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

[Zaydok Allen]

How can beretta compete for a new contract when there not even finis

They would likely submit the PX4. Development complete.... Just ramp up production.

Here's a thought...what about a 5.7mm Glock?

I don't think they would trade up cartridges that are cheap and produced by dozens of companies, and thus easy to find, and also effective, for a more expensive ammo produced by FN alone. Unless there are others that make it now and I don't know about them.

The only benefit would be capacity. If they adopted the the P90 as a weapon system also I'd see the benefit, but otherwise.... I think the chances of the P90 being widely adopted along with a sidearm chambered in 5.7 is zero.

The new M9s or pistols would need to be used by service members, both male & female.

The highly modular nature of the VP9's grip panels seems like a good choice for this reason, if the cost is kept low enough.

 

[Nom de Forum]

Unit level armorers are not taught "peace meal" with small courses that can be taught in a day or two. They have to be TRADOC certified in order to have the slot. To be TRADOC certified it needs to be an MOS. To be an MOS that is a whole 6 weeks at Ft. Lee, VA. A big Army change like a sweeping sidearm change, the backlog for retrain would be tremendous. In that regard, simple Glock courses would be easier for maintenance, if Glocks were chosen.

Perhaps things have changed in the past 20+ years, but if they have not I think you are incorrect. When I served “Unit Armor” was not a M.O.S.; Small Arms Repairman (45B) was a M.O.S. taught at Aberdeen Proving Grounds in Maryland. Unit Armors were taught essentially “piece meal” to preform unit level maintenance on their unit’s weapons and to know when to submit weapons to their Direct Support or General Support Maintenance Company. Armorer training on new weapons added to a units T.O.E./T.D.A. was provided by short classes conducted on Post. There would not be a “tremendous” backlog for retraining. This type of train happened several times when I served. An example would be when the M249 SAW was fielded in the early 1980s which is a much more complicated weapon than the M9 fielded later that decade. New training for 45B’s conducting DS/GS is also taught on Post although not always.

 

[fanchisimo]

Perhaps things have changed in the past 20+ years, but if they have not I think you are incorrect. When I served “Unit Armor” was not a M.O.S.; Small Arms Repairman (45B) was a M.O.S. taught at Aberdeen Proving Grounds in Maryland. Unit Armors were taught essentially “piece meal” to preform unit level maintenance on their unit’s weapons and to know when to submit weapons to their Direct Support or General Support Maintenance Company. Armorer training on new weapons added to a units T.O.E./T.D.A. was provided by short classes conducted on Post. There would not be a “tremendous” backlog for retraining. This type of train happened several times when I served. An example would be when the M249 SAW was fielded in the early 1980s which is a much more complicated weapon than the M9 fielded later that decade. New training for 45B’s conducting DS/GS is also taught on Post although not always.

That was what I saw when I was still in and that was only 2 years ago. Our armorer was a 19K just like most of the company. The armorer was just an extra responsibility and he had to go for classes on post. I remember a detail where we took some weapons and red dots to a building where some higher level soldiers were. I assume these were probably the full MOS armorers.

 

[Zerodefect]

They would likely submit the PX4. Development complete.... Just ramp up production.


I don't think they would trade up cartridges that are cheap and produced by dozens of companies, and thus easy to find, and also effective, for a more expensive ammo produced by FN alone. Unless there are others that make it now and I don't know about them.

The only benefit would be capacity. If they adopted the the P90 as a weapon system also I'd see the benefit, but otherwise.... I think the chances of the P90 being widely adopted along with a sidearm chambered in 5.7 is zero.

I agree. The Five Seven, or a 5.7x28mm Glock, is a defensive pistol more suited for a security detail. It's not a good choice for a fighting pistol. The P90, PS90 are a bit more useful. Unless we want pistols with 8"+ barrels?

But the cost of ammo would be a non-issue. If the ammo was widely used, supply and demand and all that, eventually it would be popular enough for it's price to come down. Their is hardly nothing about 5.7x28mm that makes it any more expensive to produce than 357SIG. Right now FN and others don't sell enough of it for wholesale pricing.

But it's not terrible, a little more than quality 5.56 ball ammo IIRC. $0.43 per round for 5.7x28mm, vs: $0.31 for quality .223, vs: $0.30 for .40S&W.

http://www.bulkammo.com/rifle/bulk-5.7x28-mm-ammo



I don't see the point of using the 5-7 pistol just because my primary is a P90. Those security guards and SS personnel are carrying extra pistol mags anyways. So it's hardly any different than using an AR and a 1911. No body has ever had to feed their P90 with ammo from their 5-7 pistol mags IIRC. If you blow through 50 rounds in a P90, the threat should be toast. LOLz. And someone's got to have an extra P90 magazine anyways.

(although, if Glock released a 5.7x28mm model, I'd be the first to try one)

 

[m9meatball]

Here you go! Just happened...

http://www.beretta.com/en-us/berett...eration-handgun-to-the-department-of-defense/

 

[crazysccrmd]

So they basically just renamed the 90-two the M9A3....

 

[burk]

I would agree with Rusty that S & W should have the inside track, although if there's anyway to screw it up I suspect they'd find it. If it were my call I'd go Glock 17 G4 although the Sig 320, or H & K VP9 should get a look. For the record, here's how I'd hand-cap it. I'm confinning my suggestions to DA striker fired 9's with the exception of the M9. There is no chance that they'll go with .40's, not with LE moving away from them due to gender integrated services. And as much as I think the Glock 21G4 (my HD gun) would be a great choice I don't see them going back to .45 for much of the same reasons.

1) SW M & P 9, the Smith has good ergo's, adjustable grip sizing and a decent reliability record, easy maintenance, it is also available with a safety (I'm not sure that's part of the bid package). The disadvantages are questionable workmanship and long term reliability, lousy trigger, and Smiths production issues, along with some accuracy issues with their 9's.

2) Glock 17, to me the best choice, especially with G4 Grip sizing. They have ease of maintenance, great combat accuracy, good D/A trigger and a great reliability record. The disadvantages are the issues with the future of company management and the lack of an external safety

3) Beretta M9A3. The worse choice of my list, but they had the contract before so they know how to win contracts. The M9 has several issues from reliability to more complicated maintenance, and too large a grip for many smaller soldiers.

4) Sig 320, Again I'm not sure of the Contract specs, but the 320 is certainly a solid competitor in the DA only striker fired market. Sig knows how to get government contracts, but this is a big one. The biggest disadvantage to the Sig IMO are a lack of long term reliability record, and I'm unsure wether they are capable of the production for that size contract.

5) H&K VP9, although I'm a Glock fan boy, I've heard nothing but good about the VP9, it may be the best gun in the test if they submit. Like the Sig, they lack a long term reliability record on that model, but the biggest issue would be higher cost issues, questions about the financial situation of the company, and HK's willingness to produce here

6) FN-S9, FN makes great guns but not so great pistols. To me their triggers are worse than HK's awful DA triggers on their hammer fired guns. They are also pricey compared to the competition. They know how to win government contracts, but considering how reluctant there pistol use had been with any LE or Military agency, I suspect it would be a long haul.

Ruger, CZ, etc, No Chance. They have never been serious about the LE market here. If they aren't interested or experienced in the procurement of LE contracts in the states why would anyone expect them to be a player in the biggest pistol contract on the planet?

 

[LeftyTSGC]

There is a chance that with the M9A3 Engineering Change Proposal (ECP), if approved, could possible wipe out a new handgun competition.

In the Army Acquisition world and ECP is the Program Managers way of getting modification done to upgrade or improve a product without having to have a new Program of Record.

If the M9A3 meets all of the proposed requirements in a new handgun and cost less than a new handgun, then HQDA will not fund another program.:banghead:

We will have to wait and see what the Army decides.

 

[Panzerschwein]

There is a chance that with the M9A3 Engineering Change Proposal (ECP), if approved, could possible wipe out a new handgun competition.

In the Army Acquisition world and ECP is the Program Managers way of getting modification done to upgrade or improve a product without having to have a new Program of Record.

If the M9A3 meets all of the proposed requirements in a new handgun and cost less than a new handgun, then HQDA will not fund another program.:banghead:

We will have to wait and see what the Army decides.

Wow does it really bother you that much? The M9 is a good combat handgun and given the financial situation that faces out country and the other far more needed equipment the military needs like better body armor, a new pistol trial is a waste of taxpayer dollars.

