PDA

View Full Version : Dragonskin FAILS



DocGKR
08-26-09, 14:36
What a surprise...The following decision from the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals shows that the now apparently defunct Pinnacle Armor LIED about the previously much lauded Dragonskin protective capabilities: http://docs.law.gwu.edu/asbca/decision/pdf2009/55831.pdf

Abraxas
08-26-09, 14:49
They apparently did not watch future weapons:rolleyes:

JLSKIP
08-26-09, 15:34
They apparently did not watch future weapons:rolleyes:

Are you being sarcastic?

Shotdown
08-26-09, 15:55
Is this another test that they ran on Dragon Skin? The last test said it failed too.

rubberneck
08-26-09, 17:01
I wonder where Karl Masters goes to get his good name back after being slandered by Murray Neal and his groupie's. On another note, didn't you test a vest and write a favorable review that was posted on Pinnacle's home site? If it wasn't you than I apologize in advance.

JLSKIP
08-26-09, 17:11
Is this another test that they ran on Dragon Skin? The last test said it failed too.

A brief summary of the 12 page document:

Government wanted level III armor.
Pinnacle said "Yeah, ours is level III"
Government buys armor from Pinnacle.
Turns out the armor Pinnacle sold them has only been tested and certified as level IIIa, which is lower that level III.
All other testing that was done did not adhere to required testing methods for properly determining armor level rating for the government contract.
That means Pinnacle lied, the dragonskin was only IIIa rated and therefore Pinnacle failed to delivery the requested number of level III armors by requested date.

Obviously from 12 pages to that brief summary, I left some stuff out. Is there anyone else who has read this document? Is this a fair summary?

MisterWilson
08-26-09, 17:32
Sounds about right from what I read.

Abraxas
08-26-09, 17:45
Are you being sarcastic?

Yes I am

DocGKR
08-26-09, 19:34
Karl Masters has served our Nation honorably; he and his family deserve the utmost respect for their sacrifices.


"On another note, didn't you test a vest and write a favorable review that was posted on Pinnacle's home site? If it wasn't you than I apologize in advance."

In the Fall of 2006, we did do a limited evaluation of the Dragon Skin SOV-2000 level III 10"x12" armor panel for a CA LE agency. This LE agency test used protocols similar to the NIJ Type III flexible armor test protocol; not surprisingly, when tested for the LE agency, the Dragonskin armor performed exactly as it did in the Fall 2006 NIJ certification test--stopping all rated shots. Pinnacle did publish excerpts of these publicly available test results on their website. However, what Pinnacle did not show was the fact that we recommended that the LE agency in question NOT purchase Dragon Skin and instead procure another vendor's armor, as there were too many unanswered questions about Dragon Skin and it needed to undergo substantial additional durability and ballistic testing prior to giving any consideration of using it as a standard issue item. Also note that in every lecture/briefing I have ever given, I have consistently stated that Dragon Skin was NOT an acceptable issue item.

rubberneck
08-26-09, 19:57
Thanks for clearing that up. I read your comments on their site at the height of all their B.S. And came away with the impression that you were a supporter. Considering what a lowlife Neal is I suppose that was what he intended.

DocGKR
08-26-09, 20:13
Currently another armor company, EGI (http://www.expertguns.com/shop/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=28), has publicly claimed I "consulted" on their armor when in fact my total "consultation" consisted of a 10 min telephone call where I cautioned them on the problems with steel plates and a brief email exchange.

With a few exceptions, most armor companies are not known for their veracity...

rob_s
08-26-09, 20:55
Seems like armor companies and suppressor companies are vying for the title.

DocGKR
08-26-09, 21:03
But how often does a bad suppressor lead to injury or death compared to failed armor...

rob_s
08-27-09, 04:10
I agree completely. I was just commenting ton the odd similarities. Certainly no comparison in terms of repercussions.

167
08-28-09, 18:52
DocGKR, do you mind naming the "few exceptions" that you speak of? I am just curious.

DocGKR
08-28-09, 22:58
http://www.fresnobee.com/business/story/1615866.html

Blob
08-29-09, 00:33
I thought that the discs on Dragon Skin were held together with some sort of adhesive which would melt in high heat (like the inside of a humvee in Iraq) and the armor would basically fall apart. True?

Jack-O
09-01-09, 19:22
Having had some experience with the AFOSI whilst in the service (as a supplier not an investigee) I can say that they are a profoundly simplistic and arrogant agency (like the FBI, but worse). They depend more on myth, bravado, and bluster more than actual facts, intelligence, intellect or good procedure.

Therefore it is in no way suprising to me that these simpletons would have been taken by an organization that appears to masters at the same thing.

It takes a con to con a con i guess:p

They deserve each other :cool: