Don’t waste good iron for nails, or good men for soldiers.
Ten thousand years of human history was as nothing to us when taking the steps to safeguard it might have interfered with the safety of our troops, or inconvenienced our operational parameters.
But embarrass a Republican donor, like David H. Brooks? Whose DHB Industries manufactures Point Blank Armor? Which is insufficiently supplied to our troops through a 500 million dollar contract? Whose product failures are at the heart of a leaked, top-secret study that found 80% of our dead troops might have survived with adequate armor? Whose main competitor, Dragon Skin, is favored by nine of the generals currently serving in Afghanistan? Embarrass the likes of a man who can hire and fire the likes of Aerosmith and 50 Cent for his daughter’s bat mitzvah by working with your parents to scrape together the $6,000 you need for the safer, better, non-issue stuff?
Well. Fuck you, soldier. The order has come down from on high: drop the non-issue armor, or your family will lose your death benefits. Fuck your safety; fuck your people; fuck the op. Some things in this world are more important than your brief life, rounded by a sleep.
Commenting is closed for this article.
Who is this idiot that writes like this. If there is a problem - focus on fixing it - not showing the world how small and shortsided one's thinking is as it does nothing to correct the problem of the body armor - if there indeed is one.
To that point. I am confident that this is not a single issue. I am aware that some soldiers do not like the guns or ammunition or even the vehicles that the soldiers ride in. Some have gone as far as to request their favorite "brand" of ammunition from family and friends back home. No - it doesn't mean that the government ammo is no good - they simply prefer their own brand and they are making a stink about it. Same story for the guns and also the vehicles and their armor too.
I would imagine the body armor issue to be similar....some like it and some don't. Personally, I would not put my entire future on determining whether or not one armor is better than the other. Many soldiers survive with out any at all. Be smart and be safe.
I’m Kip Manley, is who the idiot is that writes like this. Who the hell are you?
Less belligerently: there hasn’t as yet been a study showing that 80% of our casualties wouldn’t have been casualties had they been using Brand X ammo instead of Brand Y, now, has there? —Read the links above; the story is spelled out for you neatly enough. Point Blank is ceramic plating that turns to “a bag of sand” with one good impact; Dragon Skin is overlapping fishscale armor that’s got superior coverage. Point Blank hasn’t been able to keep up with the demand imposed by its sweetheart deal; Dragon Skin hasn’t had to deal with it, but is still there for any soldier who can scrape up the $6K on their own. Nobody had a problem with soldiers supplementing their armor—especially given the gaps in regular supply—until the study was leaked. —The 8-figure bat mitzvah is just one of those gifts that life in the aught-naughts just can’t seem to quit giving. Yelling loudly and pointing may not seem like much, but it’s all I can do over here with nothing but a blog and a keyboard to affect the military’s supply chain—but surely you must know the cathartic power of bitching and moaning, or why else would you say what you said?
More importantly than the bat mitzvah or the sweetheart deals is the prohibition of the use of the armor.
Bryce, if you read this, is there any evidence that the soldiers who get their own ammo from home, the stuff they prefer to use, are not allowed to use it? Is the ammo banned?
If it isn't, why is the body armor banned? My own military experiance suggests that most commanders are not too concerned about personal equipment provided it doesn't reduce the safety or detract from a military appearance. Dragon Skin doesn't do either. If the local commanders don't mind it being used, why does anyone else?
-Flex
Any troops caught with non-issue ammo is facing at minimum an Article 15, likely a Courts Martial, especially if the ammo is something other than FMJ. Been there, done that, got the tee-shirt.
There are concerns that a bullet striking at an acute angle will be able to slip between scales of the Dragon Skin system. Further testing is being done.
Generals do what they want and often have a cadre of body guards.
Pinnacle would not be able to keep up with demand to outfit the entire US military.
"Bryce, if you read this, is there any evidence that the soldiers who get their own ammo from home, the stuff they prefer to use, are not allowed to use it? Is the ammo banned? " - Flex
Any ammo other than issued ammo basically requires JAG approval. Failure to use issue ammo or JAG approved ammo is a fast way to lose stripes or get the boot. Same for privately owned firearms. Carry your favorite pistol from home, let's say a Glock 17, instead of an issue sidearm and you can expect to get an Article 15 or Courts Martial. When I was over there, this was one of the leading causes of Art 15s.
More info:
"On Saturday morning a soldier affected by the order reported to DefenseWatch that the directive specified that "all" commercially available body armor was prohibited. The soldier said the order came down Friday morning from Headquarters, United States Special Operations Command (HQ, USSOCOM), located at MacDill Air Force Base, Florida. It arrived unexpectedly while his unit was preparing to deploy on combat operations. The soldier said the order was deeply disturbiing to many of the men who had used their own money to purchase Dragon Skin because it will affect both their mobility and ballistic protection. " - above linked Defense Watch story.
Counter point:
"First, as you are probably aware, I cannot comment on and do not know what the Army or Marine Corps policies are on body armor. I can only provide you information about Special Operations Forces.
I have talked to all of the approriate people and no one is aware of any directive that went out of USSOCOM headquarters last week that addressed the subject of body armor, much less prohibited the use of commercial body armor. Neither is anyone familiar with any statement made about service members losing their SGLI death benefits if they are wearing commercial body armor at the time of their death. There is no such USSOCOM policy about SGLI.
Additionally, Special Operations Forces do not use the Interceptor OTV body armor that you discussed in the DefenseWatch piece. Special Operations Forces use the Body Armor Load Carriage System (BALCS)." - USSOCCOM representative.
My own understanding, which is third-hand at about this point, understand, is that rules re: non-standard gear are pretty much the first to be ignored, and enforced only when you want to nail someone Al-Capone–style for some other thing you can’t actually nail; a number of anecdotes spring to mind, specifically one about a green officer being accepted by a crusty NCO when the newbie revealed possession of a decidedly anti-reg weapon which was commonly judged to be superior than standard issue. —But again, third hand, and anecdotes are worth the paper they’re printed on as data points.
And no one’s claiming Pinnacle can from a cold start fill the military’s needs. But Point Blank already can’t, and they have the contract, and now people who’ve tried to get some armor of their own are being told to leave it behind.
And again, anecdotes are worth the paper etc., but the field reports linked above, with especial attention to these paragraphs:
—are pretty convincing to this admittedly biased layperson. But let me tell you, bias or no: the minute anyone in this government we have here says it needs more testing or the science isn’t there, I start looking for a ruler to whap their wrists with. We’ve been burned way too many times on that particular score.
[...] Why, yes. This site’s been up and down rather more frequently than something that competes professionally on the going-up-and-down-frequently circuit. The fine folks at Dreamhost insist they won’t rest until the mystery is solved. Presuming you can read this, I thought I’d alert you to Tim, who, in comments, is disputing certain allegations of the “wear your own body armor and we’ll cut your death benefits” story; also, I thought I’d point you to this essay by Emma Bull, whose opinion on the new Battlestar is, shall we say, against the grain. [...]
"My own understanding, which is third-hand at about this point, understand, is that rules re: non-standard gear are pretty much the first to be ignored" - Kip
First hand knowledge here.
There are some things that our troops are allowed a bit of leeway on, there are others that they are not. Firearms and ammo have almost no leeway. You want to carry a commercial GPS? Fine, so long as you do not use it to call in air or artillery. You want to carry your favorite Buck, Benchmade, Gerber, or CRKT knife? OK. You want to carry your personal Glock 17 loaded with Hydra-Shoks? You're gonna take a hard fall.
BTW, the current SAPI plates are rated for multiple hits and the ESAPI is even better, though a little heavier.
And as well meaning as Defense Review is, they often get things wrong.