USAF Request Bids on new Handguns

[Mike Faires]

Apparently someone finally woke up at the Pentagon. Today the Air Force issued a Request for Proposal for new handguns. One of the criteria is a caliber capable of 12 inch penetration of flesh and a permanent wound channel greater than 9MM, it goes on to say that 40 or 45 caliber is preferable. Bring back the 1911.

 

[Outlaws]

They will never bring back the 1911. Get over it. Maybe some select units will, but never a full branch.

 

[das028]

Here we go again!

Anytime there is word on any branch of the military even considering a new sidearm, all the 1911 people have to chime in.

Get over it people! There are so many better choices out there. The 1911 had its place in the military but come on fellas, times change, and so do handgun designs. Just way to many better options.

They might as well bring back the M1 Grands too.:banghead:

 

[Manedwolf]

There's no logical reason for them to move from a 17 or 20rd issue weapon to an 8rd singlestack one. If you want a .45, there's much newer high capacity designs out there.

Personally, I'd think if they wanted a .45, the 24/7 SOCOM would not be a bad choice at all. Really excellent ergonomics and grip, even if wet. Also save the taxpayers some money! And, of course, there's the HK as well. If anything, I suspect they'll go for one of the HKs.

Why the hell would you want a 1911 instead of a new, high-tech positive-grip 13+1 capacity .45 ACP?

 

[PershingRiflesC-7]

According to Mike Golden, president of S&W, they intend to pursue these types of opportunities to replace the M-9 pistol. Their proposal will be the new M&P models.

 

[gudel]

I thought they cancelled it?

Bring 1911 back? You guys can't even make the regular production to work right out of the box, and you want this as a combat gun?

 

[outofbattery]

I wonder how many times USAF personnel have used their sidearms since the Beretta was adopted and how many times the 9mm has failed.

 

[Powderman]

Ho-kay.

For all the 1911 bashers out there, consider that this pistol, in all of its sundry configurations, has been around for almost 100 years, and is still going strong.

There's a reason for that. It works. Plain and simple, it works--and it works well.

And, pray tell, which design is a better design than the 1911? Name one that is as durable. I know of some that are just as user friendly, and those are the Glock handguns--those are also rock-solid and tough as nails.

HK? Good weapons, but let something bust in the field. What do you have to do to fix it? Same thing with the S&W, or even the Beretta, for that matter.

Can you disassamble the pistol, completely, without special tools? The 1911 will do it.

Well, let's hear your choices--and why.

 

[mp510]

Bringing the 1911 back wouldn't be totally out of the quedtion, well sort of. There are domestic and imported double stacks that are only a few rounds shy of the 9x19 mag capacity. Para makes double actions- it could happen. Just in all likliehood it wouldn't.

A few years ago, the CG went to Sig .40's along with the rest of DHS.

 

[Manedwolf]

There's a reason for that. It works. Plain and simple, it works--and it works well.

For the time, yeah, it was great. But there's better options.

They didn't retire the Willys MB and Ford jeeps because they were bad...they work great, still, and were fantastic for their time. They moved to the Hummer because it offered a lot more. We don't use Sherman tanks anymore either, we use M1s.

Same with sidearms. Time marches on.

 

[RustyShackelford]

Here we go again...

As I've posted here a few times the DoD/US military should issue a ambi type model of the new compact HK .45acp USSOCOM model. A mag of 8-14 rounds, ambi features(mag release, slide release, etc), plastic frame, 1913 type rail for white lights/lasers and a barrel that can have a sound suppressor would be great!

HK has a proven record with major LE agencies and military units. I hope and pray the DoD/military do not screw the tests up and waste $$$ like they did for the M-9 9mmNATO pistol tests.

Our military troops deserve better!

Rusty S

 

[two tone]

the only weapon i see worthy of replacing it is a glock 22. same mag capacity. lighter weight. better design. unmatched reliability. and greater wound channels.

 

[noops]

As a 1911 owner, I think not...

I have a great high end 1911 (Ed Brown). I love it. Best gun I own, easiest to shoot, most accurate. But really, 1911's do take a lot of work to keep running when compared to something like an H&K USP, or a Glock (probably same for M&P).

So for me it's ok (although I carry the USP compact 9mm most of the time). But think about an armourer's job, managing and keeping running hundreds or thousands of 1911 pistols. I sure wouldn't want that job. I don't mind doing it on one pistol that was a "splurge" moment (that cost me too much money anyway). And I think not just the amount of time, but parts would probably drive up costs as well.

N

 

[Manedwolf]

the only weapon i see worthy of replacing it is a glock 22. same mag capacity. lighter weight. better design. unmatched reliability. and greater wound channels.

And lots of ADs when it gets caught on the holster/vest/belt/gear etc in a combat situation. Yes, it's user error, but combat is a high-stress situation, why have something that makes it easier to make a fatal mistake?

Grip safety is good. So is manual safety. IMO, trigger-safety-only is like lap belt only in a car. They thought it was fine for a long time. They know better now.

For combat use, I think Glock is way behind the times now. So many better products from HK, Springfield, Taurus, Beretta, even S&W.

