Thought this would be a good discussion for this board
http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2014/07/03/army-wants-harder-hitting-pistol/?intcmp=featuresThey want something more powerful that does more damage. So what gun and what caliber do you think meets their needs?
We've heard that before, at least two programs to replace the M9 have come up and went away. Both times they decided to just buy more M9's. Although now that we're out of the wars for the most part, it would seem the time is about right to take on this project.
I seriously doubt they re-instate the .45acp. Too many women and limp-wristers in the military these days. I would almost guarantee it will be the .40S&W. No real guesses on the platform but I imagine it will be a plastic fantastic. The .357 Sig would be an interesting choice but I think that would pretty much mean Glock only.
No way it will be a 1911, even though it's a better choice than the M9. My bet will be either the HK45, or the P227.
Much as we all like the 1911, it's going to be hard for any military officer to walk up to a Congresscritter or bureaucrat and say, we want a 103 year old design
even if they say it's "reimagined" or whatever
If I were Colt, think I'd borrow a page from Sig, and build a 1911 Rail Gun with a
slightly wider and longer grip, to allow 10+1 rounds, then pitch that to the military. And I'd call it the Model of 2014.
Interesting article. The question I have is what about NATO standardization?
Every other country in the world is issuing the 9x19. It works for them. With handguns, it comes down to shot placement, and of the calibers in use today, the 9mm is the easiest to score hits with. It also gives you the largest reservoir of ammunition. The should spend the money on training. Police department around the country are going back to the 9mm.
In a plastic frame gun, I've found the .40's recoil more than the .45's because the .40's are in smaller frame guns. And the .40's tend to not hold up well, where the .45's do.
My money is on a Gock 40. I wouldn't want one, but the military hasn't been requesting my input...
Police department around the country are going back to the 9mm.
Police departments utilize much better ammuntion than the military does. The military needs to replace the M9 with a modern striker fired 9mm like a Glock 17, full size M&P, or the new H&K VP9. Then, issue something 124 grain Gold Dots for combat and relegate the current 124 grain NATO FMJ load to training.
If they're sticking with FMJ ammo, then go back to the .45 in a modern platform.
Police department around the country are going back to the 9mm.
Police departments utilize much better ammuntion than the military does. The military needs to replace the M9 with a modern striker fired 9mm like a Glock 17, full size M&P, or the new H&K VP9. Then, issue something 124 grain Gold Dots for combat and relegate the current 124 grain NATO FMJ load to training.
If they're sticking with FMJ ammo, then go back to the .45 in a modern platform.
The Geneva Convention requires FMJ ammo
I would think they would stick to an all steel gun, I am not questioning Glocks, Smiths, ect on quality but will a polymer gun hold up in harsh combat? Up to and including sand and God knows what else getting inside
The Geneva Convention requires FMJ ammo
Police department around the country are going back to the 9mm.
Police departments utilize much better ammuntion than the military does. The military needs to replace the M9 with a modern striker fired 9mm like a Glock 17, full size M&P, or the new H&K VP9. Then, issue something 124 grain Gold Dots for combat and relegate the current 124 grain NATO FMJ load to training.
If they're sticking with FMJ ammo, then go back to the .45 in a modern platform.
The Geneva Convention requires FMJ ammo
I would think they would stick to an all steel gun, I am not questioning Glocks, Smiths, ect on quality but will a polymer gun hold up in harsh combat? Up to and including sand and God knows what else getting inside
The Geneva convention does not address munitions, The Hague accord does.
No way it will be a 1911, even though it's a better choice than the M9. My bet will be either the HK45, or the P227.
SIG P-227 would be an excellent choice.
Police department around the country are going back to the 9mm.
Police departments utilize much better ammuntion than the military does. The military needs to replace the M9 with a modern striker fired 9mm like a Glock 17, full size M&P, or the new H&K VP9. Then, issue something 124 grain Gold Dots for combat and relegate the current 124 grain NATO FMJ load to training.
If they're sticking with FMJ ammo, then go back to the .45 in a modern platform.
The Geneva Convention requires FMJ ammo
I would think they would stick to an all steel gun, I am not questioning Glocks, Smiths, ect on quality but will a polymer gun hold up in harsh combat? Up to and including sand and God knows what else getting inside
The Geneva convention does not address munitions, The Hague accord does.
My mistake, thanks for clarifying
In a plastic frame gun, I've found the .40's recoil more than the .45's because the .40's are in smaller frame guns. And the .40's tend to not hold up well, where the .45's do.
I watched a 40 Glock whip a big burly SRT type's azz for three days on a Roger's Range. They gave him a 9mm Glock and he started hitting plates.
