Dragon Skin in the Military

[Darth_Yuthura]

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.

 

Dragon Skin isn't marginally better; it's a leap beyond Interceptor. Where you had four ridged ceramic plates that didn't provide full torso protection, Dragon Skin's flexibility can ensure as much protection around the shoulders as every vital organ.

 

And in regards to cost, I have seen prices at $5000 last year that could drop to under $1600 per vest if Pinnacle had been awarded a military contract. When you mass produce vests, the price goes down, so it would compare to Interceptor at about $1000. I think they spend more arming US soldiers than armoring them.

 

If mobility is the concern, then DS would be great for those who man turrets where the soldier is completely exposed to enemy fire.

[Jae Onasi]

So, it currently costs 5 times more than the interceptor, weighs more, has had a history of not holding up under field conditions, isn't reparable with the same ease as interceptor, and looks like it takes longer to make.

 

I don't care how good it is at stopping bullets in the lab. If it fails in the field and can't be repaired easily, you may as well put these soldiers in no armor at all. It's a $5k useless pile of crap if it falls apart in the middle of battle, and it leaves the soldier at far greater risk than if he'd been given the interceptor armor. Now I understand why they weren't awarded the contract, and agree that this was an appropriate decision.

 

If the makers of DS can fix the problems with failure in the field and address the repair issues, then they might have a viable product worthy of consideration.

[Totenkopf]

I'd agree that if the price can be brought down to less than 2x the cost of the other product and that any remaining performance issues are resolved, that DS would be a worthy addition to ballistic protection, even if it's use is limited to certain types of units. As I recall, even in 'Nam, the heat often resulted in many troopers not always using their vests. When you consider that many of these soldiers are moving around w/ gear that weighs as much as a small child in 110+ degree heat, the weight issue is not insignificant. What problems dose the DS have in temperate or cold climates? Perhaps it might prove more useful in Korea and other more temperate environments.

[ironheart]

I'd agree that if the price can be brought down to less than 2x the cost of the other product and that any remaining performance issues are resolved, that DS would be a worthy addition to ballistic protection, even if it's use is limited to certain types of units. As I recall, even in 'Nam, the heat often resulted in many troopers not always using their vests. When you consider that many of these soldiers are moving around w/ gear that weighs as much as a small child in 110+ degree heat, the weight issue is not insignificant. What problems dose the DS have in temperate or cold climates? Perhaps it might prove more useful in Korea and other more temperate environments.

 

The lightest ruck I've ever seen was 50 pounds. Usually they're more than that. So yeah, weight is a factor. And if it can't hold up to the heat, it's pretty much useless for the soldiers running around out there in Iraq. There's not enough action going on in places like Korea to justify getting special armor just for them. I've heard from my buddies that depending on where you are over their the hardest job you have is baby sitting the border. Which incidentally , hehe, is why it's where most of the privates want to get stationed. Lots of, ah, "night life".

[Jae Onasi]

Well, a good friend of mine almost got knifed to death in the DMZ by a North Korean, so the 'night life' he saw wasn't the warm cozy kind.

[CommanderQ]

The lightest ruck I've ever seen was 50 pounds. Usually they're more than that. So yeah, weight is a factor. And if it can't hold up to the heat, it's pretty much useless for the soldiers running around out there in Iraq. There's not enough action going on in places like Korea to justify getting special armor just for them. I've heard from my buddies that depending on where you are over their the hardest job you have is baby sitting the border. Which incidentally , hehe, is why it's where most of the privates want to get stationed. Lots of, ah, "night life".

 

I wouldn't exactly say that there isn't enough going on in places like Korea....recent events have been pretty tense, especially with the Nuclear Tests, and Kim Jong-Il declaring that NK no longer acknowledged the Peace Treaty that ended the major part of the Korean war.

 

If war should erupt against North Korea, our troops would need everything we can give them, US forces would be greatly outnumbered {having only a some ought 25,000 to the entire army of North Korea, which is pretty big} , technology would be one of our few advantages, if not one of the only ones.

 

 

Well, a good friend of mine almost got knifed to death in the DMZ by a North Korean, so the 'night life' he saw wasn't the warm cozy kind.

 

Weren't there a few other events similar that happened in the past 20 years or so? I heard about a few border skirmishes and knifings...

[JediAthos]

One of the common sayings in the military is: "Remember, your weapon was made by the lowest bidder."

 

That aside, this link is from the ArmyTimes website. I found it with a quick google search.

 

http://www.militarytimes.com/static/projects/pages/dragon_skin_release_000121may07.pdf

[EnderWiggin]

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

 

_EW_

[Darth_Yuthura]

^^^

 

What does that have to do with anything?

 

DS is the best of the best, but the only technical issues are heat tolerance and weight. Beyond that, it's perfect.

 

And the Army banned it for political, not technical reasons. I don't know about you, but I would want the ones responsible for the ban to face the consequences for what they've done.

[EnderWiggin]

What does that have to do with anything?

