Please don't model US soldiers wearing Pinnacle's Dragon Skin Body Armor

[Dave H]

Apparently the US Army is now cracking down on American soldiers in the middle east providing their own body armor. This article states the Army has threatened to deny life insurance benefits to soldiers killed while wearing non-issue armor. Pinnacle claims that some generals in Afghanistan are currently "evaluating" Dragon Skin themselves, but the grunts who shelled out $6,000 for their own protection are SOL.

[MikeyD]

Gee, I wonder how many congressional golf outings the makers Interceptor OTC body armor had to pay for before that rule came into effect!

[Ryan Crierie]

Dragon Skin is made by.......Pinnacle.

The order is well founded.

Linka

Second, there are a number of companies -- among them, according to Sorenson, one named Pinnacle -- that are making unsubstantiated claims about their products. Pinnacle, Sorenson said, is "all hooah and no dooah." The army has run preliminary tests on the Pinnacle armor plates and found that they are deficient in stopping power, ten pounds heavier than the current 31-pound armor set, and about 50% more expensive. Offers to buy Pinnacle armor sets have been answered by the company by statements that production versions of their "dragon skin" armor aren't available for testing.

[Battlefront.com]

Some companies are out to make a buck no matter who gets hurt. I hate to say it, but soldiers are not exempted from this behavior. Last year there was a big scandal about life insurance companies scamming soldiers just about to deploy over to Iraq. The polices they offered were not approved of by the military, and many were HORRIBLE. The soldiers, many of them just out of high school, fell victim to the high pressure sales pitch and wound up handing over huge chunks of their paychecks for just about nothing.

So I agree that SOMEONE has to make sure body armor company's marketing claims are on the up and up. And it is the rsponsibility of the military to look after its own and protect them from profiteering scumbags.

Steve

[Dschugaschwili]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

So I agree that SOMEONE has to make sure body armor company's marketing claims are on the up and up. And it is the rsponsibility of the military to look after its own and protect them from profiteering scumbags.

Steve

How do you want to make sure that the marketing claims are valid? I doubt that anything short of forcing the manufacturer's marketing guys to wear the armor for a live test will bring some sanity into marketing claims.

Dschugaschwili

[Peter Cairns]

The best but most time consuming way to do it is to have acertification system wher you can't either sell it or troops are "Put On A Charge" if they use it,.

The harsh way is to Ban it, and tell any soilder wounded or injured while using it, to pay there own medical bills.

Peter.

Having said that, apparently during the battle for Mount Pleasant in the Falklands one British Squaddie was seen waving a samuri sword about, and I am pretty sure that wasn't standard issue.

[Peter Cairns]

Just think if this might only be the begining.

If the rate of privatisation in the US military keeps up the pace of recent yours, GI's will probably have to show a valid Bluecross card before they get CASEVACed.

Peter.

[Sgt Joch]

I am reviving this old thread since there was a "Dateline" show over the weekend comparing Interceptor vs. Dragon Skin. Based on all the firing tests in the program, Dragon Skin was superior to Interceptor in all tests in stopping various anti-personnel rounds and provided greater vital organ coverage.

Not knowing much more than what I saw on the program, could anyone comment on why the Army is sticking with the Interceptor?

[Homo ferricus]

its cheaper? Its lighter? Its the status quo?

i dont really know, actually.

[ChrisND]

Originally posted by Sgt.Joch:

I am reviving this old thread since there was a "Dateline" show over the weekend comparing Interceptor vs. Dragon Skin. Based on all the firing tests in the program, Dragon Skin was superior to Interceptor in all tests in stopping various anti-personnel rounds and provided greater vital organ coverage.

Not knowing much more than what I saw on the program, could anyone comment on why the Army is sticking with the Interceptor?

I'd like to know a heck of a lot more information about that test first. Dateline wouldnt know a damn thing about body armor, so who was running it?

[Sgt Joch]

Here is some more info on the program:

Are U.S. soldiers wearing the best body armor?

article on testing method:

NBC puts body armors to the test

I see the Army has also just released its own test results:

Army: Dragon Skin armor failed battery of tests

[ May 22, 2007, 08:10 AM: Message edited by: Sgt.Joch ]

[Misereor]

I doubt that anything short of forcing the manufacturer's marketing guys to wear the armor for a live test will bring some sanity into marketing claims.

Interestingly enough, that was exactly what the Danish king did.

So many cannons either exploded or had their barrels split, that he issued a royal order that the cannon maker had to sit astride the cannon when the first shot was fired.

Manufacturing quality soared...

[ChrisND]

47.5 pounds!!?? Screw whatever "protection" it gives, we'd die of heat stroke first!