It is going to come down to the cost of the guns, accessories and replacement parts, the believability of the promises made by the winning supplier (whether actually true or not), whose state/district is going to get the factory and other jobs, and what some out of touch, high and mighty mucky mucks and their committee people think about the guns.
No way it will be a 1911, even though it's a better choice than the M9. My bet will be either the HK45, or the P227.
Much as we all like the 1911, it's going to be hard for any military officer to walk up to a Congresscritter or bureaucrat and say, we want a 103 year old design
even if they say it's "reimagined" or whatever
If I were Colt, think I'd borrow a page from Sig, and build a 1911 Rail Gun with a
slightly wider and longer grip, to allow 10+1 rounds, then pitch that to the military. And I'd call it the Model of 2014.
Add the P220 or a mod there of and I agree
Cause it will need an external safty
Snake
I guess that revolvers are no longer in consideration, but I think that one might be a fine solution. A rugged Ruger GP 100 in .357 would be a reasonable choice. Or a single or double action in .45 Colt or .45 ACP. A revolver could use metal-jacketed bullets with effective flat noses and not have any issues with unreliable feeding. In double action, speedloaders are not an unreasonable way to reload. I will not be surprised if the Army does not take any notice of these suggestions however, as they never requested my opinion during the 21 years I was a soldier.
No way it will be a 1911, even though it's a better choice than the M9. My bet will be either the HK45, or the P227.
SIG P-227 would be an excellent choice.
Our Troopers can't wait to get the Sigs. The Cadets have them now
A side arm is such a waste of space in combat.
No way it will be a 1911, even though it's a better choice than the M9. My bet will be either the HK45, or the P227.
SIG P-227 would be an excellent choice.
Our Troopers can't wait to get the Sigs. The Cadets have them now
The Virginia State Police have been huge fans of their Sigs for years. .357SIG, too.
I'd vote Glock 21 but I bet if they go .45 it will be an FN or Sig.
No way it will be a 1911, even though it's a better choice than the M9. My bet will be either the HK45, or the P227.
SIG P-227 would be an excellent choice.
Our Troopers can't wait to get the Sigs. The Cadets have them now
The Virginia State Police have been huge fans of their Sigs for years. .357SIG, too.
Our troopers were carrying Beretta 96D's Then they switched to G37 45 GAPS then they recently switched to G21 Gen-4s. And have been having problems with more than a few cracked frames and FTFs.
Now they are getting Sig P227s
We have been carrying Glock 31s for about a year. The rumor mill is abuzz with stories of the Chief considering the allowance of Sig p226, p229s in .357 sig as well.
We shall see
...but the military hasn't been requesting my input...
Perhaps that's the problem right there
1907 Convention of The Hague to which we are not signatories, but have always abided by the guidelines.
A side arm is such a waste of space in combat.
In set-piece battle, IE tank/infantry warfare, yes. Until you get to the first town, then EVERYBODY wants a sidearm. Like Maj Herbert McBride wrote in "A Rifleman Went to War", a bayonet is what your country buys you when they are too cheap to provide you with a proper pistol".
A side arm is such a waste of space in combat.
I'd make space for one.
Unless someone makes a .45 ACP sized .40, I don't see any .40's that are going to make it the long haul without wearing out. The old S&W 4006 would probably hold up, but it's long gone. The .40 S&W is always put in a 9mm sized pistol and that cartridge beats the living crap out of the a pistol that size. So unless they make a pistol with a much heavier slide and a frame beefed up in the right places, I just don't see the .40 making it through all the military tests.
So the .45 ACP seems like it's set for a return.
For most by time you are engaging with a pistol things have gone really bad. To me it is 6 of one and half dozen of the other. The weight of the pistol and ammo would give me a lot more ammo for my rifle. Not saying I wouldn't want a pistol, just that at the point I need it more then likely its not going to matter either way. Of course there are always exceptions.
The M-9 buy was politically motivated. The military likes SIGs but what does what the military's input have to do with anything?
With Democraps in office , I think gay azz 270s and gay azz Glocks are in order.
It is going to come down to the cost of the guns, accessories and replacement parts, the believability of the promises made by the winning supplier (whether actually true or not), whose state/district is going to get the factory and other jobs, and what some out of touch, high and mighty mucky mucks and their committee people think about the guns.
This is where it will land.
Military will buy the cheapest POS with the lowest bid, just like they did with the M9. They won't buy Sigs because they are too expensive. They won't buy 1911's because they are too expensive.
It will come down to either the S&W M&P or the Glock, IMO.
It would be nice if they went with a an American MFG, for a change.
Personally, I'd prefer the Ruger SR9 or SR45 over any M&P or better yet, Ruger 1911.