 

I'll explain it to you when you're older.

 

_EW_

[Achilles]

DS is the best of the best, but the only technical issues are heat tolerance and weight. Beyond that, it's perfect.

Could you please provide us with your expert qualifications? I don't believe that one need be an expert to speak intelligently on a subject, but since you insist that we accept your opinion as though you were an authority on the subject, I really must insist.

 

And the Army banned it for political, not technical reasons.

This is opinion.

 

I don't know about you, but I would want the ones responsible for the ban to face the consequences for what they've done.

Were you think tea and cake or death?

[Darth_Yuthura]

Right I'm no expert, so my opinion is moot.

 

I'm not presenting an argument for debate, so I don't expect anyone to take my opinion to heart. Watch the youtube videos on DS from Mail call and future weapons and that would speak for itself. As for the politics, the fact that it was banned before the ballistic tests were done shows that is wasn't because the armour didn't meet the specifications the Army wanted.

[Tommycat]

^^^

 

What does that have to do with anything?

 

DS is the best of the best, but the only technical issues are heat tolerance and weight. Beyond that, it's perfect.

 

And the Army banned it for political, not technical reasons. I don't know about you, but I would want the ones responsible for the ban to face the consequences for what they've done.

 

Wait, You have proof that the army banned it for political and not technical reasons?

 

35 lbs doesn't sound like much when you are ONLY carrying that 35 lbs. Carry a full pack, an M60, and ammo. 120+ extra lbs starts to make you tire out rather quickly. Many troops would just not wear the armor.

 

Cost: 5,000,000 for 1000 units. THAT'S A LOT. Cutting it down to 1,000,000 per 1000 is a savings of 4 million per 1000 units.

 

Reliability: The military doesn't like things that break down on them. If it breaks down in hot weather, that would be a bad thing. Our military operates in a variety of climates. Hot climates are one of them.

 

Army test results (Please note 2006 date)

excerpt:

Pinnacle SOV 3000 level IV Dragon Skin suffered catastrophic failure of

the ceramic disc containment grid adhesive at -60º F, 120º F and 160º F.

• SOV 3000 design is sensitive to extreme temperatures and failed to

maintain ballistic integrity at temperatures below summer ambient in OIF.

• This failure mode caused discs to delaminate and accumulate in the lower

portion of the armor panel, thus resulting in exposing the spine, vital

organs, and critical blood vessels to lesser ballistic threats.

 

Pinnacle SOV 3000 level IV Dragon Skin vests suffered 13 first or second

shot complete penetrations, failing 4 of 8 initial subtests with ESAPI

threat baseline 7.62 x 63mm APM2 Armor Piercing (AP) ammunition.

 

I think the US Army had some PRETTY DANG GOOD reasons not to keep Dragon Skin

[mimartin]

Dragon Skin sounds and looks for like very good body armor in a control environment.

 

We should just figure out a way to fight all wars in a control environment to make it viable.

[Darth_Yuthura]

Wait, You have proof that the army banned it for political and not technical reasons?

 

Cost: 5,000,000 for 1000 units. THAT'S A LOT. Cutting it down to 1,000,000 per 1000 is a savings of 4 million per 1000 units.

 

Here's some proof right there that the Army will sacrifice the safety of its troops to save money.

[mimartin]

That all depends on how you choice to look at it, that same statement could also prove that the Army cares more about the safety of its troops by wanting to provide some protection to more troops by purchasing the less expensive, lighter weight and more easily repairable armor that holds up in extreme environments (aka desert warfare).

[Darth_Yuthura]

They didn't have to ban DS altogether. If they made the case that Interceptor was good enough that they don't reasonably need to have level 5 ballistic protection, then I wouldn't disagree with that.

 

The F-22 is the world's best fighter, but that doesn't mean that I would support it over the F-15 and F-16. It does make sense not to build many F-22's because five F-15's can do much more than one ultimate fighter. Because the F-15 still is 92/0 in combat, you don't really need a fighter that can outperform it for four times the cost.

 

Same thing could be argued with DS.

[JediAthos]

@DY did you not see the test results that Tommy as well as myself linked to? The Dragon Skin broke down at extreme temperatures which does the Army absolutely zero good in the conditions they're fighting in now.

[EnderWiggin]

 

I wouldn't want to wear that in the desert either.

 

_EW_

[JediAthos]

lol

[Darth_Yuthura]

Saw the site. If those ballistic tests would have needed that the vest go through that kind of punishment as part of the requirement, then I would admit that DS wouldn't pass.

 

That still doesn't change how DS was banned before these tests were conducted. Even if DS were a lemon, it was banned before that was confirmed as such.

 

Under normal conditions, DS outperforms Interceptor; but if the Army required that all vests pass those conditions as well, then I will admit that Interceptor wins that contest.

[Achilles]

I'm not one to easily change my opinion, but only because I make one based on a solid foundation of proof.

