Do you think that the Dragon Skin bullet-proof vest is better than the Interceptor vest?
If yes, why is the government so slow to accept the idea?
If no, what are the pros and cons of each vest?
2007-06-08 08:38:55 · 4 answers · asked by DBLtake 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
If you watch the episode on Futureweapons on Dragon Skin armor it is pretty amazing. The only thing that it didnt stop at about 75m was a .50 cal round. For some reason the military has just put forward a new vest that is the same as the IBA except it puts more of the weight based around your waist, not your shoulders. The bottom line is that it doesn't matter if it's uncomfortable or weighs a little too much, if it can be tested to sustain round after round of 7.62, the "suffering" you endure would be far better than the suffering you entail with a Purple Heart. The reason the Dragon Skin armor was initially turned down was that the "scales" were very flimsy and came apart, especially in heated environments. I believe the company proposed the idea to the government too quickly without testing it, from what I gather now, they have fixed their flaws and the Senate has pushed to retest the armor.
2007-06-08 08:46:16 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Although body armor can stop penetration there is no way to stop the trauma the body will take when hit with medium to large caliber rounds. Even though the interceptor is an imrovement in safety, stopping a .50 cal round from penetrating, doesn't stop a large slug from slamming into the soldiers body crushing ribs, bones, and vital organs.
2007-06-08 16:14:22 · answer #2 · answered by Derek L 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I personally like it after seeing field tests but I feel the gov. just doesn't like change after having the interceptor for a while.
2007-06-08 15:42:59 · answer #3 · answered by Cody S 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's all about someone lining their pockets with a government contract.
2007-06-08 23:22:02 · answer #4 · answered by Russ H 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