Posted on 05/22/2007 12:48:34 PM PDT by World_Events
The U.S. Army, in a rare move Monday, released a barrage of test results showing that a privately-sold flexible body armor that some families have sought for their soldiers failed extensive military testing.
Pieces of the hefty Dragon Skin armor, with ragged holes torn through its yellow inner skin, were propped up on the floor in the Pentagon, as Army officials systematically detailed the battery of ammunition and temperature testing the armor failed.
Although the tests were done nearly a year ago, the Army declined to release details until Monday, after recent NBC News reports suggested that the Dragon Skin may be better than the Army-issued Interceptor armor.
As a result of the reports, some members of Congress have asked for an investigation into the matter, and others have asked the Army for more information.
"We take this personally," said Brig. Gen. Mark Brown, executive officer for the Army's armor testing program. "One third of the general officers in the United States Army have either a son or daughter either in theater (at war) today or (who) has been to theater."
Holding up an armor-piercing bullet, Brown showed video of the tests, including footage of officials peering into the bullet hole in the Dragon Skin armor. "At the end of the day, this one disc has to stop this round. It didn't. Thirteen times," he said.
In response, Murray Neal, president of Pinnacle Armor which produces Dragon Skin, suggested that the Army lied about some of the testing, and he questioned why the Army was counting shots that "were fired into the non-rifle defeating areas."
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
NBC faking news again....they never learn!
Didn’t I see this stuff on an episode of Future Weapons?
Brian Williams last night suggested the US Army needed to test Dragon Skin again, rather than admit NBC (once again) got the story wrong.
No wonder they lose audience week after week, year after year.
Oh, that's rich...I hope the terrorists got Murray's memo about where it's OK to shoot at the armor and where to avoid. I'm sure Achmed is real concerned about exploiting this crap's weaknesses.
After all, that wouldn't be fair.
Yes you did i believe though that is the newer version of it. It stopped many rounds of different types of ammo and a grenade.
Yup you did, and it performed very well. In addition, Dragon Skin is more flexible than the solid ceramic inserts currently used by the US Army, giving the soldier more mobility.
This is another “NIH” syndrome by the Army.
Gee, an armor piercing bullet that pierced armor. Who’da thunkit?
http://dsc.discovery.com/fansites/future-weapons/weapons/zone2/weapon-zone-2.html
click Video then Season 2 tab and then Dragon Skin (like 14th down)
Basic question:
What do SFOD-D, SF, & SEAL people think about this system? There lies the answer.
One compelling thing in the NBC story is that they interviewed the man who invented “Interceptor” — the armor that the US military currently uses.
He says that Dragon Skin is far better than the armor he invented.
You think Interceptor is rifle-proof over 100 percent of its surface?
I remember the grenade bit. It looked very promising on that show, who to believe on this?
Then again it is twice as heavy as the standard issue as well.
Guessing things like this turn out the same way they usually do.
One will be better at something that the other isn’t.
The guy should take the results, analyze them, fix his vest and move on.
The concept is better. Fix the implementation and get the weight down. Twenty extra pounds is a big deal to 19 year old kids already humping 100+ pounds of equipment... You try it some time; it’s not fun at all.
Where do you get that information? The information I have read says that the Dragon Skin vest is lighter than the equiliviant NIJ level Interceptor vest.
From a posting on Defense Tech:
It's about time someone made some sense Staff Sgt.
I was an Infantryman and served in Iraq in 2004.
You bring up issues that I too went through. The rubbing isn't that bad for the first few weeks but after a few months I started breaking out and that led to the rash that you most likely encountered like me. I noticed if I had to take a shit and didn't want to take my vest off that it was almost impossible. Now that isn't a very good arguement but it was a problem more than once for me. I also had issues with the necesary tightness as I was told, it has to be tight so that the impact of a bullet doesn't have any room to cause worse trauma. I thought to myself, what the f**k? The other thing is that the insurgents have known about the weaknesses at least since I was there. I recall seeing a leaflett that was in a suspected Al Qaedah opperative's house (or compound I should say) the leaflett had a picture of the Interceptor vest and in red highlighting were areas of high fatality risks as our interpereter conveyed. It is time for a change in our armor and I have taken your advice sir and been spreading the word to whoever really cares to write their senators or anyone who will get this issue to congress.Posted by: Mike Luchenbach at May 22, 2007 01:40 PM
Looks like Al Qaeda already knows the limitations of Interceptor Armor, too.
