US Army: Modular Handgun System

B

BarryLee

New member
Militray.com is reporting that the US Army will hold an industry day on July 29 to discuss plans for the new Modular Handgun System or MHS which is to replace the Berretta. It appears that they are looking for an improved gun and increased caliber possibly .357Sig, .40S&W or .45acp. The Army feels like the 9mm doesn’t meet their needs and that personnel continue to complain that it isn’t effective in battle.

Critics of the plan point out that any handgun is going to be less than optimal in a battlefield situation. Also, that shot placement is very important and that many civilian law enforcement organizations are actually moving from the .40S&W back to the 9mm.

So, rumors have floated around for years, but it appears they are moving ahead. However, it seems like they’ve held these evaluations before only to stick with the M9. Am I remembering correctly?

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2014/07/03/army-wants-a-harder-hitting-pistol.html?comp=1198882887570&rank=1
 
Last edited:
$10 says they still stick with the M9. Hard to beat the reliability. I really think they just need to switch their ammo choice.

I could see them going to something in 40 or 45 though.
 
^^^^^^^^^^^^

I agree.

Why reinvent the wheel when you can choose better ammo?

I know there's some absolutely ridiculous NATO regs or whatever we need to abide by...
 
Can't find the funds to keep the A10 flying, but sure let's get a new pistol. :rolleyes:

Done before and nothing happened before. When I see a BAA I'll start to believe it. Until then :p
 
Just another example of unbridled government waste.

There is no handgun in the world (regardless of caliber) that represents a significant enough improvement over the M9 to justify its replacement. That is money that could be much better spent in so many other ways to benefit the modern warfighter.
 
Can't find the funds to keep the A10 flying, but sure let's get a new pistol.
Click to expand...

Indeed.

Keeping the most effective close air support aircraft in the history of warfare flying will provide infinitely more benefit to the troops compared to replacing the good handgun they already have.
 
I wanna guess

I guess a new pistol.
In 357 SIG.
In a hi-capacity offering.
From S&W or HK or FN.

Just guessin'......
 
So, rumors have floated around for years, but it appears they are moving ahead. However, it seems like they’ve held these evaluations before only to stick with the M9. Am I remembering correctly?
Click to expand...

Yes you are remembering correctly.

At least 2 or 3 times a year for the last 20 years or so someone writes an article in Military Times, or somewhere, exclaiming that they will be selecting a new handgun because soldiers somewhere complain about the 9mm and the M9.

An obscure committee will be named and "the man himself", "the general in charge", the experienced Lt." will be named, or not named, as the source.

The internet and gun mags will buzz for a couple of weeks debating the M9, the 9mm and ammo choices. Then the buzz will die out.

This buzz will guarantee the hit count goes up on whatever site is linked to for the info. Some intern might get a full time gig cuz of it.

Count on it two, three, maybe four times a year.

tipoc
 
perhaps it was misunderstood

I'm guessing our military WILL replace their current aged handgun.
I'm guessing the 7/29 is to get the players at the same table and on the same page.
I'm guessing the only possible choice when using hardball is the 357 SIG and 45 ACP.
I'm guessing the specs will demand capacity above modern 'any-hand' 45 ACP choices.

But I'm just guessin'......;)
 
Last edited:
Supposedly...


Most of the current inventory of M9s have reached the end of the frame's useful lifespan. They are breaking/cracking more frequently now.

I haven't heard that a caliber change is wanted...

They want a pistol that can be better adapted to individual shooters and mission requirements. Different sized shooters, battle field, MP carry, and special investigators who may carry concealed.

They want longer lifespan of various individual parts before breakage, and higher accuracy. Simpler maintenance and training requirements too.

Many of the higher ups feel that retrofitting the M9 platform to fit those requirements would be too costly if not impossible.


Thats what I have learned about the MHS program... in what little I have looked into it.
 
I know a much better and cheaper way to improve the Army. Eliminate all jargon. Anyone who invents and uses such terms as "Modular Handgun System" will be stripped of two ranks and forced to do KP along with the cafeteria workers.

We need our Army to fall out of love with its meaningless jargon and milspeak and to speak and write plainly. We need our Army to focus on its requirements, readiness and obligations, not on buying stuff just for the sake of buying stuff.
 
Wishoot said:
I know there's some absolutely ridiculous NATO regs or whatever we need to abide by...
Click to expand...
It's not so ridiculous when one considers that the goal is to allow any of our allies to use any of our ammo, and vice versa, despite wartime exigencies. :)
csmsss said:
I know a much better and cheaper way to improve the Army. Eliminate all jargon. Anyone who invents and uses such terms as "Modular Handgun System" will be stripped of two ranks and forced to do KP along with the cafeteria workers.
Click to expand...
It could be worse. If it were a Navy system, it would be made into a long and contrived acronym- MOHANSYS- spoken "Mo-han-sis" with no definite article. ;)

Then the USMC would give it a nickname which I couldn't write here due to forum rules. :D
 
Hmm....,modular and chambered in a better caliber than 9mm.....Ummm, how about going back to the 1911!!! Man, government sure knows how to waste money!!
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wishoot
I know there's some absolutely ridiculous NATO regs or whatever we need to abide by...
It's not so ridiculous when one considers that the goal is to allow any of our allies to use any of our ammo, and vice versa, despite wartime exigencies.
Click to expand...

I should've clarified: What I find ridiculous is that NATO can't use JHP ammo.
 
This is another "rumor of the week" that keeps cropping up, usually promoted by some genius who has just invented a "super gun" that he wants to sell the military.

The Army is continually looking at new weaponry - that is part of their job. But the reasons for adopting the 9mm are the same as they were in the 1980's: it is the cartridge of choice for all of our allies and, unless they all agree to replace their current handguns and ammo, we are not going to adopt something else, no matter how loud the fans of the .40 S&W or .357 SIG scream.

As to "improved" ammo, is there such a thing that would not violate the Hague convention rules? The gunzines may promote the latest super hollow point bullet that expands to the size of a basketball, but the Army can't use it.

Another gun? Possibly, but what gun is so demonstrably better than the M9 that Congress will pony up millions of bucks to adopt it? Remember that the Army does not just buy a weapon; it also buys a whole support train of manuals, spare parts, training, etc., called the "logistics tail". All of that, established for the M9, has to be replaced. The new gun would have to be a whole lot better to make it worthwhile, especially since the handgun is very much a secondary weapon.

Jim
 
Last edited:
Hmm....,modular and chambered in a better caliber than 9mm.....Ummm, how about going back to the 1911!!! Man, government sure knows how to waste money!!
Click to expand...

There are a number of better options in 45. I love JMB, but come on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top