11-04-2006

Exposed!! Another "Enabler" In The Military-Industrial-Congressional Complex Who Sees To It That America's Grunts Go To The Killing Fields Wearing Inferior Body Armor

By Roger Charles

Ever wonder why our troops cannot get the best-available body armor, and who is responsible for this disgraceful situation? DefenseWatch has identified one more "contributor" to this sad state of affairs -- Colonel D'Arcy E. Grisier, II, USMC (Ret.). Grisier serves as Military Legislative Assistant for the Chairmen of the Senate Subcommittee on Readiness and Management Support for Senator John Ensign of Nevada.

Guess which subcommittee of the Senate Armed Serviced Committee has jurisdiction (or, could claim such, if interested) for the body-armor issue? Yep... good ol' Senator Ensign's Subcommittee on Readiness and Management Support.

So, who is the key staffer upon which Senator Ensign relies for objective, professional recommendations on issues like "best-available" body armor? Well, if you divined that Colonel D'Arcy E. Grisier, II, USMC (Ret.) has that role, you would be right.

Now it can be told that the earlier article on the August briefings to various staffers on the Hill by "designated liars" from the Army's acquisition mafia did include information from a report put together by Colonel D'Arcy E. Grisier, II, USMC (Ret.).

See: While America's Grunts Bleed & Die Wearing Inferior Body Armor, Army Acquisition Mafia Capos Carry Lies To Congress

Posted below is an email Defense News submitted to Grisier on Oct. 27. The email followed a phone call to Grisier requesting an on-the-record interview about the reasons for Grisier's (and more importantly, his boss's) blindly supporting the Pentagon's specious claims that the issued Interceptor Body Armor (IBA) with its hard-plate approach to ballistic protection is superior to Pinnacle Armor's Dragon Skin with it's flexible design. Grisier passed Defense Watch off to the office flack, Jack Finn, who was in Nevada.
...

Finish reading here.
http://www.sftt.org/cgi-bin/csNews/c...=viewone&id=68

Is this unrealistic expectations or dereliction?

Some of the vets I've spoken to shunned the body armor in favor of higher mobility. I've already told the story of the uparmored HMMWVs several times over, but the fact really is that we have a nasty habit of not being prepared training- or equipment-wise to go into combat. Unrealistic expectations, largely.

Originally Posted by deerslayer

Some of the vets I've spoken to shunned the body armor in favor of higher mobility. I've already told the story of the uparmored HMMWVs several times over, but the fact really is that we have a nasty habit of not being prepared training- or equipment-wise to go into combat. Unrealistic expectations, largely.

I realize this topic is old, but I've been deployed so I may ressurect a few while catching up with the board.

None of us wear the IBAs, they're too bulky and heavy. We wear plate carriers. Does it afford less protection in exchange for more mobility? Yes. So by that, could it make things more dangerous and thereby you less safe? Depends on how you look at it.

For convoys, stagnant security, etc I think the IBAs are great, for anyone that needs to be foot mobile, they're just a pain in the ass.

As for the Dragon Skin, the hype proves better than the actual product performance, and if that doesn't get you, well, they're heavier than the IBAs too.

If memory serves me correct Dragin Skin is still in the final phases of testing, so it doesn't seem fair to blame the DOD simply because an item isn't ready to be sent into a battlefield.

I have never personally worn body armor of any type or been fired on, but PJ's comments seem to pretty well sum up what most vets have told me. I suppose I could draw comparisons to snow boarding, I wear fewer layers and am colder for it but then I can move around much more easily and snowboarding requires a lot more movement than skiing.

I've worn body armor on countless occasions though never been shot at. I serve in a pretty cold place and wearing body armor can make me heat up pretty good when I move around just even a little bit.
I can't imagine just how hot it would get wearing armor in the desert. I think I'd pass out before I even got to the Humvee.
Body armor is hot, uncomfortable and heavy ... I totally understand why people would want to ditch it. Besides, I know that if I am ever hit by an AK round with my flak vest on, I'm probably going to die regardless. I might as well use my mobility to take better cover and dart from cover to cover faster... and that'll probably keep me alive a little longer.
A lot of people, civilians especially, who always want more of this more of that, more of this, more of that are usually that way because they've never been in the position of actually CARRYING that stuff and marching off for miles over mountains and bad terrain.
I can't remember the spelling of this guy but I think it was DeMorga or something. Some Spanish guy. He loaded his ships with the most guns, the most ammunition and even completed it with a band of Japanese mercenaries as boarding party. The ships were so heavy that they were a bitch to manouver at sea. And they couldn't fire the cannons because if they did, the ships would capsize.
Remember what the ol' English teachers taught you: less is more.

Originally Posted by the_13th_redneck

Remember what the ol' English teachers taught you: less is more.

Making me all misty eyed... sniff sniff...

Originally Posted by the_13th_redneck

Besides, I know that if I am ever hit by an AK round with my flak vest on, I'm probably going to die regardless. I might as well use my mobility to take better cover and dart from cover to cover faster... and that'll probably keep me alive a little longer.

With just a flak on, yes. SAPI plates, however, will stop 7.62. I don't let my guys go out without at least a front plate in a busy area, whether or not they wear the back plate is mission dependant, and side plates? Never.

If you knew as a fact that you were going to be ambushed, would you elect to wear the full plates and armor, or would you prefer the mobility? It's an intersting subject for a civilian like myself who will probably never wear body armor more useful than a tin-foil hat.

Yeah but we just get flak vests.

They really do hate you guys.