 

[ugaarguy]

Read and heed

Everyone, go read the forum rules. Debate the pistol options on their merit and back up your statements. Don't call owners or fans of a particular make or model names. Lastly stop using the names of dieties/religious figures as an exclamation, explicative, whatever part of speech you want to call it, or any other casual and/or innapropriate use of those names since it's offensive to many on the forum. Let's get this thread back on the high road before it gets locked.

 

[Hanzo581]

And what about the XD45? Why would that not be an option?

 

['Card]

Well, since this is the Air Force we're talking about, I think the Glock might be a great choice. It fits well under desks, requires little or no maintenance, and makes a servicable paperweight. They'll clearly need to do something about the grip, though. All those rough surfaces and hard edges might give somebody a blister, for goodness sake.

 

[das028]

"Everyone, go read the forum rules. Debate the pistol options on their merit and back up your statements. Don't call owners or fans of a particular make or model names. Lastly stop using the names of dieties/religious figures as an exclamation, explicative, whatever part of speech you want to call it, or any other casual and/or innapropriate use of those names since it's offensive to many on the forum. Let's get this thread back on the high road before it gets locked."

Who is calling people names? What are you talking about?

 

[two tone]

Grip safety is good. So is manual safety. IMO, trigger-safety-only is like lap belt only in a car. They thought it was fine for a long time. They know better now.

in that case lets just put rollcages in our automobiles and HANS devices like they do in nascar.

 

[das028]

"And lots of ADs when it gets caught on the holster/vest/belt/gear etc in a combat situation. Yes, it's user error, but combat is a high-stress situation, why have something that makes it easier to make a fatal mistake?

Grip safety is good. So is manual safety. IMO, trigger-safety-only is like lap belt only in a car. They thought it was fine for a long time. They know better now.

For combat use, I think Glock is way behind the times now. So many better products from HK, Springfield, Taurus, Beretta, even S&W."

While I agree eith you, I wouldnt call Glock behind in times. After all they are probably the most durable, reliable, and simple auto on the market today. But I do agree that there lack af a manual saftey to pose a saftey issue. To an individual shooter with proper training a Glock is probably the best choice for a combat gun. But its easier to use a pistol with a manual saftey, then it is to properly train our military personel. Sad, yes, but it is the truth.

BTW, for a SHTF/combat sidearm I'll take a glock any day

 

[Skywarp]

A sig with a thumb safety would be perfect.

They are being produced in the SAO actions and probably be converted to DA/SA and enable cocked and locked carry with second strike capability. SIG has a pre existing contract with the military from the XM9 trials (which it should have won) as well as the contract for the SEALs and DHS contracts. The wiff off another big military contract will prompt SIG to customize the guns to mil spec.


Personally I think the 226 is perfect as is for this contract. Train the airmen to keep their fingers off the triggers and they'll be fine.

 

[das028]

"And what about the XD45? Why would that not be an option?"


I think it would be a good option. Its definitely on my list of guns that a far superior then the 1911

 

[sm]

ugaarguy wrote:
Everyone, go read the forum rules. Debate the pistol options on their merit and back up your statements. Don't call owners or fans of a particular make or model names. Lastly stop using the names of dieties/religious figures as an exclamation, explicative, whatever part of speech you want to call it, or any other casual and/or innapropriate use of those names since it's offensive to many on the forum. Let's get this thread back on the high road before it gets locked.

Correct!

 

[fastbolt]

Why not sit back, wait and watch what happens? Let's all be polite and cordial in the meantime, and bear in mind the forum rules, of course.

It's not surprising that the M9 is sometimes apparently reported to exhibit a bit of a potential sensitivity when it comes to functioning in a sandy environment. Of course, nothing mechanical LIKES sand, when it comes right down to it.

I always chuckle when I see folks bruit about some of the so-called "torture tests" involving sand exposure/immersion ... and then think of the very same makes & models of pistols that come through our range, and often exhibit functioning problems the first time an empty magazine is simply dropped onto the sand covering the range, and then 'functioning problems' occur once some of the magazines are reloaded and continued to be used ... with sand inside them.

Wanna impress me with "torture tests"? Take 100-500 representative makes & models of the same pistol and subject them all to the same conditions, at the same time, in the hands of different shooters ... and then see what happens. Don't be disappointed if some may function without problems, and some exhibit functioning problems, under the same conditions. Things happen.

Anyway, I thought it interesting that the USAF has actually expressed a potential interest in a pistol chambered in either .40 S&W or .45 ACP.

It'll be interesting to see whether the variable grip dimensions, especially in some of the newer polymer-framed pistol platforms, permit a .45 ACP pistol to fit the anticipated needs of the various intended shooters/users. The smaller framed .40 S&W models may offer a better 'fit', but I guess we'll see what the USAF thinks about things, won't we? Presuming, of course, this actually proceeds and goes somewhere in the next couple of years.

Might be interesting to see what this does to ammunition availability and cost of either caliber selected, too, when it comes to civilian/commercial sales.

This wouldn't be the first time the USAF has initiated a trend in small arms procurement for our military forces, either. Not as sexy as the SOCOM pistol subject, but it might turn out to have legs ...

 

[bowfin]

I think a Glock is a hard sidearm to beat, but the Smith & Wesson M&P and Springfield Armory's XD might do it.

I would rather see an American made (and not something imported by an American company) win.