11bee Posted December 31, 2014 Author Share Posted December 31, 2014 Army has decided it needs a new handgun. I find it a bit ironic that the M9, which has "only" been in service since the mid-80's is all of a sudden obsolete but the 50-year old M4/M16 family is still good to go for another few decades. http://money.cnn.com/2014/12/29/news/companies/beretta-army-gun-m9a3/ Out of curiosity, I wonder how many times has the M9 actually been used in combat (by non-special ops troops)? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
VFA-103guy Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 I was issued an M4 on my last tour as a grunt, but we didn't have the luxury of any type of optics at that time. I didn't see those until I enlisted in the Guard and our unit had some pretty high speed equipment for a guard unit. We had brand new M4's with the ACOG sights as well as M-16A4's and our platoon leader had eotech holographic sights on his weapon. I never had an issue with M4 personally, and I alwways hated the M-16A2..especially if you fired blanks through that bastard. If so, that was hours of cleaning after training. As for the SCAR, if you've ever fired one of those bastards, they kick like a mule. Some of the spec ops guys swear by them, others are HK lovers..buddy of mine in Afghanistan is carrying the HK and he loves it. Personally, I prefer the M4, but that's just because I have short arms and I liked the adjustable stock..lol Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Trigger Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 Army has decided it needs a new handgun. I find it a bit ironic that the M9, which has "only" been in service since the mid-80's is all of a sudden obsolete but the 50-year old M4/M16 family is still good to go for another few decades. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Dave Williams Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 Army has decided it needs a new handgun. I find it a bit ironic that the M9, which has "only" been in service since the mid-80's is all of a sudden obsolete but the 50-year old M4/M16 family is still good to go for another few decades. http://money.cnn.com/2014/12/29/news/companies/beretta-army-gun-m9a3/ Out of curiosity, I wonder how many times has the M9 actually been used in combat (by non-special ops troops)? The interesting point is that Beretta is offering basically the same gun to replace the "obsolete" M9. Tan color, a straight grip, and threaded barrel doesn't make it any more effective. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
11bee Posted December 31, 2014 Author Share Posted December 31, 2014 The interesting point is that Beretta is offering basically the same gun to replace the "obsolete" M9. Tan color, a straight grip, and threaded barrel doesn't make it any more effective. I think it also has a new magazine that can fit a couple of extra 9mm rounds. Doesn't seem like a massive leap forward. It is tan though, so it gets big "cool factor" points. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TaiidanTomcat Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 I think it also has a new magazine that can fit a couple of extra 9mm rounds. Doesn't seem like a massive leap forward. It is tan though, so it gets big "cool factor" points. It will win on the "and its just like what everyone else is already using so minimal retraining!" card. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Dave Williams Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 (edited) I think it also has a new magazine that can fit a couple of extra 9mm rounds. Doesn't seem like a massive leap forward. It is tan though, so it gets big "cool factor" points. That 17 round mag with the sand cuts has been out there for a while. Three came with the Beretta 92A1 I bought earlier in the year, and I think they were available long before then, possibly with the Beretta 90two. It's the same mag body as the 15 rounder with an extended floor plate that holds 2 extra rounds. If the Army only wanted the new mag, they could just buy them from Beretta and use them in their existing M9s Edited January 1, 2015 by Dave Williams Quote Link to post Share on other sites
11bee Posted January 11, 2015 Author Share Posted January 11, 2015 The interesting point is that Beretta is offering basically the same gun to replace the "obsolete" M9. Tan color, a straight grip, and threaded barrel doesn't make it any more effective. Guess that plan didn't work out. Army has rejected the upgraded M9. http://bearingarms.com/rejected-beretta-m9a3-will-u-s-armys-new-pistol-mhs-competition-goes-forward/ I'd still like to know why, in these times of budget shortfalls, replacing the M9 is such a priority. Is this weapon truly that bad? How important is a new pistol in the grand scheme of things anyway? The people most likely to use a pistol in combat (special operations guys) will probably go with their own solution anyway. Does the regular Army really even need this? Seems to be just as useful as a bayonet on today's battlefield. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TaiidanTomcat Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 (edited) Guess that plan didn't work out. Army has rejected the upgraded M9. http://bearingarms.com/rejected-beretta-m9a3-will-u-s-armys-new-pistol-mhs-competition-goes-forward/ I'd still like to know why, in these times of budget shortfalls, replacing the M9 is such a priority. Is this weapon truly that bad? How important is a new pistol in the grand scheme of things anyway? The people most likely to use a pistol in combat (special operations guys) will probably go with their own solution anyway. Does the regular Army really even need this? Seems to be just as useful as a bayonet on today's battlefield. I don't have anything against the M9 other than that weird first trigger pull. Its really the caliber that I have issue with it. Big picture though, you are correct. In a world of helmets and body armor the joke is that a pistol is best used as the "gateway" to getting a rifle again, be it from the enemy, or the Marine next to you after you shoot him and take his rifle. I would think that its probably time for a new sidearm just because the old ones are wearing out. Anytime you are talking firearms opinions are going to be aplenty, and there are folks here who know more about them than I do I promise you that. we will have to see what happens the military isn't always adaptable, and in all honesty a lot of the people who carry sidearms are not frontline combat troops if that makes any sense. One of the big factors with the M9 initially was safety. right down to that weird first trigger pull. The Majority of sidearms are carried by POGs. True story. And we can't have them hurting themselves with NDs, so safety safety safety. I recall the tragic green on blue in afghanistan 2011, when one afghan pilot held multiple US service men at gunpoint, had them give up their weapons (which they did) and then promptly executed them. That story still upsets me, if POGs have weapons they need to understand whats at stake. Very few Marine 03s are qualified on hand guns. Its not common until E-4 or up, and even then... But MPs, Security Forces (technically 03s but not usually deploying in combat) and other NCOs have them. For Officers its required and as you pointed out MARSOC has .45s even Recon (not sure about Force Recon) don't have a lot of qualified side arms folks (IIRC). Edited January 11, 2015 by TaiidanTomcat Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Trigger Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 Why not just ask Dave Majumdar what's best for the Army? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
fulcrum1 Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 Guess that plan didn't work out. Army has rejected the upgraded M9. http://bearingarms.com/rejected-beretta-m9a3-will-u-s-armys-new-pistol-mhs-competition-goes-forward/ I'd still like to know why, in these times of budget shortfalls, replacing the M9 is such a priority. Is this weapon truly that bad? How important is a new pistol in the grand scheme of things anyway? The people most likely to use a pistol in combat (special operations guys) will probably go with their own solution anyway. Does the regular Army really even need this? Seems to be just as useful as a bayonet on today's battlefield. We have a couple hundred thousand M9's and M11's that are past their shelf date. Either replace it now or continue buying more of the same for around the same price. The Military uses the pistol more than ever before and for thousands it has become a primary weapon system. The three key issues with the M9 is the 9mm ball/fmj round, the open slide, and the slide decocker none of which can be fixed with an updated version of the weapon system. However, seeing how we've already done this rodeo twice before in the last ten years I don't see much changing. If anything, I expect MPs to pull out of their own budgets to upgrade the grips and work with the CG to authorize hollow points which has already happened in many installations. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TaiidanTomcat Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 (edited) Why not just ask Dave Majumdar what's best for the Army? I could tell him all about it, I'm very talkative and my drink of choice is Fireball lately. He can hang out with a recorder while I polish off a bottle or 6. I am after all "A Marine Infantryman and Expert Rifleman familiar with the program" Edited January 11, 2015 by TaiidanTomcat Quote Link to post Share on other sites
