Revealed: DoJ Dumps Dragon Skin body armor
posted at 12:00 pm on August 8, 2007 by Bryan
Share on Facebook | regular view
Announced on Aug 3, the US Department of Justice has decided to decertify Pinnacle Inc’s Dragon Skin personal body armor.
WASHINGTON, D.C. – The Department of Justice (DOJ), Office of Justice Programs (OJP) announced today that it has determined that the Pinnacle Armor, Inc. bulletproof vest model SOV 2000.1/MIL3AF01, is not in compliance with the requirements of OJP’s National Institute of Justice (NIJ) voluntary compliance testing program for bullet-resistant body armor. Effective immediately, this body armor model will be removed from the NIJ list of bullet-resistant body armor models that satisfy its requirements. Pinnacle Armor, Inc. is the maker of “dragon skin” body armor.
NIJ, OJP’s research, development, and evaluation component, has reviewed evidence provided by the body armor manufacturer and has determined that the evidence is insufficient to demonstrate that the body armor model will maintain its ballistic performance over its six-year declared warranty period.
This is a severe blow to Pinnacle’s campaign to have Dragon Skin fielded by the US Army and put into service in combat. Pinnacle had previously used NIJ certification as evidence that Dragon Skin is of sufficient quality to be used in combat. That line of argument is now taken away. For the record, NIJ certification standards and Army certification standards are not identical, so that line of argument was always a bit of a red herring.
Pinnacle calls the DoJ’s move “unprecedented” and says that it’s working with DoJ to resolve the warranty issue.
Now, when I describe Pinnacle’s ongoing effort to get Dragon Skin deployed with US troops in combat as a “campaign,” that’s exactly what I mean. To refresh our memories, take a look at this story that we aired here on Hot Air back in July.
Since we aired that story, it’s become evident to me that NBC’s Lisa Meyers allowed herself and her network to be used by Pinnacle in a disinformation campaign designed to tout Dragon Skin and undermine confidence in the Army’s honesty and its ability to conduct fair and open laboratory tests. That campaign included getting coverage favorable to Dragon Skin on not only NBC, but on at least two other networks, the Military Network and the History Channel, on the shows Future Weapons and Mail Call respectively. Both shows attract pro-military audiences, and both shows tested Dragon Skin and touted its capabilities. Here are clips from both shows.
Future Weapons:
Link: sevenload.com
Mail Call:
In both of these stories, as in NBC’s story, it’s clear that Pinnacle is actually controlling the “tests” shown. I put “tests” in scare quotes because that’s what you’re seeing, not actual, fair and Army grade tests, but “tests.” The evidence for Pinnacle’s control is mainly in the Mail Call segment, as host R. Lee Ermey thanks Pinnacle for allowing Mail Call to come to the company’s premises and see Dragon Skin in action. Note the range, the initial test shooter, and the presence of Pinnacle CEO Murray Neal in both the Mail Call and Future Weapons segments. Pinnacle was in control of both tests the whole time. Note also that in both segments, the test shots are fired exclusively from the front, not the rear or sides.
That’s not how the Army tests body armor, though. The Army puts body armor through testing that includes temperature extremes, contact with common fluids like motor oil, and test shots fired from multiple angles, as that’s more realistic than mere front-only test shots. The NBC story claims to have commissioned “independent, side-by-side” tests that show Dragon Skin to be superior to Interceptor, but watch the NBC story closely and you’ll see that, once again, you’re only shown frontal shots into the armor. As NBC didn’t divulge the details of its testing, viewers have no way of knowing whether its “independent, side-by-side” tests are valid or not. That NBC chose a lab in Germany rather than use either of the US labs that the Army has certified for testing ought to raise suspicions as well. NBC’s test looks very similar to the “tests” that Pinnacle was able to get aired on Future Weapons and Mail Call, and therefore doesn’t appear to be any more reliable than what those other shows depicted. One would reasonably think that NBC’s journalistic standards would be above those of two cable network rah-rah shows. One would evidently be mistaken for thinking so.
By placing pro-Dragon Skin stories on two programs that attract pro-military audiences and military family audiences and on one of the country’s premiere news networks, Pinnacle evidently sought to build a groundswell of support for Dragon Skin among those with the most at stake in the Army’s choice of body armor: military members and their families. NBC’s story in particular had a major effect, with hearings convened in Congress that turned the controversy into a political issue. Will NBC now follow-up with honest reporting and real testing, noting that DoJ has decertified Dragon Skin body armor? I’m not holding my breath.
