The war between Pinnacle Armor and the Army went nuclear this week as NBC News claimed that Pinnacle’s innovative “Dragon Skin” armor is far superior to the vest the Army currently issues to soldiers.
The report shows test conducted by NBC that seem to prove the vest — as its proponents have claimed over the last several years — can take many more rifle shots than the Army’s Enhanced Small Arms Protective Inserts.
But Army officials disclosed to Military.com that in a series of tests conducted by the service in May of last year, the Dragon Skin vest failed to stop bullets as well as the current Army armor. In fact, test results showed that bullets slipped through the vest as early as the second shot.
“The bottom line is that Dragon Skin by Pinnacle catastrophically failed to meet the requirement,” said Brig. Gen. Mark Brown, the head of the Fort Belvoir, Va.-based Program Executive Office Soldier, in a May 17 interview.
Pinnacle’s president Murray Neal told Military.com the tests were flawed and that Army testers were unsure how to adequately evaluate his technology — which uses a series of small ceramic disk “scales” to cover the entire torso.
He called Army claims that his vests failed “a bold-faced lie” and said the service is embarrassed to admit its current armor isn’t the best out there.
See Neal’s full rebuttal Download file
The Army’s ESAPI is a rigid ceramic plate about 12-inches high and six inches wide. Soldiers wear front and back plates and two smaller side plates, all of which are designed to stop armor piercing AK-47 rounds found in the war zone.
The controversy went public last March when the Army issued a so-called “Safety of Use Message” that banned all store-bought armor, and specifically stated that Dragon Skin did not meet the service’s requirement for ballistic protection.
At the urging of Capitol Hill, the Army bought 30 Dragon Skin vests in May of 2006 and put them through a standard “first article” test to see if the armor could hold up to the same ballistic conditions its current-issued ESAPIs must endure during certification.
According to Karl Masters, one of the Army’s top ballistics experts, the Dragon Skin failed to stop a 7.62 x 63mm APM2 round on the second shot of the test.
“We ran this vest through the exact same test protocol that every ESAPI supplier goes through,” Masters said. “Can you meet the ESAPI requirement or not? That’s the question.”
Neal argued in a release after last year’s tests that Masters and another Army ballistics expert were dumbfounded by the “flexible armor system” and weren’t sure where to place the shots for the test.
“Deviation from the ESAPI test protocols and procedures tool place by the selection of shot placements of APM2 rounds around the ceramics in non-rifle defeating areas,” Neal said in a written statement.
But Army officials said the shots were aimed at the same areas for ESPI testing and that the first penetration would typically have been the end of the “sudden death” test.
Engineers agreed to continue with the evaluation, however, subjecting separate Dragon Skin vests to submersion in oil, salt water, extreme cold and extreme heat.
Army data shows 13 complete penetrations or unacceptable back-face deformations — where the bullet doesn’t go all the way through but causes enough of a dent that it would result in serious trauma — on four failed vests.
The tests were held in mid-May at H.P. White labs, a respected ballistics testing facility in Street, Md. H.P. White is the same test lab where the Army evaluates all its armor components, preferring not to use the Army-run Aberdeen Proving Ground ranges to fend off accusations of bias.
More troubling to Army testers was the near complete delamination of the disks from the Kevlar backing within the Dragon Skin on several of the environmental tests.
After being subjected to 160-degree heat for six hours, the Dragon Skin vest failed on the first shot. X-ray photos of the vest show the disks slipped off their backing, exposing portions of the chest area without any ceramic protection.
“Certain areas of the adhesive hardened and become brittle and when that happened, they all dropped down,” Brown said.
Further tests in minus-60-degree cold, immersion in oil and diesel fuel showed similar delaminations and shot failures.
Neal said the Army manipulated the x-ray photos, but admitted one vest had an adhesive “anomaly.”
Perhaps the biggest Army concern is Dragon Skin’s weight. An extra large vest is nearly 20 pounds heavier than the Army’s current armor, though Masters admitted it did have more rifle protective coverage than issued vests.
“The Army continues to look at these types of armor,” Masters admitted. “If we can ever eliminate this weight penalty, we may have an opportunity to go to gapless coverage.”
The Army declined to provide details of the test failures when the controversy erupted last year, claiming operational security concerns.
But the NBC News investigation prompted officials to rethink their strategy in an effort to keep Army families from purchasing Dragon Skin vests for their loved ones in the combat zone.
“Soldiers must have confidence in their equipment when they go down range,” Brown said. “They’ve got to know that they’re wearing the best and their families have got to know that they’re wearing the best.”
{ 102 comments… read them below or add one }
OK, so now the Army puts out some real info after all the hubbub, why the F didn’t they do this in the first place.
Also, it doesn’t look like the most objective of testing, 6 hours at 160 degrees would kill the soldier wearing it as would the cold. How much swimming in diesel and oil do our guys do?
Finally, where is the comparison data with the current system?
Grandjester,
The heat treatment is designed to simulate leaving the vest in the back of a hot as hell vehicle for long periods of time. Iraq is 120 degrees in the shade during the day.
Oil and diesel, same thing. A lot of that all around, and I guess they test against the possibility that it could lie around in the stuff for a while before being donned.
Comparison test is simple. No penetration. If ESAPI-makers fail one of these, that’s it.
> Karl Masters, one of the Army’s top ballistics experts
and don’t forget, “acting product manager for Interceptor Body Armor”, one of DragonSkin’s chief competitors.
there was already a ton of controversy surrounding this issue
the army KNEW the test would be under intense scrutiny
how could they be so STUPID to allow this to happen?
it does not matter if Mr. Masters ran the tests perfectly correct
perception is everything and until the test is run by someone without a vested interest, it won’t have any credibility
hmmmm, why am I still skeptical?
Somehow I don’t think this will put the issue to rest.
The increased weight sure does seem to be a major disadvatage over the Interceptor, though…
And I agree, if they had come out with this info earlier, they may have avoided the PR problem altogether.
“perception is everything and until the test is run by someone without a vested interest, it won’t have any credibility”
-irtusk
I agree. Don’t think they can put this animal back in the barn without taking it to the next level.
BUT, the info I see does seem to lend SOME weight to the Army’s argument… But stops short of closing the matter altogether.
This is the best reporting I’ve seen on the issue yet, by the way… Thanks DefenseTech.
