New Army Handgun: We're Really Doing This

Status
Not open for further replies.
T

TunnelRat

New member
Hi all,
Just an interesting note for those watching this sideshow. Apparently Beretta's M9-A3 gambit didn't pay out. Assuming Beretta is being completely up front about their side of the story, it doesn't appear that the Army even gave them a chance to submit a version for evaluation.

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2015/01/09/army-rejects-m9a3-proposal-opts-for-new-pistol.html?comp=1198882887570&rank=2

It would seem that the Army isn't kidding around about wanting a truly modular design that differs from what they already have. I'm starting to believe this might open the door to all sorts of options. Of course, whether this actually results in a new handgun being chosen is still up in the air. If the comments on this story are any indication, it should at least make for some interesting debate about what features the new pistol should feature.

-TR
 
my guess: 40SW, striker fired.

glock, sw M&P, PX4, hk VP.....

point and shoot.

keep it simple stupid.
 
Whether the Army ever actually issues a contract remains to be seen, but it does seem they are moving ahead with the evaluation. One thing to consider if a lot of manufacturers develop prototypes we might end up seeing some of them in the civilian market even if there’re not chosen by the military.
 
BarryLee said:
Whether the Army ever actually issues a contract remains to be seen, but it does seem they are moving ahead with the evaluation. One thing to consider if a lot of manufacturers develop prototypes we might end up seeing some of them in the civilian market even if there’re not chosen by the military.
Click to expand...
Bingo. FNP45, HK45 were both designed submitted for the last pistol trials that went to market after.
 
my guess: 40SW, striker fired.

glock, sw M&P, PX4, hk VP.....

point and shoot.

keep it simple stupid.
Click to expand...

Never going to be 40 S&W. Nato 9mm or good old Amerikan 45 ACP. If you are going to buck the caliber commonality with your #1 allies you are not going to do it for the 40 S&W round.

I personally do not think it is really going to happen. There are much higher priorities right now in terms of our military needs. That said the Govt/Military rarely follows logical fiscal thinking.
 
just read an article, the new F35 plane won't take off until the computer downloads to lockheed in texas.....you can buy lots of guns and ammo for what we are wasting on one of those birds that will never see combat.
 
I'm glad they are going forward. Whether they actually need it I know Army and AF personnel who really feel they need an improved sidearm. This is great news for the industry as it will bring us new stuff and interesting pistol trials. For all of you who say the Armed Forces doesn't need a sidearm and this is a waste of money, well there is a use for pistols in the United State Military and our Government waste much more money on more useless things.
 
my guess: 40SW, striker fired.
Click to expand...



April 1 is several months away!:D

A non military, non NATO civilian round, mostly only popular in the US, that they don't have a gazillion rounds for? Really?

The upside...If it happens, and we don't have a completely anti-gun regime running things, there might be a gazillion round of surplus 9MM on the market.:D
The down side....We won't see 40S&W on the store shelves for a very long time!:eek:
 
The civilian market is the icing on the cake, but a military contract is the cake.
Click to expand...

Exactly it is the large Govt contracts that create the economy of scale that allows the civilian market to be what it is.
 
The problem lies with the people that go into the army these days just like those that go into local police forces. They simply do not have a basic knowledge of firearms so of course there will be problems.
 
I'm curious if a manual safety will still be a requirement. The comments by "Army weapons officials" regarding the slide mounted safety isn't anything really new, but Beretta's counter of a G type variant seems to indicate an option for a pistol without a manual safety. That would open the doors to loads of options, I just find it hard to believe the Army would go from a DA/SA pistol typically requiring soldiers to carry hammer down safety on to a striker fired pistol with no safety (yes I know manual safety strikers are a possibility too, with commercial variants already out there.)
 
The down side....We won't see 40S&W on the store shelves for a very long time!
Click to expand...

<shrug>. Got lots of brass, I'll roll my own, like I do now.

A whole new generation of people ("women and Europeans"*) to whine about .40.

*That's sarcasm, folks.
 
.40 S&W is currently issued to Homeland Security, Coast Guard and in use by some DOD units.
Click to expand...

None of these fight on the battle field with NATO troops. 40 S&W will not happen with battle troops who will interact with NATO troops. I just do not understand why people believe we will deviate from that for the 40 S&W. 45 ACP even with its history is a long shot. The 40 S&W is even longer. Time will tell but I do not think that we are moving away from 9mm. Small units and specialized groups will still get 45 ACP and other calibers but not the bulk of the troops.
 
Spending $350 million on a new pistol seems pretty wasteful to me. Does that even include extra parts, training, writing manuals, etc?

I haven't been in the military for nearly 20 years but so few troops in the Army used a pistol that I am not sure this is a good use of resources. Maybe things have changed. Plus, it is not really a primary weapon. I know in our unit the CO, 1SGT, XO, and the APC drivers were issued a pistol(and the track drivers still had their rifle). Everyone one else had a rifle as their primary weapon.

Is the M9 that bad that it needs replaced?
 
Tests do NOT equal appropriations ($).

They did alot of testing of replacements for the M16/M4.
Click to expand...

I love this statement. I think that this will end up being a complete waste of tax payers $$$.
 
I just do not understand why people believe we will deviate from that for the 40 S&W.
Click to expand...
They want a "modular system" and "more power" so having a different cartridge could be as simple as switching barrels
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top