Modern Combat Helmets: A Comprehensive Primer
The Development and Evolution of the Ballistic Helmet
Modern ballistic combat helmets have undergone significant development since the late 20th century, with a focus on enhancing ballistic protection, integration with communication systems, and overall wearer comfort. The journey began with the introduction of the PASGT helmet, which set the foundation for future advancements.
The PASGT Helmet
The PASGT (Personnel Armor System for Ground Troops) helmet was developed at the US Army Natick Research Center during the late 1970s and early 1980s and was officially introduced in 1983. Made using 1500-denier Kevlar fabrics coated and infused with polyvinyl butyral (PVB)-phenolic resin, the PASGT helmet provided superior ballistic protection compared to its predecessors. The helmet required 19 layers of Kevlar fabric prepreg, shaped and compression-molded at 330°F (170°C) and 3.5 MPa. The finished helmet weighed around 4.2 pounds in size XL after adding the liner.
The PASGT helmet, often nicknamed the “Fritz” helmet due to its resemblance to the German stahlhelm, offered improved ballistic performance, with a V50 rating against the 17-grain fragment-simulating projectile (FSP) of 2100 fps, and was capable of stopping most handgun threats, such as the 9mm FMJ.
Subsequent US Helmets: MICH and ACH
Following the PASGT, the Modular Integrated Communications Helmet (MICH) was introduced in 2001 for special operations forces. Constructed similarly to the PASGT with the same materials, the MICH was smaller, featured helmet pads instead of webbing, and was designed for better integration with communication equipment.
The Advanced Combat Helmet (ACH), introduced in 2003, was based on the MICH and issued to all US Army soldiers. The ACH and MICH provided comparable ballistic protection to the PASGT, with improved V50 ratings of around 2100 fps for the 17-grain FSP and effective defense against 9mm FMJ rounds at 1450 fps.
Enhanced Combat Helmet (ECH)
Developed in response to a 2009 Urgent Statement of Need, the ECH was designed to offer enhanced protection against common small arms threats encountered in combat, particularly in Iraq and Afghanistan. Moving beyond aramid materials, the ECH utilized unidirectional UHMWPE composites, combined with layers of carbon fiber and aramid for structural rigidity and paintability. While the exact ballistic capabilities of the ECH are classified, it is believed to stop 7.62x39mm ball rounds at muzzle velocity and 7.62x51mm lead-cored ball rounds at 200-300 yards.
The ECH’s large extent of deformation against rifle threats, however, has raised concerns about helmet deformation potentially causing blunt force or penetrating trauma to the head. Despite these concerns, there have been no reported deaths due to backface deformation in wearers of the ECH and its successor, the Integrated Head Protection System (IHPS).
FAST Helmets and Their Evolution
In 2009, the Future Assault Shell Technology (FAST) helmet, developed by Ops-Core, began to see widespread use among US special operations forces. Utilizing lightweight UHMWPE fiber composites, the FAST helmet prioritized weight reduction over enhanced protection and featured significant cutaways around the ears for better communication headset integration. The lightweight rail system for mounting accessories and an integrated bracket for night-vision gear quickly made the FAST helmet a favorite among special operations units globally.
Modern Usage and Features
Today, combat helmets are often valued more for their ability to serve as stable platforms for mounting optics and other gear than for their ballistic resistance alone. This trend has led to the development of “bump helmets,” which are made of injection-molded plastics with no ballistic resistance but are lightweight and feature mounting points similar to FAST helmets.
Current Trends and Future Innovations
The current landscape sees ECH/IHPS-style helmets for general issue and lightweight FAST-style helmets for special operations forces. Aramid materials, once the standard, are now largely obsolete in newly designed military helmet systems. Research continues to advance, with notable emerging concepts including:
1. Ceramic Helmet Appliques:
Systems like the Adept Bastion are gaining popularity, enabling standard combat helmets like the ACH to stop steel-cored rifle rounds at muzzle velocity. These appliques are modular and easily removable, making them particularly relevant for police facing domestic rifle threats.
2. Improved UHMWPE Helmets:
Innovations in UHMWPE-based helmets are leading to improved rifle-resistant shells. For example, the new FAST RF1 from Ops-Core offers better ballistic performance than the ECH and IHPS, although it remains heavy at nearly 4 pounds for a size L. As processing technologies improve, the weight of these systems is expected to decrease.
3. High-Performance Steels Make a Comeback:
The Adept NovaSteel helmet represents a resurgence of high-performance steel in modern combat helmets. Utilizing advanced metallurgy and manufacturing techniques, the NovaSteel helmet offers enhanced ballistic protection against a range of threats. High-performance steel provides a cost-effective and durable alternative to composite materials, with improved multi-hit capability, reduced backface deformation, and enhanced resistance to environmental factors. Despite being marginally heavier than comparable UHMWPE-based helmets, the NovaSteel helmet’s robust protection and durability make it a viable option for certain military and law enforcement applications.
Modern combat helmets have evolved to meet the diverse needs of today’s military and law enforcement personnel, balancing ballistic protection, integration with technology, and wearer comfort. As research continues, future helmets will likely become even more advanced, offering better protection and functionality.
Ballistic Helmet Test Standards
Helmet test standards are critical to ensure that combat helmets provide the necessary protection and performance in real-world scenarios. Various organizations have established comprehensive standards and methodologies to evaluate the effectiveness of ballistic helmets. These standards include tests for ballistic resistance, environmental durability, and mechanical integrity.
The ACH Specification:
Introduced in 2003, the ACH was designed to replace the PASGT helmet, offering improved protection, comfort, compatibility with modern communication devices — and, unlike the PASGT, ballistic resistance against handgun threats was built into the spec. The ACH specification calls for a V50 rating of around 2100 feet per second for the 17-grain fragment-simulating projectile (FSP) and effective protection (V0) against 9mm FMJ rounds at 1450 feet per second. The ACH standard is still in wide use today, and most international combat helmet specifications are very similar to it.
The NIJ Ballistic Helmet Standard, 0106.01:
The National Institute of Justice (NIJ) has historically set the benchmark for body armor testing, with its standards like NIJ 0101.06 becoming global references. However, there is a notable gap in the NIJ’s standards for ballistic helmets. The existing NIJ 0106.01 standard is outdated, having not been updated in 40 years, and is not actively used for helmet certification. This absence has led to a reliance on other standards to ensure helmet efficacy.
ASTM Standards:
To fill this void, the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) has introduced its own ballistic helmet specification, ASTM E3368/E3368M-23. This new standard aims to provide a rigorous framework for helmet testing, though it has generated significant debate due to its omission of backface deformation (BFD) limits.
Per the ASTM specification, helmets can be tested against various threats, from handgun to rifle rounds, along the same HG1 – RF3 lines as the NIJ’s new 0101.07 standard for body armor. However, the ASTM helmet standard does not impose limits on backface deformation, meaning that if a helmet stops a threat, it passes the test regardless of the extent of inward deformation.
Unlike previous standards, the ASTM specification has eliminated the use of clay headforms and the 25mm indentation limit. This approach assumes that the way helmets are tested in laboratories (direct, 0° impacts at muzzle velocity) does not accurately reflect real-world scenarios, where angles and velocities vary.
VPAM Standards:
In Europe, the VPAM (Vereinigung der Prüfstellen für Angriffshemmende Materialien und Konstruktionen) standards, such as VPAM APR 2006, provide a comprehensive testing regime. These standards are known for their stringent requirements and include strict limits on backface deformation, capping the residual energy delivered to the headform to prevent blunt force trauma.
The NovaSteel Helmet was built to comply with VPAM specifications.
