New US armed forces/DoD XM9 contract; CNN.....

[fanchisimo]

I thought the Beretta 90two was discontinued? Are they gonna bring it back just for testing or...?

 

[RustyShackelford]

Post #217.....

Post 217 quotes/links a lengthy article that seems to bash author & tactics trainer(and THR forum member) Massad Ayoob.
What it does not explain to list is the US DoJ/FBI court cases-lawsuits from female FBI/DEA applicants in the early 2000s, not the early 1980s.
AG Janet Reno pushed to settle the legal actions & modify the weapons policy.
Massad Ayoob wrote about this topic too.
He explained how the FBI in the early 2000s, let special agents use SIGs, S&Ws, revolvers, etc.
Today's FBI sworn personnel carry Glocks or SIGs mostly.

 

[Fiv3r]

I wouldn't see any big problem with the FNS format in 9mm or a new .40 caliber. It's design has a lot to offer but I never shot any.
FWIW: the police agencies in Coloumbia SC & Baltimore County MD carry new FNSs. Interestingly Baltimore County MD cops use the long slide FNS.

Id want a frame mounted ambi safety & ambi mag release. A ambi slide stop or release would be ideal but not a huge issue.
The Walther P88 had a few ambi controls. It was considered high end in the 1980s/early 1990s. It didn't go far in the XM9 trials. It could not hold up to hard use & shooting in mud, sand, snow, etc. The P88 9x19mm was "better" than a few others in marksmanship/target shooting.

The fns has pretty much all of those features. Actually, I have an fns40 and the low bore access makes it shoot about like a 9mm.

 

[AustinTX]

I thought the Beretta 90two was discontinued? Are they gonna bring it back just for testing or...?

This is not a 90-Two. The 90-Two slide does not fit on the 92FS/M9 frame. This is a Vertec with the standard-length barrel.

 

[GeneS]

So AustinTX you mean to tell me a glock or m&p cant beat the beretta in a torture test like the dreaded mud or sand test simulating actual field conditions.

The pistol trials that selected the Beretta included mud, sand, dust, and saltwater. The Beretta and Sig P226 were the only entrants that passed the trails. I would be interested in the results if Glock and M&P competed in the same test. At these tests, M1911's were also tested as a control. The Beretta and Sig absolutely smoked them in every catagory except the mud test.

 

[Zerodefect]

How many time do they run the mud and dirts test. IME the results of such testing can vary widely by just dumb luck.

Sometimes the least reliable dirty weapon wins.

The Glock, with it's tiny little rails that shed dirt, that allows the frame to flex freely, and has plenty of extra space in the frame or slide for oiled dirt to be wiped into away from critical parts, should win such a test easy.

But I'll bet it doesn't win every time.

 

[cluttonfred]

I would certainly hope that they would run the various tests enough times to eliminate the "dumb luck" factor. According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modular_Handgun_System the initial RFI did not specify any particular caliber, which does seem to indicate a willingness to scrap the 9mm if the gun/cartridge combination showed significant advantages. According to http://www.military.com/daily-news/2014/07/03/army-wants-a-harder-hitting-pistol.html here are some of the factors in play:

--The program is looking to replace the entire handgun system, which includes the gun, ammo, holster, and some other parts.

--The program will be an open-caliber competition to evaluate larger rounds like the .40 S&W and .45 ACP or more powerful rounds like the .357 Sig.

--Although the objective is for a round with better terminal ballistics, the argument for adopting a larger bullet has disadvantages... Law enforcement personnel have found that even marginally larger pistol rounds are still too underpowered to kill a person with one shot, and that smaller rounds allow for better shot placement when firing rapidly.

--Beretta has submitted changes and product improvements to the M9 system, like the M9A1 accepted by the U.S. Marine Corps in 2006, but the Army has maintained that the M9 system does not meet their MHS requirements.

Time to bring back the Colt SCAMP? ;-) I am actually quite serious. Unlike when the SCAMP was originally proposed, we now have a proven cartridge for it in current mass production, the 5.7x28mm. A lightweight 5.7mm pistol with a burst fire cabability, likely smaller than the SCAMP but probably a little larger than an FN FiveSeven, might actually work quite well. The Steyr TMP/B&T MP9 might also provide some inspiration. It would be interesting to see an objective analysis of the "stopping power" of multiple 5.7mm SS190 hits vs. one 9mm, .40S&W or even .45 ACP round. I am quite sure that the flat trajectory and low recoil would allow even ordinary soldiers to hit targets more consistently and further away than with a conventional pistol and even special forces might appreciate the burst fire capability for close quarters work.

http://world.guns.ru/smg/usa/scamp-e.html

 

[RustyShackelford]

Hi Point.....

For some reason I don't think the conference room trash cans of the Hi Point execs & design engineers will be filled with any old pizza boxes, Dunkin Donuts coffee cups or empty 5 Hour Energy bottles.

 

[cluttonfred]

Honestly, I really hope that they run this competition in such a way that it encourages the smaller manufacturers and even individual inventors to participate. That way we might really see something novel that is really a step ahead. Otherwise, they should just hold a competition for off-the-shelf 9mm DAO polymer pistols and be done with it.

 

[Mp7]

When was the last time a regular soldier used his sidearm?


Special units can buy their own.

IMHO even a 7shot Mak would be enough
for grunts.



(It`s a waste of money. And some Dudes in the armed services committee
are getting bribed for it, by the makers, no doubt.)



What about Hi-Point? Seriously.

 

[Torian]

When was the last time a regular soldier used his sidearm?


Special units can buy their own.

IMHO even a 7shot Mak would be enough
for grunts.



(It`s a waste of money. And some Dudes in the armed services committee
are getting bribed for it, by the makers, no doubt.)



What about Hi-Point? Seriously.

The majority of regular soldiers haven't fired their M4's in combat either....but that doesn't make that weapon system any less relevant.

Nor do ALL special units have the funds to purchase their own sidearms either. The good ol' days of spending taxpayer dollars to get whatever you want are going...going...gone.

I don't disagree with the argument that it is a waste of money and that there is likely corruption involved, just the logic you are using to explain your point.

 

[m9meatball]

Thinking about it I would love to see the government run these tests. They spend my money on a bunch of stuff I don't want but this is something I actually do want to see...nothing like a good torture test.

 

[Nom de Forum]

Time to bring back the Colt SCAMP? ;-) I am actually quite serious. Unlike when the SCAMP was originally proposed, we now have a proven cartridge for it in current mass production, the 5.7x28mm. A lightweight 5.7mm pistol with a burst fire cabability, likely smaller than the SCAMP but probably a little larger than an FN FiveSeven, might actually work quite well. The Steyr TMP/B&T MP9 might also provide some inspiration. It would be interesting to see an objective analysis of the "stopping power" of multiple 5.7mm SS190 hits vs. one 9mm, .40S&W or even .45 ACP round. I am quite sure that the flat trajectory and low recoil would allow even ordinary soldiers to hit targets more consistently and further away than with a conventional pistol and even special forces might appreciate the burst fire capability for close quarters work.

http://world.guns.ru/smg/usa/scamp-e.html

I agree with you that caliber should not be limited to 9,40,45, but the SCAMP pistol is just to bulky for a sidearm that is intended for defensive use. Burst fire is not a good idea unless controllable enough to limit dispersion and that is hard to achieve in a pistol. I don't think limiting the cartridge to what is in production is economically necessary. The 5.7mm bore size is going in the right direction ballistically but needs some improvement. A cartridge that is shorter but larger in than the 5.7 mm FN along with a reduction in magazine capacity to permit narrower stacking in a double column magazine or 10 round single column magazine is needed to limit grip size. Do we really need 15+ round pistols with huge grips to have a sufficient ammunition capacity? I also think a cartridge with more energy and bullet weight than 5.7mm FN is needed. Something with exterior dimensions, and exterior and terminal ballistics between the 5.7mm FN and the .224Boz, something like the SCAMP cartridge that is +P. It would provide lower recoil, ammunition weight, better armor penetration, and a comparable or larger wound cavity than 9,40,45 FMJ.

 

[Gtscotty]

An M9 updated with everything the DoD wants. No extra training, no extra holsters, and total familiarity. Stick a fork in it, it's done....