I am pretty sure that it is no coincidence that the Glock plant in Smyrna has kicked it into high gear, and it is fairly common to see Glock slides with USA stamps on the slide rather than Austria.
And my post should in NO way be taken as Glock worship. I don't really like the bastids.
A side arm is such a waste of space in combat.
I'd make space for one.
I'd rather have two more 30 rounders in place of the M9.
In a plastic frame gun, I've found the .40's recoil more than the .45's because the .40's are in smaller frame guns. And the .40's tend to not hold up well, where the .45's do.
I watched a 40 Glock whip a big burly SRT type's azz for three days on a Roger's Range. They gave him a 9mm Glock and he started hitting plates.
This plus one. My Kahr CW40 blew itself apart with less than 500rounds through it.
Good buddy told me to never bring a 9 to a 44mag fight. I said why you couldn't hit me with that 44 anyway. Then he shot my 9. Doubt he'll say that again.
Military will buy the cheapest POS with the lowest bid, just like they did with the M9. They won't buy Sigs because they are too expensive.
SIG did beat Beretta the first time and then Beretta under bid SIG by less than $10 the second time.
I never see them going for a striker fired pistol., nor plastic for that matter. I still feel something from Sig would fit well. Along the lines of the P220.
The P220 would work well since there's a compact version. A full size pistol isn't a good fit for aircrew and plain clothes investigators.
The M-9 buy was politically motivated. The military likes SIGs but what does what the military's input have to do with anything?
I'd bet a pay check if SIG had been chosen over Beretta back in 1985 we'd be hearing as many people claim that Beretta got screwed. Give it a rest people!
USCG has been using the Sig P229 in 40 for the past 10 years or so.
I HATED the Beretta
Some people do hate the M9... Some people love it.... I own both Beretta and SIG
Looks like history is repeating itself. I seriously doubt we'll be leaving the 9x19 behind since it's the NATO round. We'd make a lot of our fellow members pretty upset. Of course, they're probably pretty upset with us right now so what's the difference right. I've qualified several times on the M9 and I could take it or leave it. The M11 on the other hand is fantastic. I like it a lot more than the M9. It'd be nice just to switch over to that.
As for another caliber, I don't know where you all are seeing .40 S&Ws break apart and destroy frames and stuff. There are .40s out there with tens of thousands or rounds through them. I've owned several .40 cal plastic fantastics and the recoil is more than manageable. It sounds to me like lots of the old stereotypes are still being played. And the thought that a Glock, M&P or other plastic pistol would have trouble in combat is a little silly. Plastic pistols have been doing a great job in combat for 20+ years. I haven�t shot a Glock enough to wear it out, but I hope to. We�ll see.
All that said, just like the search for a new carbine, this probably won�t go far and Uncle Sam will end up sticking with the 9x19 and renegotiating a new contract with Beretta. But maybe I�m just cynical.
Oh, and one other thing. In reading the Fox article it sounds like a lot of the problems with multiple shots mentioned by that expert come down to training issues. Shot placement is huge. But I imagine that�s easier said than done when bullets care coming back in your direction.
.40s ARE tough on frames, plastic or aluminum or steel, doesn't matter. I've seen a lot of .40s go belly up, and heard about a lot more, though I didn't see those.
It's a moderate-sized high pressure cartridge that isn't as well suited to the 9mm frame sizes as S&W would have thought. People tend to forget that the early Grock 40s hammered themselves into wrecks, until they made some mods to the frames.
I don't see the US Army going to .40s anyway, it'll probably be another 9mm of some flavor, or back to the .45.
But, it's all for naught if they don't train the troops better, 50 rounds a year ain't gonna get it.
They can't purchase too much ammo, the kooks will start the chicken little shiet.
if you are limited to ball ammo which the military is YES the 9mm is not a very good choice. I do think the m9 wasn't that great a choice but it was in a time when semi auto handguns where really transititioning to modern design. when the m9 came out what else was really out there. glock was barely out there and everything else wasn't that reliable or was a revolver, or was a single stack rounds limited 1911.
IMHO, sidearms are a necessary, but SECONDARY arm for the military. I have no problem with 9mm, and I have been using them
for 50 years. The .45 ACP is probably a better option still...but I don't see them going back to it. How about using a Glock 21? Lets have a modern platform with an older cartridge? 2 cents
"I don't see the US Army going to .40s anyway, it'll probably be another 9mm of some flavor, or back to the .45."
Perhaps the 45 GAP!
_________
"if you are limited to ball ammo which the military is YES the 9mm is not a very good choice."
I wonder if some kind of round nosed flat point would pass muster with the Hague accord?
____________
"when the m9 came out what else was really out there. glock was barely out there and everything else wasn't that reliable or was a revolver, or was a single stack rounds limited 1911."
