العربية
中国
Français
Deutsch
Ελληνική
हिन्दी
Italiano
日本語
Português
Русский
EspañolDRAGON SKIN BODY ARMOR
'Dragon Skin body armor' is a type of bulletproof vest made by Pinnacle Armor. It is distinguished by its silver dollar-sized circular discs that overlap like dragon scales, creating a flexible vest that allows a greater range of motion and can absorb more hits than standard military body armor. The discs are composed of a silicon carbide ceramic matrices and laminates, much like the larger ceramic plates in other types of bulletproof vests.[1]
The armor is available in the SOV-2000, which had been certified as Level III protection, but this certification has subsequently been withdrawn DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ANNOUNCES FINDINGS ON DRAGON SKIN BODY ARMOR ; SOV-3000, currently in process of getting Level IV certification, Dragon Skin Body Armor (SOV-2000) Passes all NIJ Level III Tests at USTL and a classified level V variant.
Dragon Skin has been worn by some civilian contractors in Iraq, some elite special forces in Iraq and Afghanistan,[2] some SWAT teams,[3] nine generals in Afghanistan,[4] bodyguards tasked with protecting generals,[5] and U.S. Secret Service personnel.[6]
Pinnacle SOV-2000 level III armor is made of an imbricated overlapping configuration of approximately 0.25” x 2” ceramic discs encased in an aramid textile cover. The area of Dragon Skin body armor coverage varies between different layout configurations selected by the user.
In a test for the History Channel's military show, "Mail Call", the vest repelled nine rounds of pointed steel ammunition from an AK-47 and 35 rounds of 9 mm, all fired into a 10-by-12-inch configuration on the vest. In "Test Lab", also on the History Channel, the vest withstood a total of 120 rounds, fired from both an AK-47 (7.62 × 39 mm) and MP5 (9 x 19 mm). In another demonstration on the Discovery Channel series "Future Weapons", a Dragon Skin vest withstood numerous rounds from an AK-47, an MP5, an M4 carbine (5.56 x 45 mm), and a point-blank detonation of an M67 grenade. While the vest was heavily damaged (mainly by the grenade), there was no penetration of the actual armor.
Fresno, CA police officers ordered it after a vest stopped all the bullets fired during a test, including .308 rounds from a sniper rifle and 30 rounds from a fully automatic MP-5 fired from 5 feet away. Ninety-eight federal, state, and local law enforcement officers witnessed the SWAT test. The armor also stopped 40 rounds of PS-M1943 mild steel core bullets from an AK-47 along with 200 9 mm FMJ military ball bullets fired from a submachine gun. Army ban puts Dragon Skin in the line of fire
On December 7, 2006 a demonstrational shoot for the following departments took place on a 10" x 12" SOV-2000 Level III panel: Saint Charles Parish Sheriff's SWAT, Saint John's Parish Sheriff's SWAT, Gretna PD, Jefferson Parish Sheriff's SWAT, LaCruz Parish Sheriff's SWAT, Ascension Parish Sheriff's SWAT, Coast Guard Investigative Services, US Navy.
A total of 17 rounds were fired into the panel without penetration.
★ 3 @ 7.62x51 mm Federal Match
★ 3 @ 7.62x39 mm Military Ball
★ 3 @ 5.56x45 mm M193 Ball
★ 3 @ 5.56x45 mm M193 Ball at 45 degrees
★ 2 @ 5.56x45 mm M855 Green Tip
★ 2 @ 5.56x45 mm Bonded M193
★ 1 @ 7.62x51 mm Federal Bonded
Pinnacle Dragon Skin SOV-2000 level III armor was also tested Pinnacle Dragon Skin SOV-2000 Test the week of October 2, 2006 by Dr. Gary Roberts, LTCDR, USNR, Stanford University Medical Center. These tests were conducted for a local law enforcement agency, as a control sample a stand-alone Armored Mobility Incorporated (AMI) level III steel composite plate armor was used for comparison. Both types of armor were conditioned for 12 hours at , then moved to ambient air for approximately 90 min prior to being shot. The problems associated with the use of inelastic clay backing material have been well documented; as such, the armor was secured to a life-size curvilinear torso replica made of Perma-Gel. Each armor system was shot a minimum of 20 times with five shots of each ammunition type fired against each armor system — one 90 degree perpendicular shot, two shots at 60 degrees obliquity, and two shots at 30 degrees obliquity, using each of the following loads fired at a distance of :
★ 5.56 mm 40 gr LeMas Urban Warfare (using a moly coated Nosler Ballistic Tip bullet) with a per second average velocity.
