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 "It's been around for a really, really long time, and it's just old and outdated."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.

27 of 469 comments (clear)

  1. Re:women in service by 0123456 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  2. Beretta Was Never Really Suitable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    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

  3. political correctness alert by argStyopa · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "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
    1. Re:political correctness alert by 0123456 · · Score: 3

      Doesn't matter whether women are in the front lines. If they're in combat zones, they need weapons they can shoot... it's not like the bad guys will play nice and only attack the guys in the front lines.

    2. Re:political correctness alert by ageoffri · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I get that reading the article is too much for /. , but not even reading the summary, that is inexcusable. The summary makes it very clear that the method to accommodate different hands is to have adjustable grips. Change at most 3 parts and have a slimmer or thicker grip.

      --
      -- Slashdot, making the Left look conservative since 1997.
    3. Re:political correctness alert by avandesande · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Men's hand size vary quite a bit. If you look on male dominated gun forums there is tons of discussion about customizing for this.

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
    4. Re:political correctness alert by UnknowingFool · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Seriously, people: infantry combat is STILL one of those old-fashioned things where size and strength are really fucking important.

      In an ideal world with clear and discernible front lines, you would place your best troops for combat there. Modern warfare these days is more about guerrilla forces. You will have people in combat that are not front line soldiers. Therefore you will have women in combat. Also you are neglecting the fact that not every male in the Army is 6 feet tall and 250 lbs of muscle. Some male soldiers are short and thin.

      "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.

      What does that mean? Are you one of those that believe the conspiracy that the two female soldiers that passed the Ranger tests only because they were rigged? My understanding of modern combat is that with weapons like assault rifles and hollow point bullets, there is less importance on the physical size of the shooter. Even historically like in the Battle of Stalingrad, the Soviet Union used female snipers. No one questioned them about how their size and strength.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    5. Re:political correctness alert by UnknowingFool · · Score: 4, Informative

      Yes, they lowered the require amount of pull ups for the two women.

      Really? And where is your proof that they did? By the way, there are no "pull-up" requirements for Ranger School. It is "chin-ups" and the requirement is 6 for the Ranger Physical Fitness Test (RPFT).

      Second, I didn't realize the entirety of the Ranger School was chin-ups. I mean is that what they did for 61 days in Ranger School? That navigating, combat tactics, mission planning, and airborne have nothing to do with Ranger School. It was all chin-ups.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    6. Re:political correctness alert by ProfBooty · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It means that the very elite of female soccer players at the peak of their skill and fitness, loose to male players who are still developing physically and have less technical experience.. Heck even the williams sisters have lost to a male player ranked above 200.

      Very few elite women can compete with (below) average men in most physical activities. Being a vet myself, I've seen it due to lower female physical standards and higher incidence of injuries.

      --
      Bring back the old version of slashdot.
  4. Re:Kimber by tripleevenfall · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Aren't reliability and weight big concerns with the M9?

    I'm not sure why they don't just switch to a Glock in .45. Cheap, durable, repairable, cost-effective, and very reliable.

    The importance of the sidearm is decreasing in warfare, so if you're at the point where you need to use one, you'd probably rather have .45. Being able to carry more ammunition for a pistol doesn't seem like it would be the concern it once was.

  5. Re:Hopefully it can actually kill someone by tripleevenfall · · Score: 5, Funny

    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.

  6. Re:women in service by Foobar+of+Borg · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  7. Re:Boohoo by Zak3056 · · Score: 4, Informative

    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?
  8. Re:Kimber by drinkypoo · · Score: 5, Informative

    Aren't reliability and weight big concerns with the M9?

    They're big concerns with the 1911, too. Even a commander-style pistol is still plenty heavy. And the 1911 has extra stuff to go wrong, especially if you load it up with an extra safety as Kimber does (along with many others.)

    I'm not sure why they don't just switch to a Glock in .45. Cheap, durable, repairable, cost-effective, and very reliable.

    Well, they cited the issue of fitting the hands of smaller shooters, so in the modern day none of these firearms are really applicable. They should probably be looking at a SIG.

    The importance of the sidearm is decreasing in warfare, so if you're at the point where you need to use one, you'd probably rather have .45.

    H&K M&P .45, then. The trigger is considered to be not that great, but there are mods that improve it, so perhaps with a little revision it would make a nice piece. Three grip sizes, external extractor. However, they're going to want to stick with 9mm because of the cost consideration, and the modern style of never using one bullet when five will do.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  9. Re:Kimber by MAXOMENOS · · Score: 3, Informative

    Well, they cited the issue of fitting the hands of smaller shooters, so in the modern day none of these firearms are really applicable.

    A gen 4 Glock comes with multiple backstraps --- I can pick the one I want and get the hand size I want. My hands are too small for a gen 3 Glock 20 or 21 but can grip a gen 4 21 with ease.

  10. Re:Hopefully it can actually kill someone by Penguinisto · · Score: 3

    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?
  11. Re:Hopefully it can actually kill someone by rubycodez · · Score: 4, Informative

    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.

  12. Re:1911 Copy - pfft. by sycodon · · Score: 3, Funny

    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.
  13. Re:Kimber by MachineShedFred · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I once talked with a law enforcement officer who was deeply involved in choosing the next sidearm that a major city's police department would be carrying, and he said it really came down to two choices for them:

    If you want durable and reliable, you go with a Sig Sauer.
    If you want durable, reliable, and light, you go with a Glock.

    --
    Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
  14. Sounds like the army wants Glocks. by Macdude · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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. Re:Sounds like the army wants Glocks. by geekmux · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Reading the summary, it sounds like the army has looked at a Glock brochure and just listed everything there as their requirements.

      Gee, and this sounds nothing like it did back in the 80s when the requirements read like a Beretta brochure.

      By the time we're reading about the requirements, the model has likely already been designed, and possibly even chosen.

      Glock had a hard time with requirements previously due to the lack of external safety, but that's a fairly easy design fix. Other vendors already have that, along with interchangable grip backstraps and rails. Honesty, I can think of half a dozen current models that fit the description from various vendors.

      I think the real decision will come down to them accepting a polymer frame design or not, since a good portion of the shooting industry chose to follow Gaston down that path.

  15. Re:Kimber by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 3, Informative

    I also don't like the extreme variability in weight between the gun fully loaded and when it gets near empty

    Yeah, I hate having 17 chances to hit my target instead of 7. What a pain in the ass, eh?

    Seriously though, in a defensive encounter the last thing on my mind is "Oh no, my gun is getting lighter."

    --
    Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
  16. Regarding .40 S&W: by Orgasmatron · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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?
    1. Re:Regarding .40 S&W: by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Against armored criminals, nothing short of special armor-piercing handgun loads or rifle shots will penetrate. The actual muzzle energy of a 9mm versus a .45, and the sectional density between the two, is extremely minimal. One does about as good as the other. Type IIA armor would protect from either round - and that is pretty low-end body armor.

      If you really want a "man stopper/armored killer" handgun load, you need a hot-load .44 magnum. Or nearly any rifle. In reality, there is very little difference between a .45 and a 9mm; both are rendered ineffective by low grade body armor.

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    2. Re: Regarding .40 S&W: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      As a trauma surgeon I have kept a tally of all the GSWs that I and my partners took care of.
      In the past 5 years we managed to save greater than 75% of people shot with a 9mm.
      Guess what, survivors from a .45? We have less than 4%
      And for the record the absolute numbers are statistically significant.
      I don't want to divulge any more details.
      I own a G21 Gen 4

  17. Five seveN is the logical choice by Spy+Handler · · Score: 3, Informative

    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.

  18. oops self edit by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.'"