Christian, I get it, was a touch of sarcasm while tring to make the point that the tests would skew against the dragon skin design. A plate could be left in a sand dune, a glacier and pools of petrochemicals – It’s still gonna be a plate. These tests obviously affect the glues/fabrics holding the scales togther.
“Also, it doesn’t look like the most objective of testing, 6 hours at 160 degrees would kill the soldier wearing it as would the cold.”
True. But 6 hours of 160 degrees isn’t out of line for, say, a shipping container on the way to the Green Zone. If a vest degrades on it’s way to the front, that’s not exactly a useful vest… :-)
Perhaps the biggest Army concern is Dragon Skin’s weight. An extra large vest is nearly 20 pounds heavier than the Army’s current armor, though Masters admitted it did have more rifle protective coverage than issued vests.
This is false, I own a dragon skin and have the OVT with ESAPI’s issued to me. The only way that the dragon skin could be 20 pounds more is if it was compared to a extra small OVT with no plates in it. I have been in the Marine Corps for almost 17 years and have been issued new gear many times being told it is the best in the world only to find it was a crap and did nothing close to what was promised and you could find some thing on the open market that was superior in performance and durability. If you don’t believe me all I have to say is MOLE pack.
I have also seen the ESAPI’s crack just from having the vest taken off and dropped to the deck. I guess that is why it has handle with care on it.
I will trust my Dragon skin when I deploy aging
Well… finally info!
I can see why the Diesel and oil thing would be an issue. I think the idea is if a Chinook falls from the sky carrying body armour and fuel… and they want to salvage the supplies.. it would be good to know that the cooked, fuel-dosed body armour can still work. That makes a lot of sense honestly.
However, I think that if they would have released the test criteria to pinnacle, they would have given them a chance to improve their manufacturing process.
So in short, Dragon Skin is perfect for protecting police, swat and other such people… but to outfit a moving ever changing climate army.. it’s not that good. I guess it’s like a Cinderella body armour…
If you read more of the PDF…
“temperature, diesel fuel, oil, saltwater immersion and a 14 hour temperature cycle from -25F to +120 F”
I think that is waaaaay outside any human use. Unless your swimming from Antarctica to Australia, or dragging a crate behind your Air Craft Carriers in the sea… Dragon Skin is fine.
It’s not my army.. but it still seems like they are ‘over testing’. These conditions are totally unrealistic.. and I think the pros are still better than the cons.
However, given pinnacle more time to work on their product.. and I’m sure they can come up with something.
Ok, my zwei pfenning.
Are the tests that the Army puts its gear through realistic? No, they
Great thread…
OK, if the basis for the apparent shortfall is in fact just the adhesive, then I don’t see it being long before they find a way to ‘string’ the disks together… particularly with all of the new materials available these days… hell, they might even end up improving the actual stopping-power of the system by utilitizing the tensile strength of the weave…
That would eliminate all of the issues mentioned…. BESIDES the weight – and I have to say, usmcmiller just cast major doubt upon the Army-stated ’20 lb heavier’ comparison in my mind… There may even be another factor involved – regarding the way that the flexibility of the system itself may allow for a more even weight distribution, therefore mitigating the increase in weight … WITH an increase in rifle-protected area.
All in all, it seems the truth may be more of a ‘mixed bag’ … rather than a conspiracy one way or the other…
Hopefully they’ll get it figured out in short order and get the best system fielded asap.
Eric Daniel,
Good post. I still there there is a problem with what the military did do. They didn’t clarify the reason for failure.
I think if Pinnacle had it’s hands on this material and worked with the army.. with their feedback, it would have been less suspect. The problem is that the military didn’t communicate their results of their failures.
However, with this information… and if pinnacle looks into these failures, I’m sure they could have a military ‘issue’ dragon skin with ‘weaved’ plates.
My question though. Are those X-rays of shattered disks or of disks that are misplaced?
Humm, Army. Is that the same organization that repeatedly sabotaged M-16 tests, but after finally accepting it went to the other extreme and doggedly claimed it had no problems and was “the most reliable rifle in the world” while reports from the field screams otherwise?
Has no one read the rebuttal from the company and then noted the failures??
Regardless of the conclusions of the test, it was and seems quite obvious at this point that the testing protocol was flawed at best, and downright scandalous at worse.
Wait, shoot the armor where there’s no protection and call it a ‘hit’? C’mon… all the ESAPI armor in the world isn’t going to help if it doesn’t hit the plate.
Then let’s fudge the weight calculations, and to boot, take a unit with obvious production flaws, and gun it through regardless? Even when the sub-contractor has already made design changes to ensure long term production viability?
If the Army would have used such flawed testing with any other manufacturer’s unit, there’d be a polite and silent retest.
Just look at the Bradley… it’s pretty much proven at this point there’s some serious flaws with the Army’s testing protocols….
20 years of PMI in the machine/mechanical industry tells me this is an accurate observation:
“Pinnacle’s president Murray Neal told Military.com the tests were flawed and that Army testers were unsure how to adequately evaluate his technology – which uses a series of small ceramic disk “scales” to cover the entire torso.”
The test regime is suspect, but I’d be damned if I’d let Pinnacle tell me HOW to test it or design the test. That would beyond bizzare.
Strike 1:
The delamination is a problem no matter the temperature. It can get close 160 degrees in back of an unventilated truck box, which means this armor could fall apart or …ummm… destabilized in transport through the desert.
How would a soldier know the equipment has been compromised?
Also notable: Is the breakdown just slower @ 130 degrees with the ceramic plates loosening in their damaged adhesive waiting to be moved by a round?
Strike 2:
The claim that they fired the test rounds “…around the ceramics in non-rifle defeating areas…” leaves me cold. He’s implying the armour doesn’t works under certain conditions that cannot be predetermined in the field
Strike 3:
Neal said the Army manipulated the x-ray photos, but admitted one vest had an adhesive “anomaly.”
Yer OUT!
Starting to look now medieval. Its a good thing.
I don’t test body armour, but I’ve been involved in materials testing during my career and the temperature & chemical compatibility testing seems in line with what I’ve seen before. You can’t take the high temperature, low temperature, and chemical immersion tests literally – that sort of thing is intended to be an accelerated life test to simulate aging of the materials in use. The equipment is going to be exposed to low levels of chemicals throughout its life that’ll slowly attack the material integrity. Salt water covers both actual salt water exposure and sweat. Diesel immersion covers a whole range of stuff like stains, cleaning materials, and just general air pollution. Material degradation mechanisms tend to follow an Arrhenius relationship, which means that degradation increases at an exponential rate with temperature. I’m guessing that the 6 h at 160
Did anyone read the response from pinnacle? They address each point in detail.
