<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Troops defend Interceptor body armor Update: Future Weapons test video added Update: Mail Call video added</title>
	<atom:link href="http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/</link>
	<description>The world’s first, full-service conservative Internet broadcast network</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Nov 2009 21:11:30 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: mundayr</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/comment-page-1/#comment-562874</link>
		<dc:creator>mundayr</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jul 2007 13:17:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/#comment-562874</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;Wow, that’s pretty good shot-grouping by the bad guys! Glad he’s okay! 

SSG Fuzzy on July 16, 2007 at 3:51 PM&lt;/blockquote&gt;

The Haji came out of a door right behind him and got off a good burst before he was sent to his 72 Virginians.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>Wow, that’s pretty good shot-grouping by the bad guys! Glad he’s okay! </p>
<p>SSG Fuzzy on July 16, 2007 at 3:51 PM</p></blockquote>
<p>The Haji came out of a door right behind him and got off a good burst before he was sent to his 72 Virginians.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Christoph</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/comment-page-1/#comment-562066</link>
		<dc:creator>Christoph</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jul 2007 01:58:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/#comment-562066</guid>
		<description>&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ObXZMepn3SI&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Here&#039;s a great, balanced 3:38 video on the HK416.&lt;/a&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ObXZMepn3SI" rel="nofollow">Here&#8217;s a great, balanced 3:38 video on the HK416.</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: xplodeit</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/comment-page-1/#comment-561726</link>
		<dc:creator>xplodeit</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jul 2007 22:58:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/#comment-561726</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;I think the average troop would settle for a lot less than that. Just imagine if you offered him a rifle that had “only” 50% more killing efficiency; you’d be lucky if he didn’t rip your arm off grabbing it.

logis on July 16, 2007 at 5:43 PM&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Thats why the M-14 is so popular.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>I think the average troop would settle for a lot less than that. Just imagine if you offered him a rifle that had “only” 50% more killing efficiency; you’d be lucky if he didn’t rip your arm off grabbing it.</p>
<p>logis on July 16, 2007 at 5:43 PM</p></blockquote>
<p>Thats why the M-14 is so popular.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: logis</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/comment-page-1/#comment-561589</link>
		<dc:creator>logis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jul 2007 21:43:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/#comment-561589</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;I disagree… From what I hear the HK416 was designed by those that had “been there done that” and from my life’s experience with firearms it’s the next logical leap in correcting the major deficiency of the M16/M4 family. The upgrade to the HK makes a lot of sense.&lt;/blockquote&gt;
I think the standards the DoD are using for new firearms are pretty extreme.  Basically, any replacement for the M-16 has to be a &quot;one hundred percent improvement&quot; in operational capability. 

I think the average troop would settle for a lot less than that.  Just imagine if you offered him a rifle that had &quot;only&quot; 50% more killing efficiency; you&#039;d be lucky if he didn&#039;t rip your arm off grabbing it.

No matter what the potential long-term gain, no politician wants to be blamed for the unnecessary death of even one soldier.  But this is really outrageous.  If we sit around and wait for somebody to invent phasors, a lot of troops will die needlessly in the meantime.

Bear in mind that when the M-16 first came out, it was a piece of hammered crap - not because the fundamental design was bad, but just because it was too revolutionary a change.  If a more modern replacement weapon were fielded today, who knows how great it might be ten years from now?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>I disagree… From what I hear the HK416 was designed by those that had “been there done that” and from my life’s experience with firearms it’s the next logical leap in correcting the major deficiency of the M16/M4 family. The upgrade to the HK makes a lot of sense.</p></blockquote>
<p>I think the standards the DoD are using for new firearms are pretty extreme.  Basically, any replacement for the M-16 has to be a &#8220;one hundred percent improvement&#8221; in operational capability. </p>
<p>I think the average troop would settle for a lot less than that.  Just imagine if you offered him a rifle that had &#8220;only&#8221; 50% more killing efficiency; you&#8217;d be lucky if he didn&#8217;t rip your arm off grabbing it.</p>
<p>No matter what the potential long-term gain, no politician wants to be blamed for the unnecessary death of even one soldier.  But this is really outrageous.  If we sit around and wait for somebody to invent phasors, a lot of troops will die needlessly in the meantime.</p>
<p>Bear in mind that when the M-16 first came out, it was a piece of hammered crap &#8211; not because the fundamental design was bad, but just because it was too revolutionary a change.  If a more modern replacement weapon were fielded today, who knows how great it might be ten years from now?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: BadBrad</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/comment-page-1/#comment-561506</link>
		<dc:creator>BadBrad</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jul 2007 21:04:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/#comment-561506</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;ASK anyone who has “Been There Done That” and they will say they prefer Interceptor. Is Dragon Skin was better they would buy it, same with the HK416 for the standard issue rifle &lt;/blockquote&gt;

I disagree... From what I hear the HK416 was designed by those that had &quot;been there done that&quot; and from my life&#039;s experience with firearms it&#039;s the next logical leap in correcting the major deficiency of the M16/M4 family.  The upgrade to the HK makes a lot of sense.

As for the interceptor vs DS... I have deployed with the Interceptor, I trust it, it is simple, and IT WORKS!.  I have seen SAPI plates with 6 7.62x39 rounds in them and none penetrated. (And those weren&#039;t even the new E-SAPI.)  The Dragon Skin suffers from &quot;Disk Migration&quot; when hit from an angle, allowing the rounds to penetrate the vest.  That alone is a &quot;NO GO&quot;.  Not to mention our gear is already too heavy... and they think an extra 20 lbs is going to make things better?  Even if it MIGHT be slightly better... I&#039;ll take something I KNOW works all the time in the worse case (ie shot in the center chest) than something that is &quot;better&quot; (meaning it covers more area) but only works if the round comes from a 90 degree angle to the vest.