Updates: OpFor has been all over the Dragon Skin issue. Check out their posts here, here, here and here.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
Unbelievable – Pinnacle has shown that they CANNOT BE TRUSTED by testing their products in a way that does not actually simulate combat conditions. If this means they are barred form future procurement programs – GOOD – our soldiers only deserve those who really care about their safety.
JustTruth101 on August 8, 2007 at 12:06 PM
A satisfying thump by the DOJ to NBC and Pinnacle for a truly lousy stunt. NBC won’t follow up, of course. Maybe one of its competitors will take up the story to embarrass NBC as they so richly deserve. I guess I won’t be holding my breath, either.
Thanks for the post, Bryan.
RushBaby on August 8, 2007 at 12:10 PM
You mean, the media doesn’t always tell the truth?
Shocking.
BKennedy on August 8, 2007 at 12:14 PM
Who cares if it works… it’s more than 20lbs heavier. That alone is enough to say “Thanks for coming”.
BadBrad on August 8, 2007 at 12:14 PM
Um… you have no idea if that’s true or not.
DaveS on August 8, 2007 at 12:16 PM
BadBrad,
That was the first thing my son said about the armor.
bnelson44 on August 8, 2007 at 12:20 PM
wait im floored you mean NBC news slant their coverage and stories.
thanks for the post Bryan
Mojack420 on August 8, 2007 at 12:25 PM
Edit out just a few words and it makes even more sense.
While watching the Armed Services Committee hearing on C-Span I thought Murray Neal had a valid point when he accused the Army of shooting through places in the Dragon Skin without rifle bullet defeating armor. What he was complaining about was shooting through defects in the armor. Like the Army should direct snipers in Iraq to only shoot through the good parts of his overweight armor.
TunaTalon on August 8, 2007 at 12:27 PM
While I would defend any manufacturer’s right to promote their product, this was a victory for the DOJ and our men and women in uniform. This is another reason why the MSM in all it’s identities, including Fox, can never be trusted to tell the truth. What was it Pres. Reagan said ” Trust but verify”?
MNDavenotPC on August 8, 2007 at 12:29 PM
Wow, Good job Bryan, nice investigative work!
abinitioadinfinitum on August 8, 2007 at 12:33 PM
I wonder if some of the higher ups at NBC have Pinnacle stock in their portfolios?
Pulchritudinous Patriot on August 8, 2007 at 12:36 PM
Dragonskin seemed compact, rather CVC (combat vehicle crewman) vest like. That’s what I thought it would be good for. The extra 20 pounds wouldn’t necessarily bother a vehicle crewman. And the extra protection compared to a regular CVC vest seems better to me. But, I digress…
Once, we had the old style flak vest on a combat shooting range. (if you want to know, I’ll explain the range) It was ripped, but he kevlar was intact. We put it on a log, and shot it up with some 9 mm and .223 ball ammo. Around 100 rounds. It stopped them all, some hits very close together. IT boosted our confidence in the armor. Now, what bothers me about the dragonskin, one shot, one plate, and it’s useless.
– Ssgt, USMC-R, Tanks and LAV’s.
Mazztek on August 8, 2007 at 12:38 PM
Nonsense
Brokered for
Cash
infidel4life on August 8, 2007 at 12:45 PM
All I know is I had a young man visiting last week who is home on leave from Iraq and he swears by the current body armor. He has good reason since, in his words, “I took 4, 7.62 rounds to the chest and motored on”.
If it ain’t broke , Don’t fix it.
LakeRuins on August 8, 2007 at 12:47 PM
My son normal post is behind a 50cal in a HUMMVEE. He stands a lot of the time. He doesn’t need another 20lbs on his back
bnelson44 on August 8, 2007 at 12:47 PM
Mazztek,
9mm is not high velocity ammo
bnelson44 on August 8, 2007 at 12:49 PM
Fake, but accurate.
PRCalDude on August 8, 2007 at 12:54 PM
LOL! That’s a good one!
highhopes on August 8, 2007 at 1:02 PM
This story has been all over the defense supply industry oriented websites and the milblogs.
The MSM just latched onto it without really doing the background homework and presented tests that never came close to matching the ones the military requires for acceptance testing.
What is even worse this got in front of Congress at hearings from some people.
In every case the weakness were shown and the failures of the full test requirements.
The less than full requirements tests showed basically nothing since this vest in particular suffered failures in high temperature environments when all the discs slipped out of position by detaching from their glued in position places.
Good thing we are not having soldiers any place where the weather gets warm.