fulcrum1 Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 Why not just ask Dave Majumdar what's best for the Army? If it got that article as many hits as his F-35 bashing does you can bet your bottom dollar he'd do it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TaiidanTomcat Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 If it got that article as many hits as his F-35 bashing does you can bet your bottom dollar he'd do it. I don't want to want to know what dave would do for a dollar Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Trigger Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 If it got that article as many hits as his F-35 bashing does you can bet your bottom dollar he'd do it. "US Army Wasting Millions to Replace Brand New 'Obsolete' Pistols." Throw in a subhead about the age of the M4/M16, a few choice buzzphrases such as "experts agree," "many people," and "skeptics argue" into the body copy, bury any inconvenient facts, imply correlation is causation (imply Americans have or will die as a result of this), using an active voice, and guessing motives instead of reporting facts (both of which I used in the headline). I'd consult my bingo card for more, but I left it at work and Cocaine Cowboys is on. Point is, with little effort, it'd be remarkably easy for him to do that write up. But the MHS or whatever this program is called isn't as high-profile, sexy or as long-lasting as the F-35, so he can't milk it as much. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TaiidanTomcat Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 "US Army Wasting Millions to Replace Brand New 'Obsolete' Pistols." Throw in a subhead about the age of the M4/M16, a few choice buzzphrases such as "experts agree," "many people," and "skeptics argue" into the body copy, bury any inconvenient facts, imply correlation is causation (imply Americans have or will die as a result of this), using an active voice, and guessing motives instead of reporting facts (both of which I used in the headline). I'd consult my bingo card for more, but I left it at work and Cocaine Cowboys is on. Point is, with little effort, it'd be remarkably easy for him to do that write up. But the MHS or whatever this program is called isn't as high-profile, sexy or as long-lasting as the F-35, so he can't milk it as much. Probably harder to fool all the folks with handgun experience too, not many people are involved with fighters and fighter procurement. your strategy is spot on though. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
11bee Posted April 13, 2015 Author Share Posted April 13, 2015 Army is looking at a bunch of upgrades, which will become the "M4A1+" Free floating barrel, revised gas system, new trigger, coyote brown hardware, the full list is here: http://www.military.com/daily-news/2015/03/18/army-wants-upgrades-improve-m4a1-carbines-performance-accuracy.html Quote Link to post Share on other sites
11bee Posted May 5, 2015 Author Share Posted May 5, 2015 Pretty cool rig being introduced by the Army. Enhanced NVG's that also display the output from your weapon's thermal sight. You can have your rifle off-shoulder and still get the sight's crosshair displayed on your NVG. Allows you to engage a target "hollywood stye" firing from the hip, in complete darkness. I guess you could also stay behind a corner and use your weapon to look around it. Never had neat stuff like this when I was in, just PVS-7's and iron sights. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/may/5/army-headset-will-fuse-night-vision-and-thermal-im/ Quote Link to post Share on other sites
toadwbg Posted May 5, 2015 Share Posted May 5, 2015 Pretty cool rig being introduced by the Army. Enhanced NVG's that also display the output from your weapon's thermal sight. You can have your rifle off-shoulder and still get the sight's crosshair displayed on your NVG. Allows you to engage a target "hollywood stye" firing from the hip, in complete darkness. I guess you could also stay behind a corner and use your weapon to look around it. Never had neat stuff like this when I was in, just PVS-7's and iron sights. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/may/5/army-headset-will-fuse-night-vision-and-thermal-im/ I believe the Imperial Stormtroopers use the same technology... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
niart17 Posted May 6, 2015 Share Posted May 6, 2015 I believe the Imperial Stormtroopers use the same technology... True, but not very effectively. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Horrido Posted May 6, 2015 Share Posted May 6, 2015 They were still working out the helmet coding issues. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
11bee Posted August 6, 2015 Author Share Posted August 6, 2015 (edited) Deleted Edited August 6, 2015 by 11bee Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Ben Brown Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 True, but not very effectively. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
niart17 Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 He took the sharpshooters class apparently. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ChernayaAkula Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 ^ Nah, he was probably aiming at Han Solo. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.