Slashdot Mirror
Makers Compete To Produce US Army's Next Official Handgun (military.com)
HughPickens.com writes: After 30 years in use, the U.S. Army's official handgun, the Beretta M9 pistol, is being retired. The AP reports that firearms manufacturers are competing for a rare chance to sell the U.S. Army a new handgun that would replace the current Cold War-era model. Critics say the M9 is too bulky for small-handed shooters. Troops who fought in Iraq and Afghanistan complain it's not as hard-hitting as they would like, and it can't easily accommodate the accessories now common in the civilian firearms market, such as swappable gun-sights or gun-mounted lights. "It's a little one size-fits-most" says Rodney Briggs.. "It's been around for a really, really long time, and it's just old and outdated." Read more, below.
Hugh Pickens continues: Army has a lengthy list of requirements. Among them, it wants a handgun with an adjustable grip that can easily fit large or small hands. That way, shooters don't have to adjust their grip mid-fight to operate hard-to-reach buttons or levers. The gun should accommodate sights that make it easier to shoot in low light. It should have a rail on which soldiers can easily attach additional equipment, like infrared pointers. The military also wants a gun that can be equipped with a suppressor, which muffles the sound of gunshots. Beretta intends to enter a new pistol called the APX into the competition. The new gun is a major engineering departure from the M9. It has a polymer frame like more recent handguns and can meet the Army's other requirements. Beretta has publicly complained that the government never formally requested efforts to improve its M9, which the company said is a standard procedure for upgrading platforms. "If you look at the history for a variety of weapons, you'll find all along we'll have used spiral development, product improvement. Where was the requirement they notify prime contractor with an opportunity to fix the problem?" says Howard Yellen, a military adviser for Beretta.
Hugh Pickens continues: Army has a lengthy list of requirements. Among them, it wants a handgun with an adjustable grip that can easily fit large or small hands. That way, shooters don't have to adjust their grip mid-fight to operate hard-to-reach buttons or levers. The gun should accommodate sights that make it easier to shoot in low light. It should have a rail on which soldiers can easily attach additional equipment, like infrared pointers. The military also wants a gun that can be equipped with a suppressor, which muffles the sound of gunshots. Beretta intends to enter a new pistol called the APX into the competition. The new gun is a major engineering departure from the M9. It has a polymer frame like more recent handguns and can meet the Army's other requirements. Beretta has publicly complained that the government never formally requested efforts to improve its M9, which the company said is a standard procedure for upgrading platforms. "If you look at the history for a variety of weapons, you'll find all along we'll have used spiral development, product improvement. Where was the requirement they notify prime contractor with an opportunity to fix the problem?" says Howard Yellen, a military adviser for Beretta.
I'll stick with my Kimber, thank you very much.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
back in the day everyone used to joke that the baretta's didn't have any stopping power and if you shot someone with it you would only make them angry
Then maybe you'd all think before shooting from the hip
Shouldn't this be a 3D printed sidearm? The only thing needed would be the template, and the army could print as many/few as needed themselves, in the field if necessary. This should be a no-brainer, the fucking government moves like a sloth.
Except they want it tiny so female soldiers can wield it...
More importantly they authorized hollow-point/frangible bullets, which means they're taking full advantage of the Hague Convention's ban only applying to conventional warfare -- something the Army totally doesn't engage in these days.
NATO was the reason we left the .45. It would still have the same or worse issue with small handed shooters (what are they doing in the army shouldn't they be making my sandwich?)
If the US buys a non-NATO standard chambered pistol it is likely that other NATO countries would likely also look at the new pistol/round because none of them have any real affinity to 9MM.
law enforcement is down-sizing their handguns as well. the .40SW is being replaced by the 9MM.
"Where was the requirement they notify prime contractor with an opportunity to fix the problem?" Really? Why would they need to? They want a new gun.. .Not a modular modified version of the existing one... Why keep the same contractor? It makes sense to produce a new handgun after 3 decades. They should probably have a weapons refresh program a little shorter then 30 years...
I was in the USMC right at the switch from the 1911 to the M9.
Problems with the M9:
- Fragile.
- Trigger return spring easily lost when grips removed for cleaning (this renders the weapon useless).
- 9mm, not exactly a hard-hitting round.
- Locking block fractures and cracks. Not a Browning link/linkless tilt barrel design, so unnecessarily complicated.
- Magazines too fragile compared to 1911 magazines.