I didn’t read the whole PDF.
But I’m trying to be objective too.
Here’s a good quote from the top of page 4 in the PDF.
“The test director, Karl Masters, and James Zheng after those shots were
determined to not be valid shots entered into a substantial, heated argument over who
was in charge of the testing, and over the indiscriminate 8 shots that did not impact the
Dragon Skin
Foreign.Boy,do you think that a bullet is going to care where the “edge” of the plates are?It makes no difference.
I’ve been trying to follow this story from the start, after hearing first about DragonSkin.
Can we all try to make a concerted effort between interested parties to get some cold hard facts out into the open.
First – Comparable Vest Dimensions.
What are the sizes of a X-Large interceptor system and X-Large Pinnacle system
Second – Comparable weights between Interceptor with ESAPI plates (Front and rear)in XL and Pinnacle with Dragon skin (Front and Rear) in XL
Third – Comparable bulk prices on both systems in XL sizes (Interceptor price should be with ESAPI plates aswell)
I would like to see Comparable pictures of approximate Rifle round(NIJ III and above) defeating areas for both systems but this would be against OPSEC for US forces so I dont think that info will ever get out.
Keep up the good work DT. Your restoring my faith in the site!!
Xander, the edge issue is the same for all protecion systems. Obviously, if you shoot above the plate on any armor, it’s not going to stop anything. In the edge test, you fire a round close to the edge to make sure protection is solid there as well. With a rigid plate, “edge” is quite obvious. With a flexible armor incased in fabric, “edge” is much harder to define. In the army test, they could not figure out where the armor “ends”, shot outside the protected area in the attemt to find the “edge”, and then declared it a failure. Using this logic, they might as well shoot the dummy in the knees and fail the tests.
We really need some truly independent testing on this.
I talked to Neal a couple of years ago, and he complained that the ‘not invented here’ factor prevented DragonSkin from getting a fair hearing, and that he was up against deep prejudice..
I would also be interested in who picked the test conditions and why. I suspect that a lot of possible tests in which DragonSkin may have outperformed Interceptor were simply deemed ‘not relevant’.
Mainly though, the Army’s handling of this has been terrible. if they wanted to make it look as though Neal had a point, they did a good job.
Siconik,
Thanks for replying to Xander for me. That’s exactly what I was trying to say. I can see how they are frustrated with testing cause if your suppose to do an ‘edge test’ and there is no edge.. then what?
Oh and Siconik, Pinnacle makes dragon skin need pads too :P.
Dragon skin is also offered in a ‘full wrap’ around the sides. I think they are comparing a partial interceptor (non-congress upgraded edition) version to a full wrap dragon skin version. A real apples and oranges comparison.
Some true independent study needs to be done. I say we all pool our resources and do our own testing :P.
The objective part of my mind is saying Neal has everything to gain and nothing to lose… so he’s going to raise as much fuss as he can.
====
Strike 2:
The claim that they fired the test rounds “…around the ceramics in non-rifle defeating areas…” leaves me cold. He’s implying the armour doesn’t works under certain conditions that cannot be predetermined in the field
=====
Buffalo, that’s a completely brain-dead response. Interceptor has plates, shooting it with rifle-caliber ammo in areas not protected by the plates results in full penetration. Dragon Skin has scales, shooting it with rifle-caliber ammo in areas not protected by the scales results in full penetration. How does that make Dragon Skin Worse? And considering Dragon Skin’s scales cover a lot more area than Interceptor’s plates, how does that statement “leave you cold”?
“7.62 x 63mm APM2 round”
What’s that?
Is that fired by some SVD versions?
It’s surely no standard-issue weapon calibre.
AK-47, AKM, RPK have 7.62x39mm,
SVD, PK, PKM have 7.62x54mmR
7.62NATO (known by many machineguns and battle rifles) is 7.62x51mm
On DragonSkin: Why doesn’t they simply try to sell these vests to the British or other Iraq disaster allies if the Army is so much prejudiced as they say? No success in tests overseas or what?
.300WinMag is 7.62×67.5mm
A quick look into Jane’s Infantry Weapons 2004/2005 didn’t show me any Russian Weapon in that calibre, no such calibre in the cartridges section and no “APM2″ in the 7.62×39 and 7.62x54mmR entries.
I’ve never heard or read about 7.62x63mm
What the hell did the Army use as weapon and calibre to test these vests?
The 7.62 x 63mm APM2 is the US 30.06. This projectile is used as a surrogate for the 7.62 x 54R API. The US equivalent is very consistent in manufacture and provides a consistent threat for testing. The soviet and chinese manufactured rounds vary widely in the brinnel hardness of the penetrator, so you can wind up with skewed test results since some rounds would be easier to defeat. Also the ATF severely restricts these foreign rounds from entering the country and even bonafide testing labs such as H.P. White have trouble keeping them in stock. The government and industry all use the APM2 as the baseline, and some still shoot the API in addition to the baseline. The APM2 is the more difficult to defeat of the two.
Whoever doesnt know that Draogn Skin is better than Interceptor Body armor is a complete idiot. Enough said.
yeah? What? whine/cry/bitch about it.
The adhesive gets weaker, the vest gets weaker. When the army subjects these vests to these ceonditions, the adhesive weakens. How the hell would a bullet decimate an entire row of scales, let alone an entire scale? Obviouysly these tests were sabotaged. If the round penetrated, thjere would be a neat hole WITHIN the scale. Yet here, being a physics major, I can tell you that the round pushed the scale out of te vest because the adhesive was weakened by pointless army heat testing (since when does the heat in battle become 160 degrees for 6 hours? I think the army is scrambling to find a way to fail Dragon Skin).
Heat is not an issue. We have contractors/CIA/General’s bodyguard wearing Dragon Skin in Iraq. Their vests work perfectly, fools.
Pinnacle has a new adhesive, it will withstand more heat.
I wonder why Neal says that a medium sized Interceptor weights 31.1lb and some lines down it is suddenly 33.1lb?
That’s moron. An IBA only weights 31lb with groin, neck/throat protector.
