PDA

View Full Version : Info On New USMC "Dragon Skin" Armor



BrooklynBen
04-21-2006, 07:12 AM
http://www.defensereview.com/stories/pinnaclearmor/Pinnacle%20Armor%20Dragon%20Skin%20Test_1.jpg
Article;
http://www.military.com/soldiertech/0,14632,Soldiertech_060420_dragon3,,00.html?ESRC=s oldiertech.nl

Hanzo
04-21-2006, 07:41 AM
Good info, Ben. But I didn't see anything about the USMC on there. Did I miss something or is there more info out there?

I've heard mixed reviews on Dragon Skin, but I really hope it does well in testing because I think the concept is great.

Anybody know when civilians will be able to get their hands on this stuff?

militarymoron
04-21-2006, 03:58 PM
looks like the dummy was unarmed when they shot him.

Hanzo
04-21-2006, 04:07 PM
By the looks of the drag handle, looks like he was shot in the back too.

300wby
04-21-2006, 08:38 PM
I thought all '3rd party' armor is here and forth with banned from the battlefield?
According to the news reports the Gov will reimburse the cost of sending your privately purchased body armor (i.e.:dragon skin) back to the US but will not reimburse the cost of buying said armor.
That is BS of the first order.

Olive Drab
04-21-2006, 10:21 PM
I dont put too much faith in what the author, david crane, says after reading past articles of his.

Nathan C
04-22-2006, 03:27 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Originally posted by 300wby:
I thought all '3rd party' armor is here and forth with banned from the battlefield?
According to the news reports the Gov will reimburse the cost of sending your privately purchased body armor (i.e.:dragon skin) back to the US but will not reimburse the cost of buying said armor.
That is BS of the first order. </div></div>That's only the army so far. On the same note, they(army) were testing dragon skin, it failed with some rounds. Pinnacle then found they had a bad batch some how, and the tested vests were a part of. The army has stated they will continue to look into dragon skin and other armor, but until pinnacle can ensure consistent production it is banned for private purchase and issue.

BrooklynBen
04-22-2006, 05:03 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Originally posted by Hanzo:
But I didn't see anything about the USMC on there. Did I miss something or is there more info out there?</div></div>Not really, I was referring to this information given in the first paragraph;

"...Interceptor Body Armor, which is comprised of the following components: USMC Interceptor Multi-threat Body Armor System Small Arms Protective Insert (SAPI) Level III plate or Enhanced Small Arms Protective Insert (ESAPI) Level IV plate, and the USMC Interceptor Multi-threat Body Armor System Outer Tactical Vest (OTV)."

I now see how my title could be easily misleading. Sorry /images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/cool.gif

Kerberos
04-25-2006, 01:55 AM
check out the thread under "bodyarmour and helmets" on the Lightfighter.net forum, extensive discussion plus one of the dragonskin folks are there discussing it.

RangerReject
04-25-2006, 02:44 PM
Nathan, keep in mind the Dragon Skin failed to provide LVL IV protection when it was rated for LVL III+. Pinnacle has shown that it had a problem with a batch of armor the only MET the standard, didn't EXCEED the standard like a previous batch. Folks with those vests still achieve LVL III+ . HTH. And I want to clarify for Pinnacle. This Army policy is absurd, and there is something deeper going on here. Please pay attention to this carefully.