Author Topic: Defective Helmets for US Troops  (Read 633 times)

Offline rpm

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15661
Defective Helmets for US Troops
« Reply #15 on: February 29, 2008, 12:31:37 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by BBBB
I would love to see the results of this "test" you are speaking about.
Yep, me too. There are tests and there are "tests".
My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of thought cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives.
Stay thirsty my friends.

Offline Bingolong

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 330
Defective Helmets for US Troops
« Reply #16 on: February 29, 2008, 01:03:30 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by BBBB
 Dragon Skin seems to be the top dog when it comes to body armor. Some of the test's done to this stuff boggle the mind and I am not just talking about those tests done on Future Weapons. There have been some research companies working these vests over and all the hype they have generated seems to be well deserved.

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


Maybe the NIJ has something else in mind.

http://www.youtube.com/user/defendx
http://www.defenstech.com/

Offline BBBB

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 696
Defective Helmets for US Troops
« Reply #17 on: February 29, 2008, 01:49:21 PM »
Thats just it, the NIJ's job is to test and certify body armor. Not pick and choose who is better and why.

Offline Bingolong

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 330
Defective Helmets for US Troops
« Reply #18 on: February 29, 2008, 02:28:05 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by BBBB
Thats just it, the NIJ's job is to test and certify body armor. Not pick and choose who is better and why.


"NIJ, OJP's research, development, and evaluation component, has reviewed evidence provided by the body armor manufacturer and has determined that the evidence is insufficient to demonstrate that the body armor model will maintain its ballistic performance over its six-year declared warranty period."

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/newsroom/pressreleases/2007/NIJ07057.htm

"The 75 armors tested in the Phase II P-BFS tests ranged in age from 17 to 71 months. Fifty-threewere less than 5 years old, or within the standard warranty period for most body armor (althoughthe warranty period for some of these vests is as low as 30 months). Of these 53 armors, 35
(66%) were penetrated. Twelve armors were between 60 and 70 months old, exceeding thewarranty period by up to 10 months. Of these 12 older armors, eight (67%) were penetrated.The age of 10 armors could not be determined; five of the 10 (50%) were penetrated."

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bvpbasi/docs/SupplementII_08_12_05.pdf

Isn't this what they are supposed to do?

Offline BBBB

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 696
Defective Helmets for US Troops
« Reply #19 on: February 29, 2008, 05:20:19 PM »
Sure, but now you need to question their data..That is a total reversal of their findings the first time around. It seems very odd to me, the vests work great the first time around. They are able to perform way outside their intended use and still function and now after all this buzz, suddenly the vests are flawed...according to the US Army and now the NIJ.

Offline Selino631

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1493
Defective Helmets for US Troops
« Reply #20 on: February 29, 2008, 07:04:06 PM »
I remember watching a Mail Call episode and Gunny tested the armor by putting it on a manican on a range and shot it repetedly with a AK-47, 9mm and some other weapons and the bullets didnt peirce the armor. but yea, the goverment proboly doest belive a soldiers life is worth that much :cry
OEF 11-12