He should better compare 10*12 inserts offered by Pinacle to ESAPI. The SOV3000 inserts weight 2,074lb more per plate. When their armor is so perferct why do they want to cover up a heavier weight?
@ commentator: The one disc was scatered by impact and pushed into soft armor. The others fell off because of deformation.
The Army conducts accelerated aging on their vests as part of the First Article Tests. The military environment is extreme so testing has to be extreme. It would be negligent for the Army to not properly test for material failure due to environmental exposure. 160 degrees is very common for storage conditions and even this issue has become part of the NIJ test protocol, since so many officers store their armor in the trunk of their cars when off duty. Just because Pinnacle is incompetent to build armor for the military environment is no reason to bash the Army. Just remember that plenty of other manufacturers make stuff for the military everyday that meets these type of tests requirements. If car manufacturers built cars the way Pinnacle builds armor, you guys would be all lined up for a class action lawsuit, so why does Pinnacle get a free pass?
commentator, my buddies organization just returned from Iraq and they have DS, ten guys just got back, three vests have dislodged discs just like in the Army tests. How come Pinnacle has not issued a recall of all these vests. They are endangering their lives, and they spent $5700 for each one, these are the full wrap with scales all the way around.
Topics within this issue. 1. Masters has a conflict of interest 2. The adhesive issue has been addressed how about another test? 3. If everyone who is advocating dragon skin is paid off why could interceptor pay more people off they have huge profits since 2003 including almost a 100 percent gain in stock price. 4. Where are the videos of Interceptor stopping 30 AK rounds and 150 MP5 rounds? 5. If you drop a ceramic plate it can compromise it, so if you leave one of the old dragon skins in a car in iraq it could compromise it. Doesn’t seem anyworse just that you have to take care of and inspect your equiptment before use.
William don’t complicate things, they’re simple enough. Dragon Skin offers superior protection to IBA. Dragon Skin would’ve saved lives where the IBA failed hundreds of times in Iraq. Somehow this doesn’t seem to register to these people (Yes, William also).
Just like a cat who tries to bury the problem. The concept of Dragon Skin is what is being sold. However, it is not ready for military deployment until the materials used are adequate for our troops to use with confidence. Pinnacle has had 10+ years to get this right. I do not want any of our troops being test dummies for corporate profit. Make no mistake, Pinnacle is out for a profit, just look at the price they charge, you can buy two sets of any other armor on the market for the price of Dragon Skin,what’s up with that? Don’t try and tell me how much you care about the troops and then try and get rich. I am not fooled by their motives.
Like I said look at how much money point blank armor has made off the interceptor body armor. The contracts and the stock price are both huge and way up. Neal says he has addressed the adhesive issue why not have them retest, there are high temperature adhesives that might keep the discs in place at desert temps for many tours let’s see if they have it right now. Neal also says that all the “failures” were due to either Zheng shooting the armor in the non protected areas or .5 of an inch off the edge when the edge shots have to be .75 to 1.25 from the edge. Let’s get a retest with a tester that isn’t an employee of the main competition to the dragon skin.
Both of the people that Murray the liar is referring to are government employees responsible to ensure that the materials delivered to the government meet the contract. They do not work for a competitor. Their sole job is to ensure the safety of the troops. From what I can see, they are doing a fine job. Go look at the xrays and see where the vest fell apart. This conspiracy theory doesn’t wash.
You don’t have any idea who you are talking about do you? http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9670&page=3 Karl Masters states at the bottom of that forum page that he is the man charged with testing dragon skin and that his “day job” is product manager for interceptor body armor.
He is the program manager (product manager) for Interceptor, at PEO Soldier Systems, US Army, United States of America. what Corporation do you think that is?
I forgot, he would be the program manager of anything that replaces the Interceptor too. Vendors come and go, depending upon who wins the contract to supply the Army. Mr. Masters is a Civil Service employee who works for the Army and he has an Army General as his boss. If the Army decides to change suppliers tomorrow, Mr. Masters will be responsible to ensure that the new supplier complies with the specifications contained in the contract. So what part of that do you not understand? Murry Neal is so stupid that he thinks Mr. Masters works for the supplier. LOL, Pinnacle is so far from reality they believe their own bullshit.
Could be that “Colonel (Retired) John D. Norwood, West Point Class of 1980, former Project Manager for Soldier Equipment under PEO-SOLDIER, from 2003 until his retirement in the summer of 2006. He is currently a new Vice President of the Aerospace & Defense Group of Armor Holdings, one of the principal manufacturers of Interceptor Body Armor.” Maybe people get confused when former Project Managers for the Army end up working for suppliers?
I see your point, except for the fact that Point Blank, of DHB, held the contract as sole provider from the beginning of the contract (some 10+ years) until the Army managed to get some additional players who could compete on price with Point Blank and started dividing up the contract to more than one vendor. If he had gone to Point Blank I could see your point more clearly, but the guy has to work somewhere and there are definetly rules about after career employment. We have a guy that works where I do and he could not talk to anyone in the government for 1 year and he had nothing to do with procurements. He just has a high rank. The biggest crooks are in congress by the way.
Business looks for people with the experience and skills they need. We do security work and hire former SF and other Tier One operators for PSD contracts. Are you telling me that we should hire Walmart door greeters instead, or should I be allowed to hire guys with 20+ years doing the job. If a guy compromises his integrity, then he commited a crime and should be punished. If you have proof contact the FBI, otherwise you are just disparaging his character based upon inuendo. Uncle Sam takes contact fraud very seriously, remember the boeing scandal where the lady at SOCOM got he son a job with boeing. Well she is doing time I do believe. So enough with the conspiracy crap.
That was not my intention. I am just saying that all the finger pointing, inuendo, and conspiracy crap does not solve the problem of finding the facts. The army has an armor specification for performance and weight. If Dragon Skin is different, great. Show up with a sample that meets the weight specification, and then demonstrate the performance. Pinnacle has done none of this. The Army has been very tolerant of their antics. Their vests were substantially heavier per square foot than the specification. So if they didn’t have the media attention, they would have failed First Article Testing during the form and fit test. The army humored them and tried to run all the tests. Environmental conditioning tests were failed. Ballistic limit tests were failed.
When Dragon Skin conforms to the weight standard and can perform ballistically then, and only then do they have any bragging rights. Until then they are full of crap.