The Beretta and Sig finished the trials... the Beretta M9 was then chosen based on cost.
Jerry
Having carried an m-9 for 20 years and the requirement of ball overseas I would prefer a sig P220 45 auto
If looking at a relatively small number of hardened combat Marines in need of a close quarter combat pistol, something along the lines of a railed 1911 45acp could be very doable.
If looking at a service pistol for all of today�s army, something along the lines of a modular pistol would probably be high on the list of requirements. You see the same thing today in trends with service pistols for LEO agencies who must equip and train a wide swath of personnel, to include those who may be very small in stature with very small hands. Having a modular pistol platform that is simple LEGO-esque plug and play, to quickly snap on and off pieces and parts to change barrel, frame, and/or grip size, may be the order of the day. In addition, terminal bullet performance may be tempered with the overall recoil of the pistol so that it may be easily handled by the smallest and weakest of personnel. Not making predictions, but current pistols such as the M&P and the Sig-250 are marketed to fit such bill. But in the end, what the army selects as ideal for their needs, will likely be different than ideal for use in CQB by a smaller group of hardened Marines.
Just stating facts.
In the current theatre of combat, where we are not fighting a "nation's army", wouldn't it just make sense to start issuing JHPS for all small arms?
In the current theatre of combat, where we are not fighting a "nation's army", wouldn't it just make sense to start issuing JHPS for all small arms?
Very good point. I am surprised neither of our last two commander in chief's have issued an executive order to that effect.
Well. Obama would tather we shoot marshmallows and rainbows at them
Just stating facts.
That's the story I heard. Beretta slightly underbid SIG when extra magazines and other parts were included in the second round of bidding. In troop trials I don't know which was preferred. The USAF originally tried to buy Beretta to replace their revolvers. Then Congress intervened and the Army had the selection process.
In the current theatre of combat, where we are not fighting a "nation's army", wouldn't it just make sense to start issuing JHPS for all small arms?
Very good point. I am surprised neither of our last two commander in chief's have issued an executive order to that effect.
Agreed!!! That'd be the smartest and best improvement for the money!
Just stating facts.
That's the story I heard. Beretta slightly underbid SIG when extra magazines and other parts were included in the second round of bidding. In troop trials I don't know which was preferred. The USAF originally tried to buy Beretta to replace their revolvers. Then Congress intervened and the Army had the selection process.
The AF was set to switch back to the 1911 with a 4" barrel and an officer's model frame to be done in house by the AF at Lackland AFB. Hornady developed the flat nose ball bullet for the AF. Then the 9mm BS got started. NATO wanted the US to switch to the 9mm. Congress at first said no then two members of congress, one from NY and one from MD got involved and somehow got the 9mm back on the floor. Beretta USA is or was in NY and the Berettas were assembled in MD. I don't believe in coincidence!
I've heard that the custom shop at Lackland made a terrific custom M1911 for the Office of Special Investigations plain clothes people. But only we're talking 1-2K OSI people.
Not the equipping the whole Air Force. That means 100,000 pistols to replace the assorted 38 Special revolvers then in service.
No way it will be a 1911, even though it's a better choice than the M9. My bet will be either the HK45, or the P227.
Much as we all like the 1911, it's going to be hard for any military officer to walk up to a Congresscritter or bureaucrat and say, we want a 103 year old design
even if they say it's "reimagined" or whatever
The USMC went back to the .45 ACP in a 1911 platform a couple of years ago:
http://www.gunsandammo.com/2012/07/20/colt-awarded-contract-from-u-s-marine-corps/
Well. Obama would tather we shoot marshmallows and rainbows at them
Holy schit that is funny
No way it will be a 1911, even though it's a better choice than the M9. My bet will be either the HK45, or the P227.
Much as we all like the 1911, it's going to be hard for any military officer to walk up to a Congresscritter or bureaucrat and say, we want a 103 year old design
even if they say it's "reimagined" or whatever
The USMC went back to the .45 ACP in a 1911 platform a couple of years ago:
http://www.gunsandammo.com/2012/07/20/colt-awarded-contract-from-u-s-marine-corps/ Sort of, three battalions (MARSOC) of the USMC went back to the 1911, and like I've already posted, the Quantico built 1911's the Colts replaced left a really bad impression and not all of them are impressed. It'll be a cold day in hell before the USMC drops that kind of coin for a handgun for fleet marines. MARSOC can because they belong to SOCOM
The master gunsmiths at Lackland made the AF target 1911s. I've seen and handled one and IMO no custom shop has ever come close to the workmanship!!!
No way it will be a 1911, even though it's a better choice than the M9. My bet will be either the HK45, or the P227.
