Comments on: More Army Armor Woes

By: David Woroner

David Woroner — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 08:52:15 +0000

Just DO Remember where this came from kk? < without the final k, cuz i don’t give a doggone about that crap!
Resolving the Next-Gen Armor Muddle
All right boys and girls, there

By: trhw

trhw — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 15:36:42 +0000

?
?
DC ?
VIP
?
?

By: JoseL,Hernandez

JoseL,Hernandez — Sat, 05 Apr 2008 16:59:41 +0000

as a former paratrooper,in vietnam 5/17,67 to 11,19/68, i feel for our man and women serving overseas, i know how they feel about their equipment, since its not up to par, for the job they were sent to do, i wish our elected official would take into account, that one life lost do to faulty equipment is one life to many. from a true patriot,

By: chris

chris — Sat, 05 Apr 2008 07:54:43 +0000

Forgot to add, even though i dont think they should be forced to ‘stand behind’ it, i think it would go along way as a show of faith…i mean, im willing to bet someone from Dragonskin would do it, would the interceptor guys? I understand that with any kind of automated production, some flawed units may come out, but when a flawed unit means a dead soldier in a very real way, it isnt something you can just return and say ‘sorry for the mistake, well take care of it’ dead is dead, quality control is paramount along with speed of deployment, sacrifice one for the other, and both become a moot point

By: chris

chris — Sat, 05 Apr 2008 07:50:30 +0000

I think anyone claiming that anyone should litterally ‘stand behind’ the product is making an ill informed statement. HOWEVER that bieng said, I think that with the dragonskin debate, and the advent of “flawed” armor, anyone found knowingly responsible for trying to produce purchase or distribute this kind of product should be tried as a traitor to the fullest extent of military law. (which from my understanding during a time of war, is punishable by death?)

By: M. Thomas

M. Thomas — Sat, 05 Apr 2008 02:06:49 +0000

Is this more of the blame the victim mentality? Why is it we have all these military suppliers who can’t seem to get anything right…unless they are paid $147 for a hammer, or $600 for a toilet seat.…?
Further evidence of the rip-off mentality in the corporate sector.

By: Wembley

Wembley — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 10:27:48 +0000

I guess all those who were claiming during the DragonSkin debate how wonderful the body armor testing process is will be eating their words, right?
.
No, I didn’t think so.
.
But it certainly looks to me that “something ain’t right”.

By: Charlie

Charlie — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 07:18:13 +0000

The contracting officer did not make the buy decision. Those who did are the ones that should stand in front of the weapons. (And, I don’t even like most contracting officers!)

By: Christian

Christian — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 20:32:36 +0000

Let’s be clear, folks. There’s a difference between FAT testing and “lot” testing, or “quality assurance” testing (QA). Each new lot of vests has random QA tests done. But not FAT tests, which as you know from the stories on the Dragon Skin testing, is extremely complex and expensive.

By: Deepy

Deepy — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 19:26:51 +0000

No suprise to me. Troops aint equipped with Dragon Skin anyway so wtf?