SHAH ALAM: Bullet/stab proof vests for PDRM. The police has started distributing a new bullet/stab proof reflective vests for its personnel. As only 800 vests have been procured so far these would be distributed initially to personnel assigned to patrol vehicles or MPV units.
The first 100 vests were distributed in Johor Bahru today, Bernama reports.
Bukit Aman Crime Prevention and Community Safety Department director Datuk Zainal Abidin Kasim said 800 units were distributed under the first phase by giving priority to all the contingents.
He said the distribution was also based on the frequent risks and incidents of criminal cases that required MPV patrolmen to wear safety vests. According to him, the Reflective Bullet Proof Vest Level II With Anti Stab is able to last for 10 years and provide ballistic protection against shots from nine millimetre (mm) calibre bullets.
“It also provides protection from stabs caused by sharp implements, such as knives and others besides being able to reflect light as a protection to members on duty at night or in dark conditions.
“We give the whole of Malaysia based on priorities. Large contingents, such as in Johor we give 100 units because of the high risks involved similar to those posed by Kuala Lumpur, Selangor and Penang,” he said.
Previously, Zainal said MPV members were only supplied with light reflective jackets that did not have safety features and this new quality safety vest was seen to boost the confidence of members while on duty.
He said there were 3,000 MPVs nationwide and about 6,000 units of safety vests were needed, in which, for the first phase, 800 units were given by the government through the 2018 Budget after undergoing endurance tests at the end of last year.
“If there is more, we also want the vests to be worn by personnel in other departments while on duty,” he added.
The last line is emblematic of the issue, such bullet/stab proof vests are needed as much as other equipment of the police like vehicles, firearms and communication gears hence it will take sometime for it be issued across the line.
It will also be good if personnel issued with the vests are also equipped with combat-shirt uniforms as our hot weather is very non-conducive to be wearing extra layer of clothing even for self protection. Perhaps by buying in bulk, the police and government will be able to reduce the cost of such vests.
— Malaysian Defence
Alamak,instead of buying a fix vest,why not just buy the vest only with pockets front n back its much more cheaper,it can be distributed to 6000 personnel easily,whilst the kevlar plates if its anti bullet for sure its anti stabbing..
The kevlar plates be it for anti stabbing or for anti bullet wirh different level can be issued on case by case basis….kan menjimatkan…mana ini STRIDE never do study ke.. ?
RedSot, I don’t understand. What’s your point actually?
A French aggressor training provider is sourcing MB-339s for their fleet. We could try to interest them to buy our soon retiring MB-339s.
@joe. If the Frenchies want our MB 339s… Well and good. ✔️
Its a private company thou (SEPECEM), they had recently bought a small fleet of ex RNZAF MB339s from Draken, another training provider. The airframe is still usable as I understand, so better to sell than letting them rot as museum pieces.
“instead of buying a fix vest,why not just buy the vest only with pockets front n back its much more cheaper,it can be distributed to 6000 personnel easily”
So how much effective these empty pocketed vest will be against a 9mm bullet? If we buy can afford to buy 6000 empty vest, can we also afford to buy the front and back plates for every 6000 of those vest on one go? Any estimated price to say yours is cheaper?
“The kevlar plates be it for anti stabbing or for anti bullet wirh different level can be issued on case by case basis….kan menjimatkan…”
Like other commenters said, what??? What kind of menjimatkn is that? U are suggesting some police will wear pocketed vest with bullet proof plates while other just wear empty pocketed vest right? Whats the difference between what the police are doing now??? Also higher grade plates leads to higher price so your menjimatkn statement does not ring any logic bells in me….
Haha….well i speak too fast then so none understand or not everbody knows that,the vest is just an ordinary vest meant to be inserted with a kevlar plate front n back…..and the thickness of the plate will depends on the ops of the day..
But for PDRM vest I dont see any plate pockets infront….so it must be a fix on kevlar plate attached to the vest and not detachable one…..if it is so STRIDE should do a simple study on it so rhat rhe vesr ONLY can be distributed to 6000 personnel….and the kevlar plates can be rotated to rhose on duty only..
No, the ballistic protection on these vest are soft inserts. The one you’re talking about is plate carriers which is more suitable for those in patrol in jungles or boats. Of course we get STRIDE to do it but why would we want to waste money on things already available commercially
that is old old news.
Specem bought all of the Draken MB-339CB (2+9 units) in march 2019. nearly 2 years ago.
they are currently not looking for more MB-339. Those MB-339CB are the same ones once offered to Malaysia by RNZAF, but we choose to buy new MB-339CM fitted with old MB-339AM engines.
The article I read about it came out recently so :shrugs:.
It could be they were buying long ago and only recently were commissioned for use. In any case, there are interest in these planes so its something for the powers that be to take note since we’re retiring these planes. If it works in our favour, why not?
Whatever that works should be good. MB339s, if they’re really non-flying condition should be offloaded quickly as scrap or sold to 3rd parties. Kinda sad though, since I recall in other places, these kinda trainers lasted decades ‘in use’. Same goes for the Aermacchi MB326 in South Africa. They seem to go on forever. That said, the same too for BAe Hawks. I understand modern air warfare demands have perhaps changed, but if we can’t keep the 208s, perhaps we should improve the 108s and add a few more instead. This as LIFTs, instead of buying an entire squadron of new LIFT planes.
… just a passing thought.
The only problem with our MB-339CM is that we are out of engines for it… Fine planes but no usable engines. If TUDM is just as resourceful as TLDM does with the FAC, those MB-339CM can still be flown. If you really want engines for them, quite a few places and other airforces that have similar engines just lying around. Not too difficult to pick up the phone and call those defence attaches to ask right? If there is a will…
– there will be increased overall cost to operate both a new LCA and retain Hawk 108 for LIFT. Need to keep 2 different spares, need to train 2 different group of technicians, instructors etc.
– Hawk 108 training system is antiquated. low definition simulator of the early 1990s electronic systems (would you still use your motorola brick handphone now?). no VR systems. No inbuilt Embedded Tactical Training Simulation (ETTS).
– shorter, more direct pilot training path. there will be no need of OCU to change what you know about flying the Hawk to flying the LCA.
– Need to plan around the hawks inherent structural and engine flaws. So why bother?
– still need to spend money to find and buy additional used hawk 100.
… – “ If TUDM is just as resourceful as TLDM does with the FAC”
The government agreed to the FAC enhancements but didn’t agree to do anything with the MBB-339s. It’s not as if the RMAF isn’t “”resourceful” (as you confidently put it) it has looked at ways to get the ‘CMs’ flying again. We have received a number of offers from the OEM and other parties; offering a number of solutions.
Just like how it informed the government years ago on the long term penalties of using overhauled engines from the ‘As’; it has been seeking for quite sometime now to get the ‘CMs’ flying and has presented a number of solutions. Its up to the government as to what it wants to fund and what it doesn’t.
Taib – “if we can’t keep the 208s, perhaps we should improve the 108s and add a few more”
That was the intention up to a few years ago :a few attrition 100 replacements. That time has passed. The 100s were also never a LIFT per see but – amongst other things – a conversion platform for potential 200 pilots.
I have discussed on the topic of winding down the Hawks for usage as LIFTs. SG too had downgraded their A4 Skyhawks to training roles up till retirement so we could do the same, but since the Government has committed towards a unified LIFT/LCA platform, that idea is moot now.
“No, the ballistic protection on these vest are soft inserts. The one you’re talking about is plate carriers which is more suitable for those in patrol in jungles or boats.”
I dont think so,SG police patrolling in “urban jungle” wear the plate carrier type as you called it.the vest is just a vest until it is inserted with kevlar plates,and the most expensive part is the kevlar plates its selves…but if its a built in like what u say soft insert then the price will be higher cause the vest comes built in with the soft kevlar itself…well we will never learn if we just keep to our own mind set…rubbishing others proven ways and method…
I don’t go to Singapore too much and even if I do only short stays only so I cannot comment much on the type of vests they wore. The regular policemen that I saw the ones that patrol in police vehicles usually wear the bright reflective vests that are similar looking the vests shown in the post. I hazard to guess this were ballistic/anti stab vests as well. The ones with the plate carriers are special type SWAT units
Are there any specifics when they meant by “bullet proof”? Does it only stops 9mm or up to 5.56mm rounds?
Its in the story, up to 9mm
“Its in the story, up to 9mm”
Oh I see. Cuz it mentions “from 9mm” but I wasn’t sure if that is the minimum calibre or the maximum. Thanks for the clarification.