What is Digg?138 Comments
- Schmitty, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9::deep breath::
"RANDOM PARTISAN FLAMING COMMENT!!!!"
Yay! I'm a good Digger ^^ - cmykx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Way to read the article, most people above me!
"The FAST G1, was designed for use by vehicle mounted personnel, more specifically crew served weapons operators. By nature of their duty, crew served weapons operators have a significantly reduced protection level, when compared with occupants who remain inside the vehicle."
They aren't running around with these. They have been designed for a VERY SPECIFIC FUNCTION. Thank you. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6"What the hell?
"Lets protect the mouth and nose but not the eyes""
A Jedi needs not his eyes, young padawan. - Clay3521, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8As a former active duty Marine.. I can say this looks totally stupid! What about the their eyes? The standard issue goggles aren't going to stop anything but dirt and dust. Plus, try trying to make a accurate shot with your rifle with this crap strapped to your face. A gas mask is enough of a pain in the ass to shoot with, much less 4 inches of ninja armor. This is just another prime example of your tax dollars at work. Just like the new rule that came out that said if our troops are killed over in Iraq wearing personal armor.
Story quote " Two deploying soldiers and a concerned mother reported Friday afternoon that the U.S. Army appears to be singling out soldiers who have purchased Pinnacle's Dragon Skin Body Armor for special treatment. The soldiers, who are currently staging for combat operations from a secret location, reported that their commander told them if they were wearing Pinnacle Dragon Skin and were killed their beneficiaries might not receive the death benefits from their $400,000 SGLI life insurance policies. The soldiers were ordered to leave their privately purchased body armor at home or face the possibility of both losing their life insurance benefit and facing disciplinary action."
It's crap like this that made me get out in the first place. - Phoghat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Yes Lord Vader ?
- thenativeraver, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Iraqi's, If you only knew the power of the Dark Side.
- magik, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2At least they're trying to protect our soldiers, why so many complaints? If you don't like it, design something your damn self!
- DrEbola, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2if you don't think this will work, then how did the stormtroopers use similar equipment.
geez, think before you post, okay? - JakeMcMahon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2What the hell?
"Lets protect the mouth and nose but not the eyes" - mrjabba, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2This is not the facial mask you are looking for....
- tharealmegaman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Impressive.
- Lumiras, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1well, here's the deal. If I was a soldier fighting in Iraq, where you're sticking your face into houses, cars, and various other things looking for bombs or insurgents, I would really enjoy protecting my face with some armor. Sure, it looks Star Wars-ish, but what armor could you put on your face that wouldn't make you look evil? If this thing saves a few soldier's lives, more power to them
- drewski, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Dateline Iraq: Insurgents Fragged by Donkey Kong Doppelganger. Surreal.
- Moocat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I would totally wear one of these. Running long distance from insurgents isn't usually what tends to go on (short distance yes), so the added protection in my opinion outweighs the fact it might slow you down in a long distane haul. And training is done for hauling your ass around anyway under extreme conditions.
- nato64, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1All you need to do now is photoshop out the jeep and put that guy on a Dewback...
- whisperedlie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1RTFA:
1) It clearly states it is intended for vehicle-borne soldiers, particularly weapons operators. You don't shoulder those weapons so this won't get in the way.
2) specifications state it is compatible with the standard issue NBC mask and with common vehicle communications equipment. - GrendelT, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1What about the arms, legs and "buttocks, sir"?
- sokz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"...you can see how far back the mask slides after impact (and the top strap breaking off). I can imagine at least a shattered jaw and nose from the impact alone, if not other injuries."
You don't think an impact from such a powerful gun is going to snap a guys head back and cause some damage regardless of what's covering his face? I certainly think that this is a big improvement over.. nothing.
My goodness people find anything to complain about. - dargon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1unfortunately armor tends to not be that transparent so the eyes are the sacrifice
- singularity77, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I believe it's TK-421.
- chatwithaninja, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Looks like reptile from mortal kombat.
Otherwise, good. protect everything you can. It'll be a month before they put cover over the eyes too, because they've already developed bulletproof clear material (not glass, some kind of carbon fiber I think) that is only 1/4 inch thick.
And that article about the military denying benefits to people who use personal body armor instead of the supplied body armor... DUH! What insurance company is going to insure someones life when they are not using the approved body armor? there is no way to verify that the body armor that the soldiers buy for themselves is in good condition. I don't see the problem. - magebomb11, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1cost?
- GeneralChang, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Freakin Aye! bout damn time!
Nothing sucks more than being gunner for a convoy into the Afghan mountains in the winter. Having a rag around your face helps for only so long. the air is so cold that your rag gets heavy with snot and drool.
As for the not having eye gear built in, I'd prefer that so you can swap goggles for sunglasses. - Webjunkie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Look Sir, Droids!
- Overdose, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1People still obtain injuries while wearing kevlar. But we use it. Because it is better than not having it.
- stenspect, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"that is so lame.
its probably poorly vented and very hot.
also, it doesn't appear to work with a gas mask."
Read the brief - it says it well ventilated and i bet you wouldnt say its lame if you were a gun mounted soldier driving now a narror Iraqi road that was a known hotzone. Anything is better then nothing. - F1R3, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Stupid. They should go with full helmets if the goal is to protect their heads. One that includes a visor that could be lowered or raised, and possibly with some kind of tinting scheme to better improve visibility during bright days, but becomes more clear at night. Might as well integrate it with a gas mask.
This thing just looks like a cheap ugly hunk of plastic, makes them look sort of like mental patients with a muzzle. And if they don't like them, chances are they are going to try to avoid wearing them. Expecially with the heat, the last thing you want is some hulking peice of heavy plastic hanging off of your face keeping you from breathing right and pushing your hot breath back at your face.
This also doesn't keep them from getting their heads chopped off which seems like a big problem over there. - olympuscoder, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I've seen a few comments to the effect:
"This is useless because it doesn't protect the eyes and ears. "
That is the stupidest argument for not using I've ever heard. Body armor doesn't protect the head at all, or the throat in a lot of cases, but it would be stupid to go into combat without it if it is available.
Armor is about reducing risk. Basicly, to injure you have to hit something that isn't armored. The more of the body that is armored, the more difficult that is. And, the more critical parts of the body (torso, head, face) you mostly cover, the harder it is to land a killing shot. Even if you hit a leg, a strong soldier is likely to keep shooting (e.g., http://www.michaelyon-online.com/wp/gates-of-fire.htm).
Now, as far as imparing the ability to fire a weapon, all armor is a trade off between freedom of movement and protection. This type of armor may not be appropriate for soldiers that will be fighting from a distance. For those in close urban combat (where someone sticking a gun in your face point blank is a real possibility) it would be a good compromise. The range is short, so aiming doesn't have to be as perfect. - fhwgds, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1That thing looks horrible. I guess there's no saving face in saving your face.
- iceperson, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0to clay3521,
my guess is you can't read and that's why you're no longer in my Corps. next time RTFA and don't prove to everyone that you're one of the 10% of sh*tbirds we in the Corps try so hard to weed out. - ezweave, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Ground troops appear to be testing it now -> http://www.mtekweaponsystems.com/~mtekweap/news.html
- wilf_brim, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0gg @ iceperson. The current ballistic goggles will stop most smaller fragments. Remember, these are designed to stop shrapnel, not aimed fire. A 7.62 round will defeat most body armor and helments. The eyes are very well protected if the eyewear is worn. The problem is that is tends to decrease peripheral vision and tends to be hot, and thus taken off.
I wonder what TD-0013 (From Winging It podcast) will think of this. - BradGalliford, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Why not have something more like a full helmet? i mean you know that no one is going to have that thing strapped on.. it would be a pain..
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Today is the dawn of the Star Wars age.
- shiftless, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0At least those poor kids they send out there to fight won't come back with warped faces :(
- MindTrigger, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0
"We've gone plaid!"
That reminds me, my kid would probably get a huge kick out of Spaceballs now that she's old enough to understand Star Wars, and appreciate the sarcasm of Spaceballs. - ThisGeek, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Doesn't look anything like a stormtropper or Darth Vader, looks vaguely like a big, gree, plastic slice of watermelon :)
I'm sick of digg being a forum for ignorant, anti-american children. - ezweave, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0INFANTRY VERSION: http://www.mtekweaponsystems.com/~mtekweap/FAST%20G2.html
http://www.mtekweaponsystems.com/~mtekweap/generation.html
They also have some other product that doesn't have any info. Interesting stuff. - sidebuster, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0did anyone read the fact that it is for drivers?
- b04155, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"Plus, try trying to make a accurate shot with your rifle with this crap strapped to your face"
What if the armor was molded to match the contours of a rifle, from either side? - TigerClaw, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Hehe, That would be interesting... TK421, Why aren't you at your post?
- deathguppie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Ya, I'm with other posters here this is lame.
The GI issue helmet does not stop regular small arms munitions, what the hell is this going to do.
They need new armor. All the way round. - b04155, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Wouldn't it be PFAST, as in hurry up, I need to P Fast
- Rossye, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0It is pointless to resist. kuuuuuu haaaaaa kuuuuuu haaaa
- muikano, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0It does put a friendly face on our army. Because it's so goram ugly, only retards would allow themselves to wear it.
Iraqi: "Jesus christ, that's ugly. What the hell is that?"
Soldier: "I am..a human being."
Iraqi: "Shhh, Merrick. Just tilt your head and let it all be over. There there." - ablissfulgal, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0i think it is just a bit too clunky....as though it is heavier than the armor that they wear to protect their chests
- Overdose, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Why do people care about the look of it so much, why not the efficiency.
The video looks like they can aim well. - Nerfdude, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0it's firstgen, it's not standard issue, it's not refined yet. at any rate it's a good step in the right direction.
plus it looks mean as hell :D make some goggles that snap into it and it'd make anybody look like the ultimate badass. - bigteebo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0It looks a LOT like Kabal from Mortal Kombat 3, not so much as Reptile. Can you jerk your head back and shoot stuff?
- johcha, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Does it do anything to dissipate the energy of the bullet hitting the helmet? The force of the shot would probably snap your neck if it were at 1M.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 134 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is