USArmy Orders Soldiers to Shed Dragon Skin or Lose insurance

Discussion in 'Weapons, Equipment & Rations' started by msr, Jan 17, 2006.

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

    http://www.sftt.org/main.cfm?actionId=globalShowStaticContent&screenKey=cmpDefense&htmlCategoryID=30&htmlId=4514

    Two deploying soldiers and a concerned mother reported Friday afternoon that the U.S. Army appears to be singling out soldiers who have purchased Pinnacle's Dragon Skin Body Armor for special treatment. The soldiers, who are currently staging for combat operations from a secret location, reported that their commander told them if they were wearing Pinnacle Dragon Skin and were killed their beneficiaries might not receive the death benefits from their $400,000 SGLI life insurance policies. The soldiers were ordered to leave their privately purchased body armor at home or face the possibility of both losing their life insurance benefit and facing disciplinary action.
     
  2. Is this not similar to the warnings we get before taking part in military training ie assault course where you are warned to wear issue boots and that if injuried that could count against you, or you go down with a cold injury when using a non-issue sleeping bag on exercise ie artic training?

    Is there a UK policy on wearing your own body armour?
     
  3. i know a bloke on telic who brought his own but was warned off against using it or else he would have been charged.
     
  4. In the boring days in NI there was a directive from HQNI warning soldiers to only wear issue kit as the Criminal Injuries awards would be significantly reduced if non-issue articles were worn and may have contributed to the injury. I'm sure PAX will have managed to squeeze this into their policies too, just for the sh1ts and giggles.

    Your employer is responsible with providing you with the appropriate equipment, if they do and you choose not to wear it you are not only responsibel for your own injury but your commander has a liability for not enforcing the existing policy.
     
  5. That would be Defence Clothing IPT

    However, I would be very cautious about stories about the latest bit of 'wonder kit'. Many of these stories are planted in the media and on the internet by companies seeking to promote their products. There are plenty of recent examples, from the latest 'wonder gun oil, to 'blended metal bullets' and of course, body armour.

    The various acquisition organisations spend quite a bit of time keeping an eye on the marketplace for new developments, but an awful lot turns out on closer examination to be from snake-oil salesmen.
     
  6. The article is misleading at best.

    There is nothing in the SGLI agreement that states that only authorised armour may be worn. You will note that (a) The source website is one of Hackworth's, which is somewhat unbiased, and (b) there is no 'official' statement anywhere. All it says is 'soldiers were told by someone higher up', with no knowledge of who that someone was, if he was qualified to make such statements, or if that someone was even correct.

    My guess is that the someone was just trying to cover his ass by making sure soldiers used only issue equipment in case it came back to bite him, and he invented that threat as a hypothetical.

    NTM
     
  7. No plates?? As with anything in life - you just can't get passed the physics.

    Yes, the vest may stop rounds from penetrating, but without plates to dissipate the kinetic energy, you'll get injured/die from the blunt trauma.

    I have to wear this stuff every day and I have the biggest, heaviest set of plates I could find - pain in the arrse, but I know that if the worst happens, I'm going to get up and walk away, not spend weeks in hospital (at best) with smashed sternum/ribs & bruised/injured internal organs etc etc.
     
  8. BuggerAll

    BuggerAll LE Reviewer Book Reviewer

    one-one-delta wrote:

    Is this not similar to the warnings we get before taking part in military training ie assault course where you are warned to wear issue boots and that if injuried that could count against you, or you go down with a cold injury when using a non-issue sleeping bag on exercise ie artic training?

    Barbs wrote:

    Your employer is responsible with providing you with the appropriate equipment, if they do and you choose not to wear it you are not only responsibel for your own injury but your commander has a liability for not enforcing the existing policy.

    I could be straying into the area of squaddy urban myth but with regard to the first points made above I've been told that the MoD would have to prove that the issue boots would have protected you from the broken ankle or whatever. With regard to the secomd point the fact that the employee has been stupid does not absolve ethe employer from his responsibility, although it may mitigate the damages etc. The other problem is that are you as a commander going to rigidly enforce all existing policies and only allow issue kit - or are you going to allow some deviations that have become accepted practise or because you like a bit of kit. Oh and although you would be bulletproof as a commander how would you feel if one of your soldiers was killed or badly injured and it was shown that had he been wearing the dragon skin he wanted to wear he would have been OK?

    Edited to add another thought:

    Bomb Doctor: Are you saying that you are wearing non standard kit: ie the biggest plates you could find. Seems to me that what the 'dragon skin' wearers are doing is trying to get the best armour they can buy - whether they are right about that or not I don't know - although I'm sure you are right about the kinetic energy.
     
  9. Alas, I am no longer bound by the always flexible & common sense military regulations 8O .............. which is why I can deviate from the normal military practice of buying the cheapest, smallest set of plates possible that cover only a small proportion of your vital organs.

    Body armour, if you need to wear it, is one of those things you don't want to 'save money' on...... Get the biggest, best set your pocket can stretch to.

    As for the military saying you can't wear your own...... Looking at the current issue plates and the set I have....... I know which ones I'd rather be wearing if I got shot. As long as you buy a superior spec and are happy in your own mind - why not? I'd bet that as long as you could prove your set was an equal or higher spec than the issue ones, I'd be quite happy to stand up in court and argue the toss. I'm sure the MOD would run a mile if the papers got hold of that story anyway (God forbid it should ever rear its ugly head).
     
  10. BuggerAll

    BuggerAll LE Reviewer Book Reviewer

    Further to my last rambling I wonder how the British Army would react if a CO recieved an LM along the following lines:

    "I have recently purchased Dragon Skin body armour which is demonstrably superior to the issue CBA... blah blah. I have had pockets sewn onto it to accept the issue plates (if I ever get any and they are not then taken off me to issue them to someone else).

    I have been told that I may not use this piece of kit but must use issue CBA. Of course as this is a lawful order I will obey it, but I'd like it in writing.

    My reasons for making this request are that if I am injured as a result of not wearing the superior Dragon Skin then this order will form part of the evidence in any court action I may bring"

    ATKINS

    Good Soldier
     
  11. At the beginning of the `Troubles`in NI,soldiers were issued-Flack Jackets,mostly bummed off the Yanks,who were still serving in `Nam, however the IRA,thought that they were bullet proof,and aimed at the heads of the soldier.Casualties were pretty low,and a lot of squaddies had some really close shaves.

    Some smart arrse,journalist, then decided to spill the beans, and consequently a lot of soldiers were killed,as the scum then changed their tactics,aiming for the body.Those who survived the shot through the FJ,then spent hours,in surgery having the ballistic filling,picked out of their wounds.

    At first the RUC received armoured plates,then squaddies got them.

    Some reports,state that 80% of yank casualties,could have been avoided,if plates were bigger.If I were in Iraq,I´d definitely,buy some extra plates,for without the plates, body armour is useless against anything except shrapnell.Being hit by a lump of metal at nearly 1000 mts per second,is like being hit by a car,with the force concentrated into about 10mm.

    Without the plate to spread the impact,you will certainly be killed,the hydraulic shock,or whatever you wish to call it,will destroy body tissue,lungs and heart will turn to a bloody ...............wear the plates!