USAF Request Bids on new Handguns
- Thread starter Mike Faires
- Start date
- Status
jaysouth
Member
Boats,
There were two things militating against the 1911 as a military weapon.
First there was the age and condition. I was on active duty from 63 until 71. The 1911A1s that we had in the 509th in germany were as crappy as the one that we had in the 82d at Fort Bragg. Those were slightly better than the ones that we had in the First Cav in VN. Handguns were a low priority. There was also a propensity for GIs to abuse them and misuse them. Commanders were always glad to keep them locked up in the arms room. We made a training jump in Libyia in 64. A grenadier lost his .45 on the DZ. We swepth the desert for two days looking for it. No luck, the Company commander, A ringtapper(west pointer) got relieved on account of this infraction of regs and the embarassment of losing a weapon in a place that was as politically sensitive as Libyia.
Secondly, the regs absolutely forbade the weapon from being carried with a round in the chamber. Doing so would get you an asschewing. Carrying with a chambered round with the hammer cocked would get you, your squad leader and your platoon Sgt a hefty fine and the loss of a stripe or two.
Humping the bush in combat, you carried it wrapped up in a plastic bag inside your holster, to keep the wet leather holster from eating it alive. To get the gun into action, you unsnapped the flap, lifted the flap, removed the gun, took it out of the plastic bag, chambered a round and then looked for a target. We sure were glad to get rid of them.
In the rear where you did not need a weapon, but weapon carry was mandated, a pistol was great to carry. Trips to the village to visit the ladies comes to mind. Great for escorting payroll too, but it sucked to carry in the bush.
I guess that if you were a low drag highspeed snake eater hopping and popping into the tribal regions of Pakistan or some such, it would be nice to carry a pistol to augment what every your long was. But not many folks do that or need a pistol. Carry extra grenades and mags.
There were two things militating against the 1911 as a military weapon.
First there was the age and condition. I was on active duty from 63 until 71. The 1911A1s that we had in the 509th in germany were as crappy as the one that we had in the 82d at Fort Bragg. Those were slightly better than the ones that we had in the First Cav in VN. Handguns were a low priority. There was also a propensity for GIs to abuse them and misuse them. Commanders were always glad to keep them locked up in the arms room. We made a training jump in Libyia in 64. A grenadier lost his .45 on the DZ. We swepth the desert for two days looking for it. No luck, the Company commander, A ringtapper(west pointer) got relieved on account of this infraction of regs and the embarassment of losing a weapon in a place that was as politically sensitive as Libyia.
Secondly, the regs absolutely forbade the weapon from being carried with a round in the chamber. Doing so would get you an asschewing. Carrying with a chambered round with the hammer cocked would get you, your squad leader and your platoon Sgt a hefty fine and the loss of a stripe or two.
Humping the bush in combat, you carried it wrapped up in a plastic bag inside your holster, to keep the wet leather holster from eating it alive. To get the gun into action, you unsnapped the flap, lifted the flap, removed the gun, took it out of the plastic bag, chambered a round and then looked for a target. We sure were glad to get rid of them.
In the rear where you did not need a weapon, but weapon carry was mandated, a pistol was great to carry. Trips to the village to visit the ladies comes to mind. Great for escorting payroll too, but it sucked to carry in the bush.
I guess that if you were a low drag highspeed snake eater hopping and popping into the tribal regions of Pakistan or some such, it would be nice to carry a pistol to augment what every your long was. But not many folks do that or need a pistol. Carry extra grenades and mags.
I wasn't disagreeing that the M1911 won't be coming back as general issue. It has become a HS/LD sidearm, evolving away from the lowest common denominator.
My point was that a handgun is a handgun is a handgun. Push comes to shove, you'd rather be relying on almost anything else that goes bang.
I'm sure there are tales of the M9 saving someone's bacon. The details of the next military sidearm are fairly unimportant, only that the service folks who most need them have something that works.
My point was that a handgun is a handgun is a handgun. Push comes to shove, you'd rather be relying on almost anything else that goes bang.
I'm sure there are tales of the M9 saving someone's bacon. The details of the next military sidearm are fairly unimportant, only that the service folks who most need them have something that works.
PhillyGlocker
Member
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2006
- Messages
- 235
I think the Glocks are the best choice hands down. I've fired a lot of Glocks and let me tell you, they really do go bang 99.999% of the time. It's very rare I ever see one malfuntion at the range. I had one jam due to breaking in a 33 round mag, and that was over 2 years ago. Since then, 0 problems after thousands of rounds.