This. Smart move by Beretta, maybe even with some nudging from the .gov. If they can slip this in on an ECP, the PM could claim an incremental update to the existing platform that solves the identified short comings while saving the cost of a full on procurement (which, as some people have stated, goes way, way beyond the initial purchase price of hardware).

 

[cluttonfred]

Nom de Forum, thanks for your comments. I did actually suggest something between the FN FiveSeven and the Colt SCAMP in size. I agree that the burst fire function might be an unnecessary complication but it's probably worth trying. Still, with a low bore axis, low recoil and perhaps a compensator it might be possible to put semi-auto fire on target pretty darn fast. I don't think that taking advantage of an existing cartridge would be a bad idea, and the 5.7mm could be tweaked with low-flash pistol powder for best performance in a short barrel. If going with a a new round then a straight-walled 5-6mm cartridge makes a lot of sense in order to pack more rounds in a normal magazine. Even so, something as simple as a 5.7mm Glock might be a winner

 

[burk]

Here's my issue with the Smith. While the M & P series make a great .40 and a very good .45, there 9's have been plagued with accuracy and QC issues. They are on their third Bbl design for the full size Nine, and evidently according to Chris Costa, still don't have it right.

http://monderno.com/news/chris-costa-reports-smith-wesson-mp-problem/#comment-66894


Glock designed their gun around the 9mm and consequently had some issues with the .40. I believe the same argument could be made about the Smith in reverse.

 

[tarosean]

Glock designed their gun around the 9mm and consequently had some issues with the .40. I believe the same argument could be made about the Smith in reverse.

Yet, Glocks gen4 redesign was to fix their 40SW's issues and their 9mm's suffered resulting in issues.

Revolving door when your trying to "share" as many parts as possible.

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by burk:

Here's my issue with the Smith. While the M & P series make a great .40 and a very good .45, there 9's have been plagued with accuracy and QC issues.

If the solicitation process goes that far, one would expect such issues to surface in the test and evaluation process.

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by tarosean:

Parts numbers mean nothing in the grand scheme of things, since that would all be a package deal. i.e. logistics, spares, and support.

The number of parts will have an affect on production cost, and therefore on price; on reliability; probably, on service life; and on maintainability.

Fewer are better.

 

[tarosean]

Fewer are better.

Unless those "fewer" are actually more expensive....

 

[RustyShackelford]

Soldiers in SW Asia.....

I read a few online articles by a active duty US Army soldier who deployed to OEF/Afganistan. He never fired any weapons ever & never left the FOB(forward operating base) for his entire 6mo TDY(temporary duty) deployment.

 

[crazysccrmd]

I read a few online articles by a active duty US Army soldier who deployed to OEF/Afganistan. He never fired any weapons ever & never left the FOB(forward operating base) for his entire 6mo TDY(temporary duty) deployment.

It happens all the time. The vast majority of the Army aren't combat Soldiers, they are the guys who take care of all the support crap so the real Soldiers can go out and take care of business.

 

[barnbwt]

"Burst fire is not a good idea unless controllable enough to limit dispersion and that is hard to achieve in a pistol."
What the heck, Youtube? How is there not one video of a full auto five-seven (legal or otherwise) uploaded anywhere? I won't claim such an animal would be controllable, but I am very interested in how it stacks against select fire Glocks and Berettas (and what its rate of fire might be, as well). Someone with an SOT get on this, already! :banghead:

"The 5.7mm bore size is going in the right direction ballistically but needs some improvement."
Agreed. The 5.7 was designed, first and foremost, for a short carbine with a barrel of some 10 inches. That a pistol was possible in the same chambering doesn't mean it is similarly optimal. Apart from capacity and the fact the round is still serviceable as a duty round, I agree improvement could be made (though at a significant design cost, since a true locked breech would then be needed, with attendant complexity, size, weight, and cost)

"A cartridge that is shorter but larger in than the 5.7 mm FN along with a reduction in magazine capacity to permit narrower stacking in a double column magazine or 10 round single column magazine is needed to limit grip size."
I asked in the reloading forum a while back if there was ever an attempt to 'beef up' the wimpy case head of the 30 Carbine for a high pressure chambering. I think Johnson was really on to something with his PDW cartridge, but the case head simply can't do very high pressures without the primer pocket letting go (same as the 5.7 if you run it even hotter). A 30 Carbine case sharply necked down to ~22/25, with the overall length of 7.62x25 or 5.7x28, then cranked up to 60ksi like 5.56, would be one heck of a bad day for anything. At those pressures, such a little bullet would be accelerated so fast a pistol would get them well above the velocity beyond which Kevlar no longer matters. The slightly larger case diameter would ensure brass strength. As quality as the 5.7x28 is, it's a 25acp diameter head drilled for a small rifle primer, and holding back 50,000psi --there's simply no way to reinforce it further.

Functionally, I think the round would be like the Boz or 4.6, though; obnoxiously loud and flashy, hard to control with gas (or recoil!) systems, hard to contain in a small package due to enormous focused bolt thrust, and having painfully short brass and firearm life. Maybe a recoil operation with gas-damping/delay could make things more viable, but H&K's MP7 experience (and lack of pistol offering) indicates a very difficult hurdle when it comes to developing platforms for these 'super' rounds. I think that's why FNH backed off on the pressure like they did, and stuck with more easily tuned blowback actions as best they could.

"The number of parts will have an affect on production cost, and therefore on price; on reliability; probably, on service life; and on maintainability."
I honestly wonder about this. In the '40's, when cargo ships were loaded using 'paper doll strategizing' to get the most efficient pattern, and all manifests were done in hand writing, I understand how McNamara's obsession with numerical reduction and logistical simplicity was absolutely justified.

But we have tools that have reduced that portion of the supply chain's burden a billion-fold --is it really still the all-critical limiting factor? At least, compared to the possible benefits of a more diverse supply chain? Not speaking from any authority or knowledge here, but the computerized/optimized routing systems certainly do allow Amazon, for instance, to successfully maintain a catalogue that is mind-blowingly complex compared to anything dreamed by Sears in years past.

I think it'd be tragic to force everyone into using the same platforms, if the diversity of something closer to true freedom of choice was in fact not such a terrible burden in the first place. It'd actually be quite interesting to see what kinds of true optimization would take place in such an environment (like we see with our Special guys, who actually get something akin to choice, then "somehow" manage to ferret out the best tools and equipment for their job). Personally, I think you'd see a lot of guys away from the front not waste their allotment on side arms.

TCB

 

[vaalpens]

Otherwise, they should just hold a competition for off-the-shelf 9mm DAO polymer pistols and be done with it.

The Glock guys are not going to be happy since the Glock is not a DAO, unless you saying Glock qualifies as a DAO.

Glock and Kahr semi-automatic pistols are not DA (or DAO) pistols because the striker is "cocked" to an intermediate position by the operation of the slide and they cannot be re-activated by pulling the trigger a second time.

 

[Nom de Forum]

Nom de Forum, thanks for your comments. I did actually suggest something between the FN FiveSeven and the Colt SCAMP in size. I agree that the burst fire function might be an unnecessary complication but it's probably worth trying. Still, with a low bore axis, low recoil and perhaps a compensator it might be possible to put semi-auto fire on target pretty darn fast. I don't think that taking advantage of an existing cartridge would be a bad idea, and the 5.7mm could be tweaked with low-flash pistol powder for best performance in a short barrel. If going with a a new round then a straight-walled 5-6mm cartridge makes a lot of sense in order to pack more rounds in a normal magazine. Even so, something as simple as a 5.7mm Glock might be a winner

You did indeed suggest something between the two and I got distracted when replying. I think the FN FiveSeven has too large of a grip because of an unnecessarily if not undesirably high magazine capacity. A smaller grip that easily fits the smallest of hands is more desirable if there is at least 10 rounds in the magazine. I do not think any compensator will make burst fire practical. I think only an as yet unobtainable hyper fast cyclic rate that fires a 2/3 round burst before the pistol recoils would make burst fire practical. Even before working on a controllable burst function other more important operating characteristics need to be resolved (see barnbwt's post #248 ).