Retirement of M9?

[Steelharp]

US Army will Retire M9 (because it?s old and weak) - Guns News and Guns Reviews at Guns.com

[BimmerFreak]

So the Army/DoD spins up the Joint Service/Combat Pistol trials, companies like SW, Taurus, HK, Ruger, FN, etc spend MILLIONS of dollars designing and producing guns to compete for the contract, and then the Army pulls out.

(*claiming lack of funds)

NOW, the Army is back "...looking for a replacement to the M9..."

Reminds me that some things never change in the Army

Hurry Up!

Wait!

(do pushups while waiting)

Change of mission!

Hurry Up!

Wait some more....

Edited August 30, 2011 by BimmerFreak

[mikegideon]

The article says they're going to buy off the rack. Gonna be interesting to watch.

[roverboy]

I would like to see an American company get the contract. Like S&W,Ruger,Colt.

[Dolomite_supafly]

So the Army/DoD spins up the Joint Service/Combat Pistol trials, companies like SW, Taurus, HK, Ruger, FN, etc spend MILLIONS of dollars designing and producing guns to compete for the contract, and then the Army pulls out.

(*claiming lack of funds)

NOW, the Army is back "...looking for a replacement to the M9..."

Reminds me that some things never change in the Army

Hurry Up!

Wait!

(do pushup while waiting)

Change of mission!

Hurry Up!

Wait some more....

No what it is they were already looking at adopting a specific firearms before the trials. In most cases the trials are just a formality but probably when their "golden child" didn't do as well they dropped the trials citing "monetary" reasons. Now the DoD is going to come back in with another set of trials geared specifically for the "golden child" to win.

Happens all the time. They often know who they want to select before the trials begin.

https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=9f67b094636a104ae0bd1068f6ca672a&tab=core&_cview=1

Not going to read all the way through it but most in most large scale DoD trials it is a requirement that the winner must have supplied weapon systems to the government on a previous contract. This requirement alone would eliminate most competitors no matter how good they were.

The site is intersting if you search around. Just doing a search for "sniper" resulted in these hits. Barrett won a 5 year $10 million dollar contract for their M107 Long Range Sniper Rifle system in July. Accuracy International won a $5 million dollar contract for rifle stocks in August. There is a bid up right now for 75 Glocks for the GAO. Or the contract for airsoft pistols for the Army that has now expired.

On smaller, individual unit, contracts (like a SEAL team or others) they can set their own criteria. Predator Custom Shop in Knoxville has submitted weapons for evaluation in the past.

Anyone who is in the "business" should be watching the site for potential contracts they can support. Even if you aren't in the gun business there are contracts for anything and everything the government uses.

Dolomite

[BimmerFreak]

No what it is they were already looking at adopting a specific firearms before the trials. In most cases the trials are just a formality but probably when their "golden child" didn't do as well they dropped the trials citing "monetary" reasons. Now the DoD is going to come back in with another set of trials geared specifically for the "golden child" to win.

Happens all the time. They often know who they want to select before the trials begin.

https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=9f67b094636a104ae0bd1068f6ca672a&tab=core&_cview=1

Not going to read all the way through it but most in most large scale DoD trials it is a requirement that the winner must have supplied weapon systems to the government on a previous contract. This requirement alone would eliminate most competitors no matter how good they were.

The site is intersting if you search around. Just doing a search for "sniper" resulted in these hits. Barrett won a 5 year $10 million dollar contract for their M107 Long Range Sniper Rifle system in July. Accuracy International won a $5 million dollar contract for rifle stocks in August. There is a bid up right now for 75 Glocks for the GAO. Or the contract for airsoft pistols for the Army that has now expired.

On smaller, individual unit, contracts (like a SEAL team or others) they can set their own criteria. Predator Custom Shop in Knoxville has submitted weapons for evaluation in the past.

Anyone who is in the "business" should be watching the site for potential contracts they can support. Even if you aren't in the gun business there are contracts for anything and everything the government uses.