Good things:
- Accurate
- Easily controlled during rapid fire
An updated M1911? It's not like people aren't already carrying it as a backup sidearm.
As in the past, the contract will go to whoever bribes the most officials.
The prototypes will fall short, and the initial shipments will be half working and substandard at best even after going 3-4x over budget and being years late.
However we'll keep pouring money in to the project and beating the dam things senseless until the fifth or six iteration becomes useful. Because that's how shit gets done in the army.
We've got a aging fleet of desk generals that need to keep that door revolving!
"Critics say the M9 is too bulky for small-handed shooters"
Read: women.
Seriously, people: infantry combat is STILL one of those old-fashioned things where size and strength are really fucking important. You're not going to be able to design a smaller, lighter gun for petite little hands that ALSO has (as the rest of the article explains is needed badly) an increased stopping-power (which is primarily about the kinetic energy striking the target).
"Finesse" all the Ranger tests you want, but "average woman A" will not perform as well in combat as "average man B".* This is just another example of how/why.
* that said, there are a crapton of wastrels, layabouts, and good-for-nothings in the lower bracket of the male bell curve that will be outperformed by exceptional women because the women have the mental attitude necessary to be successful, which can get you a long way.
-Styopa
This is how Gaston Glock got in the handgun market, a contract for a new sidearm for the Austrian military. I don't know handguns. All the makers have compact models now, and it seems like Glock took over the American handgun market some time ago. What do you think the chances are the US military switches to a polymer sidearm?
Here is your updated Colt 1911 in knock them down .45 ACP.
It supports every civilian accessory known to man.
Did anyone else read that title and think WTF are makers doing competing for handgun contracts for the military?
The word you are looking for is manufacturers.
The 1911A1 is still the most perfect pistol ever made & the .45 ACP is still a beast.
Why not a company known for its reliability? Glocks are the standard, but Sigs are what the pros use and pony up the big bucks for.
Of course, there is the 1911 style, which has proven itself for over a century, but is a PITA (relative to a Glock) to completely strip.
As for caliber, because body armor is so common, firefights are about getting extremities. One can debate all day, but .40 seems to be the best compromise between punch and rounds available.
The primary reason for the switch is that the .40 is very hard on frames. More and more guns are a combination of polymer stocks and aluminum slides. The barrels are steel, yes, but the .40 is a high-pressure round that beats the hell out of light guns. Several agencies, federal and civilian have seen the cracks in slides, broken slide stops, warping of polymer frames, you name it. The .40 does nothing the .45 could not do and the .45 does it with half the pressure. The .45 is also inherently very accurate all things considered.
Will the market see a large influx of surplus M9s? Or will they all be destroyed under the pretence of "fighting crime"?
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Why are we using dumb words to describe not dumb things? Have we gone full xkcd?
Let's just end the competition now. Deset Eagles for everyone.
Just give every soldier a 3D printer and let them make custom guns as needed.
Before we go any further, please, state for the record, whether or not it is sexist (in your opinion) to point out, that only women can give birth?
Yes, they do. But the humans have what is called sexual dimorphism: males of the species are, on average, larger than females. And the GP's point was, infantry service still calls for larger and stronger bodies. Because an infantry soldier (or Marine) still carries weapons (both personal and otherwise larger) and ammunition for them on his person.
Airforce, where weapons tend to be self-propelling and person-to-person combat is non-existent, may have women. Infantry — should not. As long as the goal is to have a strong army, rather than a diverse one, of course.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Next problem? Getting the ammo into production.
I love Jesus, except for his foreign policy.
The only reason that women don't have to register for Selective Service like men do according to the Supreme Court is that women aren't in combat. If that changes then women will need to start registering.
I love Jesus, except for his foreign policy.
God's gift to handguns is the Colt 1911 .45 ACP Government.
No Eurofag 9mm.
No pussified 10mm - .40 - made for wimpy modern government employees - girls and girly men.
And no penis envy calibers like the .357, .44Mag and don't get me started on those Jokes that use rifle ammunition. .45 ACP in the Colt 1911. And it will save taxpayer money.
This stopping power bullshit just kills me. A .22 short will a lot of people especially if you shoot them in the face.
And don't get me started on the shoot to stop and not to kill. Every shot can kill - talk to an ER doc sometime. I wish my fellow gun owners would stop watching action movies and listening to gun salesmen who don't have a clue.
