Army bans use of privately purchased body armor

Status
Not open for further replies.
I remember in the movie Sniper where the kid had "Gucci Flauge" and the older Marine sniper said "Can I see?" then tossed it out the train window. I've seen some guys try and uses some crazy (and dangerous) stuff.

I understand TOE. Regulations. The "Army Way."

And I recall not being able to wear the field jacket when an early norther blew in because Division Regs said you couldn't wear them until X date. In Korea we had Mickey Mouse boots that we couldn't wear when it was freezing, but instead were required to wear the overboots over our DPM boots. One guy got busted wearing some nice thinsulate civie boots under those. :)

What's all that to do with the price of tea in communist china? Nothing, except regulations serve a purpose to protect all the soldiers...and they don't always make sense. :)
 
Mudpuppy: no, sometimes there are outdated or stupid regs that accomplish nothing. But it's never because command WANTS troops to die or be unsafe. There's always a rationale, even if it's wrong.

And considering what evac, medical care, support and rehab costs, and how two troops down can cripple a squad or convoy, and the FAILURE of several recent civilian body armors, I can't really blame a commander who says, "You WILL wear the tested, issue stuff, not some crap from WalMart."

It may not be the best, but it's a known quantity.

And anyone who said you couldn't wear a field jacket when weather conditions dictate is a scumbag.:fire:
 
So does the Dragon Skin body armor not work?
Click to expand...

No clue. What's the design parameters? The weight? The coverage? The cost?

Keep in mind generals are generally not where the fighting is.

A GOOD leader wears the same gear as the troops to show support. But if he's at a desk, and this stuff is easier to wear at a desk, that might be why. If he's more worried about a potential assassin with a pistol than an IED, that might be why. If it was sent for free and he was asked to try it out, pursuant to being offered a good deal if he can push an order through, that might be why. If he wants to show off his connections and hi tech, that might be why. If he's just an arrogant @!$hole, that might be why.

Without a lot more information, I can't give you a concrete answer.
 
Plus the General has a bunch of people with him who's sole duty is to assure his safety and get him out of the area if stuff starts going wrong. Private Whatshisname doesnt have that luxury.

Kharn
 
I'm a reservist, I'm here (out on a FOB), and my entire task force came into country with the IBA and plates (we also have a very nice "sugar daddy" high command, though, so I don't claim to speak for all the Guard/Reserve types). I guess there are new (lighter? stronger? I dunno) plates out there starting to trickle down to us...

We've received the side panels and the "waterwings" since being here (when we first arrived they were only available for the turret gunners).

This is the second place we've been in Iraq and on both FOBs every unit I've seen has had IBAs with plates.

My impression is that people really needed the good civilian armor in OIF I and II, before the Interceptor was fully fielded.

I started my active duty days in the Marine Corps, where all I ever saw (though 2001) was the trusty ol' "flak." This interceptor system WORKS. Several of us here are only alive and/or non PH recipients because of it. Of course, that's all shrapnel-based, none of my people have been shot while wearing the stuff (thank goodness).
 
the ceramic trauma plates are bulky, and brittle
Click to expand...

Funny you should mention that. When I was given a SAAPI plate for the front of my Interceptor aboard the USS Bataan I was surprised to see, printed in white all capital letters on the front of the plate, the words "handle with care" :what:

And this is supposed to take a rifle round????

It seems odd, huh? The SAAPI plates work, though. That's been proven in Iraq. People have taken 7.62mm rifle fire to the center of the chest and walked way uninjured. That's one round, mind you. I'm told the SAAPI plates pretty much disintegrate when they are hit, compromising the protection they afford. I dunno for sure, mine was never hit.
 
Welcome, Abby.

I have a video of a medic getting hit center mass in the IBA. He dropped from reflex, rolled, took cover, returned fire and got the Haji.

No damage to him.

Advice for target with armor: Don't aim for the plate. Head or hips.

Be safe. Send me a mailing address and I'll send you some books to pass the time.
 
Seeker: Most units encourage that.

There isn't enough time or ammo for sufficient training on duty.

This isn't a conspiracy to kill soldiers, folks. It's a LARGE BUREAUCRACY trying to deal with a WAR, and GOVERNMENTS and its own PEOPLE, and is run by PEOPLE.

Enough of the Hollywood tinfoil hattery. Some officers are good, and some are bad, just like anywhere. The difference is, there are regs they can follow that WORK. Not always well, rarely ideally, but do work.

Of course, we COULD just give every troop $5000 and tell them to buy their own gear. Do you REALLY BELIEVE that would work better?
 
Manedwolf, why the heck should it bother you that the president of Pointblank is rich? If he makes millions of dollars from his company, why does that hurt you? Where is your evidence of "war profiteering"? (whatever the hell that is supposed to mean) Pointblank is also the most successful law enforcement body armor company out there. They sell a lot of armor, so if that dude has 10 million to blow, I say good for him. Someday I hope to be rich and blow asinine sums of money on whatever I feel like too. :)

The Interceptor is a good piece of gear.
 
MadMike, I wasn't saying the Army approach is wrong--it may not be tailored for every concievable scenario or evolve rapidly (especially in line units).

