Proof?
-
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
Proof?
Certification Letter from the NIJ
http://www.sftt.org/PDF/ComplianceLetterPinnacleArmorSOV20001-MIL3AF01levelIII.pdf
I saw nothing in that letter that mentioned lying, stretching the truth or diparaging remarks.
What I saw was a peice of equipment passed the requirements and was not/not yet chosen as the issued peice of gear.
If that is your supporting documentation for assuming that Commissioned Officers lied or decieved you need to seriously rethink your career plans.
What I saw was a peice of equipment passed the requirements and was not/not yet chosen as the issued peice of gear.
If that is your supporting documentation for assuming that Commissioned Officers lied or decieved you need to seriously rethink your career plans.
You ain't getting the point at all. Instead of relying on third, fourth and fifth hand information that you get on the internet, the Army has tested the equipment and decided to stick with the Interceptor system, which has proven itself repeatedly in combat.
This sounds like typical bitching from some guys who think they know better than 'the man' and want to continually complain about it and prove their case to anyone who will listen (how do you think Gunny got that vest......let me guess, it came from the manufacturers of the Dragon Skin......) What the hell do you think the Army testing guys are doing? Do you honestly think they are not choosing the best system? That they are deliberately screwing over their fellow soldiers? Their comrades are fighting and wearing the armor they test, don't you think they would put the best out there? I have seen the effort that support folks back home put forth to make sure that the guys in the fight are equipped with the best equipment/intelligence/information available to them. It helps that many of those support people were in the fight themsleves. Why would that be different in this case?
Just because some whiny 'experts' want to bitch about how this particular armor is the best doesn't mean it is so. The military, and government at large, has screwed up plenty of times but this is one case where there is hardly any smoke....and no fire so far. So trust the experts and quit listening to a whiny bitch of a columnist who seems to have an axe to grind........
Here are the cold hard equations on Dragon Skin from Dr. Gary Roberts, LCDR, USNR, Stanford University Medical Center.
http://www.pinnaclearmor.com/20061005-pr.php
According to this Congressional Press release
http://www.house.gov/list/press/ar04_ross/041607bodyarmor.html
I think the point off all this is, yes it may be a better system it may not be, but the Marine Corps and Army brass are privy to information that we are not.
Some possible reasons:
Skepticism regarding the effectiveness of the system (yes it may look good on TV but then again on TV the Hornet does mach 2 and the Harrier can take off vertically with a combat load)
Expense - the interceptor does a good job and considering the Pentagon just shelled out millions to Armor Holdings to build thousands more interceptors it would be a bad financial decision to go through and start replacing equipment that gets the job done
Future Appropriations - its possible, and I would say probable, that the pentagon is talking to the maker of Dragon Skin about a future acquisition of this system. Maybe they want increased capability that the vest does not yet offer, maybe they want increased mobility, or decreased weight. We just don't know.
Some possible reasons:
Skepticism regarding the effectiveness of the system (yes it may look good on TV but then again on TV the Hornet does mach 2 and the Harrier can take off vertically with a combat load)
Expense - the interceptor does a good job and considering the Pentagon just shelled out millions to Armor Holdings to build thousands more interceptors it would be a bad financial decision to go through and start replacing equipment that gets the job done
Future Appropriations - its possible, and I would say probable, that the pentagon is talking to the maker of Dragon Skin about a future acquisition of this system. Maybe they want increased capability that the vest does not yet offer, maybe they want increased mobility, or decreased weight. We just don't know.
yeah that about sums it up
If you're so in love with Dragon Skin you can still wear it. It just has to be under your Interceptor vest (I'm sure that's comfortable).
5. INDIVIDUAL MARINES/SAILORS MAY NOT USE COMMERCIAL PPE IN LIEU OF GOVERNMENT TESTED, APPROVED AND ISSUED PPE. COMMANDERS MAY AUTHORIZE MEMBERS OF THEIR COMMANDS TO USE COMMERCIALLY PURCHASED PPE ITEMS IN ADDITION TO THOSE ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT, AS LONG AS ADDITIONS DO NOT INTERFERE WITH THE FUNCTIONALITY OF APPROVED PPE. INDIVIDUALLY PURCHASED COMMERCIAL PPE WILL NOT BE REIMBURSABLE BY COMMAND/UNIT (GOVERNMENT) FUNDS.
Semper Fi,
usmcecho4
5. INDIVIDUAL MARINES/SAILORS MAY NOT USE COMMERCIAL PPE IN LIEU OF GOVERNMENT TESTED, APPROVED AND ISSUED PPE. COMMANDERS MAY AUTHORIZE MEMBERS OF THEIR COMMANDS TO USE COMMERCIALLY PURCHASED PPE ITEMS IN ADDITION TO THOSE ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT, AS LONG AS ADDITIONS DO NOT INTERFERE WITH THE FUNCTIONALITY OF APPROVED PPE. INDIVIDUALLY PURCHASED COMMERCIAL PPE WILL NOT BE REIMBURSABLE BY COMMAND/UNIT (GOVERNMENT) FUNDS.
Semper Fi,
usmcecho4
gaijin6423
Ask me about ninjas!
Yeah, that's practical. Not trying to bust on the Corps or anyone else (I think there's several reasons Dragon Skin was found lacking), but I'm imagining the little-er kid from "A Christmas Story" headed out to patrol Ramadi.
Army responds to dragon skin. Of course nothing is solved.
http://dailynightly.msnbc.com/2007/05/army_responds_t.html
Semper Fi,
usmcecho4
http://dailynightly.msnbc.com/2007/05/army_responds_t.html
Semper Fi,
usmcecho4
It sounds as if the media is just trying to burn the military with a "look how the administration isn't equipping the troops" story.
Unless I am reading that article wrong it sounds like there are several legitimate complaints about the armor and concern about it failing. According to the article at least 4 out of the 30 tested vests failed...something on the line of 13%...
The segment they did on the TV was even worse. It was just rife with anti-war/administration garbage on how the Army was sending poor ill equipped soldiers off to war and knowingly denying them good equipment. They were really good at pointing out all the flaws in their own personal test of Interceptor Armor (without any info on the methodology of the tests) but skimmed over the DOD tests of Dragonskin that it didnt pass.