98% of police in my city/Philadelphia, Pa carry Glocks. I don't believe it's a price issue. The reliability of Glocks, and their reputation for very few problems are why a large portion of LEO's carry them.
98% of police in my city/Philadelphia, Pa carry Glocks. I don't believe it's a price issue. The reliability of Glocks, and their reputation for very few problems are why a large portion of LEO's carry them.
greener
Member
A quick read of the RFI almost sounded like the AF was looking for a pistol like the M&P. It doesn't say that they are looking for special situations or a "one size fits all persons and situations" sidearm. Who knows? If you staff a bureaucracy with card carrying Mensa types, it would still be an idiot.
JSouth's comments on sidearms in combat are pretty good. The effective range of a sidearm is about the same distance you can throw a grenade, maybe less. Most people aren't particularly efficient with a handgun. And, if I had a long gun, why would I put it down and start shooting with a less accurate sidearm? I was retiring from the Army Reserve about the time we were changing to Berettas. My very limited experience with it left me convinced that if I were to really have to carry a sidearm in combat, I'd find a 1911 and ammunition somewhere. I'd also be one of those field grades running around with an M-16 if I were where I might have to actually use the firearm.
I hope the improvements in materials and technology will make the handgun much more useful than it was 4 decades ago in Viet Nam. We should be able to come up with something that holds up better.
It will be interesting to see what's tested and the results of their evaluations.
JSouth's comments on sidearms in combat are pretty good. The effective range of a sidearm is about the same distance you can throw a grenade, maybe less. Most people aren't particularly efficient with a handgun. And, if I had a long gun, why would I put it down and start shooting with a less accurate sidearm? I was retiring from the Army Reserve about the time we were changing to Berettas. My very limited experience with it left me convinced that if I were to really have to carry a sidearm in combat, I'd find a 1911 and ammunition somewhere. I'd also be one of those field grades running around with an M-16 if I were where I might have to actually use the firearm.
I hope the improvements in materials and technology will make the handgun much more useful than it was 4 decades ago in Viet Nam. We should be able to come up with something that holds up better.
It will be interesting to see what's tested and the results of their evaluations.
SoCalShooter
Member
1911 is a dream to come back into wide service, but HK or Glock or SIG is not. As for wound channel, .45acp makes a nice wound channel like what they are looking for.
I agree that for most grunts packing a rifle, a handgun is added weight that would be better put to use as XYZ. Now, it does seem that certain troopers have liked to carry handguns before because it made them feel more secure, nothing wrong with that, and if the world had infinite money, then go for it.
Now, the airforce does seem to send a lot more people out in the harsh world with just a handgun and no rifle, so for them, this seems reasonable. Many other posters listed airforce personell and MOSes that did indeed head off the airbase and into harms way.
But which of those MOSes, users, and uses require a supressor? Now, granted, making your sights a little higher and threadign the barrel isn't asking a whole lot, but really, how necessary is it? can't the few airforce personell who would actually need a suproessor just draw a SOOCOOMMMM?
Now, the airforce does seem to send a lot more people out in the harsh world with just a handgun and no rifle, so for them, this seems reasonable. Many other posters listed airforce personell and MOSes that did indeed head off the airbase and into harms way.
But which of those MOSes, users, and uses require a supressor? Now, granted, making your sights a little higher and threadign the barrel isn't asking a whole lot, but really, how necessary is it? can't the few airforce personell who would actually need a suproessor just draw a SOOCOOMMMM?
jaysouth
Member
What on earth is a Sooocoommm? Sumptin with retractable landing gear?
Tombeis
Member
Socom is a HK Mark 23 cal. .45 pistol.
Manedwolf
member
I wonder if they could get around that with discarding-tip rounds like the Pow'rball?
jaysouth
Member
Tombeis,
Is this an item of issue to our armed forces?
Is this an item of issue to our armed forces?
Not entirely true...
As aircrew, they took my M38 (aka S&W Model 10 Military & Police) revolver away on the eve of Desert Shield/Desert Storm and gave me a 1911A1. All was good in my little world, if I got shot down, I could at least make .45 caliber holes in whatever, compared to the 148gr HBWC loads we potted our targets with using the M38.
Then, once domestic production was up to speed a little while later, they took my 1911A1 away and issued me a new M9 as part of my survival gear. Yippee.
I'm so glad I retired last May. I sold my personal Beretta M92 since I don't have to requal M9 each year, and I may do the same with my Colt AR-15 since I don't have to requal M16 each year.
As aircrew, they took my M38 (aka S&W Model 10 Military & Police) revolver away on the eve of Desert Shield/Desert Storm and gave me a 1911A1. All was good in my little world, if I got shot down, I could at least make .45 caliber holes in whatever, compared to the 148gr HBWC loads we potted our targets with using the M38.
Then, once domestic production was up to speed a little while later, they took my 1911A1 away and issued me a new M9 as part of my survival gear. Yippee.
I'm so glad I retired last May. I sold my personal Beretta M92 since I don't have to requal M9 each year, and I may do the same with my Colt AR-15 since I don't have to requal M16 each year.
Take into account that the 1911A1 productionceased with the end of WWII, and those pistols were (re)issued for decades afterwords. It is possible for 1 pistol to have served in WWII, Korea, Viet Nam, various police actions, and Desert Shield/Storm in addition to a myraid of training/ qual exercises and other carry. Over a half century, that's a lot of wear. No doubt that one will be in worse shape at 65 that they were at 18.
jaysouth
Member
The vast majority of army issued 1911A1s were made 1943 to 1945. There were none brought back from the Pacific, Europe, Korea or VN. The ones issued to troops in the pacific were buried at sea, the ones the army took to the ETO were put into depots, given to our gallant allies and destroyed after the maintenance became too burdensom. The ones taken to Korea were given to the ROKS and the ones taken to VN are now in warehouses in now communist viet nam. No weapons were brought back to CONUS after a conflict until Desert Storm.
The wear and tear on surviving issued 1911s came from excessive stripping and cleaning. I had one assigned to me for almost two years in Germany. Every week, I drew it from the arms room, stripped it, cleaned and returned it to the armorer for inspection and return to the rack. During that time I got to shoot it once. 50 rounds at a round target at 25 years, strong hand holding the gun, weak side hand inserted into the left trouser pocket. This was the only acceptable way of shooting a handgun in the Army. The targets were burned and everyone later received an 'expert' qualification badge to make the commander look good for having trained so many superb marksman.
The one that I had in VN was a Colt 1911A1. It took half an hour daily to scrub the nightly accumulation of rust off it. Then it went into a plastic bag and was inserted into the wet issue leather holster. Carry mode was empty chamber with the hammer down. Any other carry mode would get you in big trouble. If you needed a weapon in a hurry, this was not it. By the time you lifted the flap, withdrew the weapon, took it out of the plastic bad, racked the slide to chamber a round and aim at your source of trouble, the trouble was gone or you were a statistic. Mercifully, our battalion commmander gave us the option of turning them in, which we were glad to do.
With the exception of a few guns assigned to Advance indivitual training units, I doubt that any 1911 ever fired a thousand rounds.
I would be the first to defend the 1911 platform as the basis for a superb firearm. I have a safe full of them and delight in firing, fondling and admiring them. However, the army and marines did not have Wilsons, Baers, or Kimbers. What they were issued was worn out crap. Crap with no finish remaining, terrible sights, terrible triggers and loose sloppy fit. As an aside, something for you to think about, at this point in history these guns were the same age as most of the Berettas in the hands of our troops now.
The golden age of the 1911 started with Jeff Cooper preaching about them and Kimber finally delivering a usable product with all the features that made a decent .45, at a reasonable price. You don't like Kimber? Well, if you don't like their guns, give them credit for making colt and springfield ship guns with decent sights, triggers, and controls that made them user friendly and accurate.
I adore and dote on my Les Baer and STIs, but have no more fond memories of GI issued 1911s than I do of C Ration toilet paper or sleeping in the snow.
The wear and tear on surviving issued 1911s came from excessive stripping and cleaning. I had one assigned to me for almost two years in Germany. Every week, I drew it from the arms room, stripped it, cleaned and returned it to the armorer for inspection and return to the rack. During that time I got to shoot it once. 50 rounds at a round target at 25 years, strong hand holding the gun, weak side hand inserted into the left trouser pocket. This was the only acceptable way of shooting a handgun in the Army. The targets were burned and everyone later received an 'expert' qualification badge to make the commander look good for having trained so many superb marksman.
The one that I had in VN was a Colt 1911A1. It took half an hour daily to scrub the nightly accumulation of rust off it. Then it went into a plastic bag and was inserted into the wet issue leather holster. Carry mode was empty chamber with the hammer down. Any other carry mode would get you in big trouble. If you needed a weapon in a hurry, this was not it. By the time you lifted the flap, withdrew the weapon, took it out of the plastic bad, racked the slide to chamber a round and aim at your source of trouble, the trouble was gone or you were a statistic. Mercifully, our battalion commmander gave us the option of turning them in, which we were glad to do.