★ 5.56 mm M855 62 gr FMJ with a per second average velocity.
★ 7.62x39 mm M43 123 gr steel-core FMJ with a per second average velocity.
★ .30-06 M2 150 gr FMJ with a per second average velocity.
All of the above ammo was successfully stopped by both armor systems in this testing, with no armor failures or penetrations, even after receiving multiple hits.
AMI level III plates are fabricated using an outer MARS steel layer bonded to a compressed Dyneema backing, with a linex coating for spall reduction, resulting in a total plate thickness of approximately . AMI level III x plates weigh about and x plates are about .
Pinnacle SOV-2000 level III armor is made of overlapping approximately x ceramic discs encased in a fabric cover. In evaluating the Dragon Skin system, it is important to note that while the external measurements of the Dragon Skin panel are x , the area of level III coverage provided by the encased ceramic discs is x ; the fabric edges are ''not'' intended to provide ballistic protection. Weight of the Pinnacle SOV-2000 Dragon Skin armor providing x of level III protection was approximately .
In 2007, NBC News had independent ballistics testing conducted of Dragon Skin versus Interceptor body armor. Retired four-star general Wayne A. Downing observed the tests, and concluded that although a limited number of trials were performed, that the Dragon Skin armor performed significantly better.[7] NBC also interviewed Jim Magee, one of the Marines involved in developing the Interceptor armor. Magee stated "If you would ask me today, ‘Jim we’re sending you to Iraq tomorrow. What would you wear?’ I would buy Dragon Skin and I would wear it.”7
During these tests, Dragon Skin stopped more bullets of the same caliber than Interceptor, and with about 40% less trauma to the clay. Additionally, Dragon Skin repelled 3 high-end level IV rounds that the military doesn't classify as a legitimate test because of its penetration and power.
In light of the May 2007 media investigations, senators Hillary Clinton and Jim Webb requested that U.S. Comptroller General David M. Walker initiate a Government Accountability Office investigation into the army's body armor systems.[8]
After being confronted with conflicting information by lawmakers who questioned the NBC test results and provided Army-supplied data of vest failures from a May 2006 test, the technical expert solicited by NBC to certify its test backed away from his staunch defense of Dragon Skin and stated that the vests weren't "ready for prime time." Dragon Skin Backers Hammered on Hill
Pinnacle has released a video showing their level V body armor during testing at the Fresno Sherrif's Department shooting range. The federal government has ordered Pinnacle to keep the armor specifications and the bullets classified. However, it was claimed that the rounds are traveling upwards of , since it was mentioned that the level V rounds travel at just under a mile per second (5280 feet per second)[1]. This is a substantial jump from level IV velocities, which range from about 2700 to .
The Dragon Skin became the subject of controversy with the U.S. Army Dispute ties up body armor plan over testing it against its Interceptor body armor. The Army claimed Pinnacle's body armor was not proven to be effective and that some failed an Air Force test and were recalled.
Pinnacle Armor put out a press release stating that Dragon Skin "did not fail any written contract specifications with the Air Force" although it admitted they did "return the vests to Pinnacle following testing ... to address a manufacturing issue, but that issue did not affect the vests' performance during testing."[9] Defense Review said they saw the test results and that they exceeded that of the Army's Interceptor vest. DefRev Sees Test Data: Dragon Skin Hands-Down Superior to Army's Interceptor The Pentagon said the test results are classified and neither side could agree to terms on another, more comprehensive test. The Army wanted to hold and inspect the vests for 1-2 weeks before shooting at them, and Pinnacle wanted them shot at right away from out of the box because they said they feared the Army tampering with them in order to save their currently cheaper body armor program.
On May 19, 2006 it was announced that the dispute had been resolved and the vests were going to be retested again by the Army to clear the dispute. Army Tests Pinnacle Armor "Dragon Skin" Vests On May 20, 2006 it was announced by the Washington Post (and other newspapers) in an article titled "Potential Advance in Body Armor Fails Tests"[10] that the Dragon Skin vests had failed the retest according to their anonymous source — an assertion that Pinnacle Armor would not comment on for at least a month afterwards.