If the liberals want to spend more money on protecting us, how about getting the Military to get us a damn handgun that is worth a crap (cancelled twice in the last 3 years now) and upgrade our rifles to something that is not older than I am (they cancelled the XM-8 and refuse to adopt the HK416).  The Beretta 9mm should have never been adopted and it&#039;s about time we went back to a .45 cal from a company that isn&#039;t the &#039;lowest bidder&#039;.  I&#039;d buy my own if we were allowed, but were not allowed personal weapons.  Ditto for the HK416... it&#039;s better, everyone knows it, but we&#039;ll continue to spend millions every year on brand-new M4&#039;s.  Before you say it... these issues are not the same.  The XM-8/HK416 both offer a large INCREASE in reliability and decrease in maintainence over the current weapons... the DS is heavier, more complicated... and flawed.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>ASK anyone who has “Been There Done That” and they will say they prefer Interceptor. Is Dragon Skin was better they would buy it, same with the HK416 for the standard issue rifle </p></blockquote>
<p>I disagree&#8230; From what I hear the HK416 was designed by those that had &#8220;been there done that&#8221; and from my life&#8217;s experience with firearms it&#8217;s the next logical leap in correcting the major deficiency of the M16/M4 family.  The upgrade to the HK makes a lot of sense.</p>
<p>As for the interceptor vs DS&#8230; I have deployed with the Interceptor, I trust it, it is simple, and IT WORKS!.  I have seen SAPI plates with 6 7.62&#215;39 rounds in them and none penetrated. (And those weren&#8217;t even the new E-SAPI.)  The Dragon Skin suffers from &#8220;Disk Migration&#8221; when hit from an angle, allowing the rounds to penetrate the vest.  That alone is a &#8220;NO GO&#8221;.  Not to mention our gear is already too heavy&#8230; and they think an extra 20 lbs is going to make things better?  Even if it MIGHT be slightly better&#8230; I&#8217;ll take something I KNOW works all the time in the worse case (ie shot in the center chest) than something that is &#8220;better&#8221; (meaning it covers more area) but only works if the round comes from a 90 degree angle to the vest.</p>
<p>If the liberals want to spend more money on protecting us, how about getting the Military to get us a damn handgun that is worth a crap (cancelled twice in the last 3 years now) and upgrade our rifles to something that is not older than I am (they cancelled the XM-8 and refuse to adopt the HK416).  The Beretta 9mm should have never been adopted and it&#8217;s about time we went back to a .45 cal from a company that isn&#8217;t the &#8216;lowest bidder&#8217;.  I&#8217;d buy my own if we were allowed, but were not allowed personal weapons.  Ditto for the HK416&#8230; it&#8217;s better, everyone knows it, but we&#8217;ll continue to spend millions every year on brand-new M4&#8217;s.  Before you say it&#8230; these issues are not the same.  The XM-8/HK416 both offer a large INCREASE in reliability and decrease in maintainence over the current weapons&#8230; the DS is heavier, more complicated&#8230; and flawed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: matthewbit07</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/comment-page-1/#comment-561425</link>
		<dc:creator>matthewbit07</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jul 2007 20:32:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/#comment-561425</guid>
		<description>Well its good to hear more info about Dragon Skin and Interceptor. I don&#039;t like the only sources I hear to be TV programs and company employees. I&#039;ve worn Interceptor, if Dragon Skin is heavier, that alone is putting it on my black list. An additional 17-20 pounds is just getting too impractical.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well its good to hear more info about Dragon Skin and Interceptor. I don&#8217;t like the only sources I hear to be TV programs and company employees. I&#8217;ve worn Interceptor, if Dragon Skin is heavier, that alone is putting it on my black list. An additional 17-20 pounds is just getting too impractical.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SSG Fuzzy</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/comment-page-1/#comment-561317</link>
		<dc:creator>SSG Fuzzy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jul 2007 19:51:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/#comment-561317</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;When I was in Iraq during Operation Phantom Fury one of my fellow Marines took nine shots from an AK-47 in the back. Not one bullet penatrated his Interceptor vest. That is just one instance I can remember of one of those vests saving a fellow Marines life

mundayr on July 16, 2007 at 3:47 PM&lt;/blockquote&gt;
Wow, that&#039;s pretty good shot-grouping by the bad guys!  Glad he&#039;s okay!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>When I was in Iraq during Operation Phantom Fury one of my fellow Marines took nine shots from an AK-47 in the back. Not one bullet penatrated his Interceptor vest. That is just one instance I can remember of one of those vests saving a fellow Marines life</p>
<p>mundayr on July 16, 2007 at 3:47 PM</p></blockquote>
<p>Wow, that&#8217;s pretty good shot-grouping by the bad guys!  Glad he&#8217;s okay!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mundayr</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/comment-page-1/#comment-561306</link>
		<dc:creator>mundayr</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jul 2007 19:47:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/#comment-561306</guid>
		<description>When I was in Iraq during Operation Phantom Fury one of my fellow Marines took nine shots from an AK-47 in the back. Not &lt;em&gt;one bullet&lt;/em&gt; penatrated his Interceptor vest. That is just one instance I can remember of one of those vests saving a fellow Marines life</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When I was in Iraq during Operation Phantom Fury one of my fellow Marines took nine shots from an AK-47 in the back. Not <em>one bullet</em> penatrated his Interceptor vest. That is just one instance I can remember of one of those vests saving a fellow Marines life</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: logis</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/comment-page-1/#comment-561268</link>
		<dc:creator>logis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jul 2007 19:32:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/#comment-561268</guid>
		<description>20 lbs?  Forget it.  If the protection level is even CLOSE, then go with the lighter brand.  

Newsflash:  The liberals don&#039;t WANT our soldiers to be able to move.