The portrayal of service weapons on T.V. don't show any U.S. brands being used. Does that mean that the American guns are inferior to the other nations? NCIS shows SIG Sauer, Army use Baretta, security details use Glock, none of which are made here. What is that saying?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
the very smallest nuclear weapons fit your criteria but have the downside you can't point them at someone's head.
Reading the summary, it sounds like the army has looked at a Glock brochure and just listed everything there as their requirements.
Of course this is a military procurement so the requirements will change at the behest of vested interests until the gun is unsuitable for the dozens of new roles it's required to fill and many times the original estimated cost. Then it will be put into production and the soldiers will be forced to use them -- then the smart soldiers will just bring their own Glocks to work.
"Grab them by the pussy" -- President of the United States of America
1) Of course not
2) Infantry service calls for all kinds. A smaller body is an advantage in situations like stealth, low cover, small access, and generally present a smaller target to hit. Females also tend to have an advantage in situational awareness, target tracking, and not getting 'locked in' on targets the way men tend to. Sure women may not typically be as strong and will suffer in certain tasks but in others size/strength is a detriment and they will excel. Firing a hand gun is certainly not a situation where they should have issues. There are many guns that suit both sexes just fine.
I think, you are describing special forces requirements, not infantry... But, yes, smaller can be useful. Just not often enough...
Citations?
Maybe. But it is still not sexist — contrary to your accusation — to point out, that the "smaller hand" mentioned in TFA and the write-up is an euphemism for "female hand".
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Is the official term for manufacturer changing to maker now?
People have always made stuff yet it seems like "maker" is some kind of new term to describe something that has always been happening.
My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
The Five-Seven is a great PDW. I have one. Very low recoil, 20 rd magazine, and those high velocity bullets make a mess of whatever they hit. They tumble, so they dump all that energy immediately after hitting something. The Mexican drug cartels love them.
I wasn't aware that they were letting Average Men into the Rangers nowadays. And I've only seen reports from the mainstream press, but the women vying for Ranger spots do not seem particularly average, either.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
Responding to your response above:
Yes, I was a Marine, and I worked with soldiers and Marines from other countries on combined arms exercises and noticed several things:
- Very few countries have our high standards because of political correctness. Even the UK has lower physical standards than the US.
- USMC standards are high for a reason. The few, the proud, the Marines. The mantra is there for a reason. It's for people who CAN hang tough.
Americans should NOT pattern ourselves after other, weaker countries because they allow women to do things. Period. Meet the standards that exist or go away.
The toughest troops I ever served alongside were the ROKs -- The Korean Marines. Look them up. They define manly, the ability to get it done. If my ass were in a sling somewhere nasty and I needed a group of men to get me to safety or to fight alongside, it would be the ROKs. Do a little reading and forget what Hollywood has told you. There are some really good fighting forces in the world, but the best in reality are, in no particular order:
- USMC (was one of them)
- US Army Rangers (worked with them)
- British SAS (worked with them)
- German SpecOps
- Israeli IDF (worked with them)
- Korean ROKs (worked with them)
- French SpecOps (worked with them)
- Australian SAS (worked with them)
- Gurkhas (worked with them, part of British Army)
- Russian SpecOps (never worked with them)
None of the above allow women, and if they did, they would be compromising. You know what compromise is? Compromise is failure in installments. Compromise for the sake of being politically correct kills troops. Lowering standards gets people killed, lowers unit morale, all manner of negative impacts.
I think, you are describing special forces requirements, not infantry... But, yes, smaller can be useful. Just not often enough...
The element of surprise, which requires stealth, is advantageous in every engagement. Low cover happens any time you're out in the open.
Maybe. But it is still not sexist — contrary to your accusation — to point out, that the "smaller hand" mentioned in TFA and the write-up is an euphemism for "female hand".
Smaller hands is a euphemism for smaller hands. Some men have smaller hands, Asians have smaller hands, women have smaller hands, etc. Unless you're going to institute a hand size requirement for joining why would you want sections of your military not able to properly use their equipment?
Yeah, I was going to suggest it. Seems to be pretty effective, durable etc.
One possible downside is the stigma of Major Nidal Hasan shooting up Fort Hood with one.
You'll carry the Walther...
The American CIA swears by them.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
A gun is a gun. People who need small grips, ergonomic buttons, and interchangeable attachments probably shouldn't be in the army. There's millions of dudes all around the same size that this would work just fine for.