On June 6, 2006 in comments posted on an online discussion forum, Karl Masters, director of engineering for Program Manager - Soldier Equipment, said he recently supervised the retest and commented on it. "I was recently tasked by the army to conduct the test of the 30 Dragon Skin SOV-3000 level IV body armor purchased for T&E [tests and evaluation]," Masters wrote. "My day job is acting product manager for Interceptor Body Armor. I'm under a gag order until the test results make it up the chain. I will, however, offer an enlightened and informed recommendation to anyone considering purchasing an SOV-3000 Dragon Skin - don't. I do not recommend this design for use in an AOR with a 7.62x54R AP threat and an ambient temperature that could range to 120F. I do, however, highly recommend this system for use by insurgents..." New Twist in Dragon Armor Tale
In response to these claims, Pinnacle Armor released a press release on June 30, 2006 as an official response to Karl Master's comments, saying the testing was biased, not conducted professionally, that the testing is still unfinished, and the vests did not fail. Response to Karl Masters' (US Army) public statements regarding unfinished FAT testing Official results of these tests are classified.
According to the Army, the vests failed because the ambient temperature tests caused the discs to dislodge, thus rendering the vest ineffective. Pinnacle Armor affirms that their products can withstand environmental tests in accordance with military standards.
In response to claims made by several US Senators, Dragon Skin and special interest groups, on Monday, May 21, 2007, the Army held a press conference where they released the test results that the Army says shows that Dragon Skin failed the Army's testing standards and that the current Interceptor body armor is the best available in the Army's opinion.[11][12][13][14]
While calling the failure of his vest to stop a round on the second shot of the Army test a "once in a while" occurrence, the Pinnacle Armor CEO denied Army claims that a dozen more rounds penetrated his Dragon Skin vests. He argued x-ray photos of one vest the Army claims failed showed the Dragon Skin disks had stopped the round. "The bullet did not go through the armor," Neal said flatly. Army officials responded by showing lawmakers a video clip of Neal inspecting the same vest after a test shot, watching engineers dig the penetrating round out of ballistic clay backing. "Are you telling me if you were wearing this vest ... and that round hit you in the chest, would that have killed you or not?" a skeptical Rep. Gene Taylor (D-Miss.) asked Pinnacle CEO Murray Neal. "No," he replied. Dragon Skin Backers Hammered on Hill
On July 8, 2006, in response to a message board query, Karl Masters stated that Pinnacle had been touting their Dragon Skin body armor as level III certified and labeling it as NIJ level III compliant when in fact it had not been certified by NIJ.
An email to the NIJ confirmed this, the NIJ stated "the SOV2000 and the MIL3AF01 have not been tested together and are not level III certified. I have spoken with Pinnacle Armor about the issue and we are trying to get the situation resolved, hopefully by getting it tested."
In an interview with KSEE 24 News an NBC affiliate on November 14, 2006 and November 16, 2006, Pinnacle Armor detailed the five year process that the NIJ and Pinnacle Armor went through to establish a test protocol and procedure for flexible rifle defeating armor, and then pass it for the certification. Dragon Skin Part I and
Dragon Skin Part II Retrieved on 2006-11-18
On December 20, 2006, Pinnacle Armor received the official letter from the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) that they've passed the Level III tests, and that Dragon Skin SOV-2000 is now certified for Level III protection. Soldiers for the Truth and
and
Fresno Bee and
The Air Force, which ordered the Dragon Skin vests partially based on claims it was NIJ certified at a time when it was not, has opened a criminal investigation into the firm Pinnacle Armor over allegations that it had fraudulently placed a label on their Dragon Skin armor improperly stating that it had been certified to a ballistic level it had not yet been. Murray Neal, the Pinnacle Armor chief executive, claimed that he was given verbal authorization by the NIJ to label the vests although he didn't have written authorization. Government Executive: Lawmakers say body armor firm made false claims
On August 3, 2007 the Department of Justice announced that the NIJ had reviewed evidence provided by the body armor manufacturer and has determined that the evidence is insufficient to demonstrate that the body armor model will maintain its ballistic performance over its six-year declared warranty period. Because of this, Dragon Skin has been found not in complaince with the NIJ's testing program and has been removed from the NIJ's list of bullet-resistant body armor models that satisfy its requirements. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ANNOUNCES FINDINGS ON DRAGON SKIN BODY ARMOR
Pinnacle CEO Murray Neal responded that this move was unprecedented, political, and not about the quality of the vests because they aren't saying they've failed any ballistics. He says it's about a dispute with the paperwork to deal with a warranty issue instead, in which the warranty period of Dragon Skin is longer than that of most other commercial vests.