[John Kettler]

I haven't read the links yet, but I will say that even Army tests are no guarantee per se. If you doubt me, just look at what the Army did to the M16

during its tests in an all out effort to make sure the weapon didn't pass. What Eugene Stoner discovered was so blatant and perverse that he was lucky to emerge from his visit to the test site with an intact hide. I've seen the interview with him and read the accounts. To call the tests "rigged"

would be a kindness.

Regards,

John Kettler

[Battlefront.com]

US DOD tests are often set up to find out exactly what they need to support the contracts the either already have or have lined up. In the case of the body armor tests, the Army appears to have been looking for a reason to dismiss Dragon Skin. Best guess is because of the cost. Even with mass production discounts the Dragon Skin would cost a LOT more than Interceptor or the new improved version. Now, imagine the reaction when the Army says "we chose the Interceptor system because it's more economical, though not quite as good." There would be emotional outrage. Yet if the Army was forced to take the better product, do you think they would get extra money for the price difference? No, they wouldn't. So instead the Army would have to cut something else which, perhaps, is more important than the few lives that would be lost as a result of not having Dragon Skin.

In short, the public is inherently incapable of prioritizing and seeing the Big Picture. Everything about war is about trading off one thing for another. Maneuver for robustness, speed for protection, cost for quantity, etc. It's not within the masses' capability to understand that these choices must be made. If any of you have any doubts, think about these Forums where every little stinking detail has A1+++ Supre High Priority, and yet the complaints about how long it takes or how much it costs go right along with it.

That being said, if the Army would kill off FCS and focus on things that really make a difference in warfare NOW, the money wouldn't be a problem.

Steve

[PLM2]

Army is ****ed up. I remember when I went to basic they brought in people to sell us crap like "class rings" or other dumb overpriced crap nobody normal would really want. But some people are desperate to spend money after 60+ days without.

The whole SGLI life insurance is ****ed up. They seem to look for things to deny dead soldiers their SGLI. For instance you weren't wearing rediculous safety equipment (how many bikers wanna wear a vest off post?). They take complete control of your life and when soldiers kill themselves or do something dumb and get killed, they deny SGLI and have the ****in nerve to charge the survivors for the percentage of the enlistment bonus for the contract that wasn't served. This includes soldiers killed in action.... Wounded soldiers medically discharged also have to pay back the percentage they didnt serve.

Its completely out of control, the whole insaness safety which really does nothing. All it is is the piss poor leadership passing on responsibility to their soldiers completely to follow moronic safety regulations. Didnt take the proper online safety class and you die? SGLI denied. Die mountain hiking without wearing hiking boots....denied.

I have to do a risk assessment in how i'm going to get to the airport near post to go on leave in the United States..... FFS...i live here. I think I can handle getting to the airport.

In a military vehicle I gotta stop at industrial railroad crossings on one lane highways in which civilian vehicles drive right through. Seems way more dangerous to stop on a ****in 70mph highway to me than risk getting hit by an imaginary train in flat open terrain in which the owners would be required to block the road in the rare circumstances a train comes through...

Dont even get me started on SGLI. I'd like to find out where those guys operate and go beat the **** out of some executives with a bat.

[ChrisND]

In regards to the body armor, I just once again gotta state, that armor is so heavy it is more of liability than protection, who cares what the cost is. Unless you never plan on leaving your humvee.

[Sgt Joch]

Looking through the articles, it looks like the Interceptor was chosen not because it offered the best protection, but because it offered the best compromise solution, cost is probably an issue, as is weight, 48 pounds for Dragon Skin vs. 28 pounds for the Interceptor.

Of course the Army sort of painted themselves into a corner by selling the Interceptor as the best on the market rather than the best overall solution. However, it does not look like this will turn into a political hot potato.

[RMC]

I think the fuss about the body armor is kinda funny. The Dragon Skin may or may not be better than the Interceptor armor at stopping bullets. But that's not what's killing soldiers in Iraq. IEDs are killing them and I don't think Dragon Skin would make a bit of difference in that regard.

[Lee]

The independent tests that were conducted in Germany do not agree at all with what the Army is claiming as far as effectiveness at stopping various calibers of the Dragon Skin armor versus the Interceptor armor.

The only thing the Germans didn't seem to test for was the temperature issue, which supposedly causes the glue that holds the ceramic disks together to fail. If that German testing facility replicates these temperature tests the Army did (-20F to 120F) on the Dragon Skin and it also passes that test without any reduction in bullet stopping effectiveness, then the Army is clearly lying.