Dolomite

lol.

I understand how the "system" works... or more specifically DOESN'T work.

Ask HK how much money they spent on their US production plant in GA in support of the XM8 program.

Ask how much money the Remington lobby group was paid when the M110 program was set to fully replace the M24 program, only to have that decision overturned, and a new policy letter drafted that changed the MTOE to authorize BOTH M24 and M110 systems within the same battalion.

The list goes on.

[BimmerFreak]

Regardless, let's cross our fingers and pray that the BEST and most combat effective caliber and platform is selected... (but not going to hold my breath)

[Karnage]

I would like to see an American company get the contract. Like S&W,Ruger,Colt.

Agreed, but probably won't happen.

[Guest 556or762]

Does anyone else find it interesting that FN has introduced several new pistols since the announcment was made about possibly shelving the M9 and using off the rack guns from another supplier? Things that make you go HMM! I have not shot the new FNX9 but it looks pretty good to me very reminiscent of the HK USP pistols both off which were offered to the US Gov't in recent contracts.

[DMark]

.... So the Army/DoD spins up the Joint Service/Combat Pistol trials.....,then the Army pulls out. (*claiming lack of funds) NOW, the Army is back...

Hell, I Was There!

Joe, I think we discussed before since during the JSCP run up I was in a position that made me one of the members of the Army's Small Arms committee (I think its called something else now).

BLUF - - - It was the money, nobody counted on the wars lasting so long & the fact that we were also running out of ammo (part of the small arms funding line, but that is another story along with the impact of USSOCOM getting direct input to the POM cycle - - - yet another story..., but I digress).

BUT in large part another big problem was that the manufactors couldn't sign up for the production runs that DOD wanted because DOD wanted it like RIGHT NOW, like STOP EVERYTHING ELSE YOU ARE DOING and like ONLY MAKE OUR STUFF!

This programming guidance was IMHO what really killed the JSCP. We had a very small window to make the JSCP happen before bigger items ate up all of the money.

Reckon we all had this idea that the USA was still the Arsenal of Democracy, too late we learned that the tooling was shipped to China back in the 90s (remember we were all going to have high-tech jobs) and more damning the skill tradesmen who know how to bend and shape metal were retired.

BTW..., a couple of us really, really liked what FN was showing us.

Edited August 31, 2011 by DMark

[JAB]

So, do you guys really think the Army would leave the NATO fold insofar as getting away from the 9mm as the major handgun caliber? Being that 'M&P' stands for 'Military and Police' (as the original M&P revolver was apparently intended largely as a service sidearm for, well, military and police) wouldn't it be kind of cool if things came full circle and it once more became truly a 'Military and Police' arm? That is, assuming they are pretty good guns.

[graycrait]

Sooooo.... does anyone have any idea what the top 5 choices might be? I retired from the Army 12+ years ago but I see and talk to a lot of young GIs nearly every day, so I am interested. I was one of those who transitioned from my rust prone 1911 to the M9, so this interests me from a "just what the insiders may be thinking" aspect.

[DaveTN]

They should have gotten rid of that worthless 9mm round years ago; and the .223 should go next.

Obviously I’d like to see an American company get the contract, (Smith & Wesson M&P) but it will probably go to low bidder.

They are talking about buying production guns, but they aren’t going to buy “Off the shelfâ€; no one has shelves that big. Whatever gun they pick will be in short supply for the civilian market.

I’d be curious to see what a Beretta insider has to say about it. The military using the M9 didn’t really help Beretta get the civilian market. I wonder if it was worth all the work and drama of dealing with the military. I'd hate to see it do damage to Smith & Wesson.

So, do you guys really think the Army would leave the NATO fold insofar as getting away from the 9mm as the major handgun caliber?

Yes, according to another article something more powerful is part of the requirement.

Being that 'M&P' stands for 'Military and Police' (as the original M&P revolver was apparently intended largely as a service sidearm for, well, military and police) wouldn't it be kind of cool if things came full circle and it once more became truly a 'Military and Police' arm? That is, assuming they are pretty good guns.