 

[pearsonm]

Here you go! Just happened...

http://www.beretta.com/en-us/beretta...nt-of-defense/

So they're announcing their entry before the requirements are released?

 

[herrwalther]

Perhaps things have changed in the past 20+ years, but if they have not I think you are incorrect. When I served “Unit Armor” was not a M.O.S.; Small Arms Repairman (45B) was a M.O.S. taught at Aberdeen Proving Grounds in Maryland. Unit Armors were taught essentially “piece meal” to preform unit level maintenance on their unit’s weapons and to know when to submit weapons to their Direct Support or General Support Maintenance Company. Armorer training on new weapons added to a units T.O.E./T.D.A. was provided by short classes conducted on Post. There would not be a “tremendous” backlog for retraining. This type of train happened several times when I served. An example would be when the M249 SAW was fielded in the early 1980s which is a much more complicated weapon than the M9 fielded later that decade. New training for 45B’s conducting DS/GS is also taught on Post although not always.

Could be. I am in, soon to be out of an 11B unit. With my interest in weapons I was earmarked to go to Ft Lee to take the armorer course to become the only full time armorer in the state. The current maintainer of firearms in my unit is the supply NCO, who performs minor repairs when he has the parts, most of which he learned on his own and outside his MOS. He would have to go through the same course with the introduction of a new pistol. Active vs NG/Reserve may play a part in differing stances here. Unfortunately the slot I wanted to fill was axed when the new fiscal year started in October.

 

[jamal28]

I highly doubt the us military will allow a slide mounted safety/decocker since that was one of the main complaints with the current m9 not to mention the complaints of sand and dirt coming in via the open slide

 

[Nom de Forum]

Here you go! Just happened...

http://www.beretta.com/en-us/berett...eration-handgun-to-the-department-of-defense/

You can put lipstick on a pig but it is still a pig. Gawd, I never thought I would advocate for returning to the M1911 but that would be preferable even in a single stack 9mm to the Swine we currently have.

 

[m9meatball]

Do you guys not think that Beretta didn't know exactly what the Army wants? It's not like Beretta "can't" or "won't" make a decocker only or frame mounted safety. Apparently that's what the Army wants. They want a hammer fired, DA/SA, 9mm, full sized, reliable, pistol. That's what the M9 is...

 

[JR24]

Yuck, slide mounted safety.

 

[RustyShackelford]

FNS 9mm, service pistols...

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.

 

[Shawn Dodson]

Women sued the DoJ & FBI in the early 2000s in a class action lawsuit over pistol qualifications/weapons. This led to major changes.

Major changes? Untrue. See Urey Patrick's explanation - http://www.firearmstactical.com/tacticalbriefs/2006/04/03/0604-03a.htm

 

[jamal28]

Beretta is trying to convince the military to stay with the 92 series. If beretta enters this updated 92 it will get smoked considering. the current crop of polymer pistols are more reliable and more durable and use fewer moving parts.

 

[AustinTX]

Beretta is trying to convince the military to stay with the 92 series. If beretta enters this updated 92 it will get smoked considering. the current crop of polymer pistols are more reliable and more durable and use fewer moving parts.

Fewer parts and more durable (polymer v. Al alloy)? Yes. More reliable? Nope.

 

[jamal28]

Either way u see it i dont see the us military adopting another pistol with a slide mounted safety. Not to mention its so obvious the military wants the .45acp back. So at the end of the day i us having two sidearms being issued a 9mm and 45acp. At least until the current berettas wear out kinda like in the 1960's when the airforce and army brought the s&w model 15.

 

[tarosean]

If beretta enters this updated 92 it will get smoked considering. the current crop of polymer pistols are more reliable and more durable and use fewer moving parts.

remember the DOD will not be taking internet fanboyism into consideration..

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

 

[m9meatball]

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....

 

[jamal28]

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.

 

[crazysccrmd]

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....

I can tell you it doesn't solve the huge problem of an awkwardly positioned and awkward to manipulate safety which is what 90% of actual users complain about. I don't expect the DoD to base the decision on end user requests or feedback since they don't on pretty much anything else.

 

[jamal28]

Tarosean & M9meatball u guys could be right the only way to find out is to wait and see but i wont hold my breath. But it would be great to see them adopt a newer sidearm.