S&W and General Dynamics to partner on Army pistol

Replacing the M9 would be an appalling waste of taxpayer money.

There are so many more significant and useful items and programs that defense budget money could be spent on than a new pistol to replace one that works just fine. (Especially when pistols are an incredibly insignificant component of modern warfare).
 
FWIW I suspect that GD's involvement will have little to do with the design of the pistol itself but a lot to do with maneuvering through the U.S. military contract bid process.

That said...
Fishbed77 said:
Replacing the M9 would be an appalling waste of taxpayer money... There are so many more significant and useful items and programs that defense budget money could be spent on than a new pistol to replace one that works just fine.
Click to expand...
+1; after reading the various articles about the Modular Handgun System, I still can't quite understand what the Army really hopes to gain from this program, or why they're moving forward with it. I don't think the current state of pistol technology really offers any drastic improvement over the M9, and special warfare units that feel they need something else can already get it under the current ad hoc system.
 
I have to register to read the article.

I've owned Beretta's in the past. I don't personally like the gun, but do respect it. I wouldn't spend my money to buy another, but if Uncle Sam or anyone else issued me one I'd use it in complete confidence. I have complete confidence in the gun and the current military 9mm load is about as good as any other handgun load.

I'm sure S&W (or any other gun manufacturer) could produce a new handgun that some people will like better than the Beretta. Some will like it less. There isn't any way anyone is going to produce a gun, or in a caliber everyone will be in agreement on. What we currently have is fine.
 
Bart, the article is hidden behind a paywall. Can you provide any further input?

Given the reduced role of the pistol in modern military usage, I'm not sure why we'd need a modular system. Sure, it's a good idea, but is it worth the cost and retraining involved in replacing the M9?
 
Even with my biases in favor of the Beretta taken into account, I agree it would be a waste of taxpayer dollars. The M&P is a good gun, but it is not better than the M9, certainly not better enough to justify a whole new purchase order.
 
Last edited:
There are so many more significant and useful items and programs that defense budget money could be spent on than a new pistol to replace one that works just fine. (Especially when pistols are an incredibly insignificant component of modern warfare).
Click to expand...

The degree to which this is true is almost unbelievable. Legitimate programs that have the potential to ensure greater survivability on the part of the warfighter are being canned thanks to sequestration and the already scheduled DoD cuts ($500 billion from sequestration, another $500 billion originally scheduled). Pistols should be very, very far down the list of expenditures.
 
There are several links to short and longer versions of the press release.

This is one of the shorter ones I came across.

http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Se...m-to-supply-new-pistol-to-Army/6881416941593/

I'd be a little surprised if the testing got off the ground and was completed, but you never know.

Deliveries slated to begin in 2017 seems an ambitious plan, though.

Reminds me of the USSOCOM CP .45 pistol program that was announced and then canceled. http://www.defensereview.com/ussocoms-combat-pistol-cp-program-cancelled/
 
There's so many good 9mm pistols out there. Right off the shelf. I don't get it. Seriously, you want "better" than a Glock 19...a Sig P226...a Berretta 92....an HK P30 or USP or a whole list of others?

I'd take any of those guns and be very happy. They are all battle tested guns.
 
They probably just want a service pistol from an American manufacturer for once... since 1911.

M&P seems to be a pretty solid choice. Right?
 
They probably want a service pistol from an American manufacturer for once... since 1911
Click to expand...

Practically all service M9s are manufactured by Beretta USA in Accokeek, Maryland (though they will be moving production to Tennessee in the near future).

M&P seems to be a pretty solid choice. Right?
Click to expand...

No.

As mentioned previously, the M&P (or pretty much any other current service pistol design) would provide no significant improvement over the M9, especially considering the financial costs of acquisition and transition to a new platform. There are MUCH more important things the DoD needs to spend this money on.
 
The military doesn't choose the objectively best pistol. They choose the one with best performance/price. Although I have no details, I could imagine that the M&P could be a cost saving measure over the M9, if it has a lower purchase price, longer service life and cheaper parts. This would free up money for other, more important, initiatives.

Also, adopting a new pistol does not mean that all the M9s are scrapped. Just that new pistols being purchased would be M&Ps. The M9s could soldier on for a decade or two, until they're all used up.
 