The M&P’s are great guns; they have been knocking down Glock steadily in the Law Enforcement community.

Politics will be at play here though; Obama might want to send more our money overseas.

[Patton]

Well it's anybodys guess. I was part of that nonsense TandE six years ago only to be told that the contract with Beretta was renewed before we even started working together. I heard of all the teams across the Army (other branches were on there own) that the SW99 in 45ACP was a great candidate. I believe a M&P would fill that role now. The Army all ready has a few 228/229's in various units but the Army took a lot of intrest in the Coast Guards 229DAK's. Theres no telling what caliber X pistol will be. To my understanding the Army will be seperate from the other branches in their selection just like it was supposed to have been before.

[DaveTN]

Sooooo.... does anyone have any idea what the top 5 choices might be?

The gun will be picked on politics; not on quality. But I would bet the round will be one of these three in this order.

.40S&W

.45ACP

.357SIG

.45ACP is what they need, but some don’t want to use it just because it’s been around forever. (It would also make there screw up in getting rid of it obvious.) So I think the .40S&W has a good chance. .357SIG will make a showing, but it’s too high velocity, won’t expel all its energy in the body. Plus they already have stuff to shoot through car doors.

[Patton]

Here is what has been leaked. I emailed a friend.

SIGP220 Combat or Compact/ H&K45c/ S&W M&P/ Springfield XD 45 all models with thumb safety/ Beretta Px4 Storm(new model in 45ACP)/Taurus PT 24/7 OSS/ FNP45-USG/ HS-45/ Para Ordinance LDA 1911

I was told that most of those aren't even being considered(sounds like the Army) but its what was presented. He also said a Glock of unknown model possible Prototype will be introduced within a year.

Edited August 31, 2011 by Patton

[DMark]

When I was wrapped up in the JSCP, it came down to two calibers - - - 9mm or 45 ACP.

We looked at .40S&W, but even with all of the good reviews coming out of the LEO world it didn't get alot of traction at the time. I think that was more production based (we know how to make 9mm & 45 ACP) than results based (there also wasn't any real .40 FMJ data to look at).

What the data did tell us was what everybody already knows (or should know). Shot placement is key and that means more training, which means more training ammo, which means more time on the training schedule, which means more ranges, etc., etc., etc.

One thing that did keep popping up for us (since we where the "trainers" in this effort) was just how honking big the M9 is.

We needed something smaller - - - the military today is 20% female.

[Patton]

SIGP220

Not that I agree but I feel this is what it will be if changes are made. Unless they stick to the requirement that it must have a external safety.

[rgaper]

When I was wrapped up in the JSCP, it came down to two calibers - - - 9mm or 45 ACP.

We looked at .40S&W, but even with all of the good reviews coming out of the LEO world it didn't get alot of traction at the time. I think that was more production based (we know how to make 9mm & 45 ACP) than results based (there also wasn't any real .40 FMJ data to look at).

What the data did tell us was what everybody already knows (or should know). Shot placement is key and that means more training, which means more training ammo, which means more time on the training schedule, which means more ranges, etc., etc., etc.

One thing that did keep popping up for us (since we where the "trainers" in this effort) was just how honking big the M9 is.

We needed something smaller - - - the military today is 20% female.

I can't see them introducing a new caliber and think any RFP/T&E will stick with either 9mm or 45acp, most likely 9mm. At the end of the day it's still "just a handgun" and we all know where the ballistics stand. Special units will continue to have the opportunity for other calibers just as they do right now when intended for offensive purposes. When it comes right down to the issue though, Big Green will do what they do best and consider the lowest common denominator and apply decision making accordingly. In other words, screw it all up.

As stated already, the M9 is an obscenely large & heavy handgun for its capacity, and slide mounted controls prohibit the contemporary training methods most are used to. I would love for them to do away with the manual safety/decocker requirement, but this is something that the military just loves.

