Controversy Emerges Over Military's Body Armor
The U.S. military is hustling to explain to Congress that it already offers its troops the best body armor available after NBC News aired a report that questioned this claim. Military.com reports that the Army's top equipment buyer, Brig. Gen. Mark Brown, will meet with members of Congress and staff to explain why the military believes an armored vest known as "Dragon Skin" is not the best choice. On Monday at a Pentagon briefing, Brown made his case publicly.
Brown appeared at the Pentagon briefing with the actual test articles that had failed to stop armor-piercing rounds, which Army officials claim its current enhanced small arms protective insert plate can withstand ... The Dragon Skin vests tested by the Army in May suffered 13 penetrations in 48 shots, service officials said.
In its investigative report, however, NBC interviewed Jim Magee, a retired Marine colonel who designed the current body armor in use by the military, known as Interceptor. Magee said he felt Dragon Skin was the best available -- "two steps ahead of anything I've ever seen." Other people interviewed for the show claimed that officers at lower levels tried to sabotage the use of Dragon Skin because it was not Army developed and would threaten their funding and programs.
NBC also reported that the CIA had approved Dragon Skin for its elite operatives and that select soldiers assigned to protect generals and VIPs in Iraq and Afghanistan wore Dragon Skin.
The Army has decided to launch "an aggressive campaign" to counter the claims of NBC and the company that makes Dragon Skin, Pinnacle Armor, so I doubt we've heard the last of this one. The discussion boards at Military.com are already filled with comments pro and con.
3:33 PM ET | 05-22-2007 | permalink

