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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Also mentioned in the above link is that S&W and General Dynamics have teamed up for an entry into the competition.

http://www.janes.com/article/46281/general-dynamics-smith-wesson-team-up-for-modular-gun

A General Dynamics subsidiary is teaming up with gun manufacturer Smith & Wesson to compete for the US Army's Modular Handgun System (MHS) programme, the companies announced on 24 November.

The army is looking to replace its M9 sidearm with a new modular system, and General Dynamics Ordinance and Tactical Systems will be working with Smith & Wesson on an entry to be based on the M&P Polymer Pistol platform.

"This partnership combines General Dynamics' proven legacy in manufacturing military armaments with Smith & Wesson's extensive experience in designing and manufacturing firearms for commercial applications," Tim McAuliffe, vice-president and general manager of medium caliber ammunition and weapons for General Dynamics Ordnance and Tactical Systems, said in a statement.
Click to expand...

This would give S&W an important leg up as GD is a long established weapons contractor with substantial clout. It would also give the M&P series a substantial boost over Glock.

tipoc
 
US Army.....

A US Army(DA) spokesperson was quoted last summer(2014) during the big "Industry Day" event that they want to change & update everything. :rolleyes:
The gun, the duty holster, the caliber, the bullet, everything.
This to me, seems a bit of a stretch. The Bianchi M92/M12 is fine. It's modular & can protect the weapon.
I'll admit that mold, mildew & UV/sunlight can cause problems. I owned a Bianchi UM84R holster in the 2000s. The upside is the holster cleans up fast & looks NIB with little effort. :)
The new Safariland AS7 holster line might be picked for this "super-pistol".

We will see.....
 
New sidearm....

If I'm correct, there were older reports & military rumors that the "new" pistol would either be FDE(flat dark earth) or a OD green. Not black or flat black.
I can see the merit of that but the US Army & DoD seem to modify uniforms & camo patterns every 15 minutes so who knows? :rolleyes:

I'm thinking of buying a Lipsey's Glock in FDE. It's cool & conceals well. The Glock 23 gen 04 .40 could be a good purchase.
 
I've read a few articles on this topic for awhile now and I sure seem to remember them saying they wanted an off the shelf commercial product and .40s&w. ...but maybe my memory is off.
 
That line of thinking was what delayed army from getting M240 to replace M60. Both fires the same bullet. Both are machine guns. But, are they the same performer? Hardly. No one I know of missed the M60.
Click to expand...
I sure do...most of the M60 issues were that they were old and worn out. A new M60 E4 would have been lighter and very reliable. Applicable to the topic as most reliability issues with M9s are they are old and worn out...

The M240 is heavier and has a faster ROF making it difficult to shoot well, something I observed (and continue to) on every MG range.

Back to the M9, I like them fine and shoot them well...but I wear a mens size L glove. They are tough for anyone with smaller hands. I have also never received any handgun training in the Army (I've been given some rounds to qualify with before each deployment, no training), though I've been sent overseas twice with an M9 and was first issued one nearly 20 years ago as a machine gunner. I, however, give handgun training to as many soldiers as I can as my way of at least rectifying the issue for a few.

I'm not excited at the prospect of a new sidearm because it likely won't be off the rack. The contract specifications will result in a step back like the M9's slide mounted safety-decocker or the BHPs mag disconnect.
 
strambo said:
I sure do...most of the M60 issues were that they were old and worn out. A new M60 E4 would have been lighter and very reliable. Applicable to the topic as most reliability issues with M9s are they are old and worn out...

The M240 is heavier and has a faster ROF making it difficult to shoot well, something I observed (and continue to) on every MG range.
Click to expand...

It has been almost three decades since I routinely repaired M60s. My experience was that M60s go from new/repaired to new condition and unworn out to old and worn out far to quickly. The M240 on the other hand takes a licking and keeps on ticking for a much longer time. I have no idea what MG ranges qualifications are like now but in the 1980s the MAG58s that 18Bs were trained to use were not at all hard to make hits with. I much prefer the extra poundage and reliability of the MAG58/M240 to the M60. I did get my hands on one M60E and do not recall noticing anything that made it better than the Belgian Beauty other than svelteness. Some of the retired SF guys from the Korean/Vietnam Era still thought the M1919A6 was a better choice than the M60.
 
I wasn't necessarily saying the '60 was objectively better than the 240, perhaps it's not...but I liked it better! Mine was reliable and I could hit with it very well. I was also an Infantry Platoon Leader during the M240 transition and MG quals went down the toilet. The M240 is definitely reliable and great vehicle mounted.
 
"Army spokesman", "officials" = huh?

Don't hold your breath on this. In the Pentagon there is no money for this, and even less interest. The budget weenies there are scrambling with sequestration to find $$ for gas, food, paychecks, and jet fuel.
 
False!....

While I would not disagree with the statement that the DoD/US military is in a serious budget crunch & financial bind in 2014, this new sidearm plan has considerable interest.
As noted in another post, the entire program is in the early stage. Gun makers & engineers have 2 FYs or so to offer pistols for the formal trials. A new pistol might not be fielded until 2018 or so.
Beretta USA stated they have approx 20,000 M9s left to send to the US Army to fulfill the last contract.

This is not rumors & speculation at this point. ;)
 
Whatever you say.

But I say "interest" does not equal $$. No $$ = no program. That's the way the Pentagon works.

The M9 meets the needs of most in the military and we have oodles of them. Those having a greater need as real shooters usually meet those needs with special, separately funded, ad hoc, contracts. Very small scale stuff.
 
Another stupid waste of money. The M9 works just fine and does what it is designed to do. The use of a pistol in combat is so small that this should be one of the last things on a budget.
 
The way things are looking for the D.O.D. they'll probably be having a garage sale pretty soon.:rolleyes:
 
No "we" don't.....

I'm not sure who "we" is :confused: but the US armed forces & DoD want a new sidearm.
Many 30 year old M9 9mmNATO pistols are wore out, loose, having spare part/logistics issues & many combat troops complained about them(fair or not).
When I served in the US Army, USFK(Korea), I was given a old, rattlely 1911a1 from Remington-Rand. :mad:
It was not brand new or updated/re-conditioned.
Weapons & parts wear out. Combat, weather & hard use can excelerate this wear.
I agree there were fits & starts with the new M9 rumors but this sidearm program has merit IMO. It should get the $$$ to find a better pistol that can meet the rigid demands of our US armed forces.
It should be noted too that a few entry pistols from top makers quickly failed or were DQed in the 1980s era XM9 T&E.
Not all brands will make the end selection. Just like the recent M4/SCAR rifle mess, the gun makers have a tough time ahead.
 
I read the Army wants to go back to the 45 Auto but who knows what to believe anymore, even if it does come from official sources...

I do know some forces are still carrying 1911's put together with parts and guns left over from 30 years ago when they went to the M9.
 
Robert Boatman....

The late author Robert Boatman, www.boatmanbooks.com in his Living With series explained the US armed forces produced so many new & unused 1911a1 .45acp sidearms in 1942-1946 that the DoD/Army never really made any new pistols or bought any later on. :uhoh:
All the pistols used during the post WWII era were just serviced or refit.
Over time, these sidearms wore out. These M9s are now 30 years old.
 
Predictions

Commercial Off The Shelf; more than one size variant; competitive package procurement covering pistols, initial spares, and magazines--and maybe more.

The cost/benefit analysis will not be made public, but it will include comparisons with staying with the Beretta.

Staying with the Beretta is not a no-cost alternative.
 
What's with all the e-insults? The current inventory's nearing the end of its lifespan, they haven't shopped since Regan was president and people are pissed because they're looking for a better value?

My guess is they're going to find a lighter, more adaptable and cheaper platform to buy and maintain. I don't know if they can break away from 9mm without pissing off NATO but if they do my money is on the .45.
 
The military weapons analyst also expressed views that Glock may not make the cut due to the firm's financial status & controversy around the owner: Gaston Glock. Glock's colorful past & his business dealings worldwide may give the Beltway bunch a lot of grief.
Click to expand...

Forgive my ignorance, but what are Glock's problems? I don't believe S&W's M&P line is on par with Glocks' mechanical design or manufacturing but S&W appears to have surprised Glock in the ergonomics department.
 
Last edited:
pearsonm said:
Forgive my ignorance, but what are Glock's problems? I don't believe S&W's M&P line is on par with Glocks' mechanical design and manufacturing but S&W appears to have surprised Glock in the ergonomics department.
Click to expand...
Glock has been under multiple investigations for the use of a network of shell companies in tax haven countries to hide income and skim profits.
 
M9 by modern standards is large, heavy, and in a sandy environment can be problematic if it gets crud in the slide...but it works well, is smooth to operate, points well, and packs plenty of rounds. It has as many things going for it as it has things working against it. For a battlefield gun, the only improvement I MIGHT ask for would be a covered barrel rather than open slide. Weight would increase slightly, but it might eliminate some of the grit in the action...or if they just put more slop in the slide it would clear itself (think AK loose). Will the got switch it out with another weapon...doubtful.
 
I've never been in the military nor have I seen combat, but I'm a big fan of the M9 when considering the stipulations put on the design submissions. As do many, I prefer decockers and strikers to a safety, but that wasn't the criteria.
 
As mentioned Glock has some serious behind the scenes legal problems. They have been brewing for a number of years now.

http://www.businessweek.com/article...ounders-ex-wife-kids-speak-out-for-first-time

http://www.fbi.gov/kansascity/press...ying-bribes-and-kickbacks-to-glock-executives

http://www.ajc.com/news/news/crime-law/former-glock-executives-indicted/ngFFx/

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-08-06/ex-glock-exec-out-of-prison-and-spitting-bullets

Some of this may not amount to much but some is more serious and could effect potential federal contracts.

tipoc
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

S
  • Locked
XM9/XM10 trials
Replies
2
Views
7K
Owen
O
R
  • Locked
MHS program, XM17, surprises ....
Replies
17
Views
2K
Jim Watson
J
T
  • Locked
Replacing the USAF M9
2
Replies
34
Views
2K
Robert
Robert
N
  • Locked
Military issue equipment: 1985
2
Replies
25
Views
2K
Detritus
Detritus
O
  • Locked
Sig 229 vs. Sig Pro...My first article.
Replies
4
Views
1K
orangeninja
O
Back
Top