Getting back to the size, the continued growth of femals in the military (and LE) has led to the adoption of multiple pistols by some agencies... such as the FAMs having the option of the P229 or P239. To some extent, we see this with the M9 vs M11 in the military, though I believe that's driven more by role & unit than gender/hand size.

The M&P would be a great off-the-shelf choice that would seem to meet the bulk of the requirements. HK has shown its ability to navigate the political BS associated with .mil as well. I can't wait to see the final requirements though, and from there it will be very interesting to see what gets immediately disqualified due to a perceived "need" that's not met. Hopefully in a few years we won't all be talking about how they came to choose Hi-Point pistols with Uncle Mike's nylon holsters.

[Murgatroy]

I am just a layman, no military experience, so this is just an outsider's observations.

I know they are saying they want a round more powerful than the 9x19mm, but like mentioned above, are they really going to leave the NATO fold? The sidearm is meant to be the last ditch. I am not exactly convinced they will leave the NATO standards, regardless of what is said. Again, I am not a military person. If they were to pick a new round, say the .357 SIG, that would give that round the legitimacy it seeks and make it a major player now, much like the .40 S&W when the FBI and subsequently many law enforcement agencies chose it.

As for a new platform, has Glock gotten past the point where it refuses to give manufacturing right or whatever the myth was the first time around and will get involved? If so I see the major players being either a Glock, a S&W M&P or something from FN. HK already has a bit of play, as does FN. From a price point, I can't see either of them beating out Glock though.

If I were a betting man, I would put most of my chips down on the Glock in a 9mm flavor to be honest. For the price, and the inability/unwillingness to really leave the 9x19mm NATO standard.

But I have been wrong before. This might turn out like the last three tries for replacing the M16/4 and they will continue on with the M9 for logistics reasons.

[Sandman]

My guess is a Glock model 21 (.45 acp).

[Patton]

such as the FAMs having the option of the P229 or P239.

I only heard of the 239 as a personally owned backup. I don't think they can even use them offduty now. Mostly all P250 compacts there now.

[Guest Katana]

On a semi-related note, if they do decide to forgo the 9mm, what are the chances that they'll sell those warehouses full of it to us civilians as military surplus?

[Guest TresOsos]

I hate to admit it but even a Glock would be an improvement over the M9.

I just hope they get rid of the "squat when you pee caliber" 9mm.

[graycrait]

If they went to JHP and ignored the "geneva convention" which I believe we are still not signatories but mererly followers of, they would find, I suspect, that 9mm is good enough. If they stick with ball then wound cavitation and channeling seems to become the most relevant issues, not just merely shoot one to take 3 out of the fight. Which then begs the presumption that maybe 9mm ball doesn't take 3 out of the fight, but .40 ball will. Is there overwhelming evidence (and I doubt there is) that .40 ball is a quantum leap over .355 ball strictly as military ordnance? Who uses .40 ball whose date could be analyzed to provide proof positive that .40 is as good as .45 and so much better than 9mm ball?

Pistols with a shot at replacing the M9 - Army News | News from Afghanistan & Iraq - Army Times

/

The Army has a new pistol in its sights. After 25 years of action, the M9 is on its

way out as officials are confident they can give soldiers a better pistol at a better

price. The goal is to replace all 239,000 M9s and the concealable M11s.

"The M9 is at the end of its lifecycle," said Maj. Art Thomas, small arms branch

chief at the Maneuver Center of Excellence at Fort Benning, Ga. "It is an old weapon.

We can do a lot better with what technology can provide us now."

Lethality is among the M9's several "limitations," said Daryl Easlick, project

officer for close effects. The requirement for a new pistol calls for "an increase in

permanent wound channel," which suggests something more powerful than a 9mm may be on

the horizon.

Other limitations the new pistol must overcome include:

. The slide-mounted safety. When solders rack the slide to alleviate a jam or

stovepipe in the M9, they often inadvertently engage the safety - and won't realize

this until they reacquire and squeeze the trigger.

