Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Dos Equis on February 28, 2008, 04:28:20 PM

Title: Defective Helmets for US Troops
Post by: Dos Equis on February 28, 2008, 04:28:20 PM
From over at VetVoice:

http://www.vetvoice.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=658

What do you think should happen to Sioux manufacturing, for KNOWINGLY (read the link) sending out helmets that they knew didn't meet the DoD standards?

Moreover, how did McCain, sitting on the Senate Armed Services Committee as one of the primary Senators, allow the contract to get renewed like that?
Title: Re: Defective Helmets for US Troops
Post by: EagleDNY on February 28, 2008, 05:22:18 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Dos Equis

What do you think should happen to Sioux manufacturing, for KNOWINGLY (read the link) sending out helmets that they knew didn't meet the DoD standards?

Moreover, how did McCain, sitting on the Senate Armed Services Committee as one of the primary Senators, allow the contract to get renewed like that?


1.  Those guys should go to jail for fraud - straight up.  They weren't providing the items they were paid to provide - they were providing substandard items instead, and they knew it.  

If anyone can be shown to have been killed because of the failure of one of those substandard helmets or kevlar sheets, then I'd say prosecute the bums for murder too.  

2.  The army comes to the senate with a budget request for new helmets and shows the data on how they protect a lot better than the old helmets.  Senators approve budget request because that sounds like a good idea.  It isn't the Senators fault that the company is screwing the troops because they aren't going to know how the helmets perform or if the company has fulfilled the contract correctly unless the army tells them so.

Army procurement is a screwy thing on it's best day.  I've sold to the Army, and most procurement geeks barely know what it is they are buying when they send out the paperwork.  I'd definitely call the procurement geeks that approved the 2nd contract up and find out what they knew and when they knew it.
Title: Defective Helmets for US Troops
Post by: bustr on February 28, 2008, 05:46:52 PM
Folks you really need to do some research. The defence dept was aware of this. Souix Manuf. is paying fines and this is from the defence dept.

The United States attorney for North Dakota, Drew H. Wrigley, called the accord “an appropriate resolution” because the Defense Department had said that 200 sample helmets passed ballistic tests and that it “has no information of injuries or deaths due to inadequate Pasgt helmet protection.”

If there has been a plauge of dead solders due to bad halmets, the solders families would have been screaming on the internet. So would thier comrads.
Title: Defective Helmets for US Troops
Post by: john9001 on February 28, 2008, 06:22:04 PM
but bustr you don't understand, Dos Equis says McCain is behind this. So drink the obama koolaid.
Title: Defective Helmets for US Troops
Post by: bustr on February 28, 2008, 06:27:57 PM
Knowing human nature is to be greedy and deceitful.

Don't you think for body armor the militairy specified a standard for numbers of layers of kevlar to overkill just in case some contractor thought they could use less and pocket the difference?

The militairy knows civilian contractors will cheat and cheat often. After all many of them get away with it.................not all americans like the militairy.
Title: Defective Helmets for US Troops
Post by: john9001 on February 28, 2008, 06:36:32 PM
in related news, the US Marines say the new body armor is so heavy it restricts their fighting ability, they want the old armor back.
Title: Defective Helmets for US Troops
Post by: bustr on February 28, 2008, 06:39:31 PM
Marines dont need armor. God uses them to gaurd the streets of Heaven. Compaired to a United States Marine, Angles are wussies......:D
Title: Defective Helmets for US Troops
Post by: rabbidrabbit on February 28, 2008, 07:56:33 PM
Quote
Originally posted by john9001
but bustr you don't understand, Dos Equis says McCain is behind this. So drink the obama koolaid.



Don't feed the troll.
Title: Defective Helmets for US Troops
Post by: Selino631 on February 28, 2008, 08:05:49 PM
what ever happend to teh dragon skin armor that was coming out?
Title: Defective Helmets for US Troops
Post by: BaDkaRmA158Th on February 28, 2008, 08:20:37 PM
They probably (like everything good/worthwhile) put it back on the shelfs after they found out it could stop direct grenade blasts.

(Sorry son, your lifes not worth 300 grand, but my last tax cut, i got myself a 120grand car.)


That kinda stuff.
Title: Defective Helmets for US Troops
Post by: Yeager on February 29, 2008, 01:23:22 AM
It wont be long before he labels McCain a racist.  Just watch :rolleyes:
Title: Defective Helmets for US Troops
Post by: BBBB on February 29, 2008, 03:37:53 AM
Quote
Originally posted by Selino631
what ever happend to teh dragon skin armor that was coming out?


 Interesting story about that..It seems when a small company comes out with a product that is superior than the product produced by a few major companies, those major companies pull their collective weight and get that small companies NIJ certification suspended so that they can not participate in the federal government bullet resistant vest cost offset program.

 The NIJ claims it receive concerns from the Army about how well their vests would hold up during six years of use. Some of the Army brass have come under fire because it is alleged that they have gotten kick backs from some of the major contractors.

 It seems we have the M-16 issue all over again. Here is a new product that changes everything we know about how body armor works and because the other companies want to keep their sub par products in production they are using the Army brass to claim Dragon Skin is unsafe and will not hold up to a combat environment.

 There are have been hearings about this. The NIJ has taken a lot of flak from law enforcement agencies and rightly so. The NIJ has went against their founded principles and it's own research. It has proven it's self to be just as much part of politics as everyone else. Dragon Skin passed every NIJ test with flying colors. To suspend their certification sighting an outside "concern" is nothing more than the NIJ going along with the strong arm.

 Pinnacle Armor is fighting this full boar. I just hope they have enough money and steam to hang in there. Because it is very clear someone doesn't want them around and doesn't want Dragon Skin around. I can only speculate this has something to do with how revolutionary the product really is, sighting all the test this vest has passed with ease.

This is a link showing stuff from the hearing. It is all a pretty interesting read.
http://www.pinnaclearmor.com/hearing.php

 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
Title: Defective Helmets for US Troops
Post by: AquaShrimp on February 29, 2008, 05:05:48 AM
When Dragon Skin was tested by the USMC, it didn't stand up to the claims that the company made.  Just goes to show you that some tests are more objective and unbiased than others.
Title: Defective Helmets for US Troops
Post by: Ripsnort on February 29, 2008, 07:21:09 AM
Quote
Originally posted by john9001
but bustr you don't understand, Dos Equis says McCain is behind this. So drink the obama koolaid.
:rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl
So t he "Blame Bush" crowd has already pre-emptively moved to "Blame McCain" now?  That's predictable! ;)
Title: Defective Helmets for US Troops
Post by: BBBB on February 29, 2008, 10:46:40 AM
Quote
Originally posted by AquaShrimp
When Dragon Skin was tested by the USMC, it didn't stand up to the claims that the company made.  Just goes to show you that some tests are more objective and unbiased than others.


 I would love to see the results of this "test" you are speaking about. I am unaware of a test done by the USMC.
Title: Defective Helmets for US Troops
Post by: rpm 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".
Title: Defective Helmets for US Troops
Post by: Bingolong 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/
Title: Defective Helmets for US Troops
Post by: BBBB 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.
Title: Defective Helmets for US Troops
Post by: Bingolong 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?
Title: Defective Helmets for US Troops
Post by: BBBB 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.
Title: Defective Helmets for US Troops
Post by: Selino631 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