Well again the public perception is what is causing the outrage. We have videos from 3 television shows who’s reputation is what makes them watchable. We have NBC news now who shows that dragon skin beats IBA in ballistic tests. I don’t know where we can go on the weight issue. Neal shows data that puts the weight per foot of coverage as better than IBA. I mean how can we settle this. You don’t trust the numbers from the company and the army doesn’t release the numbers. Where are you getting your dragon skin numbers from?
I got my Ds numbers from one of Murray neal’s rebuttal interviews. he claims 9.75 lbs to 10+ lbs per square foot. Pinnacle does not publish areal densities for their DS. they know that the stuff is heavier and have avoided the weight issue like the plague. Performance is always weight driven, the entire industry runs on mass efficiency numbers for a given threat. You can be the same weight and have better performance, or you can have the same performance and less weight, but heavier puts you out of the game. Now it is time for pinnacle to put up or shut up. Make it the same weight or make it lighter. HEAVIER? I am still rolling on the floor laughing, and so is the rest of the armor industry. Only the stupid and ignorant are getting sucked into this farce.
What’s the URL for the PDF or Powerpoint file that those two pages of X-ray photos came from?
check out this post, it is very detailed.
http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=14523
Well some people still find the rigid plates being stuck to your stomach and spine less comfortable than the flexible DS. Now you say you heard neal admit to a 9-10 weight to coverage ratio. Well if you take the 24-27 pounds we agreed on for the interceptor and the 2.25 square feet of coverage then you get a ratio of 25/2.25 = 11.111. That makes dragon skin better per square foot of coverage. Are you still rolling on the floor? Does this make you mad that you have been lied to? Let’s call pinnacle and point blank on monday and ask them for specifics too I am up for it. Tell me if I went wrong on my math please.
Well I read that post on Pro Soldier. Seems like it came down to he didn’t like the test conditions. sound familiar? But seriously he said that he esapi plate might have been non official? He questioned the flatness of the clay bed. And again he stated weights for dragon skin without the NBC show actually showing a scale and I don’t think the Army released the official weight of the tested vests either. There are just too many questions here. I agree there needs to be some answers.
I think our numbers are as good as we are going to get. The bottom line is I am sure that if Pinnacle could equal the Army’s requirement they would be shouting that fact out loud, since they avoid the question, one could safely assume that DS is much heavier. They have no problem letting you know about the other things DS does, so if they could match the weight it would be in big bold print on their website.
I found their size and weight characteristics on the website. Some math is required because they talk about percentage bigger than 10×12 but they give the weight. http://www.pinnaclearmor.com/body-armor/dragon-skin.php I selected the male then tactical and then if you click the full wrap around on the left. 8.97 lbs for the front full torso wrap around panel and 8.97 lbs for the back panel. They both are also 80 percent more than the 10×12 in the coverage arena. So that means together they cover 414 square inches. Thats about 120 * 1.8 * 2 = 414
TXZEN,
That is the way I calculated the weight/surface area. 414 sq inches for a total weight of 18-22 pounds. That is not that heavy, especially if it fits better, more distributed and thus more comfortable. Soldiers now, have Interceptor OHV (8.4 lbs), plus front and back 10×12 ESAPI plates(2X 6-8 lbs), plus left and right side(2x 3 lbs) for a total weight of 25 lbs or so.
If DragonSkin did work as advertised and stop a
7.62 x 54R mm 187 GR, steel case, armor piercing incendiary BS40, and handle the harsh environmental conditions, then it would be a no brainer to field this body armor ASAP.
Big If’s, of course.
You are using level III SOV2000 weights. There are no specific weights of SOV3000 on that page. Some time before they said a level IV panel would weight bout 55% more than a levelIII, but sadly this information vanished.
Their “17.2lb with standard large tactical panel info” is also crap. Because in their media PDF a “full cover” suddenly weights in medium 33,15 lb. So about 55% percent more coverage cause nearly 100% weight increase? Pretty lame.
So please use real weights and don’t get confused by their missleading information!
And also a medium sized with front/side plates doesn’t weight 33,1lb.
10*12 inserts made by DS are 2+lb heavier per insert than ESAPI. Point.
http://www.defensetech.org/archives/003506.html
This answers a lot of questions. Espacially PEO soldier brief.
Like I posted if you go to the PHP webpage it gives you the stats to the “full torso wrap” and we should know that the 8.9 lbs is for the front torso wrap panel and back panel only the vest also contains a kevlar mesh and zipper and webbing and all that but if you take these number and assume that the webbing and kevlar is similar for the interceptor and the ds then you can calculate weight by coverage of the coverage not counting the kevlar mesh and webbing.
36 pounds for a full torso wrap front and back SOV 3000. 80 percent more coverage than a 10×12 panel per panel there being a front and back.
I hear your concerns. What about for soldiers on stationary guns? Or VIP? I have heard people think it is comfortable. The flexing full coverage as opposed to a rigid plate strapped to your belly and spine and now there are two more rigid plates on either side. I have worn neither I just think that with ceramic plates shattering having hundreds of overlapping plates mean you can take more shots. I think the coverage per pound is really not that far off of the two systems in question. But I believe it when people say they want to carry less in combat. If soldiers don’t want body armor I don’t know then. I just think we give DS a chance with new adhesive wich has been added and let them match the coverage of the current system. DS sov 3000 full torso wrap 36 pounds “I calculate” 2.9 square feet of coverage for a ratio of 12.4 weight to coverage. IBA 27 pounds 2.25 sqare feet of coverate for a weight to coverage of 12. Also to note Neal says there is 3.4 square feet of coverage so he states a 10.5 weight to coverage ratio.
txzen, Why did Pinnacle add a new adhesive? I thought their vest never had any problems with heat etc.?
Sorry I got an area density 0,063 lb/in2 for SOV3000 and 0,39 lb/in2 for IBA. Of course calculating area density for complete vests is stupid. If you want to compare ask Pinnacle for the weight of a 10*12 panel and compare it to different plates. Only ancient or standalone plates with a better multihit capability than Dragon Skin own that weight.
