PDA

View Full Version : Dragonskin Body Armor



Pages : [1] 2 3

Phoenix
2/24/2008 3:08pm,
If you can get your hands on this stuff, then I highly urge you to do so.

I went out and picked up one of these babies to wear on duty....not only was it as light as the current type II that my department issues, but it's BETTER than type II armor and it's comparable in price, as well.

I could go on and on about this stuff, but....just read for yourself and see:

http://www.pinnaclearmor.com/body-armor/dragon-skin.php

caseyboy
2/24/2008 9:39pm,
Here here!! That stuff's almost science fiction its so good. I would love to know the shenanigens that went into the military's flunking it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KS0pSwdQfbY






Forget 9-11 conspiracy theorys... this is what a real conspiracy looks like.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTrTrsJu3pk

Lord Skeletor
2/25/2008 7:02am,
Here here!! That stuff's almost science fiction its so good. I would love to know the shenanigens that went into the military's flunking it.


I don't think that there were any conspiracies (unless you count the guys claimed as much/who created/marketed it). There were real issues with the overall weight of the product in combination with its inability to take multiple hits from what I remember hearing a while back. It somehow also failed to stop 7.62x54AP rounds (stuff fired from Russian guns like a Dragunov or SVU-AS rifles) in combination with high heat. The manufacturer claimed "unprofessional testing" procedures and was under a gag order until the military could investigate or something. In the end...I doubt we'll ever get the whole, true story.

On the surface..it has passed some pretty impressive independent law-enforcement tests---but in the end, who really knows what government standards that these vests had to stand up to? :evil6:

elipson
2/25/2008 5:28pm,
God I hate that guy on future weapons....

Phoenix
2/25/2008 8:49pm,
I don't think that there were any conspiracies (unless you count the guys claimed as much/who created/marketed it). There were real issues with the overall weight of the product in combination with its inability to take multiple hits from what I remember hearing a while back. It somehow also failed to stop 7.62x54AP rounds (stuff fired from Russian guns like a Dragunov or SVU-AS rifles) in combination with high heat. The manufacturer claimed "unprofessional testing" procedures and was under a gag order until the military could investigate or something. In the end...I doubt we'll ever get the whole, true story.

On the surface..it has passed some pretty impressive independent law-enforcement tests---but in the end, who really knows what government standards that these vests had to stand up to? :evil6:


The thing that stinks about the whole thing is that the US Army deemed Dragon Skin unfit and rejected it BEFORE even testing the armor.

Not only that, but the armor has passed numerous durability tests conducted by law enforcement agencies, as well as 3 independent televised tests, with flying colours (Mail Call, Future Weapons, and a test conduced by NBC).

And to top it off, one of the guys involved in developing the interceptor armor (ex US Marine Jim Magee) went on record to say that Dragon Skin is far better than the armor he manufactures and produces for the US Army. He said that if he had to go into Iraq or Afghanistan today, ahd could pick what armour he would use, he would use Dragon Skin.

Something definitely doesn't even out here.

Lord Skeletor
2/25/2008 9:23pm,
The thing that stinks about the whole thing is that the US Army deemed Dragon Skin unfit and rejected it BEFORE even testing the armor.

Not only that, but the armor has passed numerous durability tests conducted by law enforcement agencies, as well as 3 independent televised tests, with flying colours (Mail Call, Future Weapons, and a test conduced by NBC).

And to top it off, one of the guys involved in developing the interceptor armor (ex US Marine Jim Magee) went on record to say that Dragon Skin is far better than the armor he manufactures and produces for the US Army. He said that if he had to go into Iraq or Afghanistan today, ahd could pick what armour he would use, he would use Dragon Skin.

Something definitely doesn't even out here.

Dude...I totally agree. Something isn't quite adding up here. Hell...when it comes to any law or government contract; to get at the truth, you only need to follow the money. For years, the military has been bitching about the reliability of the M4 rifles that they have been using in the deserts of Iraq and regions of Afghanistan. Powdery sand, combined with overlubrication equals= steaming pile of crap that you have to clean twice a day.
So the military did tests using some "gas piston" designed upper receivers which don't actually blow bits of carbon residue, little bits of copper and brass, and other small foreign particulates DIRECTLY INSIDE THE RECEIVER/BOLT/BOLT CARRIER area of the weapons system. The result: The gas-piston uppers failed at an unremarkable rate---while the traditional gas operated M4's failed miserably. The final verdict?
Some general comes out and says, "Regardless of the test results---the US Army is confident of our current M4 system and we're ordering 10 bazillion more of them!"
Uh..something doesn't add up there.

