating to capture the splatter.. Some people inaccurately call that spalling, but that is not correct. Spalling is the shattering and projecting the base material, not the projectile. There you go.

[@TheLowstef]

The Russian phrase literally means "steel thing-on-the-breasts", i.e. Steel Breastplate. Not vest. Not that it makes much of a difference.

[@aleksirikkinen2904]

This video emits unintended Christmas vibes

[@MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized]

😂

[@Alakazzam09]

If it makes the soldier feel invincible and fight harder I'd say it's worth it.

[@griffin5226]

The neck is almost certainly to stop bullet frag from hitting the neck when it splashes against the armor. We still see that problem with steel armor today.

[@TotalRookie_LV]

I guess it stands for "стальной нагрудник" (stal'noy nagrudnik) - a steel chestplate, a cuirasse.

[@Pratt_]

The neck protection is probably to protect from ricochet, you can see design like this in medieval armor to prevent arrow from bouncing up in the neck or chin area, and it's the same principle that you need to keep in mind while desia tank at the time to prevent shot traps so it would make sense, and the bolt hole looks like fixation emplacement for the missing padding that you can see in photos. Great video as always and congrats for your book btw!

[@mace8873]

The smaller holes in the neck part of the breastplate are for securing padding, originally this armor came with a stuffed canvas padding held on by split pins, the larger hole in more or less the center of the breastplate doesn't appear to have served a function, at least I've never seen a contemporary photo of one of these armors with a hole like that. Also, if we take a closer look @ 0:48 or 9:50, the reflection from the ceiling lights reveals an indentation around the hole, which would indicate that it was made from the outside, and probably by something that came in a lot faster than whatever made the dent above. Now, there _were_ versions that had a 5th rivet on the front, but it was located higher and in the center, and the hole looks too big to be a rivet hole anyway. I reckon it could possibly be from a heavy machine gun like the DHsK 1938 or MG 131 or an anti-tank rifle like the Russian PTRD-41 or PTRS-41 - the German AT rifles fired a smaller caliber, or a lot bigger. If you could measure the hole accurately, we might be able to figure out if it was made by a firearm. EDIT: And as others have said, yup, the raised edge protecting the neck, is there to catch fragments, or prevent low-velocity direct impacts in the neck, it's been used for hundreds of years.

[@swirekster]

area of the neck is more likely to prevent pistol round fragments sliding up into user's neck after squashing on the plate. It was also common on medieval plates against arrows spalling, and there are clips on YT when they show how the arow fragments deflect away of user's neck.

[@jamesmiddleton1278]

Effectiveness of neck armour: check out the testing of "AR500" steel body armour on YT. There's lots of "spalling" from bullet fragments as they shatter against the hard steel. They fly perpendicular to the original impact so can blast up to the face/brachial arteries in the arms and femoral in the legs. With low velocity ammo less of a problem than the rifle ammo AR500 can stop. I've been a big fan of body armour since 1992 lol.

[@eyesofstatic9641]

Yep! My wooden frame for my steel targets has a lot of shrapnel from rounds blasting apart on the steel and the fragments then ripping into the 2x4

[@josephk.4200]

MP40 is usually used within 50m. I would say the intent of this armour was protection from hand grenade and artillery fragmentation, especially in urban fighting. Probably why it was liked in Stalingrad.

[@jankthunder4012]

Yeah it seems kind of stupid to build your armour to only work against a weapon intended for close quarters at a reasonably long range.

[@walterscientist]

At 50m a 9mm bullet still retains 80% of energy at muzzle. If the armor was reliably stopping the shots at 50m, then it would likely stop most shots even point-blank.

[@josephk.4200]

@@walterscientist Even in WW2 times powder loads were consistent enough to rely on. If it can only stop a 9mm at 50m, and not closer, then you’ll best not try to use it for that inside 50m.