On August 20, 2007 at the United States Test Laboratory in Wichita, Kansas, nine Dragon Skin SOV-2000 (Level III) body armor panels were retested, for the purpose of validating Pinnacle Armor's six year warrenty. The panels tested were between 5.75 years old to 6.6 years old. All items met the NIJ Level III ballistic protection, confirming Pinnacle Armor's six-year warranty for full ballistic protection.[15]
1. Dragon Skin Armor Passes More Tests: Dr. Gary Roberts and 'Test Lab' Video
2. http://www.military.com/opinion/0,15202,78927,00.html
3. http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/council/2006-meetings/20060901/Docs/15_OP_6646.pdf
4. http://www.rense.com/general69/rode.htm http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18720550/print/1/displaymode/1098/ http://www.military.com/opinion/0,15202,78927,00.html
5. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18720550/page/3/
6. http://www.military.com/opinion/0,15202,78927_2,00.html
7. Are U.S. soldiers wearing the best body armor?
8. Webb & Clinton call for investigation into the effectiveness of body armor issued to our troops
9. Response to US Army's allegations of failed Air Force testing
10. Potential Advance in Body Armor Fails Tests
11. Army says Dragon Skin armor falls short, The Associated Press, May 21, 2007 By: Baldor, Lolita C. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070521/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/army_body_armor
12. Army Defends Body Armor Quality U.S. Army press release May 22, 2007 By: Sgt. Wood, Sara http://www.army.mil/-news/2007/05/22/3292-army-defends-body-armor-quality
13. Army Defends Interceptor Body Armor as the Best for the Best U.S. Army press release May 22, 2007 By: Dawson, Debi http://www.army.mil/-news/2007/05/22/3298-army-defends-interceptor-body-armor-as-the-best-for-the-best
14. Army Defends Interceptor Body Armor as the Best for the Best Program Executive Office Soldier U.S. Army press release By: Dawson, Debi https://www.peosoldier.army.mil/mediaalerts/bodyarmor.asp
15. http://www.defensereview.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1043
★ Evolution Armor Systems
★ Pinnacle Armor
★ U.S. Army's Program Executive Office Soldier
★ Official results of the Army's Dragon Skin test.
The armor is available in the SOV-2000, which had been certified as Level III protection, but this certification has subsequently been withdrawn DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ANNOUNCES FINDINGS ON DRAGON SKIN BODY ARMOR ; SOV-3000, currently in process of getting Level IV certification, Dragon Skin Body Armor (SOV-2000) Passes all NIJ Level III Tests at USTL and a classified level V variant.
Dragon Skin has been worn by some civilian contractors in Iraq, some elite special forces in Iraq and Afghanistan,[2] some SWAT teams,[3] nine generals in Afghanistan,[4] bodyguards tasked with protecting generals,[5] and U.S. Secret Service personnel.[6]
Structure
Pinnacle SOV-2000 level III armor is made of an imbricated overlapping configuration of approximately 0.25” x 2” ceramic discs encased in an aramid textile cover. The area of Dragon Skin body armor coverage varies between different layout configurations selected by the user.
Testing
History Channel and Discovery Channel tests
In a test for the History Channel's military show, "Mail Call", the vest repelled nine rounds of pointed steel ammunition from an AK-47 and 35 rounds of 9 mm, all fired into a 10-by-12-inch configuration on the vest. In "Test Lab", also on the History Channel, the vest withstood a total of 120 rounds, fired from both an AK-47 (7.62 × 39 mm) and MP5 (9 x 19 mm). In another demonstration on the Discovery Channel series "Future Weapons", a Dragon Skin vest withstood numerous rounds from an AK-47, an MP5, an M4 carbine (5.56 x 45 mm), and a point-blank detonation of an M67 grenade. While the vest was heavily damaged (mainly by the grenade), there was no penetration of the actual armor.
Fresno test
Fresno, CA police officers ordered it after a vest stopped all the bullets fired during a test, including .308 rounds from a sniper rifle and 30 rounds from a fully automatic MP-5 fired from 5 feet away. Ninety-eight federal, state, and local law enforcement officers witnessed the SWAT test. The armor also stopped 40 rounds of PS-M1943 mild steel core bullets from an AK-47 along with 200 9 mm FMJ military ball bullets fired from a submachine gun. Army ban puts Dragon Skin in the line of fire
December 2006 test
On December 7, 2006 a demonstrational shoot for the following departments took place on a 10" x 12" SOV-2000 Level III panel: Saint Charles Parish Sheriff's SWAT, Saint John's Parish Sheriff's SWAT, Gretna PD, Jefferson Parish Sheriff's SWAT, LaCruz Parish Sheriff's SWAT, Ascension Parish Sheriff's SWAT, Coast Guard Investigative Services, US Navy.
