Replacing the USAF M9

[Quiet]

In 2005, US SOCOM started the Joint Combat Pistol program to seek a .45ACP semi-auto pistol to replace the 9x19mm Beretta M-9.

In 2006, the Joint Combat Pistol program was reformed as the Combat Pistol program and would apply to all branches.

In Q4 2006, the program was cancelled.

In 2007, the USAF attempted to start a new pistol program but it was immediately cancelled.

Due to budgetary issues, Congress deemed that all conventional US Military service branches must use the same sidearm.

In 2009, US DOD purchased 450,000 Beretta M-9s & M-9A1s to be delivered over five years (last shipment in 2014). The new Beretta M-9s are to be issued to the Army, Air Force & Navy and the new Beretta M-9A1s are to be issued to the Marine Corps.

So for the forseeable future (next 10-20 years), the Beretta M-9 will continue to be the standard issue sidearm for the US Military.

 

[TFIT]

So we are restricted to 9mm or 45? They are both over 100 years old and still work but most LE agencies have switched to 40 so why can't the military? One trigger pull has been the norm for many reasons now also, and that should also make for a good military gun. I sure hope whoever gets the contract that a US designed firearm wins.

Well, actually, a lot of LE agencies are starting to switch back to the 9MM or .45. Why? B/c they get better hits. Truth is for most the .40 is a very harsh and snappy round. It's all about the hit. If you can't hit your target it doesn't matter what you're shooting.

 

[TFIT]

As individuals we all have our preferences, but the fact of the matter is that a military's selection of a sidearm has never been a deciding factor in a war, and as time goes on it's less likely that it ever will be. It's been some time since a downed pilot or crewmember has had to rely on a sidearm. In Afghanistan, where varsity level flying conditions cause helicopters to crash at an unfortunate rate, most crews maintain long arms to use in case of that emergency. In addition to that more immediate need, there are other assets able to provide overhead protection.

I really don't like the M9, but aside from my personal persepective I've seen a lot of first shots in DA hit the dirt barely halfway to the target. It's a training issue that alternative equipment could help to alleviate, but I don't consider it a big deal since the pistols will rarely see use. If they do, shot placement (training) and reliability (equipment/PMCS) will remain key. While the M9 is not a preferred weapon for me, it's good enough in both that I wouldn't want to see the military go through the expense of changing.

Understood...but the topic is replacing the sidearm. I think you will agree that anyone who has served knows the primary weapon is the rifle. It is our first and offensive tool...the pistol is purely a defensive weapon, but it has proven to be critical at times. CQC being a prime example. What are your choices with regard to the sidearm?

 

[TFIT]

In 2005, US SOCOM started the Joint Combat Pistol program to seek a .45ACP semi-auto pistol to replace the 9x19mm Beretta M-9.

In 2006, the Joint Combat Pistol program was reformed as the Combat Pistol program and would apply to all branches.

In Q4 2006, the program was cancelled.

In 2007, the USAF attempted to start a new pistol program but it was immediately cancelled.

Due to budgetary issues, Congress deemed that all conventional US Military service branches must use the same sidearm.

In 2009, US DOD purchased 450,000 Beretta M-9s & M-9A1s to be delivered over five years (last shipment in 2014). The new Beretta M-9s are to be issued to the Army, Air Force & Navy and the new Beretta M-9A1s are to be issued to the Marine Corps.

So for the forseeable future (next 10-20 years), the Beretta M-9 will continue to be the standard issue sidearm for the US Military.

Yeah, I know all this...as I said in another post, the M9 will carry us into the next decade...that wasn't the point of the thread bruh. Do you have any thoughts on what you would like to see the M9 replaced with?

 

[TFIT]

"No, US Armed Forces...the US Air Force will do whatever the Army says on this."

Actually it was the other way 'round.
The Air Force started the wheels turning to buy a 9mm.
Their revolvers were wearing out, the Army was running low on 1911s and wouldn't share, so they took proposals for a new sidearm in 9mm iaw NATO agreements.
After a series of tests, they picked the Beretta.
The Army did not want to be left behind but they did not want to look like they were believing the AF, so they ran their own series of tests... and picked the Beretta. There were protests over the test protocol, so they reran the tests... and picked the Beretta.

The Air Force had the M16 first, too.

That may be, but that isn't the subject. I used USAF purely as an acronym for US Armed Forces....not to represent who leads the way. Today, however, the US Army leads the way on these issues. It is the test bed, and all branches are issued what the DOD says.

 

[TFIT]

There is no, absolutely none, general decision to replace the M9 as the standard general issue sidearm of the U.S. military. A couple of hundred thousand more were requisitioned last year as I recall.

Now various branches and units of the military use a variety of other sidearms...Sigs, a few Glocks here and there, Colt 1911s etc. But the general issue arm is the M9 and it will be for awhile.

There were at least 10 threads on this subject last year.

tipoc

You miss the entire point of this discussion. I said for fun...although there may be no immediate discussion ongoing, there has been plenty and it is being discussed behind closed doors. Don't kid yourself on that! So, back to the point, can you just play along, or do you still feel the need to set us all straight on the facts as you see them?

 

[Quiet]

Yeah, I know all this...as I said in another post, the M9 will carry us into the next decade...that wasn't the point of the thread bruh. Do you have any thoughts on what you would like to see the M9 replaced with?

It's unknown what will come about in the next 20 years, why limit yourself to something that is current but may be obsolete when the time comes?

That said...
The lead contendor in the Joint Combat Pistol/Combat Pistol program was the H&K HK-45 and HK-45C.
This may be the reason why the H&K HK-45CT was adopted by US SOCOM as the Mk 24 Mod 0 and replaced the MK 23 Mod 0 (H&K Mark 23).

Back in the 1980s, the SIG P-226 was favored over the Beretta Model 92F, but the Beretta Model 92F was selected due to budgetary issues. USNSWC refused to issue the Beretta M-9 and adopted the SIG P-226, which was recently formalized as the Mk 25 Mod 0.

Since inception, SFOD-D issued customized Colt 1911s. However, during the mid-2000s, they switched to Glocks (Glock 22 Gen3 for CONUS use and Glock 21 Gen3 for OCONUS use).
SF ODAs use a wide selection of sidearms (1911s, Beretta M9s, Glock 17 & 19).

US Navy special operations forces appears to have a preference for SIG and H&K.
US Army special operations forces appears to have a preference for 1911s and Glocks.

So, selecting a currently available sidearm may come down between...
9x19mm = SIG P-226 or Glock 17
.45ACP = H&K HK-45 or Glock 21

 

[helitack32f1]

I am a fan of Gock and wouldn't mind seeing it picked as an eventual replacement for the M9. But there are a lot of pistols i wouldn't mind seeing them, switch too, especially Sig and FN products.

My thought is that if the M9 is not going to be replaced for the next 10 to 20 years, then it is possible that there will be a ground breaking new design that would better serve our armed forces somewhere in those 10 to 20 years. Personally I hope it turns out to be a variation of Ruger pistol, built for that purpose. Or maybe their new SR45 with a dark matte finish.

 

[armsmaster270]

The U.S. Coast Guard, N.C.I.S., Army C.I.D., all carry Sigs. Coast Guard .40S&W and the others 9mm.

 

[Robert]

This is going around in circles and getting nowhere.