In 15 Years the Military Will be fielding which handgun?

[CmdrSlander]

I say a Glock in .40 Cal. Simple, powerful.

Edit: Or we move fully to the Sig P226, with Special Forces who prefer .45 using P220s.

 

[kozak6]

The military likes pistols with double action capabilities for repeated strikes.

I think the military will still be using some Beretta 92 variant in 9mm.

 

[KAS1981]

Uhhhh let's see......Beretta M9.

Yeah.

 

[harmon rabb]

probably still the beretta 92. they now own a bazillion of them and they work just fine.

 

[Big Mike]

Beretta 92

 

[Mr.Blue]

Something in .45acp. Maybe a FNP 45 Tactical or a double stack (like STI) 1911.

 

[LiveLife]

Speaking of future military handgun/cartridge. Can anyone verify this? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.224_Boz

I guess the original .224 BOZ was 10mm necked down to .223 with about 2500 fps and now they are working on 9mm necked down to .223 with about 2200 fps?

The .224 BOZ cartridge was developed in the late 1990s ... as a 10mm case necked down to .223 ... Original trials were exceptionally successful. Worldwide patents were applied for and granted. This innovative round fired a 50g projectile chronographed at well over 2500fps. The Editor of GUNS & AMMO came to the United Kingdom to personally fire the .224 BOZ and wrote a detailed illustrated report in the November 1998 issue with front page banner headlines and eight page review.

In early 1999 .224 BOZ was fired in modified 10mm MP5 and 10m Glock taking part in a significant head to head trial at DERA Fort Halstead (UK Defence Testing Establishment) against the NATO CRISAT Specification target of layered titanium and Kevlar armour. These trials most favourably compared the .224 BOZ against the 5.7 FN P90 and the HK MP7. .224 BOZ was shown at the Shot Shows 1999 and 2000 generating tremedous interest, however, the inventor's policy of preventing sales to civilians restricted income and funds dried up. The concept was solely to be made available for anti-terrorist and Special Forces use.

In 2010 work restarted on re-working .224 BOZ into a 9mm necked case to .223 and with a partnership with a leading ballistics engineer a new range of projectiles have been created. Despite decreasing the cartridge case volume velocities in excess of 2200fps have been achieved.

 

[Zerodefect]

I think that a Glock or S&W M&P will get adapted with a 1911 like manual safety and no goof ball trigger safety. Why we don't have something lighter than an M9 yet is beyond me. A weapon noone wants to ever use, shouldn't be heavy.

In the meantime our grunts will continue to stick with the M9 and our specialists will carry thier own 1911's.



So what's the catch with the .224 Boz? Looks like it would slide right into something similar to a Glock 20?

 

[Crusader103]

I am going to go out on a limb here and make a prediction. IF the military goes ahead and selects a replacement for the Beretta M9 in a reasonable time period.... say the next two years.

Smith & Wesson M&P with thumb safety

.40 caliber

I would put money on both. Not much mind you, but some.

Here's a link to a recent Army Times article concerning the search for a replacement. Knowledge of this story and a bit of insider information leads me to believe that the M&P .40 is the current top contender.

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2011/08/army-pistols-with-a-shot-at-replacing-m9-82811w/

 

[USAF_Vet]

I figure they'll stick with the Beretta M9.

 

[Tommygunn]

If Obama has anything to do with it, in 15 years this will be our military sidearm:

 

[BSA1]

+1 for the Beretta 92. It is a battlefield proven design that has proven to stand the test of time.

I do not foresee the Army switching from the 9mm because;

1. The military has joint ammunition requirements with our allies.

2. I know that the worshippers at the alter of the 45 will no doubt cast evil spells on me for saying this but there is NO difference in % of one shot stops with FMJ (64 - 66% per Evan Marshall). I would rather have more 9mm than 45's in combat (can you ever have enough ammo?)

3. Another big plus is female soldiers find the recoil easier. So do guys that do not come from a shooting background.

4. The handgun is a second line weapon. The Army has wasted millions of $$$$ researching and testing PDW weapons with nothing to show for it.

 

[KAS1981]

No way the military is going away from 9mm any time soon. Cost, cost, cost.

Look how long they've been using 5.56x45.

 

[Master Blaster]

The military has a requirement that their handguns have a hammer, that pretty much rules out the Smith M&P and the Glocks.

 

[DenaliPark]

I say a Glock in .40 Cal. Simple, powerful.

Edit: Or we move fully to the Sig P226, with Special Forces who prefer .45 using P220s.

Well DoD just took reception of half a million new M9's! Answer your question?

 

[WardenWolf]

I wouldn't be too surprised if Ruger got in on the contract somehow with the P95.

 

[Gryffydd]

There are two things I doubt our military will do any time soon:
1. Switch to a gun without a manual safety
2. Switch to any non-NATO cartridge.

 

[Balrog]

I don't think they ought to change, it is just a waste of tax payer money. If they want to gradually replace the 92 with a cheaper gun, that is fine, as long as it is phased in slowly as 92's wear out.

 

[Snowbandit]

Should the military decide to phase out the M-9, which I highly doubt for many reasons, they would likely go with something like the FNX-9. FN is already a proven military contractor and the FNX-9 does everything the M-9 does in a lighter package. Cost would be the major consideration and, for that reason alone, it's never going to happen on a secondary weapon. I fully expect the M-9 will be the last cartridge fired pistol commonly used in the US military. The next generation is likely still science fiction at this point.

 

[Skribs]

You have to remember how fickle and bad with money the Army is. Their design philosophies may change in the next month, let alone the next 15 years.

 

[KenW.]

With current requirements I'd say the FNP or FNX each in 9mm NATO.

 

[Gunner442]

M9
STANAG ammo, just bought a bunch more, pretty good pistol, just don't skimp and buy cheap mags( I carried one 20 plus years)

 

[Zundfolge]

In 15 years we'll still be using the M9. The 1911 was in service for 80 years and we've had the M9 as our primary military handgun for only a quarter as long so I doubt we'll abandon the M9 any time soon. Unless of course things get real bad real fast and the M9 gets replaced by the QSZ-92.

 

[Devonai]

Yeah, the M9 isn't going anywhere anytime soon.

Unless of course things get real bad real fast and the M9 gets replaced by the QSZ-92.

Lol!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QSZ-92

 

[HOOfan_1]

The military has a requirement that their handguns have a hammer, that pretty much rules out the Smith M&P and the Glocks.

Several striker fired guns were entered in the Joint Combat Pistol competition.

Glock 21 SF
Smith M&P 45
Taurus 24/7 OSS
HS2000 (Springfield xD)