... to make untold numbers of them. Enough for 3 for each person in the world, maybe? How about that?
captcha:
inflict
Where was the requirement they notify prime contractor with an opportunity to fix the problem?"
See the large box marked 'Campaign Donations' sitting next to the member of congress that controls spending? The 'requirement' is several large checks deposited there...
Females also tend to have an advantage in situational awareness
Tell that to my wife. Now tell her again. One more time. Nope, she's still not aware you're talking to her. Try calling her name first to get her attention. Okay, now tell her. Nope, she still didn't hear you, try again.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
LOL
Sure you can. It's just not very effective at killing them unless you have them strapped down to a concrete floor and actually drop it (unarmed) on their head.
Off-topic, but hopefully interesting. .40 S&W was invented because .45 ACP already existed.
Basically, the FBI standardized on 9mm instead of .45 ACP for various reasons. They then got into a shootout with armored criminals and "learned" what everyone already knew: 9mm doesn't have enough energy for serious work.
They should have picked the 45 in the first place, but rather than admit that they chose wrong, they invented a shitty new cartridge for political reasons. Many police departments followed their lead because they didn't know any better and assumed that the FBI had developed a better round.
Because of this, most law enforcement agencies were, for decades, stuck with a low energy 10mm-short round with excessive pressure that wears guns out prematurely and is needlessly painful to train with.
Today, it is almost random. Lots of departments around here aren't even standardized, but let the officer choose 9mm, 40 or 45. This isn't as crazy as it sounds. Each squad car has an M-4 between the front seats that, in most situations, would make an appearance long before the inability to share pistol magazines became a problem.
See that "Preview" button?
She didn't think it was quite so funny. She then admitted it was, at least, accurate.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
20 round standard mag and modern as all hell. The small caliber/high velocity ammo (same principle as the 5.56 AR rifles) hits just as hard if not harder than .45 ACP/9mm/whatever if you take into account that the military cannot use hollowpoints.
1.9 trillion USD.
putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
S&W M&P .45, that is. Has the added benefit of being a US company.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Does anybody know reasons why something like the FN Five-seven should not be considered instead of another 9mm?
Because they go through a lot more bullets than firearms, and if they keep the same cartridge then they can phase in a new sidearm at their leisure.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Wow! I didn't know homemade plastic guns had gotten to that point.
Next time, why don't you use proper English to define the story?
I'm not sure why they don't just switch to a Glock in .45. Cheap, durable, repairable, cost-effective, and very reliable.
Glock .45 is not an option. The primary problem with it is that it does not use NATO standard 9mm rounds. Rounds are standardized at 9mm so that ammunition can be shared among allies in a joint exercise or conflict scenario.
I have only one..... make it open source so people who are not looking to commit murder for a paycheck written by politicians beholden to industrial profit.
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
Cheap, reliable, effective.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
I carried a 1911 for 5 or 6 years, and my final summary is: what a piece of shit.
Here's the thing about a "1911": which one? It's like saying "I drove a car for 5 or 6 years ... what a piece of shit". There are shit, cheap-o 1911s as well as good ones (and expensive crap as well). And that's the problem when people say "get a 1911": which one? (Ditto for say "AR" or "AK": they're generic labels nowadays. Similarly for "308": Remington 700s' quality reputation has gone done, while Tikka has become more popular, along with Savage stuff.)
When you say 'get a Glock X', or a 'SIG Sauer Y', or M&P, then you know what you're getting and from whom, and so can make comments about quality.
So I generally discount people who say "1911" right away, not because of any kind of calibre or weight issue, but because it's a useless statement unless they give a particular make and model (like the GP who mentioned Kimbers).
I don't know, if you detonate a nuclear device on somebody's head that would probably do the trick.
The recoil on those things is a little extreme, though.
You're special forces then? That's great! I just love your olympics!
The FBI had standardized on .38 special and got their asses kicked in the infamous "Miami shootout".
The FBI turned to S&W who worked with Norma to develop the 10mm round which got put in the S&W 10xx series of autoloaders, sharing the same frame as the 45xx series of .45s.
The full-power Norma 10mm was hella stopping power, but it was unpopular with most women and some men due to size and recoil. The original Norma loads were close to .41 Magnum power. I handload both cartridges and believe this is pretty true -- my 610 with maxed-out 10mms feel about the same as my Model 57 with middling loads.
The FBI decided they didn't like the 10mm afterall, but some bright bulb at S&W realized that if you cut down the 10mm case by a few mm you could have a grip size and recoil similar to 9mm, but with superior stopping power due to heavier bullets and a larger cross-section (.400 vs .356).
Plus S&W didn't lose any investment on the tooling for making 10mm barrels, because now they had a new and improved gun everyone could love -- wonder-9 capacity, in a package most anyone could handle, with stopping power approaching .45 auto.
And thus .40S&W was born.
Translation: Why did the army have to open this up for bidding to a new contractor? They should have just called us an let us make a new gun. Wah! Competition!
Because 5.7mm isn't a NATO round, 9mm is, and using a non-standard round complicates the supply line.
There is only 2 tasks the female integrated units did better according to the report summary linked to above, but they don't say what they were. Male only units did better on 93 of 134. That means there were 29 where there was even performance.
I'd like to see the results with women who made if through the training schools first, and finding out how many women dropped. As I recall some women have made it through enlisted marine infantry training, but not many, and with higher rates of injury.
Bring back the old version of slashdot.
This subject notes concerns about having a handgun with a grip small enough for the newer generations of soldiers, and light weight too. I suggest an adoptioon of the Czech Skorpion theme, redesigned with possibly an entirely different action and round size (.380 Auto can't exactly be called a hard-hitting round) for durability, and reliability. Try engineering one with a beryllium copper (Alloy 25) frame for lightness, strength, and hardness. The frame can be cast, if thoughtfully designed, with little or no need for additional machining (beryllium copper, when molten, flows into every nook and cranny of a mold with extreme accomodation). I suggest a 10 mm Auto round, which is smaller and packs more energy than a standard .45 ACP. The roots of this concept of handgun go as far back as the broomhandle Mauser.
The SIG SAUER P320 seems the ideal fit (http://www.sigevolution.com/p320). Choose your caliber: .45 ACP, .40 S&W, .357 SIG, 9MM. Choose your preferred frame: subcompact, compact, carry, full size. If you can't find a combination that works out of those, you probably won't find one anywhere.
The P320 is also a DA striker fired firearm (all the rage now) where the actual "firearm" (serialized portion of the firearm) is the module that contains the trigger mechanism. Perhaps not an important feature for the military vs. civilians. However, this design does allow swapping out barrels and frames on a single trigger module. This allows a soldier to have a single trigger module plus multiple barrels of different caliber/length and multiple frames to customize the firearm for each mission as needed. It also allows for more "user" level repair of the firearm without needing to send it to the armorer. Have a trigger fail? Just swap a new trigger module in, done.
I'm a Glock guy and not a huge fan of SIGs, but I'd seriously consider a SIG SAUER P320.
The gun looks like a regular gun, pick it up, shoot it, bullet comes out the back and into the face of the person shooting it.
There, no more global terrorism.
Quickly! Someone try to slip systemd in before freeze!
As soon as they pick a piece... they will ruin it with a safety and a 13lbs trigger pull. A holster is the perfect safety. It works 100% of the time it's used. No other safety is needed. As for trigger pull. that's a crutch for lack of actual training. Muzzle and trigger discipline make a heavy trigger pull redundant. Finger outside the trigger guard until you are ready to fire. Don't point at anything you don't want to kill. It's that easy.
Either one of these makers would, could, and so produce the finest .45's in the world. SA makes their excellent XDM line, which should be a great contender.
When I was in the Air Force we would get issued the S&W model 15. I rarely ever had one issued to me, usually during war exercises. The AFOSI had a cool competition modified 45 1911. I think that competition modified 45 was a great weapon and would make a great standard weapon. The 45 has great stopping power and maybe the 1911 or one it's variants was probably the best military side arm ever. I know the military wants only one sidearm for all services and they don't want to use 45 acp because it's not a NATO standard bullet and the 9mm is. That all being said I think the glock or some varient of the glock would be a great alternative to the 45 and much lighter than the baretta.
Paul E. Bahre
my small hands https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xu_bE7g2wqM
If you have a habit of making this kind of jokes about her, I have a surprise for you...
muney
And if not?
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
If you can't hit your target, the gun and/or ammo makes no difference. Everyone has their preference (my EDC is a SIG P239 chambered in 9mm). Go with whatever you're comfortable handling and have practiced extensively on.
The M9 / 92 is a fine firearm. Personally I don't see the need to change it out.