I remember a few years ago, moonbat astrophysicist Barbara Boxer found out there were meteors in space.  She tried to call a halt to all Space Shuttle Missions until we could figure out how to launch a 1000-ton lead shield to &quot;protect&quot; the space program that she believes, litterally, takes food from the mouths of children.

The US military would be as well off taking advice from Al Qaeda as from Democrats.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>20 lbs?  Forget it.  If the protection level is even CLOSE, then go with the lighter brand.  </p>
<p>Newsflash:  The liberals don&#8217;t WANT our soldiers to be able to move.</p>
<p>I remember a few years ago, moonbat astrophysicist Barbara Boxer found out there were meteors in space.  She tried to call a halt to all Space Shuttle Missions until we could figure out how to launch a 1000-ton lead shield to &#8220;protect&#8221; the space program that she believes, litterally, takes food from the mouths of children.</p>
<p>The US military would be as well off taking advice from Al Qaeda as from Democrats.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bj1126</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/comment-page-1/#comment-561140</link>
		<dc:creator>bj1126</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jul 2007 18:24:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/#comment-561140</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;I hadn’t known about Mail Call being an ABC/NYT Co. production. I don’t see it often (Dogfights is more my “speed”), but when I do, I’ll be sure to increase the number of grains of salt I always apply to their “conclusions”.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

I don&#039;t know about the specific production companies but History Channel and Discovery Channel are owned by ABC and work closely with NYT.  Combine that with the DS manufacturer&#039;s desire to get the word out that the troops &quot;aren&#039;t being protected&quot; a rather insidious campaign of misinformation is starting to take shape.  I&#039;m not one for conspiracy theories but this one is starting to look really shady</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>I hadn’t known about Mail Call being an ABC/NYT Co. production. I don’t see it often (Dogfights is more my “speed”), but when I do, I’ll be sure to increase the number of grains of salt I always apply to their “conclusions”.</p></blockquote>
<p>I don&#8217;t know about the specific production companies but History Channel and Discovery Channel are owned by ABC and work closely with NYT.  Combine that with the DS manufacturer&#8217;s desire to get the word out that the troops &#8220;aren&#8217;t being protected&#8221; a rather insidious campaign of misinformation is starting to take shape.  I&#8217;m not one for conspiracy theories but this one is starting to look really shady</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: WoosterOh</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/comment-page-1/#comment-561128</link>
		<dc:creator>WoosterOh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jul 2007 18:16:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/#comment-561128</guid>
		<description>I should say it is controlled, but not controlled by the inventor who knows what it can withstand, knows how it would fail.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I should say it is controlled, but not controlled by the inventor who knows what it can withstand, knows how it would fail.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kini</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/comment-page-1/#comment-561120</link>
		<dc:creator>Kini</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jul 2007 18:13:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/#comment-561120</guid>
		<description>Informative.  Excellent follow up post Bryan.  And welcome back, I trust you had a good vacation.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Informative.  Excellent follow up post Bryan.  And welcome back, I trust you had a good vacation.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: WoosterOh</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/comment-page-1/#comment-561113</link>
		<dc:creator>WoosterOh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jul 2007 18:08:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/#comment-561113</guid>
		<description>&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBNyOXd3ABU&amp;mode=related&amp;search=&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Army Dragon Skin Test Video&lt;/a&gt;

If you watch it, the bullets penetrate DS. stop the video at 2:09, and that looks liek the inventor of DS Murray Neal. Same watch as you will see in &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PuMHhw_w1qs&amp;mode=related&amp;search=&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;DS InfoMercial&lt;/a&gt;

He was present at Army testing. DS could not put up when put under testing by the Army, a non-controlled testing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBNyOXd3ABU&amp;mode=related&amp;search=" rel="nofollow">Army Dragon Skin Test Video</a></p>
<p>If you watch it, the bullets penetrate DS. stop the video at 2:09, and that looks liek the inventor of DS Murray Neal. Same watch as you will see in <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PuMHhw_w1qs&amp;mode=related&amp;search=" rel="nofollow">DS InfoMercial</a></p>
<p>He was present at Army testing. DS could not put up when put under testing by the Army, a non-controlled testing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: apollyonbob</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/comment-page-1/#comment-561087</link>
		<dc:creator>apollyonbob</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jul 2007 17:53:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/#comment-561087</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;Win Win Win on July 16, 2007 at 1:38 PM&lt;/blockquote&gt;
Wasn&#039;t the HK416 developed in conjunction with Army Special Forces, and isn&#039;t it being purchased by them because of it&#039;s superiority to the M16/M4? Cuz that&#039;s what I&#039;ve read in several places, both print and online.

Bryan, is there any way that Hot Air can get its hands on some Dragon Skin armor so that they can do a &quot;fair and valid field test&quot;? I mean, isn&#039;t that how things like this should be combatted? By showing the truth? I would personally love to see a side-by-side showing Interceptor holding its own. Or even just Dragon Skin getting frozen and failing, or getting shot at an angle and failing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>Win Win Win on July 16, 2007 at 1:38 PM</p></blockquote>
<p>Wasn&#8217;t the HK416 developed in conjunction with Army Special Forces, and isn&#8217;t it being purchased by them because of it&#8217;s superiority to the M16/M4? Cuz that&#8217;s what I&#8217;ve read in several places, both print and online.</p>
<p>Bryan, is there any way that Hot Air can get its hands on some Dragon Skin armor so that they can do a &#8220;fair and valid field test&#8221;? I mean, isn&#8217;t that how things like this should be combatted? By showing the truth? I would personally love to see a side-by-side showing Interceptor holding its own. Or even just Dragon Skin getting frozen and failing, or getting shot at an angle and failing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SSG Fuzzy</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/comment-page-1/#comment-561081</link>
		<dc:creator>SSG Fuzzy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jul 2007 17:50:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/#comment-561081</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;Dragon Skin weighs too much. With ammunition and gear hanging off of it, the Interceptor can already weigh in at 60-80+ lbs., depending. Dragonskin tacks on another 17-20 lbs. This weight difference is impractical, aside from the protective comparisons.

BillINDC on July 16, 2007 at 11:35 AM&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Agree completely!  I didn&#039;t have to wear my IBA much of the time while I was in Afghanistan (on base most the time), but the few times I did the IBA was heavy enough and I was just performing vehicle searches.  Can&#039;t imagine even heavier armor plus all your field gear strapped on!

More weight, definitely a &lt;strong&gt;NO-GO&lt;/strong&gt;!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>Dragon Skin weighs too much. With ammunition and gear hanging off of it, the Interceptor can already weigh in at 60-80+ lbs., depending. Dragonskin tacks on another 17-20 lbs. This weight difference is impractical, aside from the protective comparisons.</p>
<p>BillINDC on July 16, 2007 at 11:35 AM</p></blockquote>
<p>Agree completely!  I didn&#8217;t have to wear my IBA much of the time while I was in Afghanistan (on base most the time), but the few times I did the IBA was heavy enough and I was just performing vehicle searches.  Can&#8217;t imagine even heavier armor plus all your field gear strapped on!</p>
<p>More weight, definitely a <strong>NO-GO</strong>!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Win Win Win</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/comment-page-1/#comment-561060</link>
		<dc:creator>Win Win Win</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jul 2007 17:38:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/#comment-561060</guid>
		<description>ASK anyone who has &quot;&lt;strong&gt;Been There Done That&lt;/strong&gt;&quot; and they will say they prefer Interceptor. Is Dragon Skin was better they would buy it, same with the HK416 for the standard issue rifle</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>ASK anyone who has &#8220;<strong>Been There Done That</strong>&#8221; and they will say they prefer Interceptor. Is Dragon Skin was better they would buy it, same with the HK416 for the standard issue rifle</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Romeo13</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/comment-page-1/#comment-561027</link>
		<dc:creator>Romeo13</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jul 2007 17:21:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/#comment-561027</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt; While I’m sure there’s solutions for that, it seems Pinnacle is more interested wasting time helping NBC fan anti-military flames. Like bj1126 said, Pinnacle is engaging in some really shameless marketing. Maybe they oughta stick to armor R&amp;D and shut up. 

