M80A1, M855A1 vs Level IV Armor

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • stanc
    Banned
    • Apr 2011
    • 3430

    M80A1, M855A1 vs Level IV Armor


  • VASCAR2
    Chieftain
    • Mar 2011
    • 6218

    #2
    Thanks for posting Stan!

    Comment

    • Azgeek
      Bloodstained
      • Aug 2015
      • 71

      #3
      I've done extensive testing against Level IV ESAPI plates and I can attest that they are quite capable of withstanding multiple strikes as Stan proved in his video. I believe most ceramic body armor components are made by CoorsTek. Most use the least expensive Aluminum Oxide version. With that said not all plates are made equal. Some use spalling others do not. Some use Kevlar backing others use Dyneema. I find the current US GI issued versions the worst.

      Comment

      • LRRPF52
        Super Moderator
        • Sep 2014
        • 8569

        #4
        There are several different large armor manufacturers with contracts for DOD who make plates, mostly based on Vietnam-era aviator's chicken plate technology that was adopted by certain units for short duration mission profile armor.

        It's not appropriate for large issue, but has become default due to risk-averse commanders at the senior levels.

        Armor is going to change for the better once we get away from the heavy materials and into the developmental technology that is going on right now.
        NRA Basic, Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun, RSO

        CCW, CQM, DM, Long Range Rifle Instructor

        6.5 Grendel Reloading Handbooks & chamber brushes can be found here:

        www.AR15buildbox.com

        Comment

        • n9nwo
          Bloodstained
          • Dec 2016
          • 93

          #5
          Why can't we have cool armor like we see in the SyFy movies? yes I know that it mostly fake plastic. But you would think that our developers would come up with something that makes us look better!

          Comment

          • Azgeek
            Bloodstained
            • Aug 2015
            • 71

            #6
            That's funny you mentioned that n9. The current and next-gen body armor is already obsolete. Gila Defense Systems developed that technology over two years ago. SOCOM has asked us to perform one more test (at distance) as final conformation of its effectiveness. After that, we move on to doing just that - developing the SyFy stuff!

            Comment

            • Tex Nomex
              Warrior
              • Dec 2017
              • 185

              #7
              Originally posted by Azgeek View Post
              That's funny you mentioned that n9. The current and next-gen body armor is already obsolete. Gila Defense Systems developed that technology over two years ago. SOCOM has asked us to perform one more test (at distance) as final conformation of its effectiveness. After that, we move on to doing just that - developing the SyFy stuff!
              What's the new hotness? Dilatant or metal foam?
              "The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed."
              -- Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers at 184-188

              Comment

              • Azgeek
                Bloodstained
                • Aug 2015
                • 71

                #8
                Not at liberty to say for a variety of reasons. Have not started the work so hard to say where this journey it takes us.

                Comment

                • Azgeek
                  Bloodstained
                  • Aug 2015
                  • 71

                  #9
                  Just curious. Has the 22 Grendel been discussed on this forum? Possible fallback platform for the SOCOM development work . I'll promote anything Grendel if the opportunity presents itself if we can get face time with these guys.

                  Comment

                  • LRRPF52
                    Super Moderator
                    • Sep 2014
                    • 8569

                    #10
                    There has already been independent development of far superior armor technology on the first try from materials that were meant for an entirely different application by engineers working on their own start-up project for modern battery technology.

                    Videos have been pulled from youtube, but they defeated 7.62x39 from a 20" SKS with 3mm thickness disks that don't use any of the materials common to hard plates.

                    Weight of the 3mm thick, 60mm diameter disks was fractions of an ounce. They are almost weightless.

                    I don't want to say much more because one could infer most of what they need to know to make the next generational leap in armor technology, so I'll leave it up to the cookie cutter autonomons to spiral around in the vacuum of lack of innovation, especially because I don't want potential threats to have it.
                    NRA Basic, Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun, RSO

                    CCW, CQM, DM, Long Range Rifle Instructor

                    6.5 Grendel Reloading Handbooks & chamber brushes can be found here:

                    www.AR15buildbox.com

                    Comment

                    • Azgeek
                      Bloodstained
                      • Aug 2015
                      • 71

                      #11
                      Well development of new armor technology is one thing, but practical adaptation for use of it in the field is an entirely different matter. Then there is the cost for this new stuff. I'm aware of many of these new techniques and use of materials. Yawn.... The real depressing thing is how our government refuses to partner with real innovators. Give Picatinny Arsenal a call and ask them why. They are really good at suppressing technology as we have found out. The fact I'm NOT allowed to discuss our rifle round technology speaks volumes around our innovation.

