Dragon Skin Armour

Discussion in 'The Intelligence Cell' started by BADAJOZ, Aug 18, 2007.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. msr

    msr LE

    Exit the Dragon By 2004, a newer generation of body armor was gaining the respect of military and law enforcement experts. Dragon Skin, produced by Pinnacle Armor Inc., was thought by many to be far superior to Point Blank's Interceptor vest, and soldiers and Marines bound for combat zones began to acquire their own Dragon Skin vests (in some instances, service members' families and friends contributed money to buy the newer style body armor). In March 2006, the Army banned the use of privately bought armor. Col. Thomas Spoehr, director of materiel for the Army, said at the time that, "We're very concerned that people are spending their hard-earned money on something that doesn't provide the level of protection that the Army requires people to wear. So they're, frankly, wasting their money on substandard stuff." The Army's ban specifically addressed Pinnacle's Dragon Skin, stating "the Army has been unable to determine the veracity" of claims that Dragon Skin was superior to the Interceptor armor.


  2. I saw an investigative report about this and they did trials on the dragon skin with ballistics experts. They found that it met or exceeded the Interceptor and that the Interceptor failed after a few hits in the same place where DS did not and the DS caused less body trauma.

    They interviewed Brig. Gen. Mark Brown and he said that dragon skin failed all the military test although independant testing said otherwise.

    Here's a link to the test:
  3. This is a good read - http://www.strategypage.com/dls/articles/2007670055.asp

    Also I have read that the escale design is more susceptible to the elements and hence degrade faster. Hearsay thoough - no personal experience.

    Oh screw copyright...

  4. The US Government and the Dragon Skin armour blokes have chucked so much mud at each other it's impossible to tell who's telling the farking truth.
  5. I was chatting to an american mate on another website about this last year or so who was present when the army trialled it.

    Story goes, as a demo for his unit, they put a set of dragon skin out on the range and shot the cack out of it. Loose scales everywhere, he said. Though it did take a few solid hits. But he was unimpressed by it overall.
  6. I have watched the "future weapons" epsisode with the dragon skin armour and to a layman (in that field) such as myself it looked impressive, but that is half the problem. Putting out this kind of program without proper analysis or counter argument simply sways those who do not have the scientific knowledge, which of will of course include the general public and the decision makers aswell.

    As someone who has made decisions with regard to equipment (aerospace - civilian and military) I simply cannot fathom how anyone making decisions that have the potential to affect lives can simply push equipment regardless. It sickens me that corporate profit and pork barrel politics can come ahead of (servicemen's) lives. And yes I am fully aware that engineering is not black and white, one can never account for all possibilities, but the onus is on us to provide equipment that is the best within the remit, civilain or military. Yes you can call me naive but I've put my balls on the line once or twice to ensure that the right thing should be done and I've won out.

    If it ain't upto scratch then the employee at the coal face will do his damndest to improve the kit so it does the job specified and earn the company the sale. Fecking politics should not come into it, but sadly history is littered with such failures. Failures that are not paid by the decision makers or their sons but with the lives of others.

    mmmn - just realised that was a bit of a rant, but hopefully it's a relatively clear one.
  7. From Wiki. Funny fcuker.
  8. Probably as good as you're gonna get.


  9. Schaden

    Schaden LE Book Reviewer

    From what I've read from other BBS's it's not as good as regular stuff though is more comfortable to wear and use, did fail during testing in some instances, opinion was that it would be very good for law enforcement, very bad for military.
  10. On the first clip it looks like it's stopping 7.62 on a 25m range, is ours capable of that?