US Army wants new hand gun

[mikeo80]

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2014/07/...tcmp=obnetwork

I read this article and had a serious attack of the giggles.

Please remind me of just what the hell was wrong with the Colt 1911???

There are MANY references to one shot kills with 1911. In Philipenes, WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam.

My $0.02

Mike

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Ya know... the US Army seems to be using the same notion for a handgun replacement that they used when they did the advanced rifle trials - that is to say, they want a more lethal version of the weapon.
But they missed (or ignored) two points: -
1. that smallarms fire accounts for just a small percentage of enemy killed in 20th/21st century warfare, (most enemy casualties are caused by artillery & aerial bombing) - so as appealing as the idea is, a rifle more capable of both hitting and killing the enemy isn't quite as important as it would first appear.
2. most importantly, the stresses of combat drastically reduced the ability of the soldier to hit the target regardless of how lethal the rifle was.

It seems they are doing the same sort of thing here, ignoring very real information from the police community that says handguns just aren't a good way to stop a determined enemy and multiple hits on the target are often required.
Overall, the US Army should probably be spending more effort on increasing the soldiers' ability to cope with the stresses of combat (so that they are better at hitting the target) than spending money and time on finding a wonder weapon that is better at hitting the target because ultimately, the tired, stressed individual pulling the trigger has a much bigger impact on if they score a hit.

But that's bureaucratic process for you, it's cheaper to replace the weapon than it is to continually train soldiers...

[waiting4something]

The article points out some good points. However, in the long run its all about money. Sure pistol ammo might suck compared to rifle ammo, but unless you want your grip to be bigger then a Desert Eagle, what are you going do. It's a pistol. It's made as a back up weapon for the soldier, not a primary.

The biggest problem with pistols is no one really takes them that seriously. Either they don't get the care needed to them, or soldiers don't get the range time with them they should. If a soldier is only getting use out of his pistol two times a year for pistol qualification, how good can he or she be? The military just doesn't have the funds to make avid great shooters. Even if they did they be more concerned that your SHARPS training is up to date.

[Panther Al]

I think I might have said this in another thread, but I just get a laugh out of it all.

Back, way back, in the day,

Then, the US was fighting Muslim Insurgents in the Philippines. Our standard pistol back then was a .36 calibre revolver. Well, it didn't cut the mustard. So, after trial and tribulation, we went with the .45ACP.

Now, we are fighting Muslim Insurgents in various parts of the world. Our standard pistol now is a .36 calibre automatic and yet again, we are looking at replacing it. The leading contender? The .45ACP. Again.

Everyone keeps saying History never repeats itself, but I wish someone told history this so that it wouldn't!

[CDAT]

Originally Posted by Panther Al

I think I might have said this in another thread, but I just get a laugh out of it all.

Back, way back, in the day,

Then, the US was fighting Muslim Insurgents in the Philippines. Our standard pistol back then was a .36 calibre revolver. Well, it didn't cut the mustard. So, after trial and tribulation, we went with the .45ACP.

Now, we are fighting Muslim Insurgents in various parts of the world. Our standard pistol now is a .36 calibre automatic and yet again, we are looking at replacing it. The leading contender? The .45ACP. Again.

Everyone keeps saying History never repeats itself, but I wish someone told history this so that it wouldn't!

I remember when I first joined the Army back in the early 1990's even though the M1911A1 had been replaced for for years you still had units holding on to there 1911's fro as long as they could. My frist unit held on to theres tell 94 every unit that I know of wanted to keep them just rebuild them.

[stormlion1]

Simple solution, allow the soldiers to use the pistols of there choice. If they choose to use the standard issue pistol they get resupply for ammo and parts but if they choose a superior pistol there responsible for there own ammo supply. If I could have had my 45 when I was in, I would have and I would have gladly have taken care of the ammunition myself.

[copeab]

The magazine doesn't have to go in the hand grip ...

[Targan]

Originally Posted by copeab

The magazine doesn't have to go in the hand grip ...

Yes indeed. The 5.7mm FN PDW and the G11 both have novel magazine positions. The latter is a rifle obviously but the FN PDW isn't all that larger than a pistol.

[Webstral]

This is a little tangential, but the comment about practice resonated with me. The US Army has huge sums of money for all kinds of marginal frippery, but the Army gets very stingy when it comes to ammunition for practicing. It's absurd. The Army would rather ship mountains of ammunition into combat areas than fire half a mountain in training deep in the rear. How many casualties are caused by rifle fire is only one consideration. Soldiers who are confident in their ability to handle their primary weapon are better soldiers in general as a result. Confidence and the habits instilled by constant training yield major dividends when the soldier is subjected to the stress of combat. A little ammunition goes much further when the rifleman has been habituated to firing aimed shots.

We've had this discussion about having a Marksmanship Corps and a Physical Fitness Corps so that the fundamentals of soldiering are being taught by people dedicated to nothing else, so I won't belabor the point here.

[CDAT]

Originally Posted by Targan

Yes indeed. The 5.7mm FN PDW and the G11 both have novel magazine positions. The latter is a rifle obviously but the FN PDW isn't all that larger than a pistol.

If by FN PDW you are talking about the FN P90 it has a 10.1 to 10.4 inch barrel (depending on source) and a full stock. I have one of the civilian legal ones (only visable differance is the 16 inch barrel) and it is much larger than any pistol that I have ever seen. If you are talking about the FN 5.7 Pistol it has it magazine in the normal location.

[copeab]

Originally Posted by CDAT

If by FN PDW you are talking about the FN P90 it has a 10.1 to 10.4 inch barrel (depending on source) and a full stock. I have one of the civilian legal ones (only visable differance is the 16 inch barrel) and it is much larger than any pistol that I have ever seen. If you are talking about the FN 5.7 Pistol it has it magazine in the normal location.

I was thinking about the C 96 Mauser.

[CDAT]

Originally Posted by copeab

I was thinking about the C 96 Mauser.

There is also the Scorpion SMG that is very close to handgun size but has the magazine in the "normal" SMG spot.