Go Back   Professional Soldiers ® > Special Forces > Base Camp

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-02-2006, 07:59   #76
MtnGoat
Quiet Professional
 
MtnGoat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Asscrackistan
Posts: 4,289
Quote:
Originally Posted by Karl.Masters
MtnGoat,

5x5. All this drama goes away when the results are released. Until then, we are doomed to be adrift in a sea of agendas, opinions, and speculations.

v/r
Karl
So True!!
__________________
"Berg Heil"

History teaches that when you become indifferent and lose the will to fight someone who has the will to fight will take over."

COLONEL BULL SIMONS

Intelligence failures are failures of command [just] as operations failures are command failures.”
MtnGoat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2006, 15:30   #77
VelociMorte
Guerrilla
 
VelociMorte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Karl.Masters
VelociMorte,

Test question. How do you know it exceeds NIJ Type III (7.62x51mm FMJ) performance? For that matter, how do you know it meets NIJ Type III performance? Let's put the glossy brochures and videos aside for the moment.

NIJ Standard 0101.04 Ballistic Resistance of Personal Body Armor establishes performance requirements and test methods used by DOJ to certify body armor.

From paragraph 4.5.1 (L) of this standard:

"For armor that has been successfully tested for compliance to this standard through NIJ's voluntary compliance testing program (CTP) at an NIJ-approved testing facility, the following statement shall be included on the label: The Manufacturer certifies that this model of armor has been tested through NLECTC and has been found to comply with Type (insert appropriate type designation) Performance for NIJ Standard-0101.04"

If your SOV 2000 armor successfully passed DOJ/NIJ testing, it would have this compliance statement on the label of the armor panel inside the carrier.

I'm curious, does your SOV 2000 bear the NIJ compliance statement above for Type 3 performance?

Karl

Why yes, as a matter of fact, it does.

Test Question: How is it that you didn't already know the answer to that question if you are responsible for evaluating the product? Would the Army even bother evaluating a vest that had not passed this basic standard?

On another note, can you confirm or deny what the following letter from http://www.pinnaclearmor.com/20060630-pr.php says ?

"Response to Karl Masters' (US Army) public statements
regarding unfinished FAT testing

There has been a lot said about the latest test of Pinnacle Armor's Dragon Skin® body armor by the Army in official and unofficial statements. Now their story is we didn't meet a specification.

We would like to let you in on the truth about the testing. The Dragon Skin® body armor was supposed to be tested to the ESAPI (current level 4 system) test protocol and procedures as the Army agreed to, unfortunately less then one third of the thirty vests were tested. This does not constitute a completed First Article Test.

During the period of 17-19 May 2006, the Army's Project Manager Soldier Equipment (PM SEQ) conducted First Article Testing of Pinnacle Armor's Dragon Skin® Full Torso Wrap coverage level 4 body armor system at HP White Laboratory as requested by Brigadier General Moran (he has since been forced to retire). After the first round was fired on the 17th the test director Karl Masters and technical liaison James Zheng argued openly and loudly about the placement of the shot and what constituted an edge for flexible armor systems. At this point Karl Masters threw down his paperwork and stormed off as he told James Zheng "You represent the government you select the shots and you will be responsible"! Next, Karl and James threw x-rays of our body armor at us and claimed that we didn't know how to design a flexible armor system. When we asked how James Zheng came to that conclusion James said "look at the spacing of the discs, they are not evenly spaced"? We showed him that when he picked up the vest to place it on the x-ray table he changed the spacing of some of the rows of discs and that this is what is supposed to happen in flexible systems! You could see the light come on over his head, no wonder they can't seem to design anything better than what they have. Again, deviation from the ESAPI test protocols and procedures took place by the selection of shot placements of APM2 rounds around the ceramics in non-rifle defeating areas (where there was an adhesive anomaly. James Zheng attempted to induce failure with selective placement of shots at the center and edge of individually isolated discs on the system and the system did not fail. This set James Zheng off on a tirade saying "it's not supposed to do that" and throwing his arms in the air and yelling. This does not sound like fair and unbiased testing to us.

