| Fish Tank Clan :: Forums :: Fish Tank Side Forums :: Philosophy |
|
« Previous topic | Next topic » |
| Why did the us military reject Dragon Skin? | ||
| Author | Post | ||
| Kcow |
|
||
Registered Member #643
Joined: Tue Apr 10 2007, 04:44PMPosts: 1921 |
Cost | ||
| Back to top |
|
||
| Buddha |
|
||
Boodz
Registered Member #528
Joined: Tue Jan 02 2007, 11:41PMPosts: 1085 |
Leave the fucking dragons alone. | ||
| Back to top |
|
||
| Compost |
|
||
Registered Member #607
Joined: Mon Mar 19 2007, 10:48PMPosts: 225 |
A lot of times Guys won't wear all their armor anyways. Also if you haven't seen, our government tries to cut spending for the army so money is a factor. There is a lot worse junk then this happens when you are in war. Your best protection is your buddy, your brain, and your gun. | ||
| Back to top |
|
||
| Deo |
|
||
Registered Member #474
Joined: Tue Oct 31 2006, 10:47PMPosts: 259 |
its not the cost it was because the little discs where cracking in half and falling off. i know this stuff i work for the CIA. | ||
| Back to top |
|
||
| O_Mega |
|
||
Inconsistant Ownage Device
Registered Member #59
Joined: Sat Dec 10 2005, 06:12PMPosts: 1058 |
Compost, ask the troops on the front line if they would like a body armor that would stop 7x62 rounds, trust me, they want it, and they would wear it. | ||
| Back to top |
|
||
| Compost |
|
||
|
Registered Member #607
Joined: Mon Mar 19 2007, 10:48PM Posts: 225 |
I am just going bye what I have seen and heard from my buddies that have gone. And my bro. | ||
| Back to top |
|
||
| drunkirishmafia |
|
||
Registered Member #289
Joined: Sat Jun 10 2006, 05:17AMPosts: 1543 |
okay so i already posted this in the old greg.....butt dragon skin cost around $4000 while the intercepter only cost around 1000. ( i guess we use intercepter in css). i don't think that the military sees the cost of dragon skin is necessary due to the situation in iraq. Most people aren't getting shot. Edit: after doing some more research. the army tested the vest and it failed misserably. pinnacle did the same test on the DS vest and it apparently surpassed the requirements of the army. someone is lying. might be the army do to cost issues or contract with OVT (intercepter makers). |
||
| Back to top |
|
||
| Skull Fracture |
|
||
Registered Member #820
Joined: Fri Aug 03 2007, 06:57AMPosts: 417 |
7.62? I don't care, I'm not in the army even though I might be in a few years, but my question is about the testing. If they're trying to test items designed to be used in combat situations, shouldn't they be testing them in situations as close to real combat as possible? I don't really think every shot taken by soldiers is straight on with no angle. Sure, that's maximizing the force of the round, but it's not exploring any possibility of failure under different circumstances. Who's to say a shot from the wrong angle couldn't deflect between the plates on the armour? There's obviously only one solution. An army of Iron Men. |
||
| Back to top |
|
||
| Zero |
|
||
I want to fuck your hand.
Registered Member #571
Joined: Thu Feb 15 2007, 09:59PMPosts: 2809 |
Skull Fracture wrote ... There's obviously only one solution. An army of Iron Men. Hawt And if your question is in the testing, why the fuck did the army deny the dragon skin before they even started testing? lol. It was already the "better" armor, so how would that make sense? Hai guise im army smartz |
||
| Back to top |
|
||
Powered by e107 Forum System
|
|