Here is a link from the US Army Times news outlet with the story.
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/12/army_carbine_dusttest_071217/

Now...here's the results of the test--kind of funny, eh?

HK XM8 (Gas Piston) : 127 stoppages.
FN MK16 SCAR Light (Gas Piston): 226 stoppages.
HK 416 (Gas Piston) : 233 stoppages.
FN/Colt. M4/M16 : 882 stoppages.

So...what do we have here? Gas piston guns fail at a rate of nearly 2/10 while the military issue weapons fail at almost a rate of 9/10. Hmmm...yet, "there is no problem---and we want MORE of them"???? Wow...

caseyboy
2/25/2008 9:28pm,
The thing that stinks about the whole thing is that the US Army deemed Dragon Skin unfit and rejected it BEFORE even testing the armor.

Not only that, but the armor has passed numerous durability tests conducted by law enforcement agencies, as well as 3 independent televised tests, with flying colours (Mail Call, Future Weapons, and a test conduced by NBC).

And to top it off, one of the guys involved in developing the interceptor armor (ex US Marine Jim Magee) went on record to say that Dragon Skin is far better than the armor he manufactures and produces for the US Army. He said that if he had to go into Iraq or Afghanistan today, ahd could pick what armour he would use, he would use Dragon Skin.

Something definitely doesn't even out here.


Yes, the tests were unbelievable but Magee's recommendation sealed the deal for me. See the second link above for his own words.

auschip
2/25/2008 10:28pm,
Here is a link from the US Army Times news outlet with the story.
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/12/army_carbine_dusttest_071217/

Now...here's the results of the test--kind of funny, eh?

HK XM8 (Gas Piston) : 127 stoppages.
FN MK16 SCAR Light (Gas Piston): 226 stoppages.
HK 416 (Gas Piston) : 233 stoppages.
FN/Colt. M4/M16 : 882 stoppages.

So...what do we have here? Gas piston guns fail at a rate of nearly 2/10 while the military issue weapons fail at almost a rate of 9/10. Hmmm...yet, "there is no problem---and we want MORE of them"???? Wow...

I don't know about that, but maybe I missed something. That was 887 stoppages after 60,000 rounds, and the previous test reported only 307 stoppages.

Based on that we have a uptime percentage of:

HK XM8 (Gas Piston) - 99.79%
FN MK16 SCAR Light (Gas Piston) - 99.63%
HK 416 (Gas Piston) - 99.61%
FN/Colt. M4/M16 - 98.63%

So to gain 1.16% they would have to spend how many Billions of dollars, and it still wouldn't do what they want. I would be surprised if they did switch, instead of waiting for a design that fits the spec (airburst rounds and all the rest of the stuff they wanted to add).

:e.jpg:

jubei33
2/26/2008 4:59am,
do they have its capabilities against something larger, say a .50 cal tested? I'd like to see that , and would **** my pants if it stopped it.

SFGOON
2/26/2008 11:24am,
God damn this thread is depressing. I do have to say that the M-4 isn't THAT bad with regard to stoppages, and no matter what sand will **** up a rifle. That **** gets into everything.

When it comes to sand, I'm a little bit more worried about the chafage behind my balls than stoppages, as long a I can wipe off my bolt carrier every few hours.

WhiteShark
2/26/2008 11:36am,
do they have its capabilities against something larger, say a .50 cal tested? I'd like to see that , and would **** my pants if it stopped it.

Even if it stopped the penetration the energy transfer would still kill you.

bitparity
2/26/2008 12:07pm,
Would kill you, or could kill you?

WhiteShark
2/26/2008 2:10pm,
From Wikipedia:
"While a vest can prevent bullet wounds, the wearer still absorbs the bullet's energy, which can cause blunt force trauma. The majority of users experience only bruising, but impacts can still cause severe internal injuries."

Consider that the kinetic energy of a Barrett is in another league above the biggest round a type IV vest can protect against I'm betting on Would.

DSL
2/26/2008 4:48pm,
That's one thing about the dragon skin that seemed better, the displacement of energy across the 'scales'. I wonder who's pocket has the Military sitting in it in this one.

Lord Skeletor
2/26/2008 5:05pm,
So to gain 1.16% they would have to spend how many Billions of dollars, and it still wouldn't do what they want. I would be surprised if they did switch, instead of waiting for a design that fits the spec (airburst rounds and all the rest of the stuff they wanted to add).

:e.jpg:
Ack! I misread the article. I thought that they shot 10,000 rounds---not 60,000. My fault. I must've skimmed over that part. I stand corrected! :englishmo

Wounded Ronin
2/26/2008 6:37pm,
I heard that Dragon skin has an issue where if you wear it for hours and hours it starts to sag down a bit and start to give inferior coverage.