I think you make good points. I would like to know more about the body armor related deaths and injuries. I just read about casualty and death ratios for the vietnam war and the iraq war. Vietnam had 3 injuries to every 1 death and Iraq had 8 injuries for every one death. I think better medical evacuation, surgical techniques, and armor probly play the largest roles in keeping soldiers alive after combat injury. Maybe the enemy we fight now is more concered with headlines than effective military campaign though. I think people see these numbers and then think if we get even better armor with more coverage we will see even less deaths and less severe injuries. Where could I find more on the body armor caused injuries and deaths?
Neal’s rebuttle says that a single strip of adhesive was missing and caused a row of discs to slip. The sub contractor has corrected the problem and added a quality check for the anomaly and pinacle has added a check for the anomoly. I was wrong when I talked about the need for new adhevise. I guess a question we should have asked is why did only 1 row of discs fall? If the adhesive was defecting or ineffective why wouldn’t EVERY disc fall well the answer is a 25 mm wide strip of adhesive was not placed by a sub contractor that the problem has been addressed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WMEIORtJ-DE
Dragon Skin on Mail Call
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KS0pSwdQfbY
Dragon Skin on Future Weapons
NO, the responsibility of applying the discs to the adhesive coated material belongs to the body armor manufacturer. The material used is an aramid fabric that has been sent out to have the adhesive hot melted under pressure with a release film with the final product being in roll goods form. When you cut your shape and affix the tile the tile laying technician should be able to determine if there is sufficient adhesive to be a safe adhesion. This was clearly the type of glue they were using not the subcontractor’s fault. I wish these guys at Pinnacle would just “Manup” and fix there problems instead of blaming everyone else for their failures in basic QC.
So you are saying that there is no way that a subcontractor could have quality assurance that might let slip a faulty vest? Also if the heat had caused the adhesive to malfunction why wouldn’t every disc have slipped and not just one row? So just what proof do we have that it was heat and not a manufactuering anomoly? Did every vest come out of the heat conditioning like a soup of discs and kevlar? I think addressing the issue with quality assurance tests and new production guidelines is about all you can do if you think the problem was just an anomoly.
While that may seem like a good question posing it as impossible, honestly if you spend a lot of time with adhesives applied to roll goods a trained technician should be aware of a defect in the surface wherethey are about to apply the a tile. The buck stops at the Body armor company for assembly issues.
So I see a lot of people referencing all these news articals about the test data that the government has released to make their point. My question is where can we find the actual full test results direct from the Army/testing lab instead of this second and third party through the media information. The statement that the testing lab didn’t know where to shoot the vest for the ballistic test seems kind of odd to me. Where is the data to show where they actually shot the vest and the comparison of what the full test for the ESAPI plates is?
Very simple…
Get an Interceptor vest and a Dragon Skin vest.
Go get an AK47 and SHOOT THEM BOTH!
Why is this so hard?
They either stop the shots or they don’t…
Let’s see, ESAPI plates, plenty around here to shoot at… AK-47′s…plenty of those laying around here to shoot, plenty of ammo also. Two problems… no dragon skin to shoot at and even if I did it would just be labled as a “non-official” or “non-scientific” test. I would love to see and official side by side comparison done though, too bad this has turned into a huge political battle. Hmm what will and AT4 round do to an ESAPI plate? Maybe I’ll try that one day…
Steve <—currently in Iraq
Dear Txen,
At the time I sold my rights out to Pinnacle Armo we had not progressed to the point where we would be making a serious bid for Artlicle One testing. The systems worked, the next generations was already planned, and the only conditioning tests that we had to pass at the time was a water immersion test. That was fairly straight forward. We used light weight Nylon fabric with the same amount of urethane coating as a boyancy comepensator and then ultrasonically welded the system inside this water proof cover.
We had sold some to SOCOM as well and again the issue of heat was never presented.
As far as placing the tiles into an individual envelop of fabric rather than using glue and fabric, it is possible, but a sewing nightmare, and of course placing all the tile in place is another time thief to high production manufacturing. I guess that might be a viable way to go, but I would think that the adhesive method will be tried again until it doesn’t or does prove out. It’s faster, cheaper, and easier.
We are experimenting with an adhesive for niche applications that seems to have this problem solved, we’ll see.
As for the discs, why did they only fall in one area, I can’t confirm this as a fact, one possible explaination is one section was light on adhesive and the fabric sandwich separated and allowed some tiles to fall and stack up on area where the glue didn’t fail, but this is conjecture because I don’t know exactly how the tiles looked after the heat exposure. I don’t trust what Pinnacle states as an explaination because I spent the majority part of the 1990′s using adhesive coated fabrics to affix everything from squares to hexagons in various matricies, and one thing was certain, if the glue wasn’t right we knew it, it wasn’t some difficult thing to see. We knew it. If what Pinnacle Armor is saying is true, which I doubt anyway, take responsibility for not having your staff up to specs in training. I mean look, if I were Mr. Neal, the 30 units that I sent to the military for evaluation would have been personally inspected and double checked. This was his first and supposedly best foot forward.
I say “Manup”, take responsibility instead of crying foul all the time, if your stuff is good you will get another chance, especially if you aren’t accusing the Army and it’s evaluators of being crooked all the time. It’s about diplomacy as well, Mr. Neal reminds me of the boy who cried wolf too many times.
If you look at another of my posting you will also see the difference between the testing at the German laboratory and the NIJ Vs. What the Military considers important in testing scalar armor. It was a post in response to Mr. Patriot.
Best Regards
This is nothing but a good old boys network, government contractor in bed with military body armor test officer. I
Hello Allan Bain,
Thanks for this response also. I would at this time like to invite you to the forum at http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/ some of the admins there really enjoyed your responses on this forum and there are a couple of interesting threads about armor and dragon skin one including responses from Karl Masters and I think you input would be greatly appreciated.
I call it Army tampering. Everyone knows about Dragon Skin because it’s the body armor that generals wear. Generals aren’t subject to the same rules as other soldiers. And, personally, I want to wear what the generals are wearing.
In addition, noone speaks about the Army plates shattering after being struck with a round. Thus, there’s the one-shot “sudden death” test.
And last: this is government in bed with corporations. Someone was promised a bunch of money for their campaign contributions, and buying a bunch of armor is the payback. The Army won’t buy Dragon Skin because they didn’t financially support the Bush administration.
Here is proof of tampering:
http://www.sftt.org/cgi-bin/csNews/csNews.cgi?database=Unlisted%202007.db&command=viewone&id=22
Also, they mentioned how the vest the Army tested had an anomoly whereas there was one strip of adhesive missing from the vest. That error in production has been corrected as you will see in the link I provided in the previous post
http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/files/dragon_skin_release_000121may07.pdf seriously I want there to be something better out there for troops. I wish that canadian farmboy inventor’s Trojan Full Body Armor to be a viable option and a cost effective solution. http://www.hamiltonspectator.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=hamilton/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1168470616997&call_pageid=1020420665036
Well seriously direct me to the page of the .pdf and tell me wich penetration you think is either “on an edge,” and shouldn’t be counted or wich shots were fired into “non rifle defeating areas.” Just to help out there are 8 different vests treated 8 different ways in that .pdf, I think.
That post on Pinnacle Armor’s web site is comeplete horse crap.
Yea can you imagine a guy like Karl Masters ranting outloud “I am completely baffled,I am not going to send another round down range until I can understand how flexible armor works”
Common, who actually believes that?
Allan, Murray is so delusional. He has no clue at all about what the Army spends in the way of research, their partnerships with industry and acacemia, and how they push industry to innovate. It is sad that so many people in our country are so gullible, and that they cannot realize the difference between fantasy and reality. I guess the WWF smack down crowd is growing.
Say a No-No to Army testing.
Independent Testing is the way to go.
Not only for ballistics, but for environmental conditions too. Army is obviously lying here.
While the army boys claim Dragon Skin is unsafe, they let their generals and their elite bodyguards wear it. Hm..
that’s right and from the last time I checked H.P. White testing was an independant laboratory. They could always go to U.S. Test labs. Thats where the first version of Dragon Skin were sent to, although I don’t think it will be any better for DS
since when does an armed force on the planet buy the best products for the job. Every single item is a product of competative bake off, some are good some are not all are compromises. Sure US DoD has pretty good gear compared to most, but if it was the best then why to most operators have non-issue gear…… Let an international testing agency at it, test it in environmentals that the solider woiuld survive or likely be experienced during supply or storage….
If only dragonskin had contacted the Marines, none of this media circus crap would be happening. It’s rediculous that the Army would play into such a controversy. I know that if Marines tested it there would be no controversy, there would be good results or bad results and possibly suggestions on what to do to correct the problems if they were correctable. As for anyone designing armor (Allan Bain) I suggest you contact us Marines with your idea and you won’t be in this media circus with Dragonskin. Screw independent testing, let the Marines test it if you want the clean-cut results without all the added fat.
No $hit Leatherneck. The Marines should be the testers of all armor in this country. All this b.s. could have been avoided and there wouldn’t have been any doubt (if there ever was) in soldier’s minds if the Marine Corps tested it. It shows the unprofessionalism of Pinnacle and some of the Army’s drawbacks (public dissing/what is this the fifth grade?).
Screw independent testing, it can be swayed in the wrong direction for money, as Allan Bain knows. I say let the USMC test anything that needs to be proven because they seem to be proficient at that. Allan Bain, you should really
get a life and stop posting on every forum in the known universe. You sir/mam are a hack. Your idea is pre-school at best. You diss dragonskin yet your armor is just a copy of it that you say doesn’t have the same problems.
Hey I thought it would be nice for a gay guy’s opinion on Dragonskin. I think it’s like an aids infested condom just like the one that’s up my ass right now. William did a number on my poopshoot and now I have an HIV positive rubber jammed 4 inches up my ass.
That was great Devil Dog.
You know what’s convincing to an engineer? For starters, Allan, someone who expresses their ideas with clarity. Your prose, sir, is terrible. Good day.
Exactly, copying dragonskin carries no weight with
anyone Allan Bain.
DRAGON SKIN IS NOT NIJ Certified, NIJ has issued statements stating that they have not certified Dragon Skin. Pinnacle is currently working to get the official certification, but they have not accomplished this as of yet.
This fact alone discredits Pinnacle body armor and their Dragon Skin. Why would they make false claims? Thus far, out of all the test we’ve seen Dragon Skin go through, it has all be done by Pinnacle, even the television shows and NBC. They tell them what to do, where to shoot, etc.
I know the Army can be stingy sometimes, but the Interceptor, and the new improved one their issuing now, WORK. So far, Dragon Skin may take more punishment, and may offer better protection, but the fact that it cannot stand up to battlefield standards simply means it will only give us a disadvantage.
I already dont trust Pinnacle, because they have been discredited, and all they do is point the finger and blame everyone else for Dragon Skin failures.
DRAGON SKIN IS NOT NIJ Certified, NIJ has issued statements stating that they have not certified Dragon Skin. Pinnacle is currently working to get the official certification, but they have not accomplished this as of yet.
This fact alone discredits Pinnacle body armor and their Dragon Skin. Why would they make false claims? Thus far, out of all the test we’ve seen Dragon Skin go through, it has all be done by Pinnacle, even the television shows and NBC. They tell them what to do, where to shoot, etc.
I know the Army can be stingy sometimes, but the Interceptor, and the new improved one their issuing now, WORK. So far, Dragon Skin may take more punishment, and may offer better protection, but the fact that it cannot stand up to battlefield standards simply means it will only give us a disadvantage.
I already dont trust Pinnacle, because they have been discredited, and all they do is point the finger and blame everyone else for Dragon Skin failures.
DRAGON SKIN IS NOT NIJ Certified, NIJ has issued statements stating that they have not certified Dragon Skin. Pinnacle is currently working to get the official certification, but they have not accomplished this as of yet.
This fact alone discredits Pinnacle body armor and their Dragon Skin. Why would they make false claims? Thus far, out of all the test we’ve seen Dragon Skin go through, it has all be done by Pinnacle, even the television shows and NBC. They tell them what to do, where to shoot, etc.
I know the Army can be stingy sometimes, but the Interceptor, and the new improved one their issuing now, WORK. So far, Dragon Skin may take more punishment, and may offer better protection, but the fact that it cannot stand up to battlefield standards simply means it will only give us a disadvantage.
I already dont trust Pinnacle, because they have been discredited, and all they do is point the finger and blame everyone else for Dragon Skin failures.
I don’t know where you get information from but Dragonskin is level III NIJ certified. Now as to whether they will get their others vests certified is the question. You are way behind on this subject John Prell. Either you are ill- informed or, just hate Dragonskin for it’s shitty way of doing business like me, so I’ll leave you to take your pick. Semper Fi Till’ I die.