What is most disturbing here is the vital necessity of a Democratic Congress to publicly discuss the vulnerabilities of US body armor. This is a tremendous disservice to our troops.
It is vitally more important to make spectacle politics at the expense of the Bush administration than to have secret hearings on the matter to establish the common concerns of all congressional members— that our servicemen and women be as safe as possible during combat.
Yeah, that's EXACTLY what I said.
What, are you thick or something?? Did you miss reading comprehension day in the fourth grade? Do you really believe I'm so stupid as to think any body armor is 100% bullet-proof, or are you just out to prove you're the smartest little FReeper in the land?
Why do the people on this board always have to make EVERYTHING about themselves - where-oh-where have all the grown-ups gone...?
Nothing is 100% impenetrable. We have weapons that can penetrate 20ft of concrete. Demanding perfection is neither productive nor helpful. Do you think their arms and munitions are also 100% effective in all conditions? WWhenever you try to make something (a tank, a transport, body armor, a field rifle) that can do everything, you get an expensive bloated piece of crap... that some congressman will hail as the greatest advancement since the gatling gun (if his state has a factory that will produce it, most likely).
Yo-Yo -- Fact twisting. Here is reality:
Dragon Skin vests that covers the same area as Interceptor are lighter.
If the dragon skin armor covers the torso sides, lower back, and crotch -- it weighs 20 pounds more. (These are areas not covered by Interceptor.)
I saw the grenade test. That was pretty insane.
Obviously someone leaked this to NBC with an agenda in mind and the Pentagon is FINALLY using some counterbattery fire.
He said that if you are shot in the back with a high powered rifle with Interceptor, the bullet won’t penetrate, but it’s likely your spleen will explode.
He says the Dragon Skin design spreads the impact pressure, better protecting the body’s organs.
He said that if you are shot in the back with a high powered rifle with Interceptor, the bullet won’t penetrate, but it’s likely your spleen will explode.
He says the Dragon Skin design spreads the impact pressure, better protecting the body’s organs.
Quite frankly, the media is looking for angles of attack and some parents want the best for their kids. Fact is, no country, none of our allies, has as standard issue a comparable vest with the protection afforded by Interceptor with SAPI plate inserts. A few of our allies equip their special forces with Bristol and other very nice armor, but the normal forces have lower NIJ test ratings, less area coverage of the plate and generally tend to be less adaptive (What you see is what you get). Like the M1, F15, Bradley (years past) and today F22, IBA, HMMWV etc, the media sees itself in the role of critic, even if it’s all BS. IBA uses some of the most advanced materials and is a superb design. It still won’t stop everything from every angle. That’s sad, but a reality-
That's a definite possibility. If I were, would I know?
where-oh-where have all the grown-ups gone...?
I thought I was one, but I could be wrong.
If we can assume just for the sake of the next paragraph that I'm neither stupid nor childish (perhaps that's asking too much, but try to bear with me), it might become apparent that I was pointing us both toward another conclusion...the conclusion that the question at hand is not whether Dragon Skin has vulnerable spots, but whether Dragon Skin is better than Interceptor.
You see, the point of the comparison was (nominally, at least) to determine whether Dragon Skin or Interceptor was the superior armor. This was the purpose of the test. The purpose was not to see whether you can find a place in a set of Dragon Skin you can blow a hole through...though this exact thing is the aim of the jihadis (pardon the pun).
All this is of course obvious, but the point of it all was that the question of whether Azim would aim his AK-47 only at the places where the armor was strongest is a side issue, a red herring, not germane to the discussion at hand.
That's all I meant to say. Perhaps I could communicate better. Sorry about that.
The true insanity is the fact that if a trooper is willing to spend his own money on it because he believes that doing this will make him more safer or more efficent on the battlefield has to be taken into consideration.
Also you have to take into consideration that the IBASS is quite useless when your in a M114, but the shrapnel protection would help if you happen to be inside that vehicle when it is IED’d.
Then again the fact those jihadists bury 5 or 6 155mm shells and a 114 rolls over em it really doesn’t matter.
I counterpoint though the army does have possession of your person when you are under contract.
My issue is that if a SEAL wants to wear it on his own mission they aren’t allowed to. Yet If he decided to wear a soft cap instead of a kevlar no one would say a word.
Actually that’s incorrect. IBA does have croch and side protection and there is even on some versions the ability to add side sapi plates.
This, indeed, is the issue.
From what I’ve read, a full armor dragon skin array weighs 20 pounds more that a striped down Interceptor vest.
Then everyone runs around crying “But it’s 20 pounds heavier! Oh no!”