A total of 17 rounds were fired into the panel without penetration.
★ 3 @ 7.62x51 mm Federal Match
★ 3 @ 7.62x39 mm Military Ball
★ 3 @ 5.56x45 mm M193 Ball
★ 3 @ 5.56x45 mm M193 Ball at 45 degrees
★ 2 @ 5.56x45 mm M855 Green Tip
★ 2 @ 5.56x45 mm Bonded M193
★ 1 @ 7.62x51 mm Federal Bonded
Testing by Dr. Gary Roberts
Pinnacle Dragon Skin SOV-2000 level III armor was also tested Pinnacle Dragon Skin SOV-2000 Test the week of October 2, 2006 by Dr. Gary Roberts, LTCDR, USNR, Stanford University Medical Center. These tests were conducted for a local law enforcement agency, as a control sample a stand-alone Armored Mobility Incorporated (AMI) level III steel composite plate armor was used for comparison. Both types of armor were conditioned for 12 hours at , then moved to ambient air for approximately 90 min prior to being shot. The problems associated with the use of inelastic clay backing material have been well documented; as such, the armor was secured to a life-size curvilinear torso replica made of Perma-Gel. Each armor system was shot a minimum of 20 times with five shots of each ammunition type fired against each armor system — one 90 degree perpendicular shot, two shots at 60 degrees obliquity, and two shots at 30 degrees obliquity, using each of the following loads fired at a distance of :
★ 5.56 mm 40 gr LeMas Urban Warfare (using a moly coated Nosler Ballistic Tip bullet) with a per second average velocity.
★ 5.56 mm M855 62 gr FMJ with a per second average velocity.
★ 7.62x39 mm M43 123 gr steel-core FMJ with a per second average velocity.
★ .30-06 M2 150 gr FMJ with a per second average velocity.
All of the above ammo was successfully stopped by both armor systems in this testing, with no armor failures or penetrations, even after receiving multiple hits.
AMI level III plates are fabricated using an outer MARS steel layer bonded to a compressed Dyneema backing, with a linex coating for spall reduction, resulting in a total plate thickness of approximately . AMI level III x plates weigh about and x plates are about .
Pinnacle SOV-2000 level III armor is made of overlapping approximately x ceramic discs encased in a fabric cover. In evaluating the Dragon Skin system, it is important to note that while the external measurements of the Dragon Skin panel are x , the area of level III coverage provided by the encased ceramic discs is x ; the fabric edges are ''not'' intended to provide ballistic protection. Weight of the Pinnacle SOV-2000 Dragon Skin armor providing x of level III protection was approximately .
Testing by NBC
In 2007, NBC News had independent ballistics testing conducted of Dragon Skin versus Interceptor body armor. Retired four-star general Wayne A. Downing observed the tests, and concluded that although a limited number of trials were performed, that the Dragon Skin armor performed significantly better.[7] NBC also interviewed Jim Magee, one of the Marines involved in developing the Interceptor armor. Magee stated "If you would ask me today, ‘Jim we’re sending you to Iraq tomorrow. What would you wear?’ I would buy Dragon Skin and I would wear it.”7
During these tests, Dragon Skin stopped more bullets of the same caliber than Interceptor, and with about 40% less trauma to the clay. Additionally, Dragon Skin repelled 3 high-end level IV rounds that the military doesn't classify as a legitimate test because of its penetration and power.
In light of the May 2007 media investigations, senators Hillary Clinton and Jim Webb requested that U.S. Comptroller General David M. Walker initiate a Government Accountability Office investigation into the army's body armor systems.[8]
After being confronted with conflicting information by lawmakers who questioned the NBC test results and provided Army-supplied data of vest failures from a May 2006 test, the technical expert solicited by NBC to certify its test backed away from his staunch defense of Dragon Skin and stated that the vests weren't "ready for prime time." Dragon Skin Backers Hammered on Hill
Pinnacle Testing
Pinnacle has released a video showing their level V body armor during testing at the Fresno Sherrif's Department shooting range. The federal government has ordered Pinnacle to keep the armor specifications and the bullets classified. However, it was claimed that the rounds are traveling upwards of , since it was mentioned that the level V rounds travel at just under a mile per second (5280 feet per second)[1]. This is a substantial jump from level IV velocities, which range from about 2700 to .