The Military is throrugh and even if beauractic at times, I definitely understand there is a method to the madness. (for example, troops wearing boots or gear that keeps them warm, but works a sweat. Stop for the day and instant frostbite! While you can tell I wasn't in the sandbox, i could easily envision similar problems with letting everyone do their own thing)

To this day I practice the "army way" of training people at work.

Explanation, Demonstration, and Practical Application. :)

That said, we better be doing all we reasonably can to get the troops the gear they need to do the job and get as many of 'em home in one piece!
 
Pup, my wife and I have our full issue, plus our OWN spare complete issue, down to cleaning kits, spare parts and our own M16 uppers and optics, body armor, helmets, GPS and compasses, just in case someone @#!$s up and we don't get it issued.

The PLAN is that all troops have EVERYTHING.

There is always some CRIMINALLY NEGLIGENT IDIOT (see above) who ruins The Plan.

Besides, for TEOTWAWKI, we can always use the stuff. Sure, other people around here have guns. Do they have body armor, field surgical kits, GPS and commo? I think not.
 
The owner of Point Blank (official stuff, which was defective in some batches) has made enough money off of all this that late last year, he threw a wretched-show-of-excess $10 MILLION dollar bat mitsvah party for his daughter.

Wasn't there something about "war profiteers", once upon a time?
Click to expand...

Yeah, how DARE he profit from his invention ... its too useful for any one person to profit from it ... in fact if someone invents something useful they should be put in work camps and forced to produce even more for the common good.


greedy capitalist scum.
 
Mike, that happened to everybody who used Zylon. At the time all of the body armor companies thought that Zylon was the next big thing. Turns out they were wrong. And it wasn't Pointblank that denied it and didn't do anything about it. It was Second Chance.
 
madmike said:
Besides, for TEOTWAWKI, we can always use the stuff. Sure, other people around here have guns. Do they have body armor, field surgical kits, GPS and commo? I think not.
Click to expand...

I do!
But then again, I live in California.
:D
 
When I returned from OEF-1, A friend of mine in San Jose, whom owns a police store and I, were going to send some vest over.

The CSM Of the CANG , told us we could not. the reason? he had to be sure that the Vest and other tools were up to standerd.

he said, that everytime a troop is killed. there is an inquiry in the rear. And if this Stuff we handed out did not work as intended. All hell would break loose.

he did say we could donate to the haji types that were being trained by our boys.

I lost interest.
 
Last edited:
Good point. Someone dies wearing his own vest, and the press will be all over it, as to "Why are the commanders negligently letting our troops wear substandard equipment instead of the issue gear?"

Any answer is wrong. These aren't people. They're reporters.:banghead:
 
Manedwolf, why the heck should it bother you that the president of Pointblank is rich? If he makes millions of dollars from his company, why does that hurt you? Where is your evidence of "war profiteering"? (whatever the hell that is supposed to mean)
Click to expand...

It USED to mean something. Check out instances of people being tried for war profiteering in WWII. Now, it's generally done with no-bids contracts, blatant ones, negotiated in backslapping backroom sessions.

War profiteering used to be frowned upon.

But that sort of nation-before-profit ethos died among the ranks of Ayn Rand disciples, it seems. Proto-neocons. Go ahead and get rich by any means, it's a VIRTUE to do that! Never mind how you do it!

This sort of thing, BTW, is the same reason why we're still using Vietnam-era transport helicopters, because all the funding for development of a follow-on replacement was tied up in the big, stinking barrel of pork called the V-22 Osprey, which not only doesn't work well, but has killed a number of Marines in testing.

And as for Point Blank? Here you go..here's some history.

"The INTERCEPTOR System went into production in 1998 under a five-year contract awarded by US Army Natick Soldier Center contracting. On 27 July 1998 Point Blank Body Armor Inc.*, Oakland Park, Fla., was awarded on July 23, 1998, $5,573,715, as part of an $82,265,250 firm-fixed-price, indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity contract for 10,475 U.S. Marine Corps Tactical Body Armor (INTERCEPTOR) Outer Tactical Vests (OTV)."

Right. Then in 2003, the Interceptor vest was found to be deficient in stopping rounds in some tests..didn't meet the needed specs. Remember that? Recalls?

So what's the government reaction...hold new trials, find another company, right, get the best stuff, the first one showed a problem delivering the best goods? There's LOTS of armor companies.

Nope. In July 2004, Point Blank got two more contracts, for $239,400,000, and $24,756,750.

Just tell me there's not some backroom backpatting going on, there.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

2
  • Locked
Soldiers Urged To Use Armor
Replies
16
Views
861
tater_salad
T
L
  • Locked
Harsh Words over Dragon Skin Certification tests
2
Replies
33
Views
3K
mrmeval
mrmeval
W
  • Locked
Army Thin-Skinned Over Homemade Armor
2 3
Replies
56
Views
3K
Spark
S
M
  • Locked
Marine gets body armor for Christmas
2
Replies
28
Views
928
CAnnoneer
C
M
  • Locked
Body Armor Rushed To Troops
Replies
15
Views
941
David Park
D
Back
Top