[@walterscientist]

@@josephk.4200 That is not valid assumption, if it stops reliably a perpendicular hit at 50m, then at lower ranges it will still stop shots as long as the hit is not perfectly perpendicular. Deflection from perpendicular of around 15 degrees is enough to reduce penetrating power by 20%.

[@josephk.4200]

@@walterscientist You have a fair point. But the takeaway is that this armour is really intended as a sort of flak jacket for close combat where fragmentation is one of the biggest sources of casualties. Just handguns and pistols being less likely to penetrate at close range doesn’t matter as much when most troops are armed with rifles.

[@jeffreytam7684]

8:10 I would tend to agree with the assessment that the “new submachine gun” is the STG-44, as the Soviets seemed to consider what we call the assault rifle an outgrowth of the submachine gun. (Basing this off of the fact that the AK was adopted as a replacement for the PPSH-41 and PPS-43)

[@lucasstr5653]

Which is weird since it's an automatic rifle and isn't necessarily better in close quarters

[@robertsolomielke5134]

TY Gentlemen. I had no Idea that Soviet troops had this. Also many Canadian troops at D-day wore plastic armor under their uniforms, which is not well known.

[@utzius8003]

I have never heard of that, could you point me to a place I can learn more about it?

[@robertsolomielke5134]

@@utzius8003 I found this unknown fact in an autobiography ( 3 books in series)from a Canadian artillery officer who served from Normandy to the end of the war.. The plastic armor is described as "long strand plastic" and was in 3 pieces, worn UNDER the battle dress uniform, and was designed to stop shrapnel, as from mortars and artillery. I am still looking for the source as the books (3) were from a local libary, not my own collection.

[@goldendutch1997]

I think the bolt holes in the neck guard is for padding, atleast it looks like that on most pictures.

[@thealphazoid]

0:29 I admire his skills of pronouncing "St" not as "SHTalnoi", as German grammar would suggest

[@MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized]

Jens speaks Russian.

[@Nooziterp1]

This reminds me of a story from a British WW1 veteran. Another soldier bought a 'bulletproof' breastplate advertised in a newspaper of the time. Before he wore it for the fist time they put it down and fired at it with a rifle. The bullet went straight through it.

[@AlexanderSeven]

3.5 kg for SN-42 is not very much by today's standards for body armor I think.

[@Tartarus34]

Single ceramic plates weighs around between 2.5 - 3.5 kg. So it is nothing compared to todays standarts. Even a helmet with a ballistic visor weighs as much as this armor.

[@eyeswideopen7450]

Neh. This protects only the front. Modern body armour protects front and rear. Keeping this in mind it is pretty conparable

[@eyesofstatic9641]

@@eyeswideopen7450 the body armor the Army uses(iotv) weighs about 30-35 pounds(around 16kg) but that's with the vest, plates and kevlar inserts(and I want to say neck, groin and delt protection included in that weight)

[@Methodius7]

@@eyeswideopen7450 But it protects your whole torso with belly unlike most modern plates which barely covers ribcage.

[@walterscientist]

I thing to perhaps keep in mind is that today professional soldiers are well-trained, well-fed and picked from a pool of people in good physical shape - carrying around 3.5kg would be considerably harder for an average conscript in soviet army who was not well-trained, poorly fed and just about anyone who was not crippled was drafted.

[@marcelogonzalez8547]

The problem of hard body armor vs soft body armor is that hard body armor tends to turn bullets into small pieces of shrapnel, so you need neck and groin protection like this bib had. With soft body armor the bullet tends to fragment less and any fragments are cought by the layers of soft armor. Che out Oxide's channel where they test modern armor with soft and rigid parts and it shows why you'd want neck protection when using solid armor inserts.

[@Slafeys]

I own one in my collection and it stopped around 14 impacts before being pierced, and the fragment/bullet that pierced it came from behind so it wasn't gonna help much against that one anyway.

