U.S. Brings Back the .45

[Grunt]

I agree that rear echelon troops don't get very good training. In the Air Force, our catagorey C shooters, (base ops, medical, logistics,etc) only fire once every 3 years and even then, it's only one day. Problem is that a lot of these folks (though by no means everyone) will not handle a firearm at all for the next three years until it's time to qualify again. Even our catagorey A shooters (cops, TAC-P, PJ's, etc) run the AFQC course only once a year and in the case of the cop squadrons, we also run them through the TRQC course once a year as well but still, it's only a one-day class as well.
That being said, the last thing I would like to see adopted for general issue would be a Glock or 1911. These days I'm a CATM instructor and when you see folks with a round in the chamber, finger on the trigger turning a muzzle up range, you get a little jumpy with the DA trigger on the M9. I'd probably blow a gasket if they were turning a loaded Glock or 1911 up range because of the shorter lighter triggers on these weapons.
Right now I think the best trigger system for general issue would be one of the pre-cocked DAO trigger systems like HK's LEM or Sig's DAK trigger. Here you get the lighter easier to shoot trigger for better accuracy yet still have a longer pull before it goes bang that most anyone would know they are pulling. From what I've been seeing and judging by the requirements for the new JCP, HK's new HK45 seems like it would be the best choice at this current time.
Of course even if it is ever adopted, how long until it completely phases out the M9 is another question. This summer I inspected and guaged all the wings weapons and I found in a lot of mobility boxes a lot of early M-16s, (even a couple with green handguards and chrome bolts) and even a few old XM-177E2s as well still in service.

 

[WarMachine]

Would this do anything to lower the cost of .45 ammo in time?

 

[MCgunner]

Seems to me what when long-guns come into discussion, the A-10 Wart Hog trumps them all. But, I'll stick to the pistol issue. I haven't seen many people walking about with Bushmasters, MIAs or the like stuck down their bathing suits.

Doc2005

The military doesn't carry IWB... My point, if you're counting on the "tremendous knock down power" of the .45 in a gunfight with RPG/AK toting Al Quaida, you're lookin' to die. I thought this was a MILITARY arms discussion? Turns out its a concealed carry discussion, sorry. If that's the case, carry hollow points, too! I'll take my .357, thanks!

 

[f4t9r]

should be something well made right here in the USA
not some shipping plant in the USA that builds everything overseas.
Of coarse (sadly) thats getting hard to do these days.

 

[MCgunner]

should be something well made right here in the USA
not some shipping plant in the USA that builds everything overseas.
Of coarse (sadly) thats getting hard to do these days.

Well, you got Ruger and Smith and Wesson. That's about it for modern production .45s and they're going to have to develop something real fast to meet these specs. That's why I figure the H&K has the inside on this one. It'll be interesting when it does get chosen. I can already hear the bitchin' from the 1911 crowd.

 

[Graystar]

should be something well made right here in the USA
not some shipping plant in the USA that builds everything overseas.

Ditto.

 

[Gary A]

I no longer have one but the Ruger P-90 would absolutely fit the bill for a .45 caliber service weapon. Reasonable weight, bull strong, made in U.S., stainless and alloy. 8 rounds.

 

[Grunt]

should be something well made right here in the USA
not some shipping plant in the USA that builds everything overseas.
Of coarse (sadly) thats getting hard to do these days.

Problem is that US makers aren't as inovative as they once were and the quality just isn't there when compared to a similar European made weapon. If they can't compete in a global market economy, they may go the way of Winchester.

 

[LightningJoe]

If concealment is not an issue, reliability under all conditions is critical, and the potential opponents are soldiers rather than criminals, carry what you'd want in bear country. A double-action revolver with a 6" barrel and chambered for .44 Magnum. That's what I'd want anyway if I found myself caught flat-footed by the enemy in the middle of nowhere and I had no rifle. I don't see the value of the automatic pistol for the military. Such pistols probably made more sense back before somebody thought of the speed-loader.

 

[progunner1957]

From the article in the link:

The M1911 .45 caliber pistol that the 9mm Beretta replaced in 1985, was, as its nomenclature implied, an old design. There are several modern designs out there for .45 caliber pistols that are lighter, carry more ammo and are easier to maintain than the pre-World War I M1911 (which is actually about a century old, as a design).

Yes, it's old - so what??? It also happens to work.

I say, give the warfighters Springfield Armory TRP 1911s with 0% MIM content and Wilson 47D magazines and 230g. FMJ flat point ammo!!

 

[Manedwolf]

should be something well made right here in the USA
not some shipping plant in the USA that builds everything overseas.
Of coarse (sadly) thats getting hard to do these days.

The issue there is that when it comes to large-frame semiautos, it seems like Italy, Germany, Brazil, Austria, Czechoslovakia, etc...have continued to innovate and put out VERY high quality new product, while a lot of the stateside makers have been sitting on their laurels.

I really don't see anyone raving about any absolutely incredible new S&Ws with exciting features and design and all...

 

[hksw]

...but all must be .45 caliber and have a eight round magazine (at least)...

What ever happened to the indefinite article 'an'? It seens it's going the way of the dinosaur. Even newscasters do it to nowadays.

 

[sanger]

Yeah, Strategy Page needs a proofreader, but on the plus side, they're usually spot on in terms of reportage.

Each pistol will come with 6 mags, 2 standard cap (minimum 8 rounds) and 4 hi-caps (minimum 10 rounds).

Here's the actual specifications document in MS Word...

http://fs1.fbo.gov/EPSData/ODA/Synopses/27191/H92222-05-R-0017/Attch01JCPspec080905.doc

 

[Jeff White]

Reality Check

sanger said;

Yeah, Strategy Page needs a proofreader, but on the plus side, they're usually spot on in terms of reportage.

I'm afraid I'd have to disagree. I find Strategy Page to be one of the worst sources for factual military information on the web. Articles are slanted, relevant facts are left out (just like most journalism these days). The article that prompted this thread is a good example. It leaves the reader with the impression that in a few months we're going to be trading in the M9s and M11s for whatever pistol is selected in these trials.

The truth is, fielding a new weapon, even something as simple as a pistol is at best a multiple year project, at worst a multiple decade project if it happens at all.

We have run programs like this many times in the past, just to decide we don't really need the new widget the program was charged with developing or that we couldn't afford it.

A website really dedicated to the truth about military affairs would explain that in their article. James Dunnigan knows enough about how the system works. Articles that mislead the public about what is really going on with the program wouldn't be published if they were really that concerned about accuracy.

I would estimate there are at least a half of a dozen threads on this program right here at THR. There are more threads on every firearms forum I visit. Everyone has a good time rooting for his or her favorite gun to be picked. Strayegy Page gets a lot of hits because the article is linked in the threads on the gun forums, and the shooting public is left with the very mistaken impression that someday soon we'll have new pistols in the military.

Jeff

 

[TxStorm]

sanger said;



I'm afraid I'd have to disagree. I find Strategy Page to be one of the worst sources for factual military information on the web. Articles are slanted, relevant facts are left out (just like most journalism these days). The article that prompted this thread is a good example. It leaves the reader with the impression that in a few months we're going to be trading in the M9s and M11s for whatever pistol is selected in these trials.

The truth is, fielding a new weapon, even something as simple as a pistol is at best a multiple year project, at worst a multiple decade project if it happens at all.

We have run programs like this many times in the past, just to decide we don't really need the new widget the program was charged with developing or that we couldn't afford it.

A website really dedicated to the truth about military affairs would explain that in their article. James Dunnigan knows enough about how the system works. Articles that mislead the public about what is really going on with the program wouldn't be published if they were really that concerned about accuracy.

I would estimate there are at least a half of a dozen threads on this program right here at THR. There are more threads on every firearms forum I visit. Everyone has a good time rooting for his or her favorite gun to be picked. Strayegy Page gets a lot of hits because the article is linked in the threads on the gun forums, and the shooting public is left with the very mistaken impression that someday soon we'll have new pistols in the military.

Jeff

That just kinda says it all..
and takes all the fun outta rooting for my fav!

 

[Old Dog]

To clarify what I mentioned previously, the M9 is going away no time soon. Revisit this fact from August of last year:

BERETTA AWARDED A SECOND U.S. ARMED FORCES CONTRACT FOR DELIVERY OF 70,000 M9 PISTOLS

ACCOKEEK, MD — The U.S. Army contracting authority at Rock Island Arsenal (TACOM) has awarded Beretta U.S.A. an Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract to supply up to 70,000 M9 pistols over the next five years. The contract was awarded to Beretta U.S.A. after a competitive procurement process.

This was the second major contract to be awarded to Beretta U.S.A. for the M9 pistol this year. Earlier this year, the US Army contracted with Beretta U.S.A. to produce 18,744 M9s. “The M9 continues to be the sidearm of choice for our Armed Forces,” said E. Scott Blackwell, Vice-President, Law Enforcement, Defense & New Business Development at Beretta U.S.A. “In 1985, Beretta was selected as the standard-issue sidearm for the U.S. military and the Beretta M9 9mm pistol is now the most reliable and highly tested personal defense weapon in history, exceeding all U.S. Military testing guidelines.”