apollyonbob on July 16, 2007 at 1:09 PM&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Key here is that its basic physics.  There IS NO FIX!  The only way to do it would be to either significantly increase the amount of &quot;layers&quot; (adding mucho weight), or fuse the layers, basicly making them a set of PLATE...

Scale mail was historicaly replaced by Banded mail, as the scales got larger and larger... and combinations of Chain with added plates... over leather... 

Kevlar was the attempt to overcome the weight of plate... with multiple layers and stranded weaves slowing the bullet/shell fragment... but to get a proper protection it becomes very bulky... thus the added plates...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p> While I’m sure there’s solutions for that, it seems Pinnacle is more interested wasting time helping NBC fan anti-military flames. Like bj1126 said, Pinnacle is engaging in some really shameless marketing. Maybe they oughta stick to armor R&amp;D and shut up. </p>
<p>apollyonbob on July 16, 2007 at 1:09 PM</p></blockquote>
<p>Key here is that its basic physics.  There IS NO FIX!  The only way to do it would be to either significantly increase the amount of &#8220;layers&#8221; (adding mucho weight), or fuse the layers, basicly making them a set of PLATE&#8230;</p>
<p>Scale mail was historicaly replaced by Banded mail, as the scales got larger and larger&#8230; and combinations of Chain with added plates&#8230; over leather&#8230; </p>
<p>Kevlar was the attempt to overcome the weight of plate&#8230; with multiple layers and stranded weaves slowing the bullet/shell fragment&#8230; but to get a proper protection it becomes very bulky&#8230; thus the added plates&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Spacen</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/comment-page-1/#comment-561024</link>
		<dc:creator>Spacen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jul 2007 17:19:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/#comment-561024</guid>
		<description>Dragon Skin is good armor...but only in ideal conditions.  There are some good concepts in the armor such as the way the impact is absorbed over a larger area.

Many of the problems with dragon skin deal with the fabric, not with the discs.  Tests found that under extreme temperatures and in wet conditions, the fabric would fail and the discs would fall out of place and huge areas would become vulnerable.

Also, dragon skin does not have crotch coverage which is important.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dragon Skin is good armor&#8230;but only in ideal conditions.  There are some good concepts in the armor such as the way the impact is absorbed over a larger area.</p>
<p>Many of the problems with dragon skin deal with the fabric, not with the discs.  Tests found that under extreme temperatures and in wet conditions, the fabric would fail and the discs would fall out of place and huge areas would become vulnerable.</p>
<p>Also, dragon skin does not have crotch coverage which is important.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: apollyonbob</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/comment-page-1/#comment-561002</link>
		<dc:creator>apollyonbob</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jul 2007 17:09:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/#comment-561002</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;unamused on July 16, 2007 at 12:24 PM&lt;/blockquote&gt;

No no, don&#039;t you remember? That Pentagon report proved our government wasn&#039;t equipping our soldiers properly, because of all the wounds where there was no armor coverage! If only they had better armor, they wouldn&#039;t get wounded! (I still remember the news reports about that. I pounded my head on my desk for like, a week.)