Ok, here is the thing about this. There has been over 15 independant test on Dragon Skin. Pinnacle did there own test to army standards and the armor past with flying colors. One test they fired almost 300 rounds at it. This after keeping it at 160 F and then -20 F and subbmersing it in salt water for 1 hour. None of the 300 rounds which include 60 of the AP 7.62x39mm rounds, 10 AP .308 rounds, and various 9mm and .45APC. Nothing punched through it. So i dont know what the Army did, but get this, the Army has a huge contract with Point Blank Armor, the manufacturer of ther OVT vest that I have worn in Iraq. I have also worn the Dragon Skin armor and i have to say, DS is alot bettter and more manuvurable than the OVT. It feels a heck of alot lighter than the OVT even though it weighs slightly more. The coverage in DS is more the 80% more that the OVT. Also, DS is fully customisable with more than 15 coverage options. So i dont mean to diss the Amry in this because I am in the Army, But the Army may have tampered with it before shooting it. And i agree to let the marines get a hold of the, then we would know for sure. It is also a great fact that most generals for the British and Iraq armies wear the Dragon Skin armor. Blackwater and Armor group also have worn the armor in Iraq and have had good success with DS. I will take the info from the 15 indepenent tests over the Army’s anyday.
As for the NIJ cert. issue. The CEO of Pinnacle had verbal autherisation to label them as III+ certified. But after the Army testing the NIJ reciended it. Now there is a huge legal battle between the two. The fact is DS is a far better vest than the OVT. If you have watched Future Weopons, Mail Call, and the History Channel’s Test Lab, the armor did awsome. So there are the facts that i know of.
What the hell shoots the 7.62 x 63mm??? The AK-47 fires the 7.62x39mm, the Dragonov fires the legacy 7.62x54mm same as the Mosin-Naget Rifle (which I owne two of), the AK-74 fires 5.45x39ish and the Spatsnaz say they have a sniper round able to defeat any armor in the world? Is this the 7.62x63mm stuff? Russian and Eastern Bloc/Warsaw Pact made (1946′-90′) rounds tend to hit with larger rounds rather than high velocity, that was the way of the west, of Gene Stoner to go with high Velocity, 5.56x45mm at 3,000 fps with a 55-grain slug out of the AR-15, now our guys want 77-grain 5.56×45 at a mere 2,750 FPS to knock people down cold, or the FN-SCAR in good old 7.62x51mm NATO. The new FN-USA round 5.7x29mm is the new high velocity, high campacity pistol round made to get rid of the 9×19 Para/Luger. Time will tell on that… The SCAR MK17 with a MK13 under is a very tempting weapon, but I want more than a 20 round mag (reminds me of the FN-FAL), hell the Steyr AUG in 5.56/NATO comes in 42 round mags, gimme a 30 round mag in 7.62/NATO for my SCAR MK17/MK13 and a Carl Gustov and I am fine!
What do the Israeli’s use for personal body armor? Maybe we should take a look at that, as well as buying some Merkava tanks to use for APCs. They don’t BS over there! And I am not taking sides!
they said that the glue used to hold the scales together melts under certain conditions. well then use a different glue and give our soldiers what they deserve!! the army just wants to make money even if that means loosing a few “expendables” along the way whitch is bull. im all for dragon skin..im joining really soon and i hope that by the time i do the dragon skin will be issued to EVERYONE!
but until that happens all we can do is hope that the armor we have is either made better…or we just keep up the good fight. the tests done were either good or botched..regardless, dragon skin is good..really good and im sure soldiers out there getting shot at every day really dont care what is is protecting them as long as its the best..weather thats dragon skin or the iba.
Well regardless on whether it works or dosent, would it suprise anyone that the army may be discriminating based upon mass multibillion $$$ contract it has with the current supplier of armor? This could be very well a smear campaign not telling the whole truth. A family member of mine is in the marines and they told the troops dragonskin dosent cut it. But i think what both sides need is a reputable 3rd party tester who is impartial. politics is always in the way and do we ever get the real truth anymore? The military dosent want to look bad one, and i bet the current supplier wouldnt be too happy to loose their contract with the government. Good ol’ greed can always hide the reality of something, especially here in the USA or worldwide.
To Allan Bain or Murray Neal, how about sewing each ceramic disc in its own little pouch? The fabric would wrap fairly tightly around the disc to prevent the disc from shifting too much in the pouch. This operation can be automated or put into high production with the help of semi-skilled labor, much easier than wrapping the leather cover around a baseball. (For example, take a square piece of cloth, put a disc on top in the middle, then fold each corner over the disc. Then apply 2 simple straight stitches across the face of the wrapped disc in a criss-cross to secure it firmly in the cloth).
After sewing each plate into a cloth pouch, each plate would then be stitched to the proper position on the armor vest with a button-style knot. They would be stitched on the inside vest layer to prevent bullets from breaking the thread.
The vest could further be modified to allow the soldier to inspect the plates directly by unzipping the outer or inner layer, thereby exposing the discs from either side. The soldier could verify that all discs are securely in place or re-stitch a pouch if needed. This would also allow efficient, modular vest repair should one of the discs crack under enemy fire.
—————–
A REALLY quick fix is to reverse the sequence in which the discs are laid out during production. The current configuration shows that the discs are laid out from top to bottom, with the top section of each disc exposed. If you laid out the discs from bottom to top, the bottom of each disc would stick out into the yellow shrinkwrap layer and would thus be supported if the adhesive failed.
Though unlikely, plates could fall if the armor is held upside down, so its not as good as sewing each plate in its own pouch. However, it would probably pass the army test unless the gas/high temperature dissolved the shrinkwrap layer. Ironic how Pinnacle had a 50/50 chance of arranging the discs from bottom to top, but they chose the wrong one :(
i served in the corps from 05 to 09 and i bought a DS for just under $5k (including the groin and collar) with near complete rifle coverage my armor weighed considerably less than the interceptors worn by guys in my squad. The interceptor requires 4 plates the two big ones probably wieghed 15 pounds EACH plus another 10 pounds of side SAPI my DS provided superior mobility in tight quarters and allowed me to bend over in the Hmv whenever i droped my spitter. something the interceptors just wouldnt allow haha
i seen the dragon skin blown up by a grenade and when they turned it over their was no penetration at all! what the hell does the army need testing? thats enough to convince me to be wearing one!