I'm guessing this stuff isn't too cheap.

considering the prices we pay for some things, the cost is probably not all that much. Besides, the cost is irrelevant if it saves soldiers lives.

I may be wrong but I think I heard somewhere that these would cost around 100000 dollars per jacket...so yea I'm not sure a soldiers life is worth that much in the eyes of the military.

There's about 1.4 million people on active duty in the whole of the US military. Out of those, there are 433,000 enlisted people in the Army. Ignoring the other branches, and officers in the army, and at $100k a pop, it would cost $43.3 billion to equip all of the enlisted army soldiers. That's a bit under 1% of the military's annual budget of ~$550 billion. (from wikipedia)

On a per-soldier level, the army spends in the neighborhood of $50k to train a new recruit, from enlistment to their first assigned post. (source) Not 100% sure what exactly this figure entails, but I am guessing it does not include equipment. Could be wrong.

Anyway, regardless of its effectiveness in saving lives, it seems unlikely that the army would want to ~triple the cost of a new recruit. I believe it was mentioned in the discussion for the AK47 vs. M16 video that the main reason we are still using the M16, even though better weapons have been developed, is that we already have a lot of M16s, and it's cheaper to make small changes to the existing design instead of buying new guns for everybody.

*promote

Promoting this video back to the front page; last published Friday, January 18th, 2008 3:19pm PST - promote requested by Constitutional_Patriot.

43.3 Billion eh? I guess the fiat banking system needed the money more so they can take those great vacations on their private jets. Seriously.. the military spends a huge amount on the technology to kill yet leaves their troops with minimal protection. The outcome is more deaths all the while someone is profiting BIG from the sale of arms and overpriced no-bid contracts.

Such a shame.

>> ^cheesemoo:
There's about 1.4 million people on active duty in the whole of the US military. Out of those, there are 433,000 enlisted people in the Army. Ignoring the other branches, and officers in the army, and at $100k a pop, it would cost $43.3 billion to equip all of the enlisted army soldiers. That's a bit under 1% of the military's annual budget of ~$550 billion. (from wikipedia)
On a per-soldier level, the army spends in the neighborhood of $50k to train a new recruit, from enlistment to their first assigned post. (source) Not 100% sure what exactly this figure entails, but I am guessing it does not include equipment. Could be wrong.
Anyway, regardless of its effectiveness in saving lives, it seems unlikely that the army would want to ~triple the cost of a new recruit. I believe it was mentioned in the discussion for the AK47 vs. M16 video that the main reason we are still using the M16, even though better weapons have been developed, is that we already have a lot of M16s, and it's cheaper to make small changes to the existing design instead of buying new guns for everybody.

you mean a bit under 10% not 1%

I done learned math good.

"The basic Dragon Skin vest for torso protection costs about $2,000 and the entire getup, which includes a protective collar, optional lightweight SAPI plates, an optional weight bearing rig, backpack plates, and an armored, take-it-with-you anywhere protective blanket, can run an individual more than $5,000. The basic Interceptor body armor issued to American troops costs about $1,100, although the wearer receives far less protection, ballistics information provided by both the manufacturers and the U.S. Army showed. According to the statistics provided by Pinnacle, in Army-supervised ballistics tests Dragon Skin's protective qualities "far exceeded" anything available anywhere else, Chessum said."

I need to get one of those, not to pricey really. The army already uses them in certain situations. The hold up is more bureaucratic than anything else. You have to evaluate a new weapon system and find a way to properly begin switching from older platforms ect ect.