                      Comment

                      • LR1955
                        Super Moderator
                        • Mar 2011
                        • 3355

                        #12
                        Originally posted by Azgeek View Post
                        Well development of new armor technology is one thing, but practical adaptation for use of it in the field is an entirely different matter. Then there is the cost for this new stuff. I'm aware of many of these new techniques and use of materials. Yawn.... The real depressing thing is how our government refuses to partner with real innovators. Give Picatinny Arsenal a call and ask them why. They are really good at suppressing technology as we have found out. The fact I'm NOT allowed to discuss our rifle round technology speaks volumes around our innovation.
                        AZ:

                        The government won't partner with innovators whose sole purpose is to get seed money. I have been there and part of my job was to see if their wild claims actually worked or if they were lying just to get seed money. Most were lying to get seed money. And most who did get the seed money failed to develop the product to the standards set by either the innovator or DoD. Then they wanted more money. And the response was normally 'no'.

                        If your outfit is trying to get into the system with an unsolicited proposal, you will probably fail unless you have fully developed the product and have had it evaluated at legitimate testing facilities that are accepted by DoD. Even then if your product is unsolicited, you will probably fail anyway because of the sequester and the fact that your stuff may not be what the military can afford in terms of priorities.

                        Personally I would avoid DoD. They can halt a program for absolutely no reason and or can stop one dead in its tracks if it doesn't make the budget cut. For small outfits, this means they generally go bankrupt.

                        LR55

                        Comment

                        • Azgeek
                          Bloodstained
                          • Aug 2015
                          • 71

                          #13
                          LR55:

                          You are right on the money with your commentary. However we never sought money of any kind from the government. Everything we did was self-funded without any outside investment or government participation. In fact they came to us after (I'm guessing) reviewing our patents. We had an operating business with real products, real orders and potential investors so the scenarios you described don't apply. The lesson here is exactly as you stated. They can halt a program or an independent business operation "in the interest of national security" any time they want.

                          It such a crazy story. I've only shared parts of it here on this website as this thread topic is near and dear to what we do at Gila Defense. BTW we are not going anywhere. Every dog will have its day and hopefully we will have ours this calendar year. Not going to elaborate any further publicly online. With all that said, If we can help our war fighters have the edge on the battlefield we would certainly be honored to do so.

                          Comment

                          • Azgeek
                            Bloodstained
                            • Aug 2015
                            • 71

                            #14
                            Forgot to add my apologies to the OP for getting a bit off-topic here.

                            Comment

                            • LRRPF52
                              Super Moderator
                              • Sep 2014
                              • 8569

                              #15
                              There was a guy who ran a software company in the 1970s who the DOJ approached looking for solutions to their problem of having purchased independent computer hardware in the different Federal regions without any centralized oversight, planning, or coordination. The result was that US Attorneys and staff could not send their data to each other on floppy disks because the operating systems were not compatible, and it would have been too expensive to re-purchase hardware again across the Nation.



                              INSLAW, the software company, provided the software solution with a program called PROMIS. The DOJ took delivery of it, refused to pay him, left him in the dark, then transferred the technology and intellectual property to a company in Arkansas called Systematics. Systematics then upgraded the program from 8-bit to 32-bit, and sold it to Alltel Telecom. By this time, the program had gained interest from not only FBI, but other 3-letter agencies, once its potential for electronic surveillance was realized, and it became central to the NSA's bank-monitoring program tracking illicit activities of foreign governments and non-government actors.

                              The inventor of the software won several court cases with expert witness testimony provided by a retired USAF officer who also wore a double hat as a CIA case officer, but the DOJ refused to compensate the plaintiff repeatedly. It was also discovered in the course of the investigation (paid for by the plaintiff using PIs and expert witnesses), that the DOJ failed to secure hardware with the program on it, selling it off in gov't auctions that the retired USAF/NoVA officer was able to acquire during the proceedings, then notified the DOJ of major security violations in court when being questioned by the DOJ's unprepared attorneys. These court cases all had to be done under sealed special court provisions for technology that had very high levels of TS clearance to even be aware of, as many agencies had adopted the program for their work.

                              It was later learned that corporate officers of Systematics were selling the proprietary and special access technology to unauthorized foreign agents for some serious coin as part of an ongoing foreign exploitation program directed against the United States, and this was addressed when Alltel discovered it and filed a sealed lawsuit against Systematics for major breach of contract, with National Security violations cited by the DOJ and referrals from NSA and others when they saw their program being compromised. One of the PIs in the case was found dead in his hotel room, immediately ruled a suicide.