With the exception of a few guns assigned to Advance indivitual training units, I doubt that any 1911 ever fired a thousand rounds.
I would be the first to defend the 1911 platform as the basis for a superb firearm. I have a safe full of them and delight in firing, fondling and admiring them. However, the army and marines did not have Wilsons, Baers, or Kimbers. What they were issued was worn out crap. Crap with no finish remaining, terrible sights, terrible triggers and loose sloppy fit. As an aside, something for you to think about, at this point in history these guns were the same age as most of the Berettas in the hands of our troops now.
The golden age of the 1911 started with Jeff Cooper preaching about them and Kimber finally delivering a usable product with all the features that made a decent .45, at a reasonable price. You don't like Kimber? Well, if you don't like their guns, give them credit for making colt and springfield ship guns with decent sights, triggers, and controls that made them user friendly and accurate.
I adore and dote on my Les Baer and STIs, but have no more fond memories of GI issued 1911s than I do of C Ration toilet paper or sleeping in the snow.
Feedback is starting to come in:
http://fs1.fbo.gov/EPSData/USAF/Synopses/1202/RFI-HANDGUN/ClarificationsQuestionsandResponses.doc
http://fs1.fbo.gov/EPSData/USAF/Synopses/1202/RFI-HANDGUN/ClarificationsQuestionsandResponses.doc
my choice would be something in 40sw , most guns in this caliber have more rounds than most all 45's ..and it has more punch than a
9mm..i could name a bunch of guns but ill just say this , since the military has been using berettas why not the PX4 , thats a practical choice with all the safties and changeable backstraps for people of all hand sizes..not the prettiest thing around but from the practical side you gotta admit it would be a great choice
9mm..i could name a bunch of guns but ill just say this , since the military has been using berettas why not the PX4 , thats a practical choice with all the safties and changeable backstraps for people of all hand sizes..not the prettiest thing around but from the practical side you gotta admit it would be a great choice
30 cal slob
Member
Manedwolf said:
My goodness, have you seen how big and bulky a Mk23 Socom pistol is? No pilot in his right mind would carry one in such tight quarters! I have a freakin' thigh holster for my Mk23 and it feels like I'm lifting weights when I walk around the range.
HorseSoldier
Member
Yeah, the Mk 23 has pretty much been a failure within SOCOM due to the ergonomic issues (too big, too heavy for most applications). Nowhere near enough were ever purchased to fully equip SOCOM's subordinate units and the units that did get them mostly left them in the arms room in favor of their existing pistols.
Definately is not the answer for the USAF, whose pistols are going to have to work as well for a five foot nothing female pilot or Sec Forces airman as they will for a guy with huge hands.
Definately is not the answer for the USAF, whose pistols are going to have to work as well for a five foot nothing female pilot or Sec Forces airman as they will for a guy with huge hands.
Nice sentiment XavierBreath
But you need to carry it just a little bit further!
ugaarguy,
'Card,
Everyone knows we don't need the Air Farce or the Urmy Inpanties as long as we have NavAir, the USMC and the rest of the US Navy.
....and the Coast Guard to show the Navy how to drive ships, small boats, helicopters, etc. The Navy even ripped off a picture of a CG rescue swimmer over NO during Katrina and used it in a recruiting add. And as a veteran of the Navy and the CG I know what I'm talking about.
One person way back in the beginning of this thread mentioned that us Coasties are already using the Sig 229DAK. I'll be the first one here to make the prediction that a new sidearm is coming down the pike for the rest of the services and that it is going to be the Sig.
But you need to carry it just a little bit further!
ugaarguy,
'Card,
Everyone knows we don't need the Air Farce or the Urmy Inpanties as long as we have NavAir, the USMC and the rest of the US Navy.
....and the Coast Guard to show the Navy how to drive ships, small boats, helicopters, etc. The Navy even ripped off a picture of a CG rescue swimmer over NO during Katrina and used it in a recruiting add. And as a veteran of the Navy and the CG I know what I'm talking about.
One person way back in the beginning of this thread mentioned that us Coasties are already using the Sig 229DAK. I'll be the first one here to make the prediction that a new sidearm is coming down the pike for the rest of the services and that it is going to be the Sig.
Autolycus
Member
I am suspecting that the new sidearm will be an HK. Possibly the HK 45 as it seems to meet those specs. But I could also see a P2000 or a P30 as well.
ABBOBERG
Member
Does anyone know where I can find a copy of the bid request?
- Status
Similar threads
