<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Armor News Preview</title>
	<atom:link href="http://defensetech.org/2008/08/21/armor-news-preview/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://defensetech.org/2008/08/21/armor-news-preview/</link>
	<description>The Future of the Military, Law Enforcement and National Security</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 May 2012 22:39:24 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Robert Chang</title>
		<link>http://defensetech.org/2008/08/21/armor-news-preview/#comment-184279</link>
		<dc:creator>Robert Chang</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Oct 2008 03:57:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=4034#comment-184279</guid>
		<description>Dear Christian,
I am wondering why SysCom did not select IOTV as US Army did to unify the same equipment.
Thanks,
Robert
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dear Christian,<br />
I am wondering why SysCom did not select IOTV as US Army did to unify the same equipment.<br />
Thanks,<br />
Robert</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Slab</title>
		<link>http://defensetech.org/2008/08/21/armor-news-preview/#comment-184278</link>
		<dc:creator>Slab</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Aug 2008 19:44:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=4034#comment-184278</guid>
		<description>Christian,
I was able to try on the new scalable plate carrier when I participated in a SysCom survey on the MTV.  Overall, I think it&#039;s significantly better than the MTV.  I would like to see them incorporate a capability to add larger soft armor panels to the plate carrier to provide additional coverage, instead of issuing two completely separate systems (MTV and SPC).
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Christian,<br />
I was able to try on the new scalable plate carrier when I participated in a SysCom survey on the MTV.  Overall, I think it’s significantly better than the MTV.  I would like to see them incorporate a capability to add larger soft armor panels to the plate carrier to provide additional coverage, instead of issuing two completely separate systems (MTV and SPC).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