CommentGuy on August 8, 2007 at 1:02 PM
BadBrad
Brings up a good point on the weight. If I recall correctly this vest tipped the scales at near 70 lbs.
Add to that all the other things carried and the weight becomes an issue.
If the discs had not been glued in overlapping positions and had been sewn in to individual pockets in the same pattern a number of the tests may have been more successful.
Obviously if all the discs loosen and drop down to the waistline it doesn’t help a whole lot.
CommentGuy on August 8, 2007 at 1:13 PM
Actually this story is only partially correct.
Dragon Skin is still an open issue , what has happened here is that some shipments of them were tagged as being certified to meeting a certain spec which they were never certified for.
That was potentially a fraudulent action which will be determined.
The issue of that vest v the current vest is being totally retested because of the attention and has not yet been settled.
CommentGuy on August 8, 2007 at 1:18 PM
I wonder which NBC exec bought all the stock in Pinnacle?
Jonas Parker on August 8, 2007 at 1:53 PM
bnelson44 on August 8, 2007 at 12:49 PM
duuuhhh…
Mazztek on August 8, 2007 at 1:55 PM
If anyone still questions the emotional part of the headline please click on this video from MSNBC. For all of the fine fact finders on this site, never mind, the only content of the video is emotional. Remember Lisa Meyers is a leftie, only motives count.
TunaTalon on August 8, 2007 at 2:00 PM
Exit The Dragon
Randy
williars on August 8, 2007 at 2:18 PM
I can tell you this. It always seemed to me that our 782 gear sucked as a whole and what I mean is when it is all worn at once. You could always put any one or two peaces of gear on and it was fine but when you get geared up and have to put all your stuff on it was terrible. Then ya have to carry extra chow, water, ammo, maybe some batteries for the comm guy and god forbid a mortar base. I tell ya, hump 24 hours straight wearing and carrying all that crap will make a lad a wee bit grumpy.
TheSitRep on August 8, 2007 at 2:22 PM
I don’t have a problem with the Mail Call and Futureweapon segments. Those shows are geared toward “isn’t it cool” stories. I enjoy those shows for the lighthearted fluff they’re intended to be. If a few servicemen’s parents are so goofy they lay awake at night because their kids are deprived of or a piece of gear they saw on a show like that – or on the latest Star Wars movie for that matter – then it’s their damn problem. Just take your pills and leave my scifi alone.
But NBC’s hit piece was a completely different matter. As bizarre as it sounds, that network still tries to portray itself as carrying “news stories.” They directly slandered Dragonskin’s competitors, and they effectively accused the DoD acquisition system of murdering US soldiers.
If a defense contractor wants to do a little free PR on shows like the first two, more power to them. But what NBC did was correctly labeled as “emotional terrorism.” Those guys aren’t just incompetent; they are intentionally trying to hurt American troops and the war effort.
logis on August 8, 2007 at 2:22 PM
Call me when Pinnacle puts out Trogdor Skin body armor.
Bad Candy on August 8, 2007 at 2:39 PM
The military needs to aggressively pursue this intentional mis-information. It is causing grief, and strife among its own ranks. Not only should it file a lawsuit against Pinnacle, it should also bar the company from ever doing any business with the military.
Rode Werk on August 8, 2007 at 3:01 PM
Friends, we should remember that the Military is also the people who told us that the Hughes aircraft helo, the bubble canopy 500 series was unsuitable for Military use, and they instead ordered the slower, less manuverable, Bell Helicopter Jet Ranger instead.
Almost from the inception of the Special Operations Aviation commands, they ordered the Smaller, faster, and more manuverable 500, we call Little Birds today.
The question is what would possess the Military to choose the Bell Helicopter over the apparently superior Hughes product? Some say Politics. They claim that Lady Bird Johnson owned a bunch of stock in Bell Aircraft. I don’t know myself, however I know that the Little Birds are chosen for the reasons I stated above.
Anyone remember the discussions and claims of bias when the Baretta 9mm was chosen over among others, the Ruger, The Glock, and the Sig Sauer? Half the cops in the country ended up carrying a Baretta 9mm. Now, the weapon of choice is the Sig Sauer, after it was the Glock. The Military is buying Rugers among others, including the Sigs. The Secret Service issues Sig Sauers to it’s agents. What happened to the Baretta? Hello? Anyone? Sure the Military is still buying it, but I thought it was hands down the best pistol after two rounds of testing.
The DOJ decertified Pinnacle after deciding that they couldn’t meet the 6 year warranty claim. Wait a minute, now a beurocrat has decided that the 6 year warranty is more than the company can possibly meet. Do we have examples of the 6 year warranty not being met? Do we have examples of the 6 year warranty failing? Or is it an idea that they couldn’t possibly meet the 6 year warranty claim?