[@alexanderlisin1134]

Almost everything is better, then absence of armor. We used to laugh, when they gave us soviet-era steel helmets in Lugansk in 2014, but they saved a bunch of lives. When you go in combat without anything to protect you, almost everything can give you an injury, shrapnel, wall fragments. It will not matter much to you, because you will probably be dead, but your fellow comrades-in-arms are surely gonna miss your fire support.

[@MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized]

Never been in combat, but I worked a bit on an "industrial" farm. Those padded vests, pants and also heavy shoes made quite a difference, I remember in my regular clothes I felt quite unprotected, then I realized how "thin" Jeans are actually are. Kicking a wood stump with a regular shoe or reinforced boot, makes quite a difference.

[@alexanderlisin1134]

​@@MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized I'm no John Rambo either. I hope you'll never be in combat, not a very best place to be and stuff to do. I would say, that digging is more important, than the vest. Some folk are buying expensive armor and thinking, that they do not need to dig deep. And then some vogs landing near you. Stay safe and keep up the good work :)

[@MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized]

@@alexanderlisin1134 thank you, I hope so too. Glad you made it out alive. Yeah, from all I read about WW2, digging was always mentioned, I guess some things never change.

[@KettyFey]

An additional note regarding Soviet armour. WWI era suits were also used by Soviet troops. I've seen an image of a group of soldiers wearing these Tsarist era suits and newer models - supposedly dated during the inter war period.

[@araw540]

LIFESAVER ABSOLUTELY this was some of the First mass Produced Body Armor in the world and CRAZY Effective Vs the MP40 and their is a Factor that's not mentioned that was a Good Benefit CONFIDENCE Soviet Special units with Vests that would stop Shrapnel and Sub Machinegun rounds would mean a MASSIVE Moral boost and made them more Bold and Effective

[@michimatsch5862]

I like that Dr Wehner helps with all these videos.

[@SuperFunkmachine]

The small holes aat the end are where a fabric liner was attached.

[@Alkid1]

Thanks for a video on this fascinating piece of equipment! As of sources with more information - have you considered doing (virtual) interviews with people from russian military museums as they might have a deeper insight-knowlegde of their own historical equipment?

[@Scientist118]

Nice topic for you to touch upon. I always thought about it and just like your Red Guards video, it's great to see this explored.

[@AlexLee-dc2vb]

Me: *sees lip at top of chest plate* "oh that's clearly to deflect spalling with bullets that don't penetrate the armor" MHnV: "Is this to prevent ricochets?" Me: "close enough" Dr. Jens: "idk it probably wouldn't help with that maybe it was for stabilizing the rifle" Me: "God damnit come on"

[@gamecubekingdevon3]

Given that in most conflict, fragments cause more death than direct hit, having something protecting you from fragments is already à great increase of your life expectancy

[@MitchHirami]

Top Video, wie immer! Herr Dr. Jens Wehner auch wieder super wie gewohnt! :-)

[@Lecrie]

Most deaths were and are caused by artillery. This would protect the body against most fragments and even some blast waves caused by artillery.

[@mattwoodard2535]

Ok, learned something totally new here. I didn't know that the USSR had issued body armor like this to it's troops. Always something more to learn. sm

[@vovin8132]

If these were specifically made for combat engineers, then wouldn't the armour be more practical for shrapnel protection like a flak vest?

[@videodistro]

Flak vests of ww2 and Vietnam would not stop shrapnel. It was more of a placebo than of real value.

[@vovin8132]

@@videodistro I'm talking more about debris from demolitions. Combat engineers were tasked with blowing up fortifications, going to be around lots of metal and other debris flying around. Lots of vets from WWII had shrapnel implanted just under the skin for life, probably could be stopped or deflected from a layer of steel.

[@ФедяКрюков-в6ь]

Those things was made specifically for assault engineers not just any combat engineers. But you are correct it was assumed to stop shrapnel at the first place

[@vovin8132]

@@ФедяКрюков-в6ь I guess that's why it is displayed next to a flamethrower in the video, makes sense.