Anyone familiar with the military's T&E and procument processes knows that widespread production and distribution to branches of the Armed Forces of a new service pistol is gonna take some time. Since only one branch is currently engaged in research for a replacement for the M-9, don't assume this also means the other three branches will immediately adopt a new pistol, either.

 

[ken grant]

GUNS?

All Federal forces should be using guns made in America by Americans as well as all equipment.
Hate see more tax money going to countries overseas and to countries that won't let their people have the freedom to have guns.

 

[texasguy]

I no longer have one but the Ruger P-90 would absolutely fit the bill for a .45 caliber service weapon. Reasonable weight, bull strong, made in U.S., stainless and alloy. 8 rounds.

I think ruger came out with a .45 a while back, something like the P345. Im not sure that thats the name. Supposedly its a good gun.

 

[MCgunner]

Would this do anything to lower the cost of .45 ammo in time?

That probably won't happen until I get my .45 dies for my Dillon progressive. That's how I was able to drop the price of 9mm.:banghead:

Now, I'm thinking my next die set will be .38/357. In five years, .45 probably/hopefully will be $5.90 a box at Walmart.

 

[MCgunner]

I think ruger came out with a .45 a while back, something like the P345. Im not sure that thats the name. Supposedly its a good gun.

The P345 is sort of a compact, not really needed in this instance. I think the P90 would make a better service pistol, the P345 better for IWB/CCW.

 

[MCgunner]

To clarify what I mentioned previously, the M9 is going away no time soon. Revisit this fact from August of last year:

BERETTA AWARDED A SECOND U.S. ARMED FORCES CONTRACT FOR DELIVERY OF 70,000 M9 PISTOLS

ACCOKEEK, MD — The U.S. Army contracting authority at Rock Island Arsenal (TACOM) has awarded Beretta U.S.A. an Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract to supply up to 70,000 M9 pistols over the next five years. The contract was awarded to Beretta U.S.A. after a competitive procurement process.

This was the second major contract to be awarded to Beretta U.S.A. for the M9 pistol this year. Earlier this year, the US Army contracted with Beretta U.S.A. to produce 18,744 M9s. “The M9 continues to be the sidearm of choice for our Armed Forces,” said E. Scott Blackwell, Vice-President, Law Enforcement, Defense & New Business Development at Beretta U.S.A. “In 1985, Beretta was selected as the standard-issue sidearm for the U.S. military and the Beretta M9 9mm pistol is now the most reliable and highly tested personal defense weapon in history, exceeding all U.S. Military testing guidelines.”

Anyone familiar with the military's T&E and procument processes knows that widespread production and distribution to branches of the Armed Forces of a new service pistol is gonna take some time. Since only one branch is currently engaged in research for a replacement for the M-9, don't assume this also means the other three branches will immediately adopt a new pistol, either.

Hmm, another odd thought, might there be cheap M9s on the used gun shelves in the future, barely used?????

 

[palerider1]

thank god, hopefully colt will come up with something nice and get the contract.

 

[Trebor]

Hmm, another odd thought, might there be cheap M9s on the used gun shelves in the future, barely used?????

Not from the military. The guns would have to be demilled. They'd basically be turned to scrap first.

 

[Jeff White]

MCgunner said;

Hmm, another odd thought, might there be cheap M9s on the used gun shelves in the future, barely used?????

Not likely. If (and it's a big if at this point), the military does in fact decide to replace the M9, it will take approx 10 years to replace all the M9s in service with whatever pistol is selected to replace them. The M9 was adopted in 1985. Smith and Wesson sued, got part of the test redone, the result was the same, Beretta beating out Sig on price per unit, and the first M9s were fielded to the Coast Guard sometime in 1986. It was sometime in 1995 or so when the last Army RC unit turned in their 1911A1s.

You didn't see 1911A1s in the display cases at your local gunshop did you? The Clinton administration began destroying them. The NRA stepped in and got congress to put a stop to that, but many were destroyed. The rest were put into storage. Probably some were sold overseas as part of the Foreign Military Sales Progam. None we made available to the civilian market. They are currently available to police departments on the DOD 1033Law Enforcement Assistance Program.

So I doubt you'll see any sold to the public. Not even through the auspices of CMP.

Jeff

 

[MCgunner]

Well, sounds as if the reports of the .45s return are perhaps fictitious anyway. I've never heard of any army units badmouthing the 9 anyway. That one raised hoax alarms with I read it.