reader wrote on Jan 17, 2006 8:32 PM:Seems you hit it right on the head...something to follow up on? Tuesday, January 17, 2006 - FreeMarketNews.com 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.

richard delaney wrote on Jan 22, 2006 11:10 AM:i'd like to know who manufactures the interceptor otv vests, and is there any way to check to see if the contract is going to someone it shouldn't?

another reader wrote on Feb 1, 2006 11:35 AM:How can the army legally deny death benefits? Is that actually possible? The army could just be saying that to scare the soldiers into doing what they want. I think that some reporter should ask a lawyer if the army could legally deny death benefits to a soldier who wore better body armor in order to save his/her life.

Charles wrote on Mar 30, 2006 10:52 PM:I've been following this issue for some time. Pinnacle is being overly gracious in suggesting that "institutional inertia" is what is preventing deployment of its product by the US Army. The reality never changes. Procurement officers get into bed with vendors and when retired, immediately go to work for the big company that they threw business to while they were (supposedly) working for our soldiers. Happens with Lockheed-Martin and Boeing, so why not with Armor Holdings? I suggest sending the Natick senior officers to Iraq for a year tour of duty (outside the Green Zone) and give them the choice of what vest to wear. If they get waxed wearing Interceptor, then they lose their SGLI.

Charles wrote on Mar 30, 2006 10:57 PM:I suggest that the Colonels and General who think that the Dragon Skin is inferior be assigned to combat duty in Iraq at the Platoon level. If they die in combat wearing an Interceptor, then they lose their SGLI and all service credits towards retirement. That might be an incentive for them to conduct a legitimate test of the two products side-by-side. This is all too reminiscent of the M-14 vs. FAL fiasco forty plus years ago. Another question to ask is whether or not the senior officers are looking to get jobs at Armor Holdings when they retire. Could it be that they are feathering their nests?

Rebecca wrote on Feb 4, 2007 11:11 AM:I would think that if our soldiers were given the opportunity to wear these vests there would be alot less death benefits to even be concerned about. Also, for the price of the vest one would think it comparable to the price of fuel for one visit by some of the officials that don't even make it to the front lines. I just think it's time we took into consideration the lives and futures of the brave men and women that are serving our country and our freedom.

wilson wrote on Feb 9, 2007 9:46 PM:How can i purchase 1 dragon skin vest.

Eric wrote on Feb 16, 2007 8:21 PM:Such stupidity from the Army has been well documented in the past. Whenever newer, better technology comes out, they drag their feet or use blatantly unfair tactics to use tired, old, and usually ineffective tech for their troops. They tried the same nonsense with the M16, and they're doing the same thing with Dragon Skin. It's sad that the soldier on the ground has to pay for the brass' stubborn idiocy.

Michael wrote on Feb 27, 2007 8:51 AM:The claims that the Dragon skin vest is vastly superior to the IBA are wrong. The early models of those vests were only slightly lighter than issued body armor with side plates. Even the newest model only weights about 3 pounds less than an upgraded IBA. And those models are only protection level III, while the IBA has protection level IV. The secret service, CIA and contractors are not comparable to the army. They do not have the same missions; they do not need the amounts of these vests and it also questionable how many dragon skin vests are used by them. Another argument is that it's not only the army rejecting the dragon skin. The Marine Corps issues the new MTV vest which still uses ESAPI plates. Foreign militaries that introduced new body armor as Germany and UK also didn't buy Dragon skin. Perhaps its design is the future but today it is just not worth its money. Actually the army is waiting for a new generation of body armor which has real superiority over the current system before it replaces the IBA. Think about it: When the Interceptor was introduced it was the best available. So do you think the army should spend now millions for a new system that might be slightly superior? There is a lot of research in this sector and the army is quite clever not to buy new body armor now. There are bigger concerns. The accusations the army doesn’t want the best protection for its troops and manipulates tests are stupid. You should ask yourself who tries to make you believe that the army is doing this. The interceptor meets high standards and I would suggest that people who write articles about the effectiveness of body armor should have served in today’s military.

levi wrote on Mar 4, 2007 1:25 PM:iv been in iraq as an infantryman, i was shot and seen my fair share of fighting. the intercepters are nothing in comparison to the dragonskin. when i go back id chance the posibility of losing my sgli in order to be more mobil and lighter

James wrote on Mar 11, 2007 6:43 PM:Well just finished watching future weapons. Well it's simple a dragon skin that was shot twice with an AK twice with an M16 and twice with a 9mm then a grenade and it still won't penatrate the dragon skin. So please tell me that the IBA is better??? It's true that the army doesn't care just watch the news. I served over 3 years on active duty and over 1 year in Iraq and the VA is dragging their feet on giving me my GI Bill.

Pat wrote on Mar 30, 2007 12:25 PM:Welp, seeing the controversy around this particular device reminds me of the big row surrounding the viability of planes bearing bombs being capable of sinking capital ships about this time last century, especially from a ship-based flying platform. A lot of bigwigs in the military THEN said it would never work. Of course, the aircraft carrier is now, almost a century later, the backbone and pride of our Navy, and the reason why we won World War II. In this controversy, I see a lot of the same arguments. I think a lot of it may just be folks who're too used to thinking in the same circles and not being willing or able to accept new changes, a bigger problem as technology improves at even faster rates now than 20 or 30 years ago. Topping it off, I've seen all the footage that is on the cable networks about this, and I'll even take the skeptical route and say that somehow, inconcievably, those filmed tests were fudged...but trying to make rounds weaker than they normally are is dangerous, simply because mis-packing the powder into a round could result in the round (and the rifle) blowing up on you....and I don't want to think about trying to tamper with a fragmentation grenade. So this Dragon Skin may actually be the real stuff, I'm willing to give it a go, and especially after hearing and reading up on the Interceptor body plates, seeing their size and incapacity to take multiple hits, I'm amazed that our government is pinching pennies when they're already hard-pressed GETTING new recruits to fill the holes in that are being caused by the troops over there not having sufficent protection. a few hairs over 60 years ago, in WWII, if this question had ever come up, the answer would be straightforward and simple: The body armor that did the job the best would win, and be put out into the field. This is not 60 years ago however, and politics, favoritism, and rigid thinking are most likely causing more deaths in the field now than anything else. On top of it, with the massive distrust and loss of faith the government and current administration has incurred prosecuting this war, any hemming and hawing over a dispute like this tells the public that there is most likely the smell of "smoky back-room deal" about, and not likely to win any potential future politicians much support. In this era when we cherish and support life to the degree that folks are arguing and fighting over the right to life, it occurs to me that we shouldn't be simply considering the unborn, but also the living who're putting their lives on the line out there. They signed up for this for us, it's our responsibility that we get them home safe to the best of our ability.

Shawn wrote on Apr 28, 2007 1:27 PM:I am a Corpsman in the Navy serving with the Fleet Marine Force and while I was on leave recently I saw an episode of "Future Weapons" where they demonstrated the "Dragon Skin." I must say I was amazed. The DS armor took multiple hits from a 7.62, 5.56, 9mm, all from a point blank range without penetrating. They later decide to test it with a grenade explosion that just blew my mind! How could such a product with that level of protection be in existance and not be a part of our military gear? To be honest I am not surprised to that. Body Armor is not the only type of gear issue we have. To touch lightly, at my last command we were still being issued the old PASGT kevlar with the headband suspension system. These helmets will give you headaches within 10 min of wearing them and even though it was against SOP I would take the damn thing off every chance I got. I personally would have rather been without the thing entirely. Well back to the vest. Why is it that these DS vests are in production and the government has not given them a contract? Are the lives of our Soldiers, Sailors, Marines, and Airmen not worh the extra cost of protection? Have those high ranking government officials who award government contracts had to treat a wounded service member, had to lose a close friend, a son or daughter, a mother or father? I am not saying that these vest are what makes the difference between life and death but if they provide a better level of protection. A considerable level better of protection and can possibly bring that service member back to their family, why not? I am just ann enlisted member that as far as the military is concerned, knows squat! I know that a life is a valuable thing. Especially that one of someone who believes in their country enough to give their life for its defense and what it stands for. It takes a special person to do that. I have read several accounts reguarding the DS where sure, the interceptor might have done the same job, but at the same time left room for what if? I have delt with the vest system we have now. They do save lives but with cost to the wearer. They are heavy, restrict movement, the SAPI plates break with normal treatment of gear, the carriers themselves have been known to fail. I think Pinnicle has a great product and I am gonna purchase one for my deployment to iraq. Why the government would rather dish out 400,000 dollars to pay a service members death benifits, when they could never replace that individual, who they were, and what they meant to someone boggles my mind but then again who am I? I am just supposed to follow orders and question nothing. I do plan to start a fund raising program for the members of my unit and I to aquire these vests. I guess time will tell. Oh quick note. These vests are too expensive to provide to the troops? Well how does the government pay all those private contractors? All those water sanitation, construction, food service, etc. to stay in 5 star hotels, roll around in escalades (who needs an escalade in Iraq?), provide all their workers six figure saleries, I could go on and on. They probably have DS vests? Hmm... pork barrel spending? You decide.

John wrote on Dec 4, 2007 3:18 AM:there's a highly classified Level VI body armor out there codenamed "Phoenix coat". it's light as a feather but can take all level V and below ballistics. with the additional protection from fire, ied shock and shrapnel damage. the body armor is highly flexible but turns rigid when subjected to extreme pressure shock and temperature. once the pressure and temperature has passed, it reverts back to its flexible form. there's a level VII prototype, stealth is added to the armor. the wearer becomes undetectable by infrared. dragon skin is just the beginning.

The General Navy wrote on Dec 5, 2007 7:08 PM: Look Gail I hate to burst your bubble but Army has a Red Security Clearence the lowest they can be court marshaled or shot for treason for messing with me!