That episode showed only head-on shots.
The Army’s concerns are technically valid.
1. Angular shots can penetrate the individual “scales”.
2. The glue that holds the “scales” in place is not resistant to heat or cold.
Dragon Skin may be more flexible, but it’s much HEAVIER than the Interceptor armor.
I trust Army testing over a TV show, but that’s just me ;)
Dragon Skin is flexible.
Anybody want to estimate the “blunt force trauma” from a grenade.
A hard plate will do a much better job against that specific threat and your heart and lungs smash against your spine.
There’s a reason hard plates/inserts are called “trauma plates”. A metal plate will spread the force out against the entire plate. I doubt (and Army testing confirms) that the Dragon Skin will help prevent that type of trauma.
I'm not so sure about that. Our open society has weaknesses, but in the final analysis our openness makes us stronger. This kind of debate will give us better armor in the end.
Civilian technology to the rescue, $49 retail.
The material has been used to lessen trauma in "flack jackets" in pro football, hockey, rodeo, and NASCAR for years. While the example shows it being placed in a pocket behind soft body armor, another version uses an adhesive backing that is stuck to the back of SAPI plates.
I've gotten emails from some troops who say the pads are coming "soon".
The Dragon Skin system has a trauma plate that slips in behind the scales. This two-level system offers superior trauna protection.
What I find so Ironic about your angled shots arguement is that you fail to realize that troopers are being taught to orient your weapon in front of you and move so you don’t expose vital areas and have the bullets hit the plate.
I trust army testing to a point, but I did observe enough medical malpractice ON MYSELF, my friends and my boss to realize to take everything the army says with a grain of salt.
This is also the same army that has a weapon to replace the weapon that replaces the M4 while I was sent to war with a M16A1 with the 1 scratched out and a 2 stenciled in. Then I ask if it’s okay for me to mail order a XM8 and bring it with and they said no.
Deploying again soon self ping.
NBC News get’s it wrong again, and that’s a page from ChadGores’ notebook
NBC is the same news place that hired Katie Couric willingly and intentionally.
I agree with the principal of what you are saying but I still imagine an open system where it is contained to a public that supports our troops. That public could have competing views of how best to protect the troops without advertising— shoot here to kill— to antangonistic enemies.
IBA is in all reality awesome armor. Available already in the mid 90s, the DoD didn’t have the money for large scale fielding. With the onset of Iraq the Bush administration which opened the flood gates for more procurement even before 2001 ironically were the ones who got the rose pinned on them and blamed for ill equipping troops in Iraq. At that time the issue wasn’t one of money, but manufacturing capacity! The firms building the stuff like M1114s simply could not build them quick enough, but NBC never asked the question “Well, should we not have learned from Somalia and the Balkans that we need much more than a small token fleet of up-armored HMMWVs?” No, that too was pinned on an administration that was fixing the mess created by it’s predecessor.
We can tweak here and there. Maybe use boron carbide instead of alumina sapi inserts. We can make things better a little, but essentially IBA is about as good as it comes for personal protective body armor for general use. Some of these people get their facts from TV shows that are nice, but they are TV shows and not labs where deformation, angles of impact, temperatures, sweat, aging, soldier wear and tear (bang it up) and many more variables are inserted. I noticed during the show “Future weapons” that they only took nice right angle shots!
This sort of plate armor existed before with larger plates and it failed for the exact reason we both indicate, bullets tend to come through at less than ideal angles which are the norm in real combat. The enemy will not try to present himself like Ivan at the qualification range! It is very unfortunate that soldiers die, but IBA in all reality is one of the reasons our casualty rates are so low! It is one of the reasons we have less severe injuries to the torso especially. The vest alone has a IIIA rating and will stop most handguns. The sapi plate (Stand alone) is multi hit M80 ball protection. Combine the two and even a 7.62X54 AP round can't punch through. What people are complaining about in reality is awesome body armor no other Army on this planet can afford for it's troops in large scale fielding; even our most affluent allies. But there are limits to what can be done because of materials available, weight restrictions, anatomical requirements so a soldier can lie in a prone for example....etc. IBA already pushes the limits of what is feasible for a man to carry! We don't live in 2100 like some here apparently think, and flexible gel body armor is also not out there (although they no $hit are working on it). IBA is about as good as it gets today! But moron shows like Law and Order or a cool (but they tend to over exaggerate) Future Weapons paint a picture that is not true and that is what some of these opinions are based on essentially.
I've been told they are wearing it, so are a lot of Generals in Iraq.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.