well, if you have heard about the interceptor body armor which is in current use in the army, it uses individual ceramic plates for the armor. once bullets keep on loading the armor a shatters which is a bad thing. but the army said it was the best armor. there is a new type of armor called dragonskin which uses overlapping disks and can stop a whole lot of rifle rounds. im not sure why they didnt field that.....
The horrible truth is that it's all about money. Interceptor armor costs $1,100 for a full suit. Dragon Skin costs $5,000 for a full suit. It's profit over people in the world of American politics.
Well, they could use interceptor and have everybody have okay armor, or they could use dragon skin, 1/5 the army would have great armor and 4/5 would be naked.
Yet again with the ignorance. You act like there are countries that give "Dragon Skin" to all of their soldiers. There is always something new and shiny and until you can work out the kinks and lower the cost you can't afford to equipp everyone with it.
Well, they could use interceptor and have everybody have okay armor, or they could use dragon skin, 1/5 the army would have great armor and 4/5 would be naked.
You don't have to give everyone the best armour (although this would be preferable) to keep most of your troops safe. Allocate resources according to units and regiments on rotation with highest casualty rates. For example giving pathfinders dragonskin armour since they there is a much higher likelihood of them being shot. Really though, its IEDs that are the danger not bullts, since they account for 80% of casualties in Iraq/Afghanistan.
That said, be thankful you Americans have the money to buy interceptor protection. In the UK we're lucky to get beach towels.
Dragon skin is really amazing, but it's impractical to try and get it for everyone until it can be made more cheaply. Interceptor works well enough for the time being.
That said, be thankful you Americans have the money to buy interceptor protection. In the UK we're lucky to get beach towels.
If you got enough beach towels and folded them the right way and sewed them together, you could get pseudo-dragon skin and have some fun arts-and-crafts time.
Except I'm using beach towels, not human skin. 0.o
Listman, the main reason that they aren't using dragon skin is that it's much heavier than Interceptor and has poor performance in the extreme temperatures of the Middle East - the temperatures weaken the adhesive significantly, making the armor useless. Until Pinnacle can respec Dragon Skin to weigh less and have a stronger adhesive, it'll only be practical for short uses in Iraq and Afghanistan. The protection it offers is superior, but it just doesn't have the ability to withstand the environmental conditions of Iraq.
The only way you can justify a failing system is to look for the few flaws that a succesful system has. However, it can be hard to find those flaws, so they must be made up.
Thelistman is only looking for an excuse to bash America and to pretend that America is an evil entity so that he can try to suede people to the other side.
Thelistman is only looking for an excuse to bash America and to pretend that America is an evil entity so that he can try to suede people to the other side.
OMG! THE COMMIES ARE GOING TO TAKE OVER!!!! >_<
The reason why we don't give our soldiers Dragon Skin is the same reason why we are equipping them with Cold War era weapons. M4/M16 was used during Vietnam. The SCAR is a much superior weapon; doesn't over heat as much, higher capacity, slightly more durable, I think it has a higher rate of fire. But it is also more expensive. We still employ Cold War era fighter jets, subs, and other military vehicles. Its cheaper to use inferior equipment. Many guns are better in combat than the AK47. Its so popular mainly due its low cost. The army wants to suit its self with the most cost effective weaponry as possible.