. The open-slide design, which allow contaminants and dirt into the system.

. The lack of a modular grip, integrated rail and night-sight capabilities.

. The inability to suppress.

. Limited service life - replacement should have a service life of at least 25,000

rounds.

Service life is a key issue, Easlick said, noting that the M9 is only required to

fire 5,000 rounds.

"We are looking for a threshold capability ... in the magnitude of five times better

than that," he said.

Beretta insists that the M9's numbers are well beyond 5,000 rounds. Two-thirds of all

M9s fire 5,000 rounds with one or no malfunctions, said Gabriele de Plano, Beretta's

vice president of military sales and marketing. Slides have 35,000-round durability,

frames last for 30,000 rounds and locking blocks for 22,000. The average reliability

of all M9s is 17,500 rounds without a stoppage.

Related reading

Love it or hate it: troops sound off on M9

During one test conducted under Army supervision, 12 M9 pistols shot 168,000 rounds

without a malfunction.

But that is not the norm. Easlick said an M9 is tempo-dependent, and its service life

is "exponentially" dropped when it is used as an offensive handgun and in intense

combat training.

To get the changes it desires, the Army adopted the Air Force's Modular Handgun

System proposal, which had been approved by the Joint Requirements Oversight Council

but lost steam in recent years.

The Army plan has jumped through most hoops and is at Army Headquarters awaiting

approval. Of course, there is the reality of diminishing defense dollars. But Thomas

said all participants are "working diligently" to create a budget-friendly fielding

and funding plan.

While timelines remain to be seen, the Army in a June 30 omnibus reprogramming

request placed procurement in fiscal 2014.

Your next pistol

Officials are not allowed to discuss the selection process while requirements are

being written. But Thomas did say the next pistol would be a commercial,

off-the-shelf product.

Narrowing the field is not especially hard. The soldier requirements division must

first consider existing programs of record. If another government agency has a pistol

program that meets or exceeds the Army's requirements, that is the one you will get.

There are some strong contenders in that category, and they are not limited to the

.45 caliber and 9mm varieties. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms in 2010

made a big switch to the .40 caliber, and many military leaders would like to do the

same.

Smith and Wesson's .40 cal M&P nudged the Glock 22 and 27 in the ATF competition.

Scores were so close that both received a part of the $80 million contract - and

prime standing as the Army enters its search.

"It's kind of hard to beat the Smith and Wesson M&P right now," said one industry

insider from a competing company, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. "It is a

polymer gun with high-capacity steel magazines. It has a positive safety and

ambidextrous controls ... they simply came out of the gate with the right gun."

Other companies with existing government contracts and weapons that meet Army

requirements include:

. Beretta. The company in 2010 launched the 92A1 9mm and 96A1 .40 S&W pistols. They

include increased capacity magazines, removable front sights, an accessory rail,

captive recoil spring assembly, frame recoil buffer and sand-resistant magazines. The

Army would need no transitional training if it chose the 9mm, and parts compatibility

is 90 percent.

Beretta's next-generation Px4 family of pistols has polymer frames, modular grips and

a rotary barrel system similar to a bolt-action rifle. The Px4 Storm Special Duty .45

ACP, which had been submitted for the now-defunct Joint Combat Pistol program,

includes a long barrel for suppressor mounting.

. Sig Sauer. Many Navy SEALs carry the company's P226, and the Coast Guard has

adopted the P229. The industry insider called the Sig a "workhorse," but said the

P229 is an unlikely selection because it is double-action only and has no positive

safety.

The .40 caliber P250 probably has little to no chance. The pistol had 58 stoppages,

13 of which were gun-induced, during the ATF competition. Smith & Wesson had 16

shooter-induced stoppages and Glock had seven, and neither had gun-induced stoppages.

. Heckler & Koch. The HK P2000 is lauded by the Border Patrol. They love its modular

grips, dual slide release levers and mounting rails that easily accommodate a variety

of lights, lasers