                              I could go on into it more, but I think it would distract from the scope and intent of this forum. Suffice it to say, one of the men who was compromising the program now sits in Federal Prison in Colorado in a cell not too far from Ramzi Yusef, the other (who was caught and issued a sealed indictment for espionage while he still worked in the White House) "committed suicide" the day after the FBI Director was fired (July 19th, 1993), and the perpetrators walked away clean. The FBI Director, William Sessions, was probably the best Director the Bureau ever had-a Distinguished Eagle Scout, who let the chips fall where they lay in the course of investigations. The senior FBI official who is now in Federal Prison is Robert Hanson. He was using his special access to this program from within the Bureau and selling it to the Russians. They made a movie about it called Breach.






                              The problem with dealing with the Federal and many State governments is that legislators have exempted themselves from insider trading. The moment you actually meet a need or solve a problem they have that has serious potential for market, your intellectual property is subject to being passed off to investors who have relationships with larger companies that are in a better position to capitalize off the new product. Something to be aware of when approached by DoD or any Federal or State agency. The legislators and their friends know they can bury you in court, so they usually just steal the technology and laugh at you.

                              Look at what happened with DragonSkin, for example. Pinnacle Armor already had a full product line and capacity to manufacture and fill larger orders, since they did building and vehicle armor.

                              Whatever relationship existed between DoD and the 9 major body armor manufacturers seemed to come into play, because Pinnacle Armor wasn't willing to share licensing with them. This is a legitimate concern for DoD, because they are already used to working with large suppliers for critical equipment, so Pinnacle's unwillingness to license to Ceradyne, Point Blank, etc. was a major red flag. They didn't want to be left out hanging with all their eggs in one basket with Pinnacle, so a campaign to discredit the armor technology of Dragonskin was launched and successfully executed.

                              It didn't help that Pinnacle pushed the angle with the media, revealing that Generals and their security details were using Dragonskin, while Joe Infantry and Jane Truckdriver were stuck with Interceptor. They even had the designer of Interceptor openly state that DragonSkin was far superior to Interceptor. General Brown is the one who stated that he wished insurgents would wear DragonSkin, while Generals, GRS, SAD, SF, PSDs sourced DragonSkin for themselves. Even General Downing covered down on it, stating that the tests he helped supervise showed that DragonSkin out-performed Interceptor substantially.

                              The interesting thing is the NIJ never cited ballistic performance or the staged failures of the vests when they pulled the NIJ certs, but cited a clause in the warranty. This leaves the door open in the future for competitors who want to re-market the technology after acquiring the license or simply waiting out the patents. The Army's procurement officer at the time, General Brown, after said DragonSkin was so bad he wished insurgents in Iraq would wear it, also stated that the M110 SASS was more accurate with more effective range than the M24. The M110 has a 20" barrel and is semi-automatic. The M24 has a 24" barrel and is a bolt gun, probably the most accurate rifle the Army had ever adopted up to that time. While I prefer a SASS over the M24 SWS, General Brown's comments were demonstrably false on the matter, just as they were on body armor.



                              To top it off, the DoD classified one of DragonSkin's enhanced protection vests which provided even more ballistic protection from high velocity HP projectiles, something no armor had been able to do then. Pinnacle Armor filed for bankruptcy in 2010 IIRC. Keep in mind that Pinnacle had substantial production infrastructure already in place, with automated systems, TQM, certs, you name it, and they still were wrecked, while the Army came out with the monstrosities known as the side SAPI plates to try to CYA when it was shown that DS provided even more coverage of a soldier's vital areas and potential penetration vectors from the sides of the abdomen and chest.

                              The armor I'm talking about is a fraction of the weight of current ceramic and polyamide plates. It smokes the performance of DragonSkin even, offering next generation protection against ballistic threats that don't even exist in any known fielded military ammunition. If you don't have your ducks lined up, including greasing politician's skanky palms, my advice is to avoid DoD like the freaking plague. Refer any unsolicited approaches to good legal counsel with experience dealing with DoD contracts, and focus on the private sector with cool products that benefit a much larger market.

                              Also be aware of paid foreign agents looking for any developmental technology in the US, many of whom may be actual agents of the US government selling out our Nation. This happens with far more frequency than most people would ever know. There's a reason so much foreign money goes into K Street lawyers/lobbyists in DC. With congressman bought off, they have access to the Congressional committees, which includes Defense and Intel committees. Any new technology that actually has market potential is often stolen and sold to foreign agents before the inventors have a chance to really market it.
                              Last edited by LRRPF52; 01-30-2018, 04:44 PM.
                              NRA Basic, Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun, RSO

                              CCW, CQM, DM, Long Range Rifle Instructor

                              6.5 Grendel Reloading Handbooks & chamber brushes can be found here:

                              www.AR15buildbox.com

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X