Army Testing Controversy and Comparison with Interceptor body armor
The Dragon Skin became the subject of controversy with the U.S. Army Dispute ties up body armor plan over testing it against its Interceptor body armor. The Army claimed Pinnacle's body armor was not proven to be effective and that some failed an Air Force test and were recalled.
Pinnacle Armor put out a press release stating that Dragon Skin "did not fail any written contract specifications with the Air Force" although it admitted they did "return the vests to Pinnacle following testing ... to address a manufacturing issue, but that issue did not affect the vests' performance during testing."[9] Defense Review said they saw the test results and that they exceeded that of the Army's Interceptor vest. DefRev Sees Test Data: Dragon Skin Hands-Down Superior to Army's Interceptor The Pentagon said the test results are classified and neither side could agree to terms on another, more comprehensive test. The Army wanted to hold and inspect the vests for 1-2 weeks before shooting at them, and Pinnacle wanted them shot at right away from out of the box because they said they feared the Army tampering with them in order to save their currently cheaper body armor program.
On May 19, 2006 it was announced that the dispute had been resolved and the vests were going to be retested again by the Army to clear the dispute. Army Tests Pinnacle Armor "Dragon Skin" Vests On May 20, 2006 it was announced by the Washington Post (and other newspapers) in an article titled "Potential Advance in Body Armor Fails Tests"[10] that the Dragon Skin vests had failed the retest according to their anonymous source — an assertion that Pinnacle Armor would not comment on for at least a month afterwards.
On June 6, 2006 in comments posted on an online discussion forum, Karl Masters, director of engineering for Program Manager - Soldier Equipment, said he recently supervised the retest and commented on it. "I was recently tasked by the army to conduct the test of the 30 Dragon Skin SOV-3000 level IV body armor purchased for T&E [tests and evaluation]," Masters wrote. "My day job is acting product manager for Interceptor Body Armor. I'm under a gag order until the test results make it up the chain. I will, however, offer an enlightened and informed recommendation to anyone considering purchasing an SOV-3000 Dragon Skin - don't. I do not recommend this design for use in an AOR with a 7.62x54R AP threat and an ambient temperature that could range to 120F. I do, however, highly recommend this system for use by insurgents..." New Twist in Dragon Armor Tale
In response to these claims, Pinnacle Armor released a press release on June 30, 2006 as an official response to Karl Master's comments, saying the testing was biased, not conducted professionally, that the testing is still unfinished, and the vests did not fail. Response to Karl Masters' (US Army) public statements regarding unfinished FAT testing Official results of these tests are classified.
According to the Army, the vests failed because the ambient temperature tests caused the discs to dislodge, thus rendering the vest ineffective. Pinnacle Armor affirms that their products can withstand environmental tests in accordance with military standards.
In response to claims made by several US Senators, Dragon Skin and special interest groups, on Monday, May 21, 2007, the Army held a press conference where they released the test results that the Army says shows that Dragon Skin failed the Army's testing standards and that the current Interceptor body armor is the best available in the Army's opinion.[11][12][13][14]
While calling the failure of his vest to stop a round on the second shot of the Army test a "once in a while" occurrence, the Pinnacle Armor CEO denied Army claims that a dozen more rounds penetrated his Dragon Skin vests. He argued x-ray photos of one vest the Army claims failed showed the Dragon Skin disks had stopped the round. "The bullet did not go through the armor," Neal said flatly. Army officials responded by showing lawmakers a video clip of Neal inspecting the same vest after a test shot, watching engineers dig the penetrating round out of ballistic clay backing. "Are you telling me if you were wearing this vest ... and that round hit you in the chest, would that have killed you or not?" a skeptical Rep. Gene Taylor (D-Miss.) asked Pinnacle CEO Murray Neal. "No," he replied. Dragon Skin Backers Hammered on Hill
Official NIJ Certification and Later Decertification
On July 8, 2006, in response to a message board query, Karl Masters stated that Pinnacle had been touting their Dragon Skin body armor as level III certified and labeling it as NIJ level III compliant when in fact it had not been certified by NIJ.