Much as we all like the 1911, it's going to be hard for any military officer to walk up to a Congresscritter or bureaucrat and say, we want a 103 year old design
even if they say it's "reimagined" or whatever
The USMC went back to the .45 ACP in a 1911 platform a couple of years ago:
http://www.gunsandammo.com/2012/07/20/colt-awarded-contract-from-u-s-marine-corps/ Sort of, three battalions (MARSOC) of the USMC went back to the 1911, and like I've already posted, the Quantico built 1911's the Colts replaced left a really bad impression and not all of them are impressed. It'll be a cold day in hell before the USMC drops that kind of coin for a handgun for fleet marines. MARSOC can because they belong to SOCOM
I believe the Colts do not have to meet the same accuracy requirements. Therefore they are less accurate, which to me means less well fit.
if you are limited to ball ammo which the military is YES the 9mm is not a very good choice. I do think the m9 wasn't that great a choice but it was in a time when semi auto handguns where really transititioning to modern design. when the m9 came out what else was really out there. glock was barely out there and everything else wasn't that reliable or was a revolver, or was a single stack rounds limited 1911.
Thanks for playing, try again.
A side arm is such a waste of space in combat.
Tell that to the guys who have been wounded and unable to shoulder their rifles, yet survived by using their sidearm.
Same thing with the guys who have used their pistols from inside vehicles..
A side arm is such a waste of space in combat.
Tell that to the guys who have been wounded and unable to shoulder their rifles, yet survived by using their sidearm.
Same thing with the guys who have used their pistols from inside vehicles..
Pistols are invaluable in my eerie nice and I always want one.
lets not forget there are substantial downsides to the 1911 and 45 acp. take your 1911 bias out of it. the fact is the 1911 is a heavy gun that is very much rounds limited. if I am going to war its going to be something double stack and polymer framed. If I am limited to ball ammo I would probably compromise and run a 40 and it would be a glock. If I could run hollow points 9mm would be just fine for me again glock. I will be saving about a 1# in weight and able to fire double the rounds.
You forgetting about the double stack 1911s I see. They can be completely taken apart including the grips removed as long as slotted screws are used without any tools other than parts from the pistol itself. The down side is they are expensive to produce when fitted properly.
I'm surprised to read how many people think the .40 is a happy medium in the shootability department.
I know it is subjective but I find the 230gr hardball stuff a helluva lot more shooter friendly than the full house 40's. Especially when you get below 180gr bullets.
Travis
Looks like history is repeating itself. I seriously doubt we'll be leaving the 9x19 behind since it's the NATO round. We'd make a lot of our fellow members pretty upset. Of course, they're probably pretty upset with us right now so what's the difference right. I've qualified several times on the M9 and I could take it or leave it. The M11 on the other hand is fantastic. I like it a lot more than the M9. It'd be nice just to switch over to that.
As for another caliber, I don't know where you all are seeing .40 S&Ws break apart and destroy frames and stuff. There are .40s out there with tens of thousands or rounds through them. I've owned several .40 cal plastic fantastics and the recoil is more than manageable. It sounds to me like lots of the old stereotypes are still being played. And the thought that a Glock, M&P or other plastic pistol would have trouble in combat is a little silly. Plastic pistols have been doing a great job in combat for 20+ years. I haven�t shot a Glock enough to wear it out, but I hope to. We�ll see.
All that said, just like the search for a new carbine, this probably won�t go far and Uncle Sam will end up sticking with the 9x19 and renegotiating a new contract with Beretta. But maybe I�m just cynical.
Oh, and one other thing. In reading the Fox article it sounds like a lot of the problems with multiple shots mentioned by that expert come down to training issues. Shot placement is huge. But I imagine that�s easier said than done when bullets care coming back in your direction.
The 40 is hell on frames. 180's going 1,000-1050 seem to be less hell on frames.
Travis
The master gunsmiths at Lackland made the AF target 1911s. I've seen and handled one and IMO no custom shop has ever come close to the workmanship!!!
Some knowledgable people would agree to that in its day
I'm surprised to read how many people think the .40 is a happy medium in the shootability department.
I know it is subjective but I find the 230gr hardball stuff a helluva lot more shooter friendly than the full house 40's. Especially when you get below 180gr bullets.
Travis
Your experience with the 40 and 45 mirror my own. The 155 grain Gold Dots we were issued were flippy little bastids.
Mine too.
My double taps and controlled pairs are much tighter with a .45 or 9mm over the .40. After having trained one or two shooters in the last couple decades, I have yet to see one who shot a .40 best..
Mine too.
My double taps and controlled pairs are much tighter with a .45 or 9mm over the .40. After having trained one or two shooters in the last couple decades, I have yet to see one who shot a .40 best..
And I thought I was the only one.
"It's better to hit with a BB, than to miss with a cannon."
And 230's
ain't BB's.
FC
A side arm is such a waste of space in combat.
Tell that to the guys who have been wounded and unable to shoulder their rifles, yet survived by using their sidearm.
Same thing with the guys who have used their pistols from inside vehicles..
"During the recovery, Gunnery Sergeant Blanton courageously transitioned from his rifle to his pistol and began engaging insurgents located in close proximity to his position."
(Read rifle jam)
http://projects.militarytimes.com/citations-medals-awards/recipient.php?recipientid=3729]LINK[/url]
Link Sorry, above is link.
Looks like history is repeating itself. I seriously doubt we'll be leaving the 9x19 behind since it's the NATO round. We'd make a lot of our fellow members pretty upset. Of course, they're probably pretty upset with us right now so what's the difference right. I've qualified several times on the M9 and I could take it or leave it. The M11 on the other hand is fantastic. I like it a lot more than the M9. It'd be nice just to switch over to that.
As for another caliber, I don't know where you all are seeing .40 S&Ws break apart and destroy frames and stuff. There are .40s out there with tens of thousands or rounds through them. I've owned several .40 cal plastic fantastics and the recoil is more than manageable. It sounds to me like lots of the old stereotypes are still being played. And the thought that a Glock, M&P or other plastic pistol would have trouble in combat is a little silly. Plastic pistols have been doing a great job in combat for 20+ years. I haven�t shot a Glock enough to wear it out, but I hope to. We�ll see.
All that said, just like the search for a new carbine, this probably won�t go far and Uncle Sam will end up sticking with the 9x19 and renegotiating a new contract with Beretta. But maybe I�m just cynical.
Oh, and one other thing. In reading the Fox article it sounds like a lot of the problems with multiple shots mentioned by that expert come down to training issues. Shot placement is huge. But I imagine that�s easier said than done when bullets care coming back in your direction.
The 40 is hell on frames. 180's going 1,000-1050 seem to be less hell on frames.
Travis
Do you think platform can be attributed to that?
Another
http://projects.militarytimes.com/citations-medals-awards/recipient.php?recipientid=1001Medal of Honor
Awarded for actions during the United Nations Operations in Somalia II
The President of the United States of America, in the name of Congress, takes pride in presenting the Medal of Honor (Posthumously) to Master Sergeant Gary Ivan Gordon, United States Army, for gallantry and intrepidity at the risk of life above and beyond the call of duty, on 3 October 1993, while serving as Sniper Team Leader, United States Army Special Operations Command with Task Force Ranger in Mogadishu, Somalia, in support of Operation RSTORE HOPE. On that date, Master Sergeant Gordon's sniper team provided precision fires from the lead helicopter during an assault and at two helicopter crash sites, while subjected to intense automatic weapons and rocket propelled grenade fires. When Master Sergeant Gordon learned that ground forces were not immediately available to secure the second crash site, he and another sniper unhesitatingly volunteered to be inserted to protect the four critically wounded personnel, despite being well aware of the growing number of enemy personnel closing in on the site. After his third request to be inserted, Master Sergeant Gordon received permission to perform his volunteer mission. When debris and enemy ground fires at the site caused them to abort the first attempt, Master Sergeant Gordon was inserted one hundred meters south of the crash site. Equipped with only his sniper rifle and a pistol, Master Sergeant Gordon and his fellow sniper, while under intense small arms fire from the enemy, fought their way through a dense maze of shanties and shacks to reach the critically injured crew members. Master Sergeant Gordon immediately pulled the pilot and the other crew members from the aircraft, establishing a perimeter which placed him and his fellow sniper in the most vulnerable position.
Master Sergeant Gordon used his long range rifle and side arm to kill an undetermined number of attackers until he depleted his ammunition. Master Sergeant Gordon then went back to the wreckage, recovering some of the crew's weapons and ammunition. Despite the fact that he was critically low on ammunition, he provided some of it to the dazed pilot and then radioed for help. Master Sergeant Gordon continued to travel the perimeter, protecting the downed crew. After his team member was fatally wounded and his own rifle ammunition exhausted,
Master Sergeant Gordon returned to the wreckage, recovering a rifle with the last five rounds of ammunition and gave it to the pilot with the words, "good luck." Then, armed only with his pistol, Master Sergeant Gordon continued to fight until he was fatally wounded. His actions saved the pilot's life. Master Sergeant Gordon's extraordinary heroism and devotion to duty were in keeping with the highest standards of military service and reflect great credit upon, his unit and the United States Army.
In the movie "Black Hawk Down" the actors sidearms were 1911's. Does anyone know what handgun he and the other sniper were actually using?