Perhaps the type of Dragon Skin armor that is required to outperform the Interceptor armor (Dragon Skin comes in different levels of protection, IIRC) would in some cases be too heavy for men that have to go on long foot patrols or cross country marches and such. But for those that are on short foot patrols or in humvees (if the armor checks out on the temperature tests), this armor looks to be much superior if and when the troops come under gunfire.

It would cost more to buy this armor, no doubt, but we're not talking about 50x more or some ridiculous amount that is just not possible to afford. Congress I don't think would have any problem adding a special supplemental to the Army's and Marines' budget (so other vital equipment purchases do not have to be cut) to get the best armor vests for our men fighting out in the field.

Those that need lighter armor to keep their overall combat load down because of the mission they are on that particular day can use the lighter and cheaper Interceptor vests. But there would be a supply of the Dragon Skin armor vests for all other times.

And, of course, only those men that are in front line combat units or who regularly travel in dangerous areas to protect vehicle convoys, etc. would need the Dragon Skin armor. So, maybe roughly 50,000-60,000 sets of vests would be needed to cover all needs in Afghanistan and Iraq. Figure around 250-300 million to get the best armor (again, assuming all independent armor tests are passed) in the world for our men in the front lines, who are at the greatest risk of coming under fire and need it the most. Which will save quite a few lives from gunfire, and one would think even reasonable size hunks of sharp metal thrown by IED explosions would be better stopped and with less blunt force trauma to the soldier by Dragon Skin based on those tests results from Germany (less back face deformation than Interceptor armor).

That's not an unreasonable amount of money, especially considering all the money the government utterly wastes on junk it shouldn't even be spending money on (the infamous "bridge to nowhere", etc.).

[tiny_tanker]

And the controversy continues! While I agree with the Army's decision to mandate/threaten/punish anyone not wearing their issued body armor, keeping fear an jealousy over who has the best armor on to a minimum. I have to say I find the Army's findings to be very stilted. I do have a question though, how much does the Interceptors weight change when you include all the extra armor is added, like the "required" side, shoulder, and groin plates? Also how does the Dragon skin compare in those area's or protection?

[RMC]

And what about that complete head-to-toe suit designed by that Canadian? How come they haven't tested that? It only weighs 18kilos.

[ChrisND]

Link?

A head to toe suit sounds like a disaster waiting to happen....

One of the big problems is that this issue has now become an emotional and political one, and when it comes to military equipment that is not good.

[PLM2]

In regards to the body armor, I just once again gotta state, that armor is so heavy it is more of liability than protection, who cares what the cost is. Unless you never plan on leaving your humvee.

I dissagree, I know people who ducktape SAPPI plates to their sides. It saves a LOT of lives, the arguement that its not worth it is insane. Soldiers wore armor in the olden days to stay alive. And here we are requiring less mobility, almost no hand to hand combat and of course we're gonna wear the **** when you can chill out and have someone try to kill you from hundreds of meters away.

If you honestly wouldnt wear it, you're on teh same level with people who wont wear ear protection. Before I even joined I knew more than one person who lost hearing in the war and they were the only casualties I knew. ****, someone I know is getting medboarded for one incident of firing one shot without earplugs.

I'm sure some of the people who have the same complacency with armor are in caskets right now.

I think the fuss about the body armor is kinda funny. The Dragon Skin may or may not be better than the Interceptor armor at stopping bullets. But that's not what's killing soldiers in Iraq. IEDs are killing them and I don't think Dragon Skin would make a bit of difference in that regard.

You're crazy if you dont think it makes a difference in IEDs. You definately wanna have something inbetween yourself and thousands of bits of gravel/shrapnel. And buddy, bullets arent killing soldiers a lot of the time because the armor is stopping them. I know people I see every day in rehab who are probably alive only because of the armor they wore.

Know someone who his armor only stopped one round but guess what, that $400 SAPPI plate taking one round might be the difference between 50 more years of living and being dead and a memory at 20. Give me a break

[ May 23, 2007, 07:31 PM: Message edited by: PLM2 ]

[RMC]

Originally posted by PLM2:

You're crazy if you dont think it makes a difference in IEDs. You definately wanna have something inbetween yourself and thousands of bits of gravel/shrapnel. And buddy, bullets arent killing soldiers a lot of the time because the armor is stopping them. I know people I see every day in rehab who are probably alive only because of the armor they wore.

I know you're like this big internet bad ass an' all, but your inability to read gets quite annoying. The point is not that the body armor is unimportant or that soldiers should not bother to wear it.

The point is that the alleged qualitative difference between the Dragon Skin and Interceptor is of distinctly secondary importance. The vast majority of soldiers getting killed are being killed by the blasts of IEDs and not bullets. The Dragon Skin won't have any effect on that number of IED deaths even if it did offer better protection against bullets.