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 "It's been around for a really, really long time, and it's just old and outdated."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.
law enforcement is down-sizing their handguns as well. the .40SW is being replaced by the 9MM.
Given that US police seem to hit ten innocent bystanders for every bad guy they shoot, I'd recommend they downsize to Nerf Guns.
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.
"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
What was the joke in WW2?
The German and American officer meet on the field. The German officer pulls out his Walther P38 and shoots the American. The American pulls out his 1911, kills the German, picks up the P38 as a souvenir, and limps off to the field hospital.
law enforcement is down-sizing their handguns as well. the .40SW is being replaced by the 9MM.
Given that US police seem to hit ten innocent bystanders for every bad guy they shoot, I'd recommend they downsize to Nerf Guns.
Indeed. There is a lot written about the militarisation of the police. But, they've only been militarised with respect to the hardware, not with respect to actually knowing what they are doing.
Similar to the upcoming US election results
Short of innovations like those Glock brought to the table over three decades ago, the semi automatic pistol has not changed much in the last century, and the previous standard service pistol of the US military served for almost three quarters of a century (and STILL is the preferred sidearm of those who kill people and break things for a living). The standard issue rifle has been so for more than half a century.
30 years does not seem especially long for something like this.
What part of "shall not be infringed" is so hard to understand?
I remember a Korea vet complaining that the .30 carbine he was issued with couldn't kill a bad guy if he hit them with a full magazine of bullets, and would break if he tried to beat them to death with it.
Stopping power is all too often overrated (I say this as a .45 1911 pistol owner).
You'll never get someone to fall backwards (let alone fly backwards across the room), even if you used a .50 Desert Eagle to do it... that's Hollywood crap.
Fact is, even a well-placed 9mm round can kill instantly if you hit the attacker in the right spot... but most shootings don;t really involve accuracy.
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
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
This is a commentary about the caliber of the bullet, the joke is often directed toward Beretta because they are known for their 9mm platforms. It's actually a very serious problem which is exacerbated in a war-zone by the Hague convention which bans JHP rounds. The 9mm is a market failure IMHO, it's too small for it's muzzle velocity making over penetration a problem; even with a hollow point there might not be enough time for the bullet to expand. It's good enough for personal defense because it's lightweight\easy to carry, getting shot hurts like hell and any penetrating wound has the potential to hit something important. But a pistol is never meant to be a primary weapon on a battlefield, it's meant to be used in a scenario where your primary weapon is inoperative and you do not have the time to correct the problem. In such a scenario you cannot assume you will have time to aim properly so you should want something that will work the first time with less regard to shot placement than is required for the 9mm. I may be just another civilian talking out of my ass, but I've done enough research for my own PDW to dismiss this caliber as an option. Furthermore, as a taxpayer, I want my money going toward something that works.
all urban legend.
Look it up with experts who keep real stats on actual shootings, military 9mm vs 45 .ACP the 115 gr. 9mm is slightly MORE effective than 230 gr, 45 hardball.
And neither one very good compared to hollow point.
While I'm not intimately familiar with firearms, I have shot just about everything once; I tend to agree. Sounds like Hollywood influence. So many people pooh-pooh the 9mm as if it's a .22, or even a BB gun, but I'll tell you, I don't ever want to get shot with a 9mm, anywhere.. I wouldn't even want to get shot with a .22 for that matter. I'm pretty sure either would compromise my ability to ambulate or attack someone, or at least distract me big time, unless maybe I was on PCP or something whack.
Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
fanboi nonsense.
the actual model 1991 not as durable, not as safe, doesn't have the capacity, will jamb when dirty (I shot one in matches for years with standard 830fps 230gr hardball) and will rust under humid/corrosive conditions, and has a slide spring that will go flying.
Many modern guns solve these issues. M1911 a great gun of the 20th century, but progress has left it behind.
While my .45 makes a very convincing argument, my Super Blackhawk ends the argument once and for all. :-)
Yes, it may be penis envy, but it's fun as hell, expensive to shoot, and looks great.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
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.
Blackhawks are for little girlymen. Real men carry a Ruger Redhawk in .480 Ruger caliber.
The only handgun you can use to beat a grizzly bear into submission after you miss six times.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
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?
A major reason for why 9x19 Parabellum continues to be used from a military perspective is that many opponents will be wearing light body armour and/or helmets, and 9x19 Parabellum, and 9x19 has far superior penetration than .45 ACP. The US Army bought up as much of old Swedish m39/b ammo that they could for SMG's and handguns for that purpose. Cut-through view of the m39/b bullet: http://www.amkat.se/Images/9x1...
As the joke among military paramedics go: If your patient was hit outside the plate with 9x19, you prepare him for surgery, if the patient was hit outside the plate with .45 ACP, you treat the 2nd degree burns, at worst.
For those who have not been hit/haven't treated those who've been hit: A little known side effect of body armour stopping a bullet is the fact that the kinetic energy is converted to plenty of heat, enough to give even second degree burns through the vest and the clothing underneath if the patient is unlucky.
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?
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.
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.'"
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.
Really? Twice? What's the muzzle energy of a 9mm an .45 ACP? About 383 lb-ft and 416 lb-ft, respectively. That's not even a 10% differential, let alone a 100%. The fact you claimtwice the energy proves you don't understand the situation - at all.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!