The testing was stopped by the Army at 12:37 pm on the 19th, Karl Masters and James Zheng had just shot one of our Medium sized vest with 12 rounds of APM2 (level 4) with complete stops on all rounds with a back face trauma average of 22.5mm for this vest and 23mm for all the vests tested, which is a 50% reduction in trauma over the current system. Imagine how many more lives could have been saved if the Dragon Skin® body armor system was available to our troops today. When was the last time the Army dared to shot 12 rounds of M2AP (level 4) into any Interceptor IBA with ESAPI plates? The reason Karl Masters, Col. John Norwood (being forced to retire early) and James Zheng gave for stopping the testing early on the 19th was as quoted by Karl Masters: "I'm completely baffled by this flexible technology and I'm not going to send another round down range until I can understand how a flexible system works"! This is the same group that falsely claimed to have paid Pinnacle Armor nearly a million dollars to develop our Dragon Skin® system as Major General Sorenson said on CNN, 31 March 2006!

All of the Government agencies that use our Dragon Skin® body armor have all tested the system and found it to be far superior to the current Army system. We are still looking forward to working with the Department of Defense to conduct fair and unbiased testing to prove that our Dragon Skin® system is far superior to any other system."
__________________
“War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself." John Stuart Mill

Last edited by VelociMorte; 07-08-2006 at 20:59.
VelociMorte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2006, 17:25   #78
The Reaper
Quiet Professional
 
The Reaper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Free Pineland
Posts: 24,779
VM:

Unless there are corroberating witness statements, That is pretty close to a slanderous attack on Karl.

Okay, now we are getting two versions of this with some apparent pretty strong emotions.

This report is unsubstantiated and I for one, would like to remind everyone posting on this thread to pause and remember that we will keep it professional, remember that this is just the internet, and that everyone here wants the same thing - to ensure that soldiers get the very best gear that we can, especially armor.

Be polite, be professional, keep it clean. Just the facts.

TR
__________________
"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat." - President Theodore Roosevelt, 1910

De Oppresso Liber 01/20/2025
The Reaper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2006, 18:00   #79
VelociMorte
Guerrilla
 
VelociMorte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 137
Reeper,

The preceeding letter was Cut and Pasted from the Pinnacle Armor website. I am in NO WAY questioning anyone's integrity, honesty, or motives. As you stated, we all want the same thing; what's best for the Soldier.

In fact, this goal drives me to such an extent that I sometimes voluntarily deploy with SOTAs and others, to some of the most interesting places...places in Paktika, TK, and Ramadi are a few examples. I just got back from two months in Iraq. I do this for two reasons: the first is to deploy specialized equipment, and the second is to gain valuable insight into how that equipment is utilized in a real-life tactical environment so that I can build a better product for the user. In the past, I normally ended up with whatever PPE I could get my hands on. I carry all my own stuff, and never know where I'll end up, or how long I'll be there. I'm 46 years old, and I get a little tired after an hour or two of carrying a hundred pounds of ruck, armor, ammo, weapons, and water.

For that reason, I purchased a Pinnacle Armor SOV-2000. It meets DOJ level III requirements. It weighs 16.5 pounds. It's comfortable. And it doesn't feel like I've got a damn sheet of plate steel strapped to my spine and sternum.

Now I just want to know if it really works, and I'd like to know before I'm getting shot at again.
__________________
“War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself." John Stuart Mill
VelociMorte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2006, 18:37   #80
smp52
Guerrilla
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: So. Cal
Posts: 122
I've discussed this on SOCNET and recently posted a link to this thread in the discussion there, in particular with Pinnacle's letter posted.

From my experience in acquistion, First Article Testing, contractors, etc. it seems like the letter is reaching for straws to grasp. It has attacked the professionalism, test methodology, and competancy of Government personnel charged with making the appropriate techincial decision for troop protection. From other posts made here, I believe the Progam Manager is a professional. Not that folks at Pinnacle aren't, it's just that the above letter does not respond in a diligent objective manner. Rather than stick to a discussion regarding the objective merits of the equipment in question, or even the test, it attacks individuals in a personal manner. That is not productive, IMHO.

An internet article links to the original post by Mr. Masters in this thread that has evoked the above response from Pinnacle.

As a fellow DOD acquisition employee (though probably junior in pay grade and with a different service). Pardon me Mr. Masters, I would recommend you NOT commenton this letter as asked by VM (sorry, nothing personal) here. I understand this is the home of QPs and I am a guest, so if my comments overstep, I apologize.

I know of instances where such comments (as the above letter) eventually wind up in some type of litigation and puts the government in a difficult position. I may be being overprotective or paranoid, but in my Govt. - Contractor dealings, I've had to be very careful in how and what medium comments/recommendations are made.
smp52 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2006, 22:50   #81
irtusk
Asset
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: US
Posts: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Moroney
He is a consumate professional
He may be very committed, he might be very skilled, he may have only the bests interests of this country and its soldiers at heart, he may have more integrity than anyone alive, but his comments here clearly do not demonstrate that he is 'a consumate professional'.

> My day job is acting product manager for Interceptor Body Armor

A consumate professional would have recused himself to avoid the appearance of any conflict of interest.

When Pinnacle Armor's primary complaint is that they have been the victim of 'conspiracy' to foist IBA on our troops, how does it look to have someone on IBA's payroll running the test? Does it not confirm everything they have been saying?

The sad thing is, if what you say is accurate and DragonSkin is trash, many will not believe you because of the appearance of inpropriety. You just further fuel their propaganda.

> I'm under a gag order until the test results make it up the chain.

Then a true professional would honor the gag order and keep his mouth shut and let his report do the talking for him.

> I do however, highly recommend this system for use by insurgents...

This is a very cheap shot that comes across as . . . well, unprofessional

Simply stating that it did not pass the test and the full results will be available in the report shortly would have been more than sufficient.

Look, we're all human and we all make mistakes, but do you not see how your actions encourage the conspiracy theorists?

PS: I am by no means saying Pinnacle Armor has handled this professionally either

Last edited by irtusk; 07-07-2006 at 23:28.
irtusk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2006, 05:15   #82
Jack Moroney (RIP)
Quiet Professional
 
Jack Moroney (RIP)'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Vermont
Posts: 3,093
Quote:
Originally Posted by irtusk
He may be very committed, he might be very skilled, he may have only the bests interests of this country and its soldiers at heart, he may have more integrity than anyone alive, but his comments here clearly do not demonstrate that he is 'a consumate professional'.
And you were able to deduce all that from comments written by him, and you have worked with him and known him for how long now? Hmmm, interesting.

Before you take any more cheap shots at me or my assessment of someone with whom I worked and about whom I had made those observations for duty performances and accomplishments he achieved for tasks and missions assigned by me and evaluated by folks above my paygrade who concurred with the trait associated with the term "consumate professional", feel free to strap on my jump boots and stand in my stead and evaluate those same performances for which he garned the term "consumate professional". Otherwise keep you character assasination comments to yourself until you meet the man and evaluate his performance in person. If you have personal knowledge of the equipment in question or personal observations that you feel are pertinent feel free to share them but keep the personal attacks on an individual's character between you and the individual.
__________________
Wenn einer von uns fallen sollt, der Andere steht für zwei.
Jack Moroney (RIP) is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2006, 09:01   #83
NousDefionsDoc
Quiet Professional
 
NousDefionsDoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: LA
Posts: 1,653
Quote:
Originally Posted by irtusk
He may be very committed, he might be very skilled, he may have only the bests interests of this country and its soldiers at heart, he may have more integrity than anyone alive, but his comments here clearly do not demonstrate that he is 'a consumate professional'.

> My day job is acting product manager for Interceptor Body Armor

A consumate professional would have recused himself to avoid the appearance of any conflict of interest.

When Pinnacle Armor's primary complaint is that they have been the victim of 'conspiracy' to foist IBA on our troops, how does it look to have someone on IBA's payroll running the test? Does it not confirm everything they have been saying?

The sad thing is, if what you say is accurate and DragonSkin is trash, many will not believe you because of the appearance of inpropriety. You just further fuel their propaganda.

> I'm under a gag order until the test results make it up the chain.

Then a true professional would honor the gag order and keep his mouth shut and let his report do the talking for him.

> I do however, highly recommend this system for use by insurgents...

This is a very cheap shot that comes across as . . . well, unprofessional

Simply stating that it did not pass the test and the full results will be available in the report shortly would have been more than sufficient.

Look, we're all human and we all make mistakes, but do you not see how your actions encourage the conspiracy theorists?

PS: I am by no means saying Pinnacle Armor has handled this professionally either
You are entitled to your opinion. However, around here we like opinions to be based on something in order for them to be expressed.

From what I can see, your knowledge of the topic at hand is limited to this thread on the internet? That about the extent of it?

You "happened across the thread" and you "just had to comment" and this is what you came up with? Somehow I doubt you "happened across" anything. You would have been better served commenting on the armor rather than the poster. Because you see, we might actually care if you have worn/tested/shot the armor. But the truth is, none of us give a flying rat's ass what you think about us personally.

Again I ask, what special traits or skills do you have that allow you to qualify the characters of Special Forces officers as less than professional?

You be careful there Mr. irtusk person. Your introduction was weak, your profile unimpressive and you are insulting professionals. You watch your tone and content or seek life elsewhere. There won't be another warning.
__________________
Somewhere a True Believer is training to kill you. He is training with minimal food or water, in austere conditions, training day and night. The only thing clean on him is his weapon and he made his web gear. He doesn't worry about what workout to do - his ruck weighs what it weighs, his runs end when the enemy stops chasing him. This True Believer is not concerned about 'how hard it is;' he knows either he wins or dies. He doesn't go home at 17:00, he is home.
He knows only The Cause.

Still want to quit?
NousDefionsDoc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2006, 10:42   #84
Karl.Masters
Quiet Professional
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Culpeper, Virginia
Posts: 203
Integrity

Quote:
Originally Posted by VelociMorte
For that reason, I purchased a Pinnacle Armor SOV-2000. It meets DOJ level III requirements. It weighs 16.5 pounds. It's comfortable. And it doesn't feel like I've got a damn sheet of plate steel strapped to my spine and sternum.

Now I just want to know if it really works, and I'd like to know before I'm getting shot at again.
VM,

You seem to have been misled on the actual NIJ compliance status of your armor.

The National Institute of Justice/National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center (NIJ/NLECTC) maintains a consumer products list (CPL) of body armor models that have been tested under the NIJ compliance testing program (CTP) and found to comply with threat specific performance requirements detailed in NIJ-Standard 0101.04, Ballistic Resistance of Personal Body Armor.

The NIJ/NLECTC CPL can be found at:
http://www.justnet.org/BatPro/Reports/rptCPL2005.asp

The CPL lists models of armor that have obtained the status of NIJ/NLECTC "Compliance", defined by the standard as "NIJ approval, AFTER SUCCESSFUL BALLISTIC PERFORMANCE TESTING TO THIS STANDARD, of a body armor model submitted to the NIJ compliance testing program CTP."

After NIJ grants compliance status for a particular model of armor, the manufacturer is authorized to apply the "Certification of Compliance", defined by the standard as the "Manufacturer's affadavit (certification) that a production unit of body armor meets (complies with) all of the requirements of this standard for the labeled protection classification."

NIJ-Standard 0101.04 also attempts to maintain the integrity of the CTP with the proviso that: "THE COMPLIANCE STATEMENT ABOVE SHALL NOT APPEAR ON ARMOR THAT HAS FAILED NIJ COMPLIANCE TESTING, OR ON ARMOR THAT HAS NOT BEEN TESTED FOR COMPLIANCE AS SPECIFIED BY THIS STANDARD. ONCE AUTHORIZED TO PLACE THIS STATEMENT ON A MODEL OF ARMOR, THE MANUFACTURER SHALL NOT ALTER OR MODIFY THIS STATEMENT IN ANY WAY."

There are three ways to verify the compliance status of an armor that has been labeled with the NIJ Type III compliance statement:

1) Ask the manufacturer for a copy of the NIJ Type III compliance certification.

2) Check the NIJ/NLECTC CPL at http://www.justnet.org/BatPro/Reports/rptCPL2005.asp[/url] to determine if the model is certified for NIJ Type III performance.

3) E-mail or call the NIJ/NLECTC directly with an inquiry. E-mail to kmerlo@nlectc.org or call 301 519-5119.

In the case of a conflict between the Type III compliance statement on the armor label and the CPL, as we seem to have in this case, I recommend that you contact the NIJ directly for an explanation of this unfortunate situation.

Karl
Karl.Masters is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2006, 11:34   #85
CoLawman
Area Commander
 
CoLawman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,205
VM,

Sticking my nose in.......
DOJ Level III requirements are used in determining a federal buildings level of security. Probably just a mixup on acronyms. I understand that NIJ is a branch of DOJ, but it is probably best to use the appropriate acronyms to avoid any confusion amongst us less educated and experienced.

Mr. Masters sir...........touche!
CoLawman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2006, 17:14   #86
Doc
Quiet Professional
 
Doc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Ohio
Posts: 982
Freakin sales people.

Most of them have never ever entered the arena they are selling in and bet their position in life and/or their reputation by the decision(s) they make in such matters.

I have zero respect for that type of person.

No conviction and no humility.
__________________





De Oppresso Liber



Doc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2006, 19:42   #87
Team Sergeant
Quiet Professional
 
Team Sergeant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 20,929
Quote:
Originally Posted by VelociMorte
Reeper,

The preceeding letter was Cut and Pasted from the Pinnacle Armor website.

I will tell you this once:

If you (or anyone else) does a "cut and paste" WITHOUT also posting a URL (link) properly attributing the site the cut and paste was taken from I'll delete it all and ban you next time, do I make myself clear?

Now you have a few minutes to make that above post correct or I'll delete all your posts and remove you from the board.

Team Sergeant
__________________
"The Spartans do not ask how many are the enemy, but where they are."
Team Sergeant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2006, 21:29   #88
VelociMorte
Guerrilla
 
VelociMorte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Karl.Masters

VM,

You seem to have been misled on the actual NIJ compliance status of your armor.

The National Institute of Justice/National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center (NIJ/NLECTC) maintains a consumer products list (CPL) of body armor models that have been tested under the NIJ compliance testing program (CTP) and found to comply with threat specific performance requirements detailed in NIJ-Standard 0101.04, Ballistic Resistance of Personal Body Armor.

The NIJ/NLECTC CPL can be found at:
http://www.justnet.org/BatPro/Reports/rptCPL2005.asp

The CPL lists models of armor that have obtained the status of NIJ/NLECTC "Compliance", defined by the standard as "NIJ approval, AFTER SUCCESSFUL BALLISTIC PERFORMANCE TESTING TO THIS STANDARD, of a body armor model submitted to the NIJ compliance testing program CTP."

After NIJ grants compliance status for a particular model of armor, the manufacturer is authorized to apply the "Certification of Compliance", defined by the standard as the "Manufacturer's affadavit (certification) that a production unit of body armor meets (complies with) all of the requirements of this standard for the labeled protection classification."

NIJ-Standard 0101.04 also attempts to maintain the integrity of the CTP with the proviso that: "THE COMPLIANCE STATEMENT ABOVE SHALL NOT APPEAR ON ARMOR THAT HAS FAILED NIJ COMPLIANCE TESTING, OR ON ARMOR THAT HAS NOT BEEN TESTED FOR COMPLIANCE AS SPECIFIED BY THIS STANDARD. ONCE AUTHORIZED TO PLACE THIS STATEMENT ON A MODEL OF ARMOR, THE MANUFACTURER SHALL NOT ALTER OR MODIFY THIS STATEMENT IN ANY WAY."

There are three ways to verify the compliance status of an armor that has been labeled with the NIJ Type III compliance statement:

1) Ask the manufacturer for a copy of the NIJ Type III compliance certification.

2) Check the NIJ/NLECTC CPL at http://www.justnet.org/BatPro/Reports/rptCPL2005.asp[/url] to determine if the model is certified for NIJ Type III performance.

3) E-mail or call the NIJ/NLECTC directly with an inquiry. E-mail to kmerlo@nlectc.org or call 301 519-5119.

In the case of a conflict between the Type III compliance statement on the armor label and the CPL, as we seem to have in this case, I recommend that you contact the NIJ directly for an explanation of this unfortunate situation.

Karl
Karl,

The site http://www.justnet.org/BatPro/Reports/rptCPL2005.asp provides a list of products that are certified to the NIJ 2005 Interim Requirements for Bullet-Resistant Body Armor, effective September 26, 2005, not NIJ-Standard 0101.04. On August 24, 2005, NIJ introduced the NIJ 2005 Interim Requirements for Bullet-Resistant Body Armor. These requirements modify and supplement NIJ's Standard-0101.04, Ballistic Resistance of Personal Body Armor. They are promulgated on an interim basis to address recent NIJ research findings that indicate that certain body armor models previously found by NIJ to be compliant with earlier NIJ requirements for ballistic resistance of new body armor (including NIJ Standard-0101.04) may not adequately maintain ballistic performance during their service life (specifically those made of Zylon). The report does not lists products which conform to NIJ-Standard 0101.04. NIJ Standard 0101.04, “Ballistic Resistance of Personal Body Armor,” document NCJ 183651, was originally published in September 2000.

I'll email kmerlo@nlectc.org and see what's up. I'll also email Pinnacle and ask for a copy of the compliance certification.
__________________
“War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself." John Stuart Mill
VelociMorte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2006, 16:25   #89
Karl.Masters
Quiet Professional
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Culpeper, Virginia
Posts: 203
VM,

All requirements of NIJ-Standard 0101.04 must be met for an armor panel to be certified under the NIJ 2005 Interim Requirements, which as you state contain additive requirements involving materials and service life/warranty period. Manufacturing date will determine which standard is referenced in the compliance statement.


The point of the post was that an armor panel must actually be submitted for NIJ Type III compliance testing, and must actually pass NIJ Type III compliance testing before it can be labeled with an NIJ Type III compliance statement.

Karl
Karl.Masters is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2006, 19:28   #90
VelociMorte
Guerrilla
 
VelociMorte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Karl.Masters
VM,

All requirements of NIJ-Standard 0101.04 must be met for an armor panel to be certified under the NIJ 2005 Interim Requirements, which as you state contain additive requirements involving materials and service life/warranty period. Manufacturing date will determine which standard is referenced in the compliance statement.


The point of the post was that an armor panel must actually be submitted for NIJ Type III compliance testing, and must actually pass NIJ Type III compliance testing before it can be labeled with an NIJ Type III compliance statement.

Karl

Karl,

Are you stating that Pinnacle Armor labels their SOV-2000 product as compliant, when in fact it is not?
__________________
“War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself." John Stuart Mill
VelociMorte is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:52.



Copyright 2004-2022 by Professional Soldiers ®
Site Designed, Maintained, & Hosted by Hilliker Technologies