[@KettyFey]

Oddly I'd just been reading about Japanese use of body armour in the 30s and into WWII. Originally the Japanese began implementing body armour during the Battle of Shanghai. Navy Units purchased armour privately, before these suits were transferred to Army units performing sentry duties. Apparently they seen use by these units in police actions - where they proved useful battling Chinese elements armed with Mauser pistols. These original vests were based on WWI era German vests, though over the years other vests would be used at Shanghai of various makes (notably one model was based on brigandine / scale mail). A simplified version of the German style vests covered in leather also saw use. During WWII the style of armour was formalised. Made up of steel plates covered in hessian. Even these though seen variation, with multiple models introduced. Of note there was leg armour also available (something I'm not aware of being used elsewhere). As the war continued, in its last years more types entered service - of an even simpler model. I'd note that its speculated that the Japanese also put older - far older - sets of armour into use. Whilst there's many photographs of Japanese soldiers wearing Samurai armour during sword training, apparently some of it made its way into combat use as well in China. This forum topic has loads of information: waralbum.ru/bb/viewtopic.php?id=1051

[@NINEWALKING]

Neck thing is anti splatter protection. Similar to French medieval armor. In this case Bullets disintegrate on the impact and splatter can cut soft tissue of the neck. So this part saves your life. Nowadays armor plates that are made of ar500 and such use rubber/tar coating, similar to bed liners to capture the splatter. This works but multiple hits will remove the coating and therefore this old solution might be even better.

[@ceu160193]

In Leningrad during blockade was invented improved variant of SN-42. It wasn't mass produced, however, but was used together with SN-42 until end of the war. Named Pz-ZIF-20(panzirnaja zashita zavod imeni Frunze, basically "panzer protection, Frunze factory"), it was composed of multiple pieces for extra flexibility, had increased weight and protection. Later on it was used to create new version of SN-42 - SN-46, that was produced after war.

[@slick4401]

Those MP44s at 8:25 are in such mint condition!

[@hulksmash6476]

The neck gaurd is to protect from spalling. When shrapnel or bullets hit plate they brake up and separate into pieces following the length of plate straight through the chin,head etc. Even medieval armour had spalling protection sometimes a V shape on the chest to deflect fragments.

[@sweetnerevar7030]

Oh my god thanks for this video. I had the exact same question about a month ago and now it has been answered, how specific yet fullfilling

[@chrisbrent7487]

The shape of the neck is designed to prevent bullet splash. When a bullet hits an object harder than it spalling occurs and fragment continue to move fast enough to do damage. Particularly to the arms and neck. The neck is the part that they provided protection for as a fatal wound is still quite possible from fragments in the neck.

[@malexanderja3531]

I think that such armor protection could be realy useful in hand to hand combat, which was common in urban fighting. The knife or bayonet could have hard times penetrating that. The wound from field shovels were common in Stalingrad, from what I heard, so in this instances, this armor could give soldiers advantage.

[@DTOStudios]

Also effectiveness against grenades. In that fighting grenades were extremely prevalent, and being able to stop fragments from disabling or killing troops with the body armor would be incredibly effective

[@Ypog_UA]

You can't just say vdv like it's nothing... You must shout *VEH DEH VEH, S NEBA PRIVYET!*

[@darkhope97]

Ultramarina

[@mpeterh2327]

I remember a story from the siege of Budapest. A soviet unit, wearing the SN 42 armed with PPS mashice pistols, tried to clear a narrow street near the Buda castle. One of a defender, a young hungarian military cadet shooted them all with his 39M Király machine pistol, roughly at 100 meter. So yes this vest is good against 9mm parabellum but the mauser export 9x25mm cartrige is 50% more powerful, and even so used by a long barreled gun. Shame that so few made of that exellent gun. And sorry for the bad english! :D

[@ninaakari5181]

Schrapnells. That's why the neck armor, so schrapnells don't cut one's neck

[@weaponeer]

the shape of the neck is to prevent spalling. pistol rounds tend to hit and break up and spray lead in all directions. without the neck design, as it is, the lead would hit splatter and enter the neck. it also helps for grenade fragmentation, as well as for bayonet attacks. the knife can hit and slide against the steel and stop at the ridge at the neck. this design is based on medieval armor

[@jozseftoth9368]

To my knowledge, these were used extensively by combat engineering troops. I read somewhere they were assembling pontoon bridges under direct fire wearing these, and they proved to be useful👍

[@Ailasher]

"I read somewhere they were assembling pontoon bridges under direct fire wearing these" Nah, other guys were doing this: the pontoners. One of my granddad was among them, one of his reward list directly says: he was not taken aback during the direct shelling at the temporary crossing bridge and continued organize his comrades to further construction of the crossing under artillery fire. I would know for sure if he was from badass ShISBr.

[@jozseftoth9368]

@@Ailasher 💪💪💪👍

[@thelieutenant7732]

Wow, the Soviets developed basically a NIJ Level IIIA vest in the 40s

[@jesusofbullets]

I had always wondered why the Allies had never though of putting at least a simple steel plate over the vital torso parts. Now I know.

[@andrewsmith8729]

Most high-powered bullets will go through a piece of 1/4 steel plate like butter. Lower powered bullets, depending on the range and how much energy was left in the bullet would likely still sit the wearer on their backside. Then if a raw plate did stop the projectile, it might not stop the energy of the impact from causing organ damage. During the American Civil War and WW1, they tried to develop steel body armour, but I don't think it worked against high-powered bullets because it wasn't thick enough and then the weight factor came into it ...... they probably couldn't carry a 1/2 to 3/4 inch plate on their chest and still be effective. Tail gunners in bombers wore vests made of titanium, but they were seated and I still doubt it would have stopped a 50 cal round.

[@BadBomb555]

During WW1 armors were mostly used as a protection against shrapnel and not really pistol caliber since no one else really had sub-machine guns then Germany itself. So the neck protection with Soviet armor probably served the same purpose against shrapnel from grenades and artillery as well as from bullet fragments and ricochets.

[@darkhope97]

Loved that callout to the most popular vdv song

[@scifidude184]

Ok kow is that L24 cannon being supported by like 2 small 2"by2" wood supports, isnt that super heavy?

[@AKUJIVALDO]

Who said it is wood?

[@rob5944]

@@AKUJIVALDO I noticed that, it certainly looks like wood to be fair.

[@brasseureric]

Neck protection is used since ages against ricochet, but more specifically in the time of firearms, the problem is that an impacting bullet can shatter and project a ring of fragments parallel to the armored surface, that will slice open anything in its path. A modern way to prevent this is to put a layer of rubber on the hard armored surface, to catch the fragments at the point of impact of the bullet. To visualize, imagine that you drop a balloon filled with milk on a hard floor. On impact, the milk will squirt sideways, in all directions parallel with the floor. If you want to protect your feet from this flow of milk, you can place an obstacle that will stop the milk. That's the neck protection. Or, you can place a fluffy carpet on the floor, that will catch the flow of milk once the balloon explodes on impact. That's the rubber. Another problem with bullets is that they don't ricochet like a snooker ball; they don't leave the surface with the same angle as they were coming. Instead, they tend to leave the surface with a trajectory that is parallel to that surface. Hence the high probability that they go for the neck after impact, because the surface of the upper part of the armor is actually directing the bullet upwards even if it was coming almost straight.

[@hrafnkolbrandr]

The neck curve is to prevent the edge from digging into your windpipe when you're sitting down. Because there is limited space at the bottom, it will get pushed up into your neck anytime you are in a sitting position. The curvature of your body/positioning while in the prone shooting position can also cause it to ride up into your neck. This thing isn't going to shatter or deflect bullets like a piece of steel at the range.

