Army's new handgun to be designated XM17...

General General Discussion
41

The issue of packing a full size pistol is one of the most striking things that i have heard from people i know/have met who have been deployed to combat theaters. From stories my uncle has told of himself and guys from his unit stashing their issue 1911’s in foot lockers and stuffing a personally owned detective special or j-frame in a fatigue pocket while in Vietnam to friends who were involved in both Iraq campaigns and Afghanistan ditching the Beretta to carry more rifle ammo. I used to think that a full size combat pistol would be an essential piece of gear for any infantry soldier, but after talking with a number of people about the actual usefulness (or lack thereof) and the issues with finding an effective carry solution among all the other crap a line troop must carry the idea of a fullsize service pistol made less and less sense.

Timothy J. Mullin has an good book on the subject (though dated) titled The 100 Greatest Combat Pistols which touches on the subject and comes to many of the same conclusions that a big pistol rarely makes sense for anyone that has a better option available.

I personally can’t imagine a scenario where anyone other than maybe an MP on a secured base somewhere is actually going to be able to use a pistol as an effective weapon against even a single adversary in a modern military engagement (SOF is a different story).

I don’t pretend to be an expert, or even purport to have any practical experience on the subject, but listening to those who have had experience certainly has changed my thought process.

42

You do know that almost no line troops are even issued a sidearm right? The only ones that really get one in many units are commanders or primary staff - people who will be inside a TOC the whole time.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

43

I don’t see how issuing a handgun that is very difficult to use effectively - like a J-frame - is any better than issuing a handgun that is merely difficult to use effectively.

Maybe I’m just too much a student of Jeff Cooper and Ken Hackathorn - if you’re going to use a handgun, use one that you can use the most effectively, which pretty much almost always means a full-size handgun.

The full-size handgun for a warfighter (or anyone, for that matter) is, IMHO, a compromise between the carbine you’re not willing (or perhaps unable) to carry and the pocket gun you cannot employ effectively.

It is worth bearing in mind, I feel, that the M4 Carbine was originally intended to be the spiritual successor to the M1 Carbine (and the select-fire M2 Carbine and the IR scope-equiped M3 Carbine - Colt didn’t pick “M4 Carbine” out of a hat, afterall) and to be issued to support troops. The entire PDW concept was intended to produce successors to the M1 Carbine FOW. This coming after the M14 - and then the M16 - was supposed to replace the M1 Garand, M1 Thompson and M3 Grease Gun, M1/M2 Carbine, M1918 BAR, with all troops. (These developments coming just under forty years after the US military decided to replace carbines for cavalry and support troops and long rifles with leg infantry with short rifles that split the difference for everybody in the M1903.)

So I think the idea that we’re taking a step back from the halcyon days of 1942 - when a squad needed magazines and ammunition for their M1911s, M1918 BARs, M1 and M3 SMGs, M1 Carbines, and clips and ammunition for their M1 Garands - is one that nakedly ignores US military small arms development over the last one-hundred years. The trouble seems to be that because a new carbine or PDW - even if intended for support troops - is new and therefore cool, it will therefore be utilized by SOF - who will get it first. And then the rest of the Army decides that they should have the new toy SOF is playing with for their line infantry. And then they encounter a problem that the weapon was never intended to deal with and “fix” the weapon, turning their 5lb. PDW into a 10lb. tinker toy.

Subsequently, the weapon originally designed to be lightweight and issued to support troops becomes a fat assed pig that never gets issued to support troops.

I digress. Point being, we already have a PDW for support troops, to replace their pistols. We’ve had one for decades. And it has never replaced those pistols - or the muskets they have been forced to carry in their stead. And it is no longer the light, handy weapon that it was intended to be.

44

So why even mess with having a new pistol in inventory ? Get the people who need a PDW some better equipment and let those who carry a pistol as a badge of rank keep the beretta.

45

The thought process is that outside of someone like Jeff Cooper or Alvin York, the pistol is ineffective in an infantry role. Personally i think the handgun is all but obsolete for military uses, but that a compact pistol would be the best choice for one if it is going to be used at all since it has a higher likelyhood of actually being carried and that it won’t waste space on an item that isn’t even likely to be used at all.

As to the M4 carbine, if their attempt at a PDW was cutting a couple inches off a rifle barrel it was pretty half assed, considering what was already available even at that time. As i said above, if no one is getting sidearms outside of commanders or support troops, the whole idea of adopting another useless handgun is waste of time and money.

46

I realize that the British procurement system is different than ours, but I have to admire the way they picked the Glock 17 as their new sidearm - take the competing pistols and shoot them in desert, jungle, and cold environments and then (based on test criteria) a Lt Col picked the winner. In less than a year’s time, IIRC. And that was that. No political backlash or protests either.

47

What kind of fuctup lack of discipline is that?

LE training programs are also not intensive enough to instill the necessary trigger and muzzle discipline to prevent NDs and accidental shootings.

Despite the “three safeties” is really is like running around with an unlocked 1911 and not everyone is responsible enough to do that. This is why we get stories of guns being fired into the pavement while somebody is being cuffed up and things like that.
Here’s an idea that costs nothing extra: why don’t they stop hiring idiots and instead do like every other profession and only keep people who are capable of using their work equipment properly, and train them until they’re experts at it? Works for HVAC, surgeons, dentists, opticians, pilots, mechanics, computer techs, pharmacists, carpenters, electricians…

48

Colt could have made it shorter, lighter, handier, but the Army wanted to be able to attach a bayonet to it.

And carrying a handgun you can’t effectively use is no different than not carrying a handgun. Except for the extra weight you’re carrying around.

49

The philosophy of use for line troops to carry a compact pistol is at bayonet range, at least that’s how I understand it.

At any rate, a circle jerk procurement for another pistol when money would be much better spent on something like the Magpul PDR and the ammo to go with it makes no sense.

50

Theoretically you give a pistol to the machine gunners and vehicle crews. Then if you have extra, to officers as a status symbol when dealing with the locals.

But I think the M9 is good enough that unless switching will save money in the long run, it’s not worth replacing.

51

They also made an collapsible buttstock instead of the huge fixed one. And just because only a smaller portion use it, doesn’t mean it won’t be a worthy upgrade. And regardless of what you may have heard about Vietnam, troops these days don’t get away with leaving a weapon somewhere that easily. I’m not sure how you’re so adamant on something you have no first hand knowledge about. M&P9 and be done with it. No PDW to invent a whole separate category of weapon in big Army. Talk about waste of money.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

52

Are we talking about the M4 as a general issue weapon or as a PDW ? General issue of a collapsable stock was a huge leap forward compared to the A1/A2 configuration, but that does not make the M4 a very viable pistol replacement for tank crews or other non-infantry units does it ?

Now i would ask, who benefits from the M&P vs the Beretta ? What inherent problem with the effectiveness of a military sidearm does that fix ? If no one is actually using these things in combat why change anyway ? If they are being used as defensive weapons, cut the pistol and replace with PDW. net increase of weapons systems = 0

Line troop dont get pistols anymore. got it. i learned something, which is why i participate in forums such as these and as much as you may currently believe otherwise I appreciate the information.

A waste of money is crappy uniforms and camo patterns, not getting our support troops effective personal use weapons when they may be operating around active combat zones. Just because a person isnt a door kicker basass dosent mean they can’t see that giving a person a taurus judge vs an AR for protection is a lousy idea, if in fact it is going to actually be used for more than a costume accoutrement.

53

Funny story: That’s exactly who the M4 was designed for.

54

A damn SMG would get in the way just as much as an M4. If you’re gonna carry a two handed weapon, might as well be a good damn carbine shooting a rifle caliber. People are not issued both. It’s pistol, or M4.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

55

That’s not how it is in the United States Marine Corps.

But then again, Marines are not people.

56

You know I’ve seen that now that you mention it. Our MPs get both I’m sure but the commanders and staff that will be stuck in the TOC only get M9s.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

57

What ranks/positions are you referring to specifically?

Practically every E6+ and Officer has both. Some E4/5 NCOs do if they have buddies in the armory too.

There was talk about eliminating the M9 and only issuing M4s to everyone except CO, XO, SgtMaj, etc but the groaning of SNCOs and Officers walking around fobs and training ops with a rifle must have been too loud.

Is this different than big army?

58

In my BN only company commanders have an M9 at the company level. Even the 1SG and XO have M4s. I know the battalion commander has an M9 and assume the SGM and XO do as well, though I’m not sure. I’m also assuming that the primary staff such as the S1-4, S6, etc have M9s, but again I’m not positive.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

59

FN P90, and Five Seven for PDW and pistol. Both use the same ammo, virtually no recoil, the PDW holds 50 and the pistol holds 20. Only qualm I have about them is that the P90 throws spents casings at your feet. The 5.7 round is more effective than 9mm, .40, .45 (objectively). Since FN is already supplying our military with various weapons platforms, procurement shouldn’t be an issue.

60

Watch Future Weapons much? I seem to recall reading that the 5.7 had abysmal ballistics. And again, wtf is with this PDW bullshit. There’s a reason SWAT and CT teams transitioned from SMGs to carbines.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk