A few point about handguns for the U.S. military.
1. They don't win wars.
2. In a generic sense they have to fit a wide variety of hands and sizes of people.
3. You can't use hollowpoints except in state-side investigative services like the AFOSI and their M-11 (SiG-228).
4. Whatever is picked has to be affordable. For this kind of convenience weapon, 9mm is OK. We don't need to pay for .357-SiG, .40 S&W, .45ACP. A 9mm service pistol can produce a pretty flat trajectory out to 50 meters.
5. Special Forces are going to use either the standard military arm or something completely different depending on what they consider necessary. So in a sense, their needs for a generic pistol don't count.
6. The replacement has to fit in with what various services feel they can maintain and train with.
I'm not convinced this is the best time with so many other communities in DOD starving for funds. But lets go ahead and look at one candidate that I think is interesting.
General Dynamics is teaming up with Smith and Wesson for their "M&P" (Military and Police) entry.
I have not shot this weapon. But it is used by numerous law enforcement agencies. In some cases replacing Glocks. I don't know if that is an endorsement as such, given these kinds of purchases can be political at the best of times.
The M&P is claimed to feel better in the hands and there is some sizing available with that. I have shot the Glock 19 a lot and it either feels OK for some or not. You don't get a Glock because you are looking for a great feeling grip. Historically military pistols have been standard. You don't get something just on it feeling good in the hands...or not. Example: Colt 1911A1, Beretta M-9, S&W Model 15 revolver (used by USAF many years ago). I like the feel of all of these except the Model 15. The stock grip was horrible.
The M&P comes in a variety of sizes. The standard version (pictured above) which would replace anything where you see the M-9 today.
There is a longer version for competition shooting.
There is a compact version. It has a few less rounds; shorter barrel and grip. I could see this being good for aircrews and investigators.
There is a sub-compact with a single stack magazine. This would also be good for investigators and personal carry pistol for general officers.
Weapons like the M&P, M-9 and M-11 have a breakdown lever that makes field stripping it quick and easy. I see this as an advantage over the Glock.
I would not select a gun that has a safety. I have actually seen an event where dumb people (you have to soldier-proof everything) have shot themselves in the foot after charging an M-9 and attempting to holster it. Take a wild guess how that happened. It is also possible for the less gun-savvy people to charge an M-11; not de-cock it and attempt to holster it. I know.... I know.
I suspect that if the U.S. Army goes ahead with replacing the M-9 (and eventually the M-11?) that it can only be surrounded by controversy. Because that is how the M-9 choice went in the 1980's.
Completion for this effort is scheduled to start in January. General Dynamics is infiltrated with revolving-door ex-Army officers. How could they lose?
.
No comments:
Post a Comment