Well, I'm sure a lot of their M9s have seen better days and will need to be replaced very soon regardless. Wont make that big of a difference whether they spend more money with Beretta or S&W.

And I meant that technically, Beretta is an Italian company (even if they have a plant in US).
 
Replacing the M9 would be an appalling waste of taxpayer money.
Click to expand...

Hardly appalling - just "another." It would have to stand in line behind a WHOLE lot of other government spending before it got to first place in appalling.
 
Although I have no details, I could imagine that the M&P could be a cost saving measure over the M9, if it has a lower purchase price, longer service life and cheaper parts. This would free up money for other, more important, initiatives.
Click to expand...

But holsters, magazines, training have all been done on the M9. To replace all of that would be a large cost in itself

And I meant that technically, Beretta is an Italian company (even if they have a plant in US).
Click to expand...

I care about putting US workers to work. Yes we supposedly get the tax revenue, but we have all see how well the government spends money ($500 million for transport aircraft for the Afghan military, who then couldn't fly them due to lack of training; we scrapped the aircraft for $32,000 in salvage). Paychecks to working Americans means more to me personally.

Besides that I have a hard time believing the US Army would abandon hammer fired pistols when the last competitions have involved hammer fired pistols. I can't imagine it not having a manual safety either (though S&W does have that as an option). The US Army can be reluctant to change, and to go from the Beretta M9 to the S&W M&P seems pretty radical to me.
 
Last edited:
It simply does not matter in todays modern warfare. There are so few people in combat where a side arm is their primary weapon and nothing you deploy will be a major improvement over the M9.

We in the civilian world are too hyper focused on the pistol IMHO.

My brother who is a Marine and fought Iraq told me once he never gave the M9 a second thought. I am paraphrasing and removing the cursing so this post does not get deleted again. In order for him to have to use it a lot of people would have had to screw up. It was a defensive weapon only and if he and everyone around him did their job it would never leave the holster. If the M9 was coming out the guy with the Saw, the Ma deuce, the M240B all messed up. On top of that he would have had to have poorly deployed his M4 rounds.

This was not something they could allow. If he had to reach for his side arm the reality of the situation was that it would not matter what that side arm was because he would be in a world of hurt and the type of gun he was drawing would not be the determining factor between life and death.
 
Well, I'm sure a lot of their M9s have seen better days and will need to be replaced very soon regardless.
Click to expand...

Nope. The military just bought over 400,000 new M9s a few years ago. As older M9s wear out, they can be replaced with newer ones, keeping the rest of the program structure intact.

Remember, the costs of replacing a service weapon include much, much more than the costs of the firearms themselves. There are also costs for magazines, holsters (the military just adopted a new holster for the M9s) , accessories, training, parts, manuals, armory setup, etc., etc.


.
 
Last edited:
Hardly appalling - just "another." It would have to stand in line behind a WHOLE lot of other government spending before it got to first place in appalling.
Click to expand...

It is appalling when you put it into context.

U.S. warfighters desperately need better communications, better electronics integration, better armored vehicles, better tactical intelligence-gathering methods, and even simple things like better uniforms (with better camouflage) and better body armor. And that's not even getting started with the better mental health, emotional, and financial support that even active-duty members need.

What they do not need is a new pistol design.


.
 
Last edited:
I would like to see a new tactical modular pistol, maybe something like the HK Offensive Handgun concept. Using new materials like polymers and carbon fiber over the steel Beretta, they could get the weight down. .45 ACP is a must since troops are stuck with ball ammo. I'd love to see something like a modernized HK Mk 23. Heck, with the advancements in body armor maybe even something like the FN 5.7 pistol would be nice, a selector switch might be useful at close range, think Skorpion machine pistol PDW type piece.

Whatever the DOD decides, I believe it's time to leave the old designs behind and make something truly effective for out troops. I hate to say this, but if I was stuck with an M9 and 9mm ball ammo in the military I would be pretty angry. Our troops deserve better, more stopping power, more firepower, more reliability. To think otherwise is just selfish. The tactical warfighter mission is changing daily, and outdated weapons like the 1911 and M9 need to go the way of the dodo bird.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top