M
manny15
Guest
LAST EDITED ON Apr-01-06 AT 08:09PM (MST)[p]Army orders soldiers to stop wearing commercial body armor
WASHINGTON (AFP) - The US Army has directed soldiers in Iraq and Aghanistan to stop wearing commercial body armor, insisting that only army-issued armor has been certified as safe and effective, officials said.
The army issued the directive in response to reports that some soldiers were opting for an unapproved commercial body armor called Dragon Skin over the army's Interceptor Body Armor (IBA).
"Commanders at all levels will ensure only IBA, and its components, is used by our soldiers. All other body armor should be immediately replaced with IBA," the army directive said.
Major General Jeffrey Sorenson, an army procurement official, said soldiers could be disciplined if they ignore the order.
He said the directive reflected the army's concern that use of unapproved armor could result in death or serious injury to soldiers.
"I think the mothers and the fathers that are currently having soldiers deployed, whether they're female or male, ought to feel comfortable with the fact ... that we have provided the best body armor that is available anywhere in the world," he said.
"All these other claims that are being made are -- essentially at this point in time, that's exactly what they are, claims," he said.
"They have not been tested, they have not been evaluated, they have not passed the rigor that we put into standards determining whether something is safe, effective and suitable," he said.
The directive singled out Dragon Skin armor, a commercial product made by Pinnacle Armor, as not having met army requirements despite claims that its product is superior to the army-issue armor.
"In fact, Dragon Skin has not been certified by the army for protection against several small arms threats being encountered in Iraq and Afghanistan today," the directive said.
Sorenson said the army had encouraged Pinnacle Armor to develop a lighter, more flexible armor by awarding it a contract worth nearly a million dollars.
"But until they meet the Army standard in terms of what we've set for safety, for effective and for suitable, it's not going to be fielded," he said.
The army, meanwhile, has fielded 200,000 sets of body armor in Iraq and Afghanistan, including the latest version of the Interceptor Body Armor, he said.
A shortage of body armor earlier in the war prompted many soldiers to buy their own.
The army is required by law to reimburse soldiers for personal armor acquired during the period when there was a shortage....(Hmmmmmmm)
WASHINGTON (AFP) - The US Army has directed soldiers in Iraq and Aghanistan to stop wearing commercial body armor, insisting that only army-issued armor has been certified as safe and effective, officials said.
The army issued the directive in response to reports that some soldiers were opting for an unapproved commercial body armor called Dragon Skin over the army's Interceptor Body Armor (IBA).
"Commanders at all levels will ensure only IBA, and its components, is used by our soldiers. All other body armor should be immediately replaced with IBA," the army directive said.
Major General Jeffrey Sorenson, an army procurement official, said soldiers could be disciplined if they ignore the order.
He said the directive reflected the army's concern that use of unapproved armor could result in death or serious injury to soldiers.
"I think the mothers and the fathers that are currently having soldiers deployed, whether they're female or male, ought to feel comfortable with the fact ... that we have provided the best body armor that is available anywhere in the world," he said.
"All these other claims that are being made are -- essentially at this point in time, that's exactly what they are, claims," he said.
"They have not been tested, they have not been evaluated, they have not passed the rigor that we put into standards determining whether something is safe, effective and suitable," he said.
The directive singled out Dragon Skin armor, a commercial product made by Pinnacle Armor, as not having met army requirements despite claims that its product is superior to the army-issue armor.
"In fact, Dragon Skin has not been certified by the army for protection against several small arms threats being encountered in Iraq and Afghanistan today," the directive said.
Sorenson said the army had encouraged Pinnacle Armor to develop a lighter, more flexible armor by awarding it a contract worth nearly a million dollars.
"But until they meet the Army standard in terms of what we've set for safety, for effective and for suitable, it's not going to be fielded," he said.
The army, meanwhile, has fielded 200,000 sets of body armor in Iraq and Afghanistan, including the latest version of the Interceptor Body Armor, he said.
A shortage of body armor earlier in the war prompted many soldiers to buy their own.
The army is required by law to reimburse soldiers for personal armor acquired during the period when there was a shortage....(Hmmmmmmm)