An email to the NIJ confirmed this, the NIJ stated "the SOV2000 and the MIL3AF01 have not been tested together and are not level III certified. I have spoken with Pinnacle Armor about the issue and we are trying to get the situation resolved, hopefully by getting it tested."
In an interview with KSEE 24 News an NBC affiliate on November 14, 2006 and November 16, 2006, Pinnacle Armor detailed the five year process that the NIJ and Pinnacle Armor went through to establish a test protocol and procedure for flexible rifle defeating armor, and then pass it for the certification. Dragon Skin Part I and
Dragon Skin Part II Retrieved on 2006-11-18
On December 20, 2006, Pinnacle Armor received the official letter from the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) that they've passed the Level III tests, and that Dragon Skin SOV-2000 is now certified for Level III protection. Soldiers for the Truth and
and
Fresno Bee and
The Air Force, which ordered the Dragon Skin vests partially based on claims it was NIJ certified at a time when it was not, has opened a criminal investigation into the firm Pinnacle Armor over allegations that it had fraudulently placed a label on their Dragon Skin armor improperly stating that it had been certified to a ballistic level it had not yet been. Murray Neal, the Pinnacle Armor chief executive, claimed that he was given verbal authorization by the NIJ to label the vests although he didn't have written authorization. Government Executive: Lawmakers say body armor firm made false claims
On August 3, 2007 the Department of Justice announced that the NIJ had reviewed evidence provided by the body armor manufacturer and has determined that the evidence is insufficient to demonstrate that the body armor model will maintain its ballistic performance over its six-year declared warranty period. Because of this, Dragon Skin has been found not in complaince with the NIJ's testing program and has been removed from the NIJ's list of bullet-resistant body armor models that satisfy its requirements. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ANNOUNCES FINDINGS ON DRAGON SKIN BODY ARMOR
Pinnacle CEO Murray Neal responded that this move was unprecedented, political, and not about the quality of the vests because they aren't saying they've failed any ballistics. He says it's about a dispute with the paperwork to deal with a warranty issue instead, in which the warranty period of Dragon Skin is longer than that of most other commercial vests.
On August 20, 2007 at the United States Test Laboratory in Wichita, Kansas, nine Dragon Skin SOV-2000 (Level III) body armor panels were retested, for the purpose of validating Pinnacle Armor's six year warrenty. The panels tested were between 5.75 years old to 6.6 years old. All items met the NIJ Level III ballistic protection, confirming Pinnacle Armor's six-year warranty for full ballistic protection.[15]
References
1. Dragon Skin Armor Passes More Tests: Dr. Gary Roberts and 'Test Lab' Video
2. http://www.military.com/opinion/0,15202,78927,00.html
3. http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/council/2006-meetings/20060901/Docs/15_OP_6646.pdf
4. http://www.rense.com/general69/rode.htm http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18720550/print/1/displaymode/1098/ http://www.military.com/opinion/0,15202,78927,00.html
5. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18720550/page/3/
6. http://www.military.com/opinion/0,15202,78927_2,00.html
7. Are U.S. soldiers wearing the best body armor?
8. Webb & Clinton call for investigation into the effectiveness of body armor issued to our troops
9. Response to US Army's allegations of failed Air Force testing
10. Potential Advance in Body Armor Fails Tests
11. Army says Dragon Skin armor falls short, The Associated Press, May 21, 2007 By: Baldor, Lolita C. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070521/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/army_body_armor
12. Army Defends Body Armor Quality U.S. Army press release May 22, 2007 By: Sgt. Wood, Sara http://www.army.mil/-news/2007/05/22/3292-army-defends-body-armor-quality
13. Army Defends Interceptor Body Armor as the Best for the Best U.S. Army press release May 22, 2007 By: Dawson, Debi http://www.army.mil/-news/2007/05/22/3298-army-defends-interceptor-body-armor-as-the-best-for-the-best
14. Army Defends Interceptor Body Armor as the Best for the Best Program Executive Office Soldier U.S. Army press release By: Dawson, Debi https://www.peosoldier.army.mil/mediaalerts/bodyarmor.asp
15. http://www.defensereview.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1043
External links
★ Evolution Armor Systems
★ Pinnacle Armor
★ U.S. Army's Program Executive Office Soldier
★ Official results of the Army's Dragon Skin test.
This article provided by Wikipedia. To edit the contents of this article, click here for original source.
psst.. try this: add to faves
