I can't remember where I saw it, but I do remember an article, pretty sure it was Vietnam era, of a guy that dove on a grenade with a vest on and survived it. Had pictures of the plate and the nasty bruising on his chest. He had a few broken ribs and likely a few other injuries, but he was alive...
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
HQMC Restricts Non-Issued Armor Use
- Thread starter ChuckMK23
- Start date
I can't remember where I saw it, but I do remember an article, pretty sure it was Vietnam era, of a guy that dove on a grenade with a vest on and survived it. Had pictures of the plate and the nasty bruising on his chest. He had a few broken ribs and likely a few other injuries, but he was alive...
sodajones
Combat Engineer
Sounds like the Corps has issued a pretty balanced command here. There are a lot of "magic water" products out there ('2nd Chance' body armor anyone?) that promise a lot, but don't deliver. Maybe I'm extremely naive, but I have more faith in something thats been tested by our military as opposed to a new product that only has big claims and no experience or evidence of its capabilities and efficiency.
I'm sure someone will correct my limited view shortly.
I'm sure someone will correct my limited view shortly.
gaijin6423
Ask me about ninjas!
I concur that there is thorough testing done on armor/helmets chosen for purchase by DoD, but I think it's important to remember that they are not necessarily looking for the best product out there. Instead, they're looking for a broad spectrum set of PPE that will be functional over a wide range of trauma events, while still being relatively lightweight (ESAPI, anyone?), and offering mobility. And let's not forget about cost and availability. DoD could buy the best freaking body armor out there, but if there were so few available--or the price was so high--that they could only outfit a dozen Marines/Soldiers/Sailors, I'm betting that they would chose a higher Pk for their own troops instead.
Dragonskin's been used by the contractors for a while, and they have some pretty crazy war stories already. May not be perfect for all applications, but for some... it's the real deal...
Anecdotes are not a substitute for the testing the military puts its equipment through.......
Agreed. The statement of contractors for or against the use of Dragon Skin vs present systems would be no more informed then wandering over to your nearest shooting range and starting up a .45 vs 9mm arguement.
So you are going to depend on the word of a columnist on a private website?
Seriously, there is a very good reason that the military puts things through its testing procedures instead of relying on the good word of people. Read Chuck Yeager's bio and how he describes the screw-up with the early F-100's. The USAF depended on the word of fighter pilots who had flown it and loved it, but they did not do thorough testing of its stability until it killed a bunch of pilots.
Well, that is up to the military.......not random people on the internet. If it turns out it is the best option, more power to the Dragon Skin manufacturers.......
But it had gone through government testing, and passed, and gained certification up to Level III from the National Institute of Justice, when previously several officers involved (edit) made disparaging remarks and said it did not meet standards.
And you know this how? Be careful throwing around Officer and Lie in the same sentence as a whatever class midshipmen you are, with or without all the facts.