It's likely that they were using 1911's during that time frame. Delta's primary sidearms were 1911's until they transitioned to Glock 22's.
I'm surprised to read how many people think the .40 is a happy medium in the shootability department.
I know it is subjective but I find the 230gr hardball stuff a helluva lot more shooter friendly than the full house 40's. Especially when you get below 180gr bullets.
Travis
We should declare the .40 lite caliber Gay like the .270
I'm surprised to read how many people think the .40 is a happy medium in the shootability department.
I know it is subjective but I find the 230gr hardball stuff a helluva lot more shooter friendly than the full house 40's. Especially when you get below 180gr bullets.
Travis
We should declare the .40 lite caliber Gay like the .270
Rename it the 40 'flave?
Here's an interesting article on the subject:
http://kitup.military.com/2014/07/sof-prefers-9mm-45-caliber.html The Army�s Delta Force adopted .40 caliber, but the elite unit is having the same problems as the FBI � the heavier caliber is causing excessive wear problems in guns that were originally designed to be 9mm. Delta is now using 9mm Glock 17s, 19s and 34s.
The 75th Ranger Regiment and Special Forces units use M9A1s and Glock 19s.
SEAL Teams mostly use the Sig Sauer 226.
DEVGRU, or SEAL Team 6, does use Heckler & Koch .45 for special occasions when they need a suppressed capability.
Marines seem happy with their 1911's in .45 ACP but they're having logistical issues getting .45 ACP ammunition. If you ask me, that's completely intolerable.
Logistical problems? Seriously....?
Me and the M9 have always gotten along. I own a Berreta 96 and like it well. I have buddies in my unit that are far more "experienced" than I and they don't hate the M9 and they have literally 100k+ rounds through them. By their account, failures were remedied when the blocks were modified and replaced years back. Magazines of course can be culprits if they are the really cheap version of yester-years. I'd go back to theater with an M9 and not be worried about my sidearm. I'd be sure to have berreta factory mags though, as an extra measure of insurance.
As stated by many, just upgrading to modern defense ammunition like the Gold Dot or Federal HST would be the most cost effective "solution."
I don't believe we will go away from the 9mm. If we were to change the pistol I sure like XDm's capacity and ergo's. But I seem to be in the minority on that. I have owned an XD40 sub for a long time now and it's money. I will have an XDm someday. M&P's ergos feel great to me, but haven't shot them. Glock's ergos just don't fit me and they feel terribly awkward in my hands. But they would be a fine choice for a combat pistol and I could train into comfort with them.
Oh and I wouldn't want to go to combat without a sidearm. For many many situations and reasons.
In reading all the post on here it does seem that Army policy has changed and everybody now has a side arm. Back in the day only select individuals were issued side arms. Probably the 9MM is best if everybody is going to have a side arm.
Rename it the 40 'flave?
Has a nice ring to it...
Travis
Mine too.
My double taps and controlled pairs are much tighter with a .45 or 9mm over the .40. After having trained one or two shooters in the last couple decades, I have yet to see one who shot a .40 best..
Flave, Crimson Tide, and Mac all agree with me... Better buy a lottery ticket!!
40 S&W is still the most popular police caliber in the upper Midwest, but almost nobody uses anything less than 180 gr ammo. Folks in the cold North wear a lot of clothes and they tend to run on the fat side. You need heavier bullets with more momentum to reach the good stuff.
FWIW, my modest instructional experience over the past 15 years or so mirrors Mackay's. This is especially true in IDPA and IPSC shooter classes. The 40 is a snappier round than either 9mm or 45 , which slows you down and degrades accuracy. And when we're talking competition, fractions of a second are very clearly noticeable.
I carried a Glock 23 as my off-duty/CCW pistol for 8-9 years, and I liked it a lot. I shot it in IDPA matches more than a few times. I shot 3-4 matches with my G23 and G19 in tandem, and every time the G19 scored better. Not by much, but enough to make a difference in my match placement.
And a Glock is less "snappy" than an M&P or an XD. Put a ported Storm Lake on a G17 and you can get about 5-6 pieces of brass in the air at the same time, and still actually hit a target.
Setting aside the pistol platform, while looking only at the terminal end, to fit the Army bill for harder-hitting:
It is clear by their own data, the current 9mm NATO round does not reach this goal, whereas the previous 45 caliber round did. So no question that the 45ACP would work wonderfully, unless recoil was considered an issue by the Army. So if this were the case, and the Army intends to use ball pistol ammo, where is the data that would either show, 1) that the same 9mm ball projectile fired at the increased velocity of the 357sig, would greatly improve terminal performance, or 2) that the increase in frontal area of the 40 caliber is enough to greatly improve terminal performance when shooting ball. IMO, I believe when limited to ball pistol ammo, I doubt the 357sig would reach the goal, and likely the 40 caliber would still fall short of the previous 45ACP. In addition, when you do consider recoil, I�m not so sure the Army would find the 45ACP to be a great jump in comparison to either the 357sig or the 40 caliber.