At least on Futureweapons they didn&#039;t act like Interceptor was sub-standard. And like someone said in another post, Futureweapons is &lt;em&gt;always&lt;/em&gt; talking about something is the &lt;em&gt;the absolute most awesome&lt;/em&gt; or &lt;em&gt;totally&lt;/em&gt; state-of-the-art, etc. It&#039;s filled with hyperbole about everything :P NBC should really be held to a way higher standard. I mean both Mail Call and Futureweapons they&#039;re just ... shows to see neat stuff. They&#039;re not really meant to be serious science or hard journalism. Not that Bryan was implying they were, just from the comments. I mean, the Gunny goes out, he fires a gun and goes &quot;OO-RAH!&quot; ... That&#039;s not something you want to base any sort of conclusions on XD

Myself, I used to think Dragonskin was super awesome too -- it never dawned on me that if you move 3 feet over and shoot at an angle the failure rate would suddenly be horrible. While I&#039;m sure there&#039;s solutions for that, it seems Pinnacle is more interested wasting time helping NBC fan anti-military flames. Like bj1126 said, Pinnacle is engaging in some really shameless marketing. Maybe they oughta stick to armor R&amp;D and shut up.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>unamused on July 16, 2007 at 12:24 PM</p></blockquote>
<p>No no, don&#8217;t you remember? That Pentagon report proved our government wasn&#8217;t equipping our soldiers properly, because of all the wounds where there was no armor coverage! If only they had better armor, they wouldn&#8217;t get wounded! (I still remember the news reports about that. I pounded my head on my desk for like, a week.)</p>
<p>At least on Futureweapons they didn&#8217;t act like Interceptor was sub-standard. And like someone said in another post, Futureweapons is <em>always</em> talking about something is the <em>the absolute most awesome</em> or <em>totally</em> state-of-the-art, etc. It&#8217;s filled with hyperbole about everything :P NBC should really be held to a way higher standard. I mean both Mail Call and Futureweapons they&#8217;re just &#8230; shows to see neat stuff. They&#8217;re not really meant to be serious science or hard journalism. Not that Bryan was implying they were, just from the comments. I mean, the Gunny goes out, he fires a gun and goes &#8220;OO-RAH!&#8221; &#8230; That&#8217;s not something you want to base any sort of conclusions on XD</p>
<p>Myself, I used to think Dragonskin was super awesome too &#8212; it never dawned on me that if you move 3 feet over and shoot at an angle the failure rate would suddenly be horrible. While I&#8217;m sure there&#8217;s solutions for that, it seems Pinnacle is more interested wasting time helping NBC fan anti-military flames. Like bj1126 said, Pinnacle is engaging in some really shameless marketing. Maybe they oughta stick to armor R&amp;D and shut up.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: TheBigOldDog</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/comment-page-1/#comment-560982</link>
		<dc:creator>TheBigOldDog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jul 2007 17:01:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/#comment-560982</guid>
		<description>The Mail Call video:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=gNY1MtsVwG8</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Mail Call video:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gNY1MtsVwG8" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gNY1MtsVwG8</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: liquidflorian</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/comment-page-1/#comment-560960</link>
		<dc:creator>liquidflorian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jul 2007 16:53:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/#comment-560960</guid>
		<description>Bryan, you should call up some of the security firms that operate in Iraq, I think some of their contractors choose Dragon Skin; I would like to hear from some one who actually has worn Dragon Skin in the field.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bryan, you should call up some of the security firms that operate in Iraq, I think some of their contractors choose Dragon Skin; I would like to hear from some one who actually has worn Dragon Skin in the field.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Hening</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/comment-page-1/#comment-560944</link>
		<dc:creator>Hening</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jul 2007 16:44:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/#comment-560944</guid>
		<description>This became an issue based on the premise our military and the President always do the wrong thing and are willing to be bought.  

This, by people who look down their nose at the military and only are interested in military technology when they think it can be a wedge issue.  I would go as far as to say they would love to have some US KIAs just to prove their point.  They are scumbags.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This became an issue based on the premise our military and the President always do the wrong thing and are willing to be bought.  </p>
<p>This, by people who look down their nose at the military and only are interested in military technology when they think it can be a wedge issue.  I would go as far as to say they would love to have some US KIAs just to prove their point.  They are scumbags.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: GT</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/comment-page-1/#comment-560941</link>
		<dc:creator>GT</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jul 2007 16:43:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/#comment-560941</guid>
		<description>Bryan,

This is why I like your posts so much.  You&#039;re up front about your associations and about those you&#039;ve spoken with.  I appreciate that.  