Pinnacle may have a superior product, and they may not. They may have a product that could save lives, and they may not. However, I’m not about to jump on the “they are evil” bandwagon just because NBC did a report.
Remember Murphy’s Law of Combat. Your weapon was made by the lowest bidder.
I don’t see the presence of Pinnacle’s President of Vice President on the range as proof of tainted testing. If they were a thousand miles away, and I shot the armor 20 times and didn’t acheive penetration with armor piercing rounds, does that make the test better?
Tell you what guys, set up your own test. Buy a Pinnacle Vest, and buy a Military vest, and put them downrange and blast away. Shoot one, then shoot the other. See which one lasts longer. Interesting thing about all these who are denouncing the test, they won’t go see for themselves.
I heard lot’s of people talk bad about Kia, but I went to see for myself, and their warranty of 10 years sold me. I didn’t just toss a coin and decide that they couldn’t possibly meet that. I looked for myself.
Snake307 on August 8, 2007 at 3:28 PM
Lady Bird Johnson was an evil woman.
Christoph on August 8, 2007 at 3:36 PM
Anyway, Snake, I dismiss your analysis out of hand because you miss the key point aptly summed here:
Christoph on August 8, 2007 at 3:38 PM
When someone opens their SUV door next to your kia in the parking lot, and your insurance adjuster totals it for the resulting dent, come back in here and tell us how much you love that 10 year warranty.
RushBaby on August 8, 2007 at 4:08 PM
I can say out of confidence that we are outfitted better now that at any time in the US military history. The current ESAPI plates and the older SAPI plates have saved many lives, and lets not foget the current light weight kevlar everyone wears. I have seen Marines including myself walk away from firefights, IED’s and Indirect fire because of these great pieces of gear. Now what we do not need is more weight, we have quite enough thank you, I don’t care what they are shooting at me. Even our HUMVEES are so bogged down with armor, mine rollers and ECM capabilites they have lost most of their offroad capability because they are just too heavy and non manueverable. There is always a trade off for more protection but anybody with the slightest bit of tactical sense knows you can only win the battle on the ground if you can orient, and act on your enemy faster than they can. I think what is great about being in the Marines today is the great support we get from the American public. But remember doting moms can go overboard! Now if you really want to help me out I’d love a date with Contessa Brewer from MSNBC!
gator70 on August 8, 2007 at 4:40 PM
Just the type of argument to be expected from a moniker of “snake”. The set up revealed your expectation that the military can’t be trusted. You have to do your own tests only if military has no credibility (in your own mind). In my world the military is a trustworthy source and they provide lots of documentation and video to keep it that way.
Just blasting away makes fine television but is no way to simulate combat conditions. The military tests used temperature extremes and oil, diesel fuel exposure as found in the field in Iraq. Body armor was also dropped to simulate combat conditions. The Dragon Skin vests failed miserably. Scales came off and dropped to the bottom of the vest leaving areas with zero protection. The Dragon Skin armor failed abjectly early in the test process.
The facts are clear, Dragon Skin is “not ready for prime time” as admitted under oath by Pinnacle’s expert consultant in front of Congress.
Only appeals to emotion can make this a political issue.
Oh, as BadBrad said it’s too heavy to be useful even if the obvious problems are fixed.
TunaTalon on August 8, 2007 at 4:49 PM
Sure, considering that I paid at least 10 grand less than the SUV guy, after I pay a minimal deducatable (I have a $200) I’ll go get another Kia. I much prefer to have the cash in my pocket, rather than paying half again, or even twice as much for no more utility vehicle.
FYI, I looked at Ford, GM, and Dodge before I bought the Kia. The closest in features was the Ford, and they wanted $10,000 more for similar mini-van with a 36 month warranty. Now, how smart would I be to pay more, and get less? Perhaps if I was a Liberal, I would feel like it was my duty to do that.
It’s a car, not a child. If it get’s destroyed, and no one get’s hurt (Kia had the higher safety rating BTW) I don’t care if the car is totaled out. I’ll take my insurance check and get another one.
Snake307 on August 8, 2007 at 4:52 PM
Firepower, or in this case, armor versus Manuverability is one of the long standing debates. It has been going on since before World War 1. The Germans started the war with heavy firepower. The French started with manuverability being their key to success. The French succeded, after the Germans overexteneded, but it took years to recapture the lost ground, and millions of lives.
In Panama, we didn’t have Flack jackets at all. In Iraq, Gulf War 1 we did get issued the flack jackets. I thought they were heavy, unweildy, and hot as hell. I wore it because it increased chances to survive. It wouldn’t stop a rifle bullet, nor did it provide the protection of modern systems. One thing I don’t like about the plate system the Army was using in Somalia is that once the ceramic plate took a hit, it was often reduced to powder. Yes, it stopped the bullet, but the second shot wasn’t going to be stopped as easy.
The current system may be better, and the Pinacle may be better. I don’t know, and never said I did. Here is the thing though. I don’t always assume that because someone says it’s better, that it automatically is. This is the reason we are even debating Global Warming. The “experts” have announced it is a fact, it’s caused by human activity, and there is no more need for debate or discussion much less review of evidence.
If the Military announced that after a year of study they have determined that the sun rises in the west after all, some of you all would declare it to be gospel because the military said so. I on the other hand would ask if anyone had a hammer so I could adjust my compass until it agreed with the official version. That smart assed comment would anger some of you.
The army way isn’t automatically the best way. We used to joke that there were three ways of doing things. The right way, the wrong way, and the Army way. How many of you have been in a Bradley? When I was in, every crew would purchass a Craftsman Socket wrench to use while loading the gun. It was better than the army supplied tool. It probably wasn’t authorized, hadn’t been tested, but it worked. When I was squad driver, I bought a complete set of tools to work on the truck. Not because I thought I was a mechanic from hell, but because I found that the supplied tools didn’t always let me do the job I could do.
The right way, the wrong way, and the army way.
Snake307 on August 8, 2007 at 5:06 PM
Good emotional appeal. But in just this one case:
1. Pinnacle’s expert said under oath that the armor was not ready for prime time.
2. The Military’s experts said under oath that the Pinnacle armor failed the standard tests.
3. The Dragon Skin armor is too heavy for use in combat.
If the facts fail to fit your formative world model then fine.
TunaTalon on August 8, 2007 at 5:36 PM
Yeah all very fine and if you were talking about its use on a tank and needing to build a bigger engine that burns through more gas then I’d say great, let’s discuss it.
But we’re talking about people wearing these and carrying all the other gear that, and you, have experience with humping. There comes a point where soldiers just can’t carry any more and be effective. You can start getting heat and orthopedic injuries if nothing else not counting letting the enemy escape or outmaneuver you because of your fatigue and snail’s pace.
Plus, the armor doesn’t work worth a tinker’s damn for side shots and that counts for a lot of the ones police and soldiers receive in combat.
Good call on the DoJ.
Christoph on August 8, 2007 at 5:59 PM
* that I, and you…
Christoph on August 8, 2007 at 5:59 PM
Snake307, I think you missed my point.
The topic is body armor, not cars, and soldiers, not children. If Dragon Skin gets totaled, will you be so cavalier about the person inside it?
RushBaby on August 8, 2007 at 6:40 PM
It’s a shame too. Pinnacle had a real opportunity to help the war effort by providing a product that the Army actually thinks IS valuable: Knee pads. Their soft body armor can be made into knee pads that are lightweight, extremely durable, and comfortable.
But I imagine that after garnering this much ill-will with a product that was simply not ready for prime time … Well, who knows if any gov’t agency will ever buy from them.
Bryan, you should post the video the Army made showing Dragon Skin failing
apollyonbob on August 8, 2007 at 6:49 PM
I’ll stick with the Interceptor, thanks. I know it works, and it is lighter. I don’t want to slow anyone down anymore than necessary.
I have bet my life on the efficacy of Interceptor, and I will again, soon.
major john on August 8, 2007 at 8:39 PM
Snake, the Ruger P95 outperformed the Baretta in EVERY SINGLE TEST the Army conducted in that series in 1988 (as did the Glock and the Sig Sauer). The Army decided that the difference in performance wasn’t enough to justify a $65 higher price tag per weapon for the Ruger, and even higher prices for the others. The reason why most services later turned to the P226 (other services following the Navy Seal’s lead) was an all-too-common catastrophic slide failure that resulted in injury to the user.
It was never “hands down the best”. it was the cheapest, and from a bean-counter’s perspective, that outweighed the “minor” performance deficit.
Freelancer on August 8, 2007 at 11:58 PM
I have done NO scientific testing so I’ll just offer my personal opinion.
The Ruger P95 is a joy to hold and the Baretta is awkward. I like shooting the former, but not the latter.
That’s just me.
Christoph on August 9, 2007 at 4:03 AM
Comment pages: