I'm sure you all have already seen this, but here's a story we ran as our lead item at Military.com this morning:
DoD Audit Finds Body Armor Buys Flawed
The Army can't be sure some of its body armor met safety standards, partly because it didn't do proper paperwork on initial testing of the protective vests, a Defense Department audit said.
Democratic Rep. Louise M. Slaughter of New York, who requested the department inspector general's report, on April 3 demanded the firing of officials responsible. But the Army said the gear is safe and the issue is a disagreement over when and what type of testing is required - principally so-called "first article testing" typically done on a product before a contract is awarded.
The inspector general reviewed $5.2 billion worth of Army and Marine Corps contracts for body armor from 2004 through 2006.
"Specific information concerning testing and approval of first articles was not included in 13 of 28 Army contracts and orders reviewed, and contracting files were not maintained in 11 of 28 Army contracts to show why procurement decisions were made," the report concluded.
"As a result, DoD has no assurance that first articles produced under 13 of the 28 contracts and orders reviewed met the required standards," or that 11 of the 28 contracts were awarded based on informed decisions, it said.
The news wires beat me to the punch on this, but I did find the report on the DoD IG web site if you want to read it for yourself...
I also pinged PEO Soldier for their reaction to the report. Here's what they told me:
Soldier protection is the Army's top priority. Since its initial fielding in 1999, the Army's Interceptor Body Armor has demonstrated superior combat performance in Kosovo, Afghanistan, and Iraq. Many Soldiers are alive today because of it. Prior to issuing body armor to Soldiers, the U.S. Army conducts rigorous and extensive testing to ensure it meets Army standards and is safe for use by Soldiers in combat.
The Army is in full and complete compliance with the FAR, DFAR, source law and current policy in every case concerning body armor procurement.
The fact that the Defense Department Inspector General was not completely able to verify testing and approval of first-article testing or aspects of contracting files does not mean the body armor did not meet specifications.
The Army requires two levels of performance verification prior to acceptance of body armor issued to Soldiers: First Article Test (FAT) and Lot Acceptance Test (LAT). These two test requirements verify that body armor meets U.S. Army standards before being issued to Soldiers and ensure production processes remain in check. The Army's response to the draft report states that first-article testing is a regular and consistent current business practice for purchasing body armor.
The current body armor is doing what it is designed to do: stop or slow bullets and fragments, and reduce the severity of wounds.
Prevention of injuries to our men and women is a top priority for the Department of the Army and the Department of Defense.
IG Report Points:
The IG reviewed Army and Marine Corps contracts and orders awarded between January 2004 and December 2006.
The scope of the review was limited to reviewing pre-solicitation and the solicitation and evaluation phases of the acquisition process, as well as contracting files related to first-article testing.
DoD IG found:
Specific information concerning testing and approval of first articles was not included in 13 of 28 Army contracts and orders.
Contracting files were not maintained in 11 of 28 Army contracts to show why procurement decisions were made.
DoD has no assurance first articles produced under 13 contracts met required standards or 11 contracts were awarded based on informed decisions.
First-article testing is performed before or in the initial stage of production to determine whether the proposed product conforms with contract requirements.
Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) allows first-article testing to be waived if the contractor is already producing the item under contract.
Now, I don't like the idea that the Army took shortcuts in testing. But I can understand that the service wouldn't pay for a series of FAT tests if they're contracting for another large buy of the same vest.
When I looked into the Marine Corps armor flaws -- where waivers were issued on specific production lots of armor that government testers believed were flawed -- the rejections did not require a FAT test to verify. In fact, the engineers looked at earlier FAT test data as a benchmark for performance of the new, flawed lots.
Technically, it seems correct that if the Army -- or any service -- is buying a new type of armor, or new components or either with new manufacturing techniques, a FAT test must be conducted. It seems to me on the surface that the Army issued a new contract to the same company -- Point Blank -- for the same vest with the same components and manufacturing technology as previous ones. That shouldn't technically require another FAT test. But, I guess you could argue that it's better to be safe than sorry.
As a commenter on the Military.com story put it:
"Yeah, it's too bad they cut through all the red tape to rush this equipment out to the troops instead of the usual procedure that keeps new gear in the prototype phase until years after the need has passed and the technology has become obsolete."
You can kind of see the guy's point.
-- Christian
Just DO Remember where this came from kk? < without the final k, cuz i don't give a doggone about that crap!
Resolving the Next-Gen Armor Muddle
All right boys and girls, there’s been a helluva lot of discussion over at Military.com about Dave’s armor design and whether it would work or not work or whatever. Honestly I think part of the problem is that first off it’s over most (not all)of our heads. Second off, Woroner doesn’t want to tell too much about the damned thing out of OPSEC or COMSEC concerns, which makes explanation difficult at best. Imagine trying to explain a lawnmower engine if you couldn't talk about internal combustion, or if pistons were classifed.
Lemme see what I can do to make it make a little sense.
Have you heard about the Boomerang System made by the folks out of Boston? It’s an acoustical sensor system that uses “acoustical entrapment” to quickly and reliably identify the location of a sniper or other shooter that’s putting rounds downrange towards our grunts. It's been on Future Weapons and a couple other shows, has actually deployed to the AOR and apparently works.
Woroner’s system is kind of like that, but it uses light sensitivity to detect incoming projectiles. Sound won’t work, it’s too slow for a system to detect an EFP or whatever and mitigate the blast. You might be able to detect the blast, depending upon the strength of the device and the range, but you damn sure wouldn’t be able to detect it and then take steps to defeat it. Only light and electricity are fast enough to react to something moving at thousands of feet per second, which is why light and electricity are the basis of Woroner’s “barrier system”.
It’s in the high nanosecond, low microsecond range of response, putting a countermeasure out to intercept the incoming weapon and either destroy it or mitigate it by shearing the blast wave off with it’s own blast moving at a reciprocal speed. This is effectively a countermeasure system intended to be used in addition to next-gen armor to reduce or nullify the incoming blast and projectile(s). Let me put it to you the way I had to explain it to Slim, which I think you’ll find is a little simpler than Dave’s explanation.
Some delinquent little bastard in your neighborhood uses a potato gun to launch a spud at your car. You’ve got Woroner’s system mounted on the hood. It detects the incoming spud using light, not sound, and throws out some high tech shit you can’t pronounce let alone explain to intercept it. That stuff is moving at about the same speed as the spud. It hits the potato and slows it down, possibly deflecting it some so that while it still hits your fender, it only hits with the impact of a nerf dart.
Potato-gun launched spud to nerf dart. Makes sense to me. I’d rather get clocked in the head with an orange foam bullet than an Idaho baker any day.
Translate that to the Big Sandbox. Hajji detonates an IED next to a humvee with Woroner’s system mounted on it. Woroner’s system senses the wave of the incoming projectile and puts a radically different defensive measure into play. This measure deflects the oncoming shear waves and ameliorates the remaining overpressure and underpressure events by shear redirection and deflection. Whatever’s left of the incoming projectile and its blast hits the humvee. The crew inside are better off if its up-armored, and better off still if it’s armored in next-gen armor and best of all if they weren't in it to begin with (but that's not really practical now, is it?).
So that’s the deal with his ‘armoring’ system. I can’t tell you any more about it ‘cuz me no speaka da geek and I only understand about half of what he says. If you want to know more, you need to ask Woroner himself, or maybe that fat bearded guy that does the TV advertisements and infomercials. I dunno. I don’t know if you flip a switch, click an icon or piss on the damned dilithium crystals to turn it on, and I couldn’t tell you whether it’s powered by lithium batteries, sparkplugs or a pseudo-Riemannian manifold. What I do know is that if there’s the slightest chance the thing works, and it’ll help our guys come home whole, then somebody somewhere with some mojo needs to check it out and get it some attention. It’s a sad truth that without the lobbyists and pitchmen and assorted high dollar schmoozers the big corporations have, it may not even matter whether it works or not because no one will hear about it.
That’s why I ran the damned article in the first place, and I honestly don’t much give a shit if you agree with him or disagree with him, think he’s a genius or a complete assclown. If we get a debate started about it, generate some dialogue, then maybe something positive will come out of it.
Oh, and about the MRAPs and all that other business – those of you that are bitching about his statements regarding the MRAP are missing the point. He agrees, I agree, Slim agrees, everybody agrees they’re saving lives. That’s not the issue. The issue is we’re going to have to come up with something else to address other missions and other terrains, because it gets stuck and it rolls over and you can’t turn the damn thing around in a narrow street. Unless our next war is waged in the world’s biggest parking lot, then that’s going to cause some problems.
So, hope this clears things up a little bit. If not, then I hope it at least piqued your interest. If you were somehow offended by anything I’ve said, then I’d like to humbly suggest you grow a thicker skin or just don’t subscribe to the damned blog. What kind of fucktard gets offended by an action figure anyway? (Even an action figure as undeniably bad ass and devilishly handsome as I…)
That’s it for now, more to follow.
Swingin’ Dick Out!
Posted by: David Woroner at November 17, 2008 03:52 AM