Navy SEALS acquiring Glock 19s?

[CaptainO]

No, but I hadn't trained by five of my fellow sailors picking up a taber (large log) on our shoulders and going fo a two mile trot down the beach. My father did this in UDT traning (the forerunners of the SEAL teams).

This keeps the sailors at their physical peak for strenuous work. I know this because that's how they still train to this very day.

 

[Walt Sherrill]

Not a bit. The men in the SEAL teams could (and can) use every edge they can obtain. I carried the Glock 20 for at least ten hours a day in a Sam Browne belt in a uniform a minimum of 5 days a week.

These men are in their early 20's at their peak of strength and training. I was 50 years old at the time. (I think they can handle it).

First of all, not all SEALS are in their early 20s. Some of them start into the program at that age, but many of them are quite a bit older.

We have to keep in mind that handguns are not their primary weapon as might be the case for an LEO -- and that seems to be your focus. An LEOs weapon needs are different than a SEAL's. For that matter, even SWAT teams seldom go into potential confrontations with handguns only.

The two SEALS participating on the AR15 forum made the point that every extra bit of weight mattered, and they welcomed a lighter weapon -- as they might be carrying 70+ lbs of gear at different times.

• A loaded Glock 20 weighs 39.71 ounces (about 2.5 pounds),
• a loaded P226 Mk25 (the version used by SEALs) weighs 34.4 ounces (2.2 ounces),
• a loaded P228(M11A1) is 34 ounces (2.2 ounces)
• a loaded Glock 19 weighs 30 ounces, or 1 lb. 14 ounces.

If you're talking logistics, that weight difference and the weight of extra ammo also carried might be significant. Scrounging for ammo in the field, if you run low, is likely to be almost impossible for a 10mm weapon.

SEALS and other Special Ops troops sometimes have to carry concealed on missions (when not in combat gear) and the two SEALS mentioned above said they chose the smaller SIG P228 (M11A1) over the P22 for that usage. Size, not weight, was the concern. Both thought the Glock 19 would effective in that role.
.

 

[tipoc]

CaptainO seems to have sidestepped an issue I raised earlier. While he believes the 10mm would be a great round for the Seals, what leads him to believe that they have not looked at it?

(I probably don't need to point out that the Seals likely have no reason to listen to the opinion of a guy on a gun forum about what they should be using, and that they have more than enough experience to make their own decisions in this matter and enough weight as a group to use what they prefer.)

The 10mm is not a new round. The Seals are not a new outfit. They get about any weapon that they need and believe would provide them an edge. The Seals have a good deal of latitude as individuals and as units in what they use for specific operations and as their personal weapons. It's quite likely that it was used at some point by someone in the Seals for something but it has not seen widespread use there.

CaptainO seems to believe that the use of the 10mm by the Seals is blocked in some way politically. I don't see evidence of that.

tipoc

 

[CaptainO]

I don't believe that it makes any difference what I or anyone else on this forum thinks. I do believe they need something that serves better than the 9mm Parabellum. The only way they could improve on the current 9mm is to either load it to Hirtenberger pressures.

The 9mm is limited in what it can accomplish.

I am finished with this discussion.

 

[TunnelRat]

I don't believe that it makes any difference what I or anyone else on this forum thinks. I do believe they need something that serves better than the 9mm Parabellum. The only way they could improve on the current 9mm is to either load it to Hirtenberger pressures.

The 9mm is limited in what it can accomplish.

Pistol calibers in general are limited in terms of what they can accomplish. I'm not going to stand here and say the difference between 9mm and 10mm is negligible. But if you want more firepower then that's why SEALS use primary weapons including carbines, rifles, light machine guns, the list goes on. Even submachineguns in pistol calibers are being phased out for short barreled rifles in many roles. Unlike a civilian that often uses a pistol as his/her primary, a Navy SEAL is not as limited.

Given the requirement for pistols to hit really the central nervous system or the heart/aorta to immediately end a fight, I think having the most chances to hit those locations might be an advantage. Both 9mm and 10mm can penetrate an unarmored opponent to the depth required to kill a human opponent. I'm not sure non-critical hits from a 10mm will disable an opponent when a 9mm would not. I think 10mm will penetrate more, but again this is a human not a bear. You can argue that pass through gives you advantages, but I've never heard of any unit choosing a weapon explicitly for excessive pass through. Maybe when we fought in rank and file, but those days are over.

 

[tipoc]

I don't believe that it makes any difference what I or anyone else on this forum thinks. I do believe they need something that serves better than the 9mm Parabellum. The only way they could improve on the current 9mm is to either load it to Hirtenberger pressures.

Well as I and others pointed out they have access to what they want. As I said Kyle carried a 45. He was not alone in that in his choice as a secondary weapon. They have options and there is no reason to assume that they have not, or that some of them anyway, looked at the 10mm.

There are a lot of guns and makers who have promoted their products by claiming "As used by the Navy SEALS" and they are usually right.

From the Walther TPH, and Ruger 22 pistols, to the H&K SOCOM pistol and many in between, many have been used by some SEALS at some time.

If most these days are using a 9mm I assume they know their business and their preferences.

tipoc