What about the projectile itself? Delta may be shooting something other than ball from their pistols, but this probably would not carry over to all of today�s Army. Modern LEO loads with their law enforcement hollow points may not fit the bill either. But what about the new generation of expanding fmj projectiles. They are not hollow points and kind of act like a wall anchor to implode upon itself to increase in diameter on the terminal end. If this were something considered in the mix, then suddenly the 9mm comes back into play. You would then maintain the lower recoil, the magazine capacity, in addition to the harder-hitting.
If it were up to me, every combat soldier would be a battle-hardened Marine and would be issued a railed 1911 chambered 45ACP. But, it�s not up to me and today�s Army runs a wide swath of big to little along the lines of most modern law enforcement agencies. In that world, the trend is for striker-fire for the percentage having difficulty with long trigger strokes, 9mm for the percentage having difficulty for increased recoil, and modular for the cost efficiency and ease of fitting that wide swath. So in reality, the platform chosen by the Army may likely not be a hammer fired gun such as the old school Sig, but may likely be a striker fired gun along the lines of the Glock gen 4 type or M&P.
Best
Some very good analysis there Gary.
What about the projectile itself? Delta may be shooting something other than ball from their pistols, but this probably would not carry over to all of today�s Army. Modern LEO loads with their law enforcement hollow points may not fit the bill either. But what about the new generation of expanding fmj projectiles. They are not hollow points and kind of act like a wall anchor to implode upon itself to increase in diameter on the terminal end. If this were something considered in the mix, then suddenly the 9mm comes back into play. You would then maintain the lower recoil, the magazine capacity, in addition to the harder-hitting.
Well here's the problem with that. The expanding FMJ's expand on IMPACT pressure vs. hydraulic pressure like the JHP. The advantage that the JHP has is when it hits a solid object, it doesn't expand, so barrier penetration isn't affected. But when it hits a fluid object, like living tissue, the fluid pressure gets inside that cavity and rips the bullet open.
So the expanding FMJ would certainly get you the greater stopping power, but you'd completely give up barrier penetration, and in military and LE roles, barrier penetration is VERY important.
What's more, while The Hague convention does somewhat specify FMJ, you don't get a pass just because your bullet starts out as an FMJ, they specifically forbade any expanding bullet... ("bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body")
If it has to be a non-expanding bullet, why not just go to a flat point? The increased terminal effect on tissue by simply changing from a round nose to a flat nose has been seen in countless examples on game and humans since Elmer Keith's days at least.
Physics is physics. If the weight of the bullet or the velocity is increased, recoil increases. And no matter the opinion of smart people like us, .gov is intent of having women and males of questionable masculinity in combat arms and that means no heavy recoiling handguns.
So, it would seem to me the obvious choice to increase lethality without changing the recoil characteristics of the 9mm is a FMJ flat point or WFN. The profile wouldn�t be any different than a HP so feeding should be a non-issue.
That, or a much lighter projectile at much higher velocity ala the 5.7x28 or some new round of our own creation with similar ballistics.
I know that doesn't address the barrier penetration or armor penetration characteristics and my knowledge in that area is sketchy, but if barrier/body armor penetration is a primary goal then increased velocity or a much heavier projectile are the only means to achieve that (AFAIK), and without increasing recoil that means a lighter projectile going faster.
They want something more powerful that does more damage. So what gun and what caliber do you think meets their needs?
45 ACP in a 1911 which was the gun originally designed for that purpose.
Well. Obama would tather we shoot marshmallows and rainbows at them
They should put all the queers on the front line to use as a buffer zone for the good men.
Ill bet the SF boys won't give up their 1911s..
Ill bet the SF boys won't give up their 1911s..
I believe lots of SF(all branches) are already using Glocks and Sigs
The Marines have already obtained their new pistol. It's a Colt and it's chambered in 45 ACP.
![[Linked Image]](http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y209/MyMIPics/Sale%20items/Pictures/2026cmp_2_zps0bf2f1bd.jpg)
The Marines have already obtained their new pistol. It's a Colt and it's chambered in 45 ACP.
I'm still frickin kicking myself over one of those Colt Marine 1911's. When they came out, the LGS had one on display for $1399.00. I was gonna think on it overnight, and of course, it was sold the next day before I got back to the store to buy it.
Tried to buy several on Gunbroker the next few days, and all of them sold for $3K or more!
Ive never seen another for sale since then! Frickin Hindsight !