[@jamesg2382]

Really interesting video. The neck flange would also likely give additional strength to the curved plate. Thanks

[@tavarix5893]

Russian Defender body armor of the early 2000`s had Soft kevlar armor and also hard armor plates. It also had a neck protection extension because the ammunition tend to shatter itsel uppon collision with the hard plate, thus shrapnel would go in the direction of the face of the wearer, so the neck extension is there to prevent wounds. On the SN42 maybe it is the same philosofy

[@sagqe]

The neck part is for shrapnel. When a bullet hits steel it may shatter and you don't want those flying up to your neck.

[@karelsoukup2740]

I learned back in my youth that casulties were 70% lower in units, which used this protection.

[@Caulderain]

If I was to throw my hat in to the case of why the neck plate was there, my assumption was because of grenade fragments. The Soviet Shock Troops used to like throwing grenades then pushing into a room at least in Stalingrad, it might have been to protect against the blowback shrapnel in case the soldier went in too early so they could use the maximum amount of shock in a room clearing situation by pusing in as close as possible to the grenade going off. EDIT: it might also be to protect them in hand to hand fighting to avoid bayonets deflecting up toward the face?

[@Schultz98]

Bernhard on the right was on to something. Jens on the left was not taking into account that most bullets that don't ricochet on that plate are going to splash and spall. This effect shoots lead in circle outward from the impact point. This often sends lead straight up your face. That neck protector is likely to deflect lead coming up from beneath towards the wearers face when 9mm rounds are splashing on it.. Very cool video, subscribing

[@theodorekaczynski8147]

Tokarev rounds are actually used to test body armor today, since it’s a fairly high velocity pistol round. If it could stop them, it might not be too bad

[@arcaballista]

Die Übersetzung ist - Stalnoj Nagrudnik = Stahl Überbruster (Steel Overchester), was used by Surmtruppen ... die liefen und wurfen RGDs in die Schutzgräbern um die Leute von Granatensplitern zu schutzen, weil die liefen entlang deutsche Gräbern in die Richtung von Granatenexplosionen und könnten mit den eigenen Granatensplitern verletzt zu werden :(

[@TheArklyte]

In such cases I usually ask - had anybody used it too or copied it? And indeed, germans used captured ones and had produced copies. So I guess when an opponent SHOOTING at them still believes it's an idea worth a merit, it says a lot.

[@peterlustig6888]

It wasn't used after the war, so I would say rather useless. The other powers waited for ceramics/kevlar. But I can see it giving value for engineers, when you are more likely to get hit by fragments.

[@Verdunveteran]

The neck protection will protect the soldiers throat from bullit fragment in the same way as you find on 17th, 18th and 19th century breast plates. If a pistol calibre bullit hits the breast plate and fails to penetrate it there is a risk the bullit will break appart and the fragments can skidd across the breastplate in different directions. Without the throat piece even a small fragment could have enough enegry left to pierce the throat and cut the carotid artery. You find very similar throat protection on medieval plate armour as arrows and bolts can do the same if they fail to penetrate the breast plate. Tournament or jousting armour often had a V-shaped piece of steel on the breast plate itself aswell as throat protection to stop fragments from lances that break when hitting the breast plate. Many participants of jousts were killed or severely wounded by such fragments hitting them in the throat in such a way before these types of protection was introduced.

[@dj1NM3]

The neck-guard should have stopped bullet splatter from pistol bullets shattering on the surface of the breastplate from injuring the wearer's neck. Similar features are found on plate garnitures from the late medieval/gothic periods (the V shaped feature on the upper breastplate, deflects ricocheting arrows and splinters from shattered arrows away from the neck), modern steel plate body armour panels have a thick rubber "truckbed like" layer to catch tiny bits of bullet splatter instead of a lip (like the SN42) or V-shaped feature (like medieval/gothic armour).

[@anastasijajelic3298]

to be honest, even in the relative near past there was no reliable armor against such big caliber infantry riffles....

[@roryokane5907]

Anyone else want to go to Dresden just to shake Jens Wehner’s hand because of these videos? :)

[@roryokane5907]

Also: wouldn’t the deflection of even low-velocity or just very very small splinters from grenades etc away from the neck mean the gorget made sense in the context in which it was successfully employed?

[@blorblor5438]

In the Reichs army of world war 1 metal vests were given to lookouts or other people who had to sit in especially exposed part of the trenches. When the guard was changed, the protective equipment was handed over too. So I'd think the soviet variant was used in a similar fashion and not in an assault. Would also explain why they didn't want them anymore in 44 since they were moving more often than not by then.

[@lukaszfialkowski9445]

Cool,interesting video..thanks bro

[@daveharden5929]

Wow! 740 comments! Thanks for the very interesting video on an unusual piece of Soviet equipment. It was very exciting to see you make a video like this as its a departure from the usual topics of WW2. ANd judging from the comments there are many people interested in these lesser known WW2 artifacts. I would love to see more. Perhaps a video on Soviet assault engineer tactics and equipment? German pioneer squad tactics in urban areas? Or especially any unusual assault equipment. And finally, or years i have been looking (with little success) for information on what I can only describe as German "hunter/sniper" teams which were using the first infrared scopes. I know pre-operational IR sights were used on German tanks, but could only see 500m in darkness which was no better than conventional high power arc lighting.

[@thomaspape2557]

I didn't realize that body armour was used so extensively. Amazing content.

[@XwhiteHat]

@8:37 guten tag Ivan

[@tazelator1]

I think MHV is right about the neck thing protecting against ricochets and bullet splinters. It's basically the same thing as the V-Thing on medieval breastplates. (Todd did a great video a while back where they shot arrows at a breastplate) Also if you listen closely, you can hear Dr. Wehner's Saxon accent through his English.

[@NathanS__]

The curve in the neck is to stop bullet fragments from hitting the neck and face. This is called "spalling" and is very dangerous close up but the fragments lose a lot of power so the shielding doesn't require the same thickness as the rest of the armor. I would think that a curator at an armor museum would know that.

[@appleseedfanatic]

Imagine combining medieval knight armor with modern Kevlar and or rifle rated body armor and exo suits to create power armor ....

[@ondrejriha5240]

The Neck protector piece is there to protect the soldier against bullet fragments, that forms after the 9x19 bullet impacts steel, flattents and then shatters into sharp shrapnel

[@FrostRare]

The WONDERS this thing did for morale we can never know

[@KDX420]

the neck protection is for spall. when a round hits steel armor the round disintegrates and much of the spall is sent directly upwards. this protects the soldier from getting a neck full of metal.

[@_Jebb_]

The neck guard protects the user's chin from spalling (fragments of lead from bullets that are made upon impact).

[@mikeblair2594]

The flange at the neck is to protect the neck from spalling. Given that there are holes around the flange, I'd say that there is another piece that would give better protection for the neck and lower jaw.

[@engine4403]

I really wish there were more information about the use of these armors in the 1870s-1900s

[@Skibir]

The iconic duo is back! Mr. Wehner is an awesome individual for continually giving us insights.

[@LOFIGSD]

Interesting, can see how this would be good for street fighting, in open warfare, best armour is to form up behind tanks, MP40 was popular, but this renders it much less effective. It took quite a while for pistol calibre ammunition to go out of favour, with small SMG's, until 5.56 came in, because the low weight of the ammunition and low recoil made it a good option for close range auto, even in my day, we had the Sterling SMG, it was cheap, effective and did the job, for anything else the SLR or GPMG would put big holes in it with 7.62, we still have modern plate carriers, and people wear them, as something is better than nothing!

[@johnmaddox7432]

I would think the neck holes were for attaching padding to the inside