FUBAR: Army Blew Tests on 5 Million Body Armor Plates

Feuer Frei! · 08-05-11, 10:16 PM

The U.S. Army didn’t bother to properly test five million body armor plates that were supposed to protect soldiers on the battlefield. In some cases, certain tests of the live-saving gear were ignored altogether.
That’s according to a new report from the Defense Department Inspector General, which found that the Army office in charge of insuring the armor’s quality essentially fell asleep at the switch. Inserts were tested improperly and in some cases not at all. The testing flubs don’t prove that all five million plates are defective, but they deprive the Army of information about the reliability of a lot of equipment needed to protect troops in the field.
“The Army cannot be sure that the appropriate level of protection has been achieved,” the report says. Now, it’ll go back and retest the vests, some of which were bought as long as seven years ago.

The problem lies with seven contracts for $2.5 billion worth of Interceptor Body Armor (IBA) inserts bought between 2004 and 2006. IBA consists of a vest that holds a series of inserted plates designed to stop bullets and other fast moving objects.
On two contracts, the Army’s Project Manager Soldier Equipment (PM SEQ) didn’t perform tests to find out the velocity at which a projectile would penetrate plates because they said they weren’t concerned about the design. On six out of seven contracts, PM SEQ simply didn’t do weather and altitude tests on the inserts or substituted less. Why the substitution? The PM SEQ Director of Technical Management told the IG that the more rigorous tests would take longer and the inserts needed to meet the “urgent wartime operational requirement” for body armor, according to the report.

Consistency was a problem, too. PM SEQ didn’t always test the right size insert plates on about 30 percent of tests. The IG also found that about half of the inserts tested for humidity and temperature weren’t tested in the right temperature range.
The most recent report is only the latest in a series of investigations carried out by the Defense Department’s Inspector General on body armor testing. In March 2008, the IG found 13 body armor contracts where proper testing wasn’t performed. Following a request from Rep. Louise Slaughter, the IG dug deeper into the 13 contracts and found a series of problems with quality assurance. A year later, the Army recalled 16,000 of the ceramic plates.
Since the beginning of the war in Iraq, both the Army and Marines have had to fend off criticism over how they buy body armor. First, critics charged, the military did not buy enough modern body armor with rifle plates for combat troops deploying to Iraq (one George Washington University Law Professor called it the “bring your own bulletproof” war). Then, troops and their supporters began to raise questions about whether their Interceptor vests were indeed top-of-the-line. The Marines, in fact, recalled some sets of Interceptor body armor back in 2005. The military rushed to field new armor add-ons such as enhanced plates and side plates to protect against new threats in Iraq.

The controversy didn’t end there. Pinnacle Armor Inc., makers of an alternative body armor design called Dragon Skin, accused Army officials of unfairly favoring Point Blank, which supplies that Inerceptor armor to the military. Congressional hearings followed after NBC News alleged that the Army’s tests were rigged in favor of the incumbent. But it was Pinnacle that wound up in the hot seat, and the military never purchased Dragon Skin in big numbers.
Update: Stars and Stripes got in touch with Army officials, who said that two lots of the improperly tested inserts were fielded and 58 percent of them were later returned. The officials said subsequent tests showed that all of the returned plates were up to the “maximum level of protection requirements.”

SOURCE

Platapus · 08-06-11, 09:45 AM

Bah, it is only the lives of grunts. What does that matter compared to the profits of the corporation. Come one, you have to focus on what's important here folks.

As for the military inspectors, why both inspecting what contractors do? If they say it is good enough, it is. After all, would a corporation ever lie in order to make profits?

Is there anyone in this system concerned with who is wearing the armour and the purpose?????

sigh. Ever since the Civil War, and probably prior to that, contractors have been sacrificing the military for profits. It is imperative that the government inspect, keep on inspecting, and holding companies accountable.

The word embarrassment does not even come close.

If we are going to be a war-mongering nation, at least give our troops good equipment.

mobucks · 08-06-11, 12:34 PM

Couldnt have said it better more sarcasticly myself. End of discussion.

Stealhead · 08-07-11, 12:05 AM

When I was stationed in Germany I got assigned to work as an SP when the assigned squadrons got deployed to boost manpower because I had expert marksmen (I assume because only folks that had expert marksmen got picked in my Squadron) above each Urinal in the mens room at the SP post was this: http://images4.cpcache.com/product_z...quare-true.jpg

notice number 8? that applies to every piece of equipment.

08-05-11, 10:16 PM	#1
Feuer Frei! Navy Seal Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Valhalla Posts: 5,295 Downloads: 141 Uploads: 17	FUBAR: Army Blew Tests on 5 Million Body Armor Plates The U.S. Army didn’t bother to properly test five million body armor plates that were supposed to protect soldiers on the battlefield. In some cases, certain tests of the live-saving gear were ignored altogether. That’s according to a new report from the Defense Department Inspector General, which found that the Army office in charge of insuring the armor’s quality essentially fell asleep at the switch. Inserts were tested improperly and in some cases not at all. The testing flubs don’t prove that all five million plates are defective, but they deprive the Army of information about the reliability of a lot of equipment needed to protect troops in the field. “The Army cannot be sure that the appropriate level of protection has been achieved,” the report says. Now, it’ll go back and retest the vests, some of which were bought as long as seven years ago. The problem lies with seven contracts for $2.5 billion worth of Interceptor Body Armor (IBA) inserts bought between 2004 and 2006. IBA consists of a vest that holds a series of inserted plates designed to stop bullets and other fast moving objects. On two contracts, the Army’s Project Manager Soldier Equipment (PM SEQ) didn’t perform tests to find out the velocity at which a projectile would penetrate plates because they said they weren’t concerned about the design. On six out of seven contracts, PM SEQ simply didn’t do weather and altitude tests on the inserts or substituted less. Why the substitution? The PM SEQ Director of Technical Management told the IG that the more rigorous tests would take longer and the inserts needed to meet the “urgent wartime operational requirement” for body armor, according to the report. Consistency was a problem, too. PM SEQ didn’t always test the right size insert plates on about 30 percent of tests. The IG also found that about half of the inserts tested for humidity and temperature weren’t tested in the right temperature range. The most recent report is only the latest in a series of investigations carried out by the Defense Department’s Inspector General on body armor testing. In March 2008, the IG found 13 body armor contracts where proper testing wasn’t performed. Following a request from Rep. Louise Slaughter, the IG dug deeper into the 13 contracts and found a series of problems with quality assurance. A year later, the Army recalled 16,000 of the ceramic plates. Since the beginning of the war in Iraq, both the Army and Marines have had to fend off criticism over how they buy body armor. First, critics charged, the military did not buy enough modern body armor with rifle plates for combat troops deploying to Iraq (one George Washington University Law Professor called it the “bring your own bulletproof” war). Then, troops and their supporters began to raise questions about whether their Interceptor vests were indeed top-of-the-line. The Marines, in fact, recalled some sets of Interceptor body armor back in 2005. The military rushed to field new armor add-ons such as enhanced plates and side plates to protect against new threats in Iraq. The controversy didn’t end there. Pinnacle Armor Inc., makers of an alternative body armor design called Dragon Skin, accused Army officials of unfairly favoring Point Blank, which supplies that Inerceptor armor to the military. Congressional hearings followed after NBC News alleged that the Army’s tests were rigged in favor of the incumbent. But it was Pinnacle that wound up in the hot seat, and the military never purchased Dragon Skin in big numbers. Update: Stars and Stripes got in touch with Army officials, who said that two lots of the improperly tested inserts were fielded and 58 percent of them were later returned. The officials said subsequent tests showed that all of the returned plates were up to the “maximum level of protection requirements.” SOURCE __________________ "History is the lies that the victors agree on"- Napoleon LINK TO MY SH 3 MODS

08-06-11, 09:45 AM	#2
Platapus Fleet Admiral Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 19,360 Downloads: 63 Uploads: 0	Bah, it is only the lives of grunts. What does that matter compared to the profits of the corporation. Come one, you have to focus on what's important here folks. As for the military inspectors, why both inspecting what contractors do? If they say it is good enough, it is. After all, would a corporation ever lie in order to make profits? Is there anyone in this system concerned with who is wearing the armour and the purpose????? sigh. Ever since the Civil War, and probably prior to that, contractors have been sacrificing the military for profits. It is imperative that the government inspect, keep on inspecting, and holding companies accountable. The word embarrassment does not even come close. If we are going to be a war-mongering nation, at least give our troops good equipment. __________________ abusus non tollit usum - A right should NOT be withheld from people on the basis that some tend to abuse that right.

08-06-11, 12:34 PM	#3
mobucks Seasoned Skipper Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 713 Downloads: 209 Uploads: 0	Couldnt have said it better more sarcasticly myself. End of discussion.

08-07-11, 12:05 AM	#4
Stealhead Navy Seal Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Kentucky Posts: 5,421 Downloads: 85 Uploads: 0	When I was stationed in Germany I got assigned to work as an SP when the assigned squadrons got deployed to boost manpower because I had expert marksmen (I assume because only folks that had expert marksmen got picked in my Squadron) above each Urinal in the mens room at the SP post was this: http://images4.cpcache.com/product_z...quare-true.jpg notice number 8? that applies to every piece of equipment.