Dragon Skin in the Military

[Darth_Yuthura]

This is the kind of subject for Kavar's, but I don't want to discuss it there.

 

Dragon Skin armour by Pinnacle vs. Interceptor by Point Blank

 

Dragon Skin was banned by the US military before it was even tested in 2007. Is that because it didn't meet the technical specifications for ballistic protection, or was it politics? Many third-part sources say Dragon Skin is rated at level 5 ballistic protection, but the military claims it doesn't compare to Interceptor armour.

 

Just like to know what everyone else thinks about this. What would you prefer for our brave soldiers to have in the heat of battle? I would be all for Dragon Skin, as it is the best gear for the job.

[Achilles]

This is the kind of subject for Kavar's, but I don't want to discuss it there.

The Senate Chambers

 

Dragon Skin armour by Pinnacle vs. Interceptor by Point Blank

 

Dragon Skin was banned by the US military before it was even tested in 2007. Is that because it didn't meet the technical specifications for ballistic protection, or was it politics? Many third-part sources say Dragon Skin is rated at level 5 ballistic protection, but the military claims it doesn't compare to Interceptor armour.

Sounds pretty technical. Know of any websites that break down both sides of the argument for us lay-people?

 

Just like to know what everyone else thinks about this. What would you prefer for our brave soldiers to have in the heat of battle? I would be all for Dragon Skin, as it is the best gear for the job.

Considering that we do not seem to be able to provide even basic kevlar for our armed forces, I'm wondering how the more expensive, labor-intensive Dragon Skin could ever become a reality. Perhaps for special forces types???

[Darth_Yuthura]

Point Blank had gotten over $50 million dollars in contracts this year for Interceptor Armour. I would think that US taxpayers would be willing to see that each one of our soldiers is protected by the best body armour, considering that they are risking their lives for us.

 

You can see youtube videos about it, but sites would include

 

http://defense-update.com/products/d/dragonskin.htm

 

http://www.fftt.us/ffttj/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=105:-dragon-skin-flexible-scalar-body-armor-defeats-rifle-threats&catid=56:the-web&Itemid=95

 

http://www.policelink.com/products/products/1577-dragonskin-bodyarmor

[Achilles]

Point Blank had gotten over $50 million dollars in contracts this year for Interceptor Armour. I would think that US taxpayers would be willing to see that each one of our soldiers is protected by the best body armour, considering that they are risking their lives for us.

I'm sure both of these arguments are sound, however neither one addresses the point that I was making.

 

If we cannot afford to give every soldier existing, cheaper body armor, then what should lead us to expect that we will be able to provide more expensive stuff that takes longer to make?

 

I, for one, would prefer we put more money into things that would allow us to avoid putting people in harm's way in the first place.

[Jae Onasi]

This is the kind of subject for Kavar's, but I don't want to discuss it there.

As long as it doesn't turn into a 'hot topic', and other staff also don't object, this should be fine. Don't be surprised if it takes a turn towards Ahto silliness, however, just so you have fair warning.

 

I don't know enough about any of these armors to say why one is used vs. another. It could be cost, reliability, comfort in the field, ability to easily mass-produce the items, heat retention issues (important in the desert areas), weight, ability to easily fit males and females, reactions with different chemical agents, and so forth.

I, for one, would prefer we put more money into things that would allow us to avoid putting people in harm's way in the first place.

Definitely agreed on that.

[Darth_Yuthura]

I, for one, would prefer we put more money into things that would allow us to avoid putting people in harm's way in the first place.

 

I would have preferred that the US not invade Iraq either, but they're already committed; they're there. Now the issue is to do whatever we can to support them until they can be pulled out. It would be better to do whatever it takes to get them out of harm's way, but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't give them the best protection for the job in the meantime.

[Achilles]

I would have preferred that the US not invade Iraq either, but they're already committed; they're there.

I'm not limiting my argument to Iraq...or Afghanistan.

 

Re: Iraq: Yes, they are there, but they could also be here. It would seem that if we were to limit our options to two, we could say that our choice is either to provide them with better stuff (how long would it take secure contracts, mass produce, ship, train, fit, etc?) or bring them home (which I'm betting we could do quicker than the first option).

 

Now the issue is to do whatever we can to support them until they can be pulled out. It would be better to do whatever it takes to get them out of harm's way, but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't give them the best protection for the job in the meantime.

If we could snap our fingers and have every service member in this new armor tomorrow (next week, month, 6 months from now) I could see your point, however I don't think such a scenario is realistic.

 

I'm all for giving them the best protection in the mean time, but again, you seem to be ignoring the fact that we can't even do that with existing, cheaper options.

[Salzella]

Is it made of real dragon skin?

[Darth_Yuthura]

This isn't about an issue that's yet to happen; this was about a year ago that DS was banned and since then, new contracts for interceptor armour have been awarded. If this had not been shot down by politics over a year ago, the US military could have instead awarded contracts to Pinnacle and not Point Blank for its inferior Interceptor.

 

Now instead of Dragon Skin, any new vests since it was banned was inferior to what could have been provided for them. The problem I present here is that if DS were superior to Interceptor, then any deaths that happened where DS could have protected them better would be depraved indifference to the lives of US troops.

 

IF Dragon Skin were banned because it was considered too heavy compared to the lighter Interceptor, then that might be valid enough to restrict its use; but politics has gotten in the way. And now DS armour has a false reputation for being inferior to other vests when even the inventor of Interceptor says its two steps ahead of his own design. That convinced me that was the best, but now the Army has banned it entirely for the wrong reasons.

[Jae Onasi]

Is it made of real dragon skin?

Your choice of green, purple, red, or shiny bad-a** black

 

@D_Y--weight is a very real issue for soldiers. Their packs already can weigh up to 60 lbs or more, and the guy who carries the M-60 has even more weight to carry beyond that. The last thing you want to do is encumber a soldier with a lot of armor weight. The ability to run from secure point to secure point very quickly is just as important as bullet-resistant armor. There are parts of the body that can't be covered with armor (armpit, back of knee, top of thigh/portions of hip, and so on), and the soldier has to be able to move quickly if he comes under, say, overwhelming fire,

[Achilles]

This isn't about an issue that's yet to happen; this was about a year ago that DS was banned and since then, new contracts for interceptor armour have been awarded. If this had not been shot down by politics over a year ago, the US military could have instead awarded contracts to Pinnacle and not Point Blank for its inferior Interceptor.

Okay. And how many armed services personnel currently have this armor?

 

(I notice that we're also assuming that the Interceptor armor actually is inferior).

 

Now instead of Dragon Skin, any new vests since it was banned was inferior to what could have been provided for them. The problem I present here is that if DS were superior to Interceptor, then any deaths that happened where DS could have protected them better would be depraved indifference to the lives of US troops.

This seems an awful lot like a non sequitur. "If" (quotin' you) DS is superior to Interceptor, then that has absolutely nothing to do with the current body count, unless you can show that a certain percentage of current casualties were wearing the armor AND that their death(s) could have been prevented had they been wearing DS instead.

 

 

IF Dragon Skin were banned because it was considered too heavy compared to the lighter Interceptor, then that might be valid enough to restrict its use; but politics has gotten in the way.

I'm sorry, I can't just accept this on your say-so.

 

And now DS armour has a false reputation for being inferior to other vests when even the inventor of Interceptor says its two steps ahead of his own design. That convinced me that was the best, but now the Army has banned it entirely for the wrong reasons.

Same for this. Citations, etc would go a long way toward building your case.

[Totenkopf]

The govt has long had a history of going with the lowest/best connected bidder. Remember seeing something on it where they said that though the Army had passed on it that many of the bodyguards for the various generals were using it in Iraq. Frankly, doesn't matter whether the troops are in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan or Mexico...they should get the best stuff they can. As Rumsfeld said, though, you go to war (wherever that might be) with the army you have. Would just be nice if the govt did it's best to make sure it had what it needed....both at the beginning and all along the "learning curve" of whatever conflict it finds itself in in the end. Still, costs can't be ignored. How expensive is the Dragon Skin if bought in bulk and how quickly can it be manufactured w/o cutting corners? It might just be that such armor is prohibitive in cost for your average line doggie, but that spec operators are a small enough group that the expenses wouldn't bust the budget.

[Salzella]

Your choice of green, purple, red, or shiny bad-a** black

 

hah, clearly a no-brainer

[CommanderQ]

I would think Dragon-Skin would be an excellent form of protection for our troops. It's been tested, and has proved itself more then capable in ways of protecting, it can take AK rounds at point-blank, I was pretty dang impressed by that. I really don't know exactly why the Government canceled the project...

[Achilles]

It's been tested, and has proved itself more then capable in ways of protecting, it can take AK rounds at point-blank, I was pretty dang impressed by that.

To be fair, I've only seen one DS demonstration (and it was several months ago), however I would really need to see this independently verified before I accepted it.

 

An AK-47 will shoot through lots of things (like houses) from very far away. To stop a bullet at point-blank is truly impressive (if it's true).

 

I really don't know exactly why the Government canceled the project...

I'm guessing cost.

[Darth_Yuthura]

I'm sorry, I can't just accept this on your say-so.

 

Same for this. Citations, etc would go a long way toward building your case.

 

Look up a few posts.

 

Go to youtube, type 'dragon skin,' and watch a few videos. If you don't have the time, then just watch 'The Shocking truth about DS' and this should just about cover it all.

 

Marine kernal, Jim Mcgee, says DS was way better than his own design of Interceptor. That is a source.

 

The Army's limited tests that showed how the armor failed are quite difficult to locate. Here are some more sites that have some reading involved:

 

http://www.defensereview.com/pinnacle-armor-level-iv-dragon-skin-passes-esapi-fat-test-at-aberdeen/

 

http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/0607/060707cdam1.htm

 

http://www.ksee24.com/news/local/9207202.html

 

 

The lack of credible sources which verify that DS failed the ballistic tests and how it was blackballed from Army use before even being tested brings to question the actual results of their tests. There is reason to doubt the results of these tests because numerous 3rd parties have done their own and showed it to be vastly superior to the Army's current generation of Interceptor Armour. Many have seen for themselves how it withstood dozens of AK rounds and allowed no penetrations.

[Totenkopf]

...it can take AK rounds at (near) point-blank, I was pretty dang impressed by that.

 

 

(This BBCode requires its accompanying plugin to work properly.)

[Darth_Yuthura]

I really don't know exactly why the Government canceled the project...

 

They banned it because those who advocated against it had something at stake for killing off Point Blank's competition. Everyone who have 'seen' these tests where the armour failed can't be considered credible because they had something at stake for lying.

 

Those sites and videos performed by Pinnacle, likewise, would be subject to question. I can conceive the company showing it off on Mail Call and Future Weapons, but there are many 3rd party sources that verify the armour would be rated at level 5 ballistic protection. This is not an official term, but DS would qualify as level 5.

[Pho3nix]

(This BBCode requires its accompanying plugin to work properly.)

how do all u people kno so much stuff about guns and bullets gotta give you all props its pretty amazing u kno like which bullets penetrate more and like alot its crazie

[ForeverNight]

That still doesn't address the point made earlier, Cost-per-unit. What is the difference in cost between this kickass DragonSkin and the Interceptor armor? If this Interceptor can take a few less hits/provide less protection at a unit price that is very much lower as compared to the DS, then I have no problem using Interceptors.

 

Reason? Infantry aren't the valuable parts of an Army. Sure men go where vehicles can't, but you can throw away squads whereas you can't throw away tanks, APC's and other vehicles. However, I remember reading in article in Machine Design a little while back dealing with DARPA and some mechanized body suits... basically we're going to be developing Powered Battle Armor one of these years....

 

So, basically, what's the Cost-Per-Unit?

 

@Jae, I'll take a little bit of every variant.... with double Black of course.

[ironheart]

Having spent way too many ridiculously long hot days in my Kevlar, not too fond of the stuff. especially when it's just those big old plates shoved into the IBA vest. (I've heard there's better, more flexible stuff but the guard doesn't see it. Hmph.) But it does do it's job. most of the time. Assuming you don't get shot in the small side area that the IBA doesn't cover. Yeah.

 

It's a price thing. The Army's cheap. They want it in bulk and they want it affordable. So long as it's moderately functional, phhhaaah, the higher ups don't care. In their view, men are easier and cheaper to replace than equipment.

[Aash Li]

I wish we could avoid having to send out our loved ones to protect us from the various people that want to kill us too. No one really wants war. No one wants to go and get maimed or killed, or end up blinded.

But unfortunately you can only have true lasting peace if both you and the enemy want it. If you go over "there" (being a general term, not just the mid-east) and claim that were not at war, we dont have anyfight with them. Then were just going to get bombed or have more innocents murdered by hijacked planes...

 

And Ironheart, its not the military thats cheap, its Congress. They hold the financial purse-strings of the military in general.

 

My comment seems off topic, but I was just responding to other bits of conversation I didnt quote. Sorry... and since I dont have any feedback on the armour issue, Ill leave with this:

 

I want what ever sort of armour that will help keep our soldiers alive. We fund the military to keep ourselves safe. We cant spend our taxpayers money on "green" nonsense or education or whatever if we are just a smoking crater...

[swphreak]

<- not an expert

 

The Interceptor thingy is modular and can swap out plates and stuff right? It doesn't look like Dragon Skin can be switched out. Instead of replacing a damaged DS vest, a soldier can just replace their damaged plate in the Interceptor one. I bet that was a factor in the Army's decision to drop Dragon Skin.

 

Though my money is on that Interceptor body armor is cheaper.

[Rogue15]

from what i read at goarmy.com it doesn't hold up so well in the desert.

[Q]

Yeah, I've read that prolonged exposure to heat will make the ceramic layers that make up the "scales" separate because whatever substance is used to bond them together breaks down.

 

As has been pointed out above, Dragon Scales is not modular and costs roughly twice as much as Interceptor. And as Jae indicated, hauling 35 pounds around is not practical and can be more of a liability than an asset in a combat situation. New materials will have to be invented before the weight issue can be properly addressed, though.