Posted on 05/30/2007 11:31:06 PM PDT by DTAD
The Marine Corps wants its Marines and sailors to know that the body armor it issues is the best available for combat despite recent inquiries concerning replacement gear.
The armor the Marine Corps issues has met government test standards, and in many cases, the standards exceed civilian testing, said Maj. Bradford W. Tippett, infantry advocate for Headquarters Marine Corps in a recent interview with reporter Lance Cpl. David Rodgers.
(Excerpt) Read more at defencetalk.com ...
American Troops are the best equiped, best trained, and best motivated of all armies. Period.
Dude, they failed the Army’s heat test! One would think that in Iraq that would be important. I was in Fallujah during the 04 battles and again last year, trust me it gets very hot in the summer. Also I’ve seen the interceptor save alot of Marines lives, I definately feel safe wearing it.
Have you seen that video or read any "official" document?
d. SOV 3000 design is sensitive to extreme temperatures and failed to maintain ballistic integrity at temperatures below summer ambient in Iraq and Afghanistan. This failure mode caused discs to delaminate and accumulate in the lower portion of the armor panel, and thus would expose the spine, vital organs, and critical blood vessels of the Soldier in these operational environments.
The Army claim in Paragraph 4d is false.
The above explanation for Paragraph 4c also applies here.
Additionally, Pinnacle Armor subjected three vests to tests for six hours at +170 degrees (F) and +180 degrees -- 10 and 20 degrees higher than the FAT protocol temperature -- at the Army Test Center, after the Army terminated the May FAT testing at H. P. White Laboratory. Later, Dr. Gary Roberts conducted an independent test October 3, 2006 at +170 degrees (F) for 12 hours -- twice as long as the six hours and 10 degrees higher than called for in the FAT protocol -- without any ballistic failures or adhesion failures, further validating that the one anomaly at +160 degrees (F) was just that - an anomaly and not a design or material failure. (It is also notable the Army did not re-test this issue, as is required by the Army's own FAT Q/A protocol.) (All 13 shots that the Army falsely claimed as penetrations have now been rebutted.)
As I said, some very interesting reading.
Yes, some very interesting reading.
I’m glad somebody thought so.
Would you want to hump an extra 20 pounds through the 115 degree streets of Falluja?
L
Would you want to hump an extra 20 pounds through the 115 degree streets of Falluja?
L
Interceptor Body Armor (IBA) (it's by the same group that put out the .pdf above where the weight of a L IBA is 28 lbs. and an XL Pinnacle SOV 3000 is 47.5 lbs)
Weight System: Weight: System — 15.7 pounds to 23.9 pounds (size medium) depending on configuration;
OTV (Outer Tactical Vest): 9.61 pounds;
ESAPI (Small Arms Protective Insert/Enhanced): 10.9 per pair (size medium);
DAP (Deltoid and Axillary Protector): 5.034 pounds;
ESBI (Enhanced Side Ballistic Insert): 7.75 pounds per set
Now, according to Murray Neal's rebuttal...
The Army is comparing the size Medium Interceptor OTV with two 10”x12” inch plates and two 6”x7” inch side plates, with a total square footage of 2.25 square feet of rifledefeating (ballistic) coverage, and a weight of 31.1 pounds (according to Army and Marine Corps Systems Command data). The weight per area (with ballistic protection) in this size/configuration Interceptor vest is 13.82 pounds per square foot. Therefore, comparing a size Medium Dragon Skin with a size Medium Interceptor:... (stats are at link, I've never really bothered learning HTML for tables)
Snip...The result -- a size Medium Interceptor with a front and back plate, and two side plates is 41.7% heavier than a size Medium Dragon Skin in the full-torso wrap, rifle-defeating configuration.
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree and wait for some more independent test results or more information.
Bullshit, lowest military bidder NEVER produces the best.
Agreed.
Of course it may have something to do with the fact that Dragon Skin goes for about $5,000 a unit, or so I've heard.
All I know is that I hated the old 'flak' vests we were issued back in the early 80s. Uncomfortable, heavy, and hot...
It makes the Safariland vest I now own seem like a gift from the Gods.
L
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.