 

Right I'm no expert, so my opinion is moot. I'm not presenting an argument for debate, so I don't expect anyone to take my opinion to heart.

You form your opinions "based on a solid foundation of proof", however when it's pointed out to you that you're not an expert and when you're asked to provide evidence for your accusations, you simply repeat yourself.

 

Which might make it difficult for some of us to accept it when you say things such as:

 

When I don't have that much proof to go on, my opinion is very flexible to change, and I don't put much value in that belief.

 

If you want to believe that DS is superior (which seems not to be the case in many areas), then that is your business, but I don't know what you seek to gain by continuing to argue with people who clearly see the evidence differently than you. Especially since (repeat):

I'm not presenting an argument for debate, so I don't expect anyone to take my opinion to heart.

(Emphasis added)

 

Hint: Your accusatory/conspiratorial tone doesn't strike me as very being very "dispassionate observer" either. FYI.

 

Final thought: I must admit that I haven't read that many of your posts. However what little I have read leads me to believe that you are a person who makes an effort to examine arguments critically. Kudos. The world needs more people like this.

 

Based on what I've seen in this thread, I don't get the impression that you've adopted the practice of turning those critical thinking skills on your own arguments (although I do get the impression that you've convinced yourself that you do, per an earlier quote). Doing so does a couple of things, most importantly a) it allows you to find the flaws in your arguments before someone else does (which may or may not be embarrassing) and b) allows you to make better arguments (if a. didn't cause you to abandon them altogether) because you can anticipate potential counter-arguments.

 

I would ask you to consider that perhaps you do not have access to all the facts and rationales that went into this decision. That perhaps DS was not the best product (at the best price). I'm wondering if your arguments (which you are presenting, whether you care to own them or not) would sound different if you simply considered these two possibilities.

 

Thanks for reading.

[Darth_Yuthura]

Final thought: I must admit that I haven't read that many of your posts. However what little I have read leads me to believe that you are a person who makes an effort to examine arguments critically. Kudos. The world needs more people like this.

 

Thank-you. I was starting to think that I've essentially presented so much conflicting material that no one would believe anything I ever say again. I try to understand how the other side comes to their conclusion, but I end up assuming everyone knows why I came to my own conclusion and don't present what lead me to a different conclusion in the first place. This isn't Kavar's, so I didn't make an effort to present conclusive proof or to treat this as a debate.

 

I am by no means an expert on the subject of body armour. I have read many texts about it and spoke to various individuals, but I haven't exactly compiled a list that I would include with a term paper. I do take into consideration many aspects outside of what I've stated, but assume not to go to the effort of including it until the matter and sources are asked for.

 

I saw most videos on Youtube that show the tests done on DS, including Mail Call, CSNBC, and future weapons. Some included Jim Mcgee, the designer of Interceptor, advocating for DS.

 

Here is a site that brings to question the reliability of the tests done on DS:

 

http://www.sftt.org/cgi-bin/csNews/csnews.cgi/csNews.cgi?command=viewone&id=18&database=Unlisted%202008.db

 

From this, witnesses who've filmed the tests, check-in records, and extraordinary conditions were found that suggest that the Army manipulated records against DS. If you have a level 4 round fired at a level III vest, that is not regarded as a failure by DS, but is recorded as such.

 

Some witnesses say that the actual video presented publicly wasn't how the tests actually happened. When you remove the ballistic plates from a vest, a penetration isn't considered a failure.

 

http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0524/p99s01-duts.html

 

This site has various links to other sites for readers to look for themselves.

 

Here is an independent video on DS:

 

http://technorati.com/videos/youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D861L7Ly-gR4

[Jae Onasi]

Here's some proof right there that the Army will sacrifice the safety of its troops to save money.

Tommycat's second part of his post quotes a source saying the thing falls apart when the temprature hits 120 degrees. There's proof right there that they weren't willing to sacrifice troop safety on something that doesn't work. It gets up to and over 120 degrees in the summer in Iraq and other deserts. As the wife of a soldier who is on active duty and could end up in Iraq any time the Army wanted, I'm very glad that some general looked at the reliability data and decided that it would not be intelligent to buy something that would have a critical and potentially life-threatening failure in conditions that we fight in on a regular basis right now. So the scales fall down in the bottom of the vest at 120 degrees? Great. We'll have excellent beltline protection from bullets while other little things like the heart, lungs, liver, and spleen are without any protection except cloth.

 

It would be a completely irresponsible use of our money and soldiers to put them in substandard armor. It is not perfect, as DY claims, if it falls apart in the middle of battle on a hot summer day. If they solve the delamination problem, then it can be re-assessed, but we shouldn't buy and use the DS armor before the problem is fixed.

[CommanderQ]

Well, that's unfortunate that the armor breaks down at high temperatures...that would only allow it to be given to troops stationed elsewhere, like Europe, South Korea, and some palces in the US. I agree though, giving our troops this armor in hot areas like Afghanistan or Iraq would be irresponisible and idiotic....