Thanks.

.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bryan,</p>
<p>This is why I like your posts so much.  You&#8217;re up front about your associations and about those you&#8217;ve spoken with.  I appreciate that.  </p>
<p>Thanks.</p>
<p>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: eon</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/comment-page-1/#comment-560936</link>
		<dc:creator>eon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jul 2007 16:41:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/#comment-560936</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;bj1126 on July 16, 2007 at 12:27 PM&lt;/blockquote&gt;

 Another problem with scale-type armor when dealing with explosions is a tendency for the overpressure to &quot;imprint&quot; each and every scale onto your body. The result is usually serious and often deep bruising damage, with the possibility of laceration at the plate junctures (all it takes is a penetration of the backing by a plate edge or corner). This is why police bomb technicians wear &quot;hardshell&quot; armor; it&#039;s bulky, but it won&#039;t try to &quot;vacuform&quot; itself to your body if the &quot;package&quot; gets irate about being examined.

 I hadn&#039;t known about &lt;em&gt;Mail Call &lt;/em&gt;being an ABC/NYT Co. production. I don&#039;t see it often (&lt;em&gt;Dogfights&lt;/em&gt; is more my &quot;speed&quot;), but when I do, I&#039;ll be sure to increase the number of grains of salt I always apply to their &quot;conclusions&quot;.

 cheers

 eon</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>bj1126 on July 16, 2007 at 12:27 PM</p></blockquote>
<p> Another problem with scale-type armor when dealing with explosions is a tendency for the overpressure to &#8220;imprint&#8221; each and every scale onto your body. The result is usually serious and often deep bruising damage, with the possibility of laceration at the plate junctures (all it takes is a penetration of the backing by a plate edge or corner). This is why police bomb technicians wear &#8220;hardshell&#8221; armor; it&#8217;s bulky, but it won&#8217;t try to &#8220;vacuform&#8221; itself to your body if the &#8220;package&#8221; gets irate about being examined.</p>
<p> I hadn&#8217;t known about <em>Mail Call </em>being an ABC/NYT Co. production. I don&#8217;t see it often (<em>Dogfights</em> is more my &#8220;speed&#8221;), but when I do, I&#8217;ll be sure to increase the number of grains of salt I always apply to their &#8220;conclusions&#8221;.</p>
<p> cheers</p>
<p> eon</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bj1126</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/comment-page-1/#comment-560900</link>
		<dc:creator>bj1126</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jul 2007 16:27:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/16/troops-defend-interceptor-body-armor/#comment-560900</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;DragonSkin is a variation of ScaleArmor from the Dark Ages… the scales work really well straight on, but the protection is non existant if you bring the bullet in from an angle… it splits the seam between the scales, and the scales actualy channel it deeper in the set….&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Which is exactly why I said it would be more vulnerable to an IED.  You have no control over where the shrapnel is coming from and it&#039;s likely coming from the ground up or at somewhat of an upward angle.  Also in an instance where you are crouching and running for cover you expose the weaker points of the vest to fire.

Also keep in mind that while Future Weapons and Mail Call are really cool shows they are in the end ABC/NYT productions.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>DragonSkin is a variation of ScaleArmor from the Dark Ages… the scales work really well straight on, but the protection is non existant if you bring the bullet in from an angle… it splits the seam between the scales, and the scales actualy channel it deeper in the set….</p></blockquote>
<p>Which is exactly why I said it would be more vulnerable to an IED.  You have no control over where the shrapnel is coming from and it&#8217;s likely coming from the ground up or at somewhat of an upward angle.  Also in an instance where you are crouching and running for cover you expose the weaker points of the vest to fire.</p>
<p>Also keep in mind that while Future Weapons and Mail Call are really cool shows they are in the end ABC/NYT productions.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
