Nope.Zerodefect Seems like many of the troops get to carry whatever they want, as long as it's on the approved list and a 9mm. (...and you buy the pistol yourself ):
Makes me wonder about Sgt. Cowles there. The rest are high speed, low drag types, I'm sure their Armory looks like the one Neo and Trinity had in 'The Matrix.If you are in the US military you can only carry the weapon you are authorized to carry. Certain special operations units have more freedom to choose the handguns they want.
The Marines will probably keep plugging along with the 1911 pistols they already have. From what I have read over the years in American Rifleman, the Marine Corps believes that John Moses Browning was quite literally sent by God, to give them the 1911.
As would the M45A1, made by Colt.M&P series fits the bill
Keeps an American made company going strong
The Special Operation units will use what ever they deem best. Everyone else it matters not what handgun they end up with.
I did, and sometimes more than one, when the officers in my unit got sick of carrying them.lol at whoever picked the 1911.
No infantryman wants to carry that when you've already got 60lb on your back.
In December 2006, the Center for Naval Analyses released a report on U.S. small arms in combat. The CNA conducted surveys on 2,608 troops returning from combat in Iraq and Afghanistan over the past 12 months. Only troops who fired their weapons at enemy targets were allowed to participate. 161 troops were armed with M9 pistols, making up 6 percent of the survey. 58 percent of M9 users (93 troops) reported they were satisfied with the weapon, which was the lowest satisfaction rate in the survey. 48 percent of users (77 troops) were dissatisfied with the M9's ammunition. 64 percent (103 troops) were satisfied with handling qualities such as size and weight. M9 users had the lowest levels of satisfaction with weapon performance, including 76 percent (122 troops) with accuracy, 66 percent (106 troops) with range, and 88 percent (142 troops) with rate of fire. 48 percent of M9 users (77 troops) were dissatisfied with its ability to attach accessories. 26 percent of M9 users (42 troops) reported a stoppage, and 62 percent of those that experienced a stoppage said it had a small impact on their ability to clear the stoppage and re-engage their target. Only 45 percent of M9 users (72 troops) reported their weapon's magazine did not fail to feed completely. 83 percent (134 troops) did not need their pistols repaired while in theater. 46 percent (74 troops) were not confident in the M9's reliability, defined as level of soldier confidence their weapon will fire without malfunction, mainly due to difficulty of maintenance. 63 percent (101 troops) were confident in its durability, defined as level of soldier confidence their weapon will not break or need repair. The M9 had the lowest levels of soldier confidence in reliability and durability. 74 percent of M9 users offered recommendations for improvements. 26 percent of requests were for increased caliber or stopping power, with some specifically requesting returning to .45 ACP rounds. 20 percent of requests were for a new pistol. Other recommendations were for more durable magazines and better grips.
In 2007, soldiers in the field had a lot of concerns with the M9, notably a lack of confidence in its stopping power[10] resulting from the use of the 9mm ball round, a significant factor in military evaluations because the Hague Conventions (1899 and 1907) prohibit use of expanding bullets in warfare.
Certain special operations units have more freedom to choose the handguns they want.
.
In December 2006, the Center for Naval Analyses released a report on U.S. small arms in combat. The CNA conducted surveys on 2,608 troops returning from combat in Iraq and Afghanistan over the past 12 months. Only troops who fired their weapons at enemy targets were allowed to participate. 161 troops were armed with M9 pistols, making up 6 percent of the survey.
What were the other 94% (2,447) small arms that were in the survey?
What handgun should replace the Army's M9?...
What handgun do you choose, in what caliber(s), and why?
Last thing on earth they need or can afford is as a new handgun.
If we're talking a caliber change, .40 S&W is the only alternative to 9mm. Some hangups are still all about .45 ACP, but the Army will never return to the cartridge because of the fact between the choices of 9, 40, and 45, it's the most expensive alternative.Whatever meets the newest specifications, including any change in service caliber, providing it's designed to provide significant enough improvements to merit introducing a new system into military inventory, effectively manageable by the intended average military user, and which does so at the least cost, and which can be delivered by the vendor(s) in the time specified.
It's not like we're talking about a F35, you know.
Of course, private citizen handgun enthusiasts are probably always going to put more emphasis on, and have more interest in, handguns.
There is zero chance that the military would switch to the .40S&W. Hell, even a lot of law enforcement agencies are going back the 9mm, following the FBI's lead once again. This is because there is not, in fact, any evidence that the .40 is more lethal. It does, however, have more recoil. The truth is that the difference in terminal performance among the major calibers, using the best JHP ammo, is negligible. I really doubt the .40 offers any improvement in terminal performance using FMJ either; both rounds are likely to go completely through a human torso, and the difference in size between the holes they make is all of one millimeter -- nothing important. Truthfully, I don't see any reason to switch calibers. The .40 offers no advantages, and several disadvantages. Right now, the army has better things to spend money on than a new handgun, but whenever they do change, it will almost certainly be another 9mm.If we're talking a caliber change, .40 S&W is the only alternative to 9mm. Some hangups are still all about .45 ACP, but the Army will never return to the cartridge because of the fact between the choices of 9, 40, and 45, it's the most expensive alternative.
The .40 S&W has the infrastructure already in place due to the vast police market that has used it the past 20 years and would fit every bill that the Modular Handgun System is asking for.
.40 S&W, whether it's FMJ or JHP, is more lethal than 9mm and more cost effective than .45 ACP. It's the Goldilocks handgun cartridge.
TruthTellers said:f we're talking a caliber change, .40 S&W is the only alternative to 9mm. Some hangups are still all about .45 ACP, but the Army will never return to the cartridge because of the fact between the choices of 9, 40, and 45, it's the most expensive alternative.
The .40 S&W has the infrastructure already in place due to the vast police market that has used it the past 20 years and would fit every bill that the Modular Handgun System is asking for.
.40 S&W, whether it's FMJ or JHP, is more lethal than 9mm and more cost effective than .45 ACP. It's the Goldilocks handgun cartridge.
Seems like many of the troops get to carry whatever they want, as long as it's on the approved list and a 9mm. (...and you buy the pistol yourself )
Makes me wonder about Sgt. Cowles there. The rest are high speed, low drag types, I'm sure their Armory looks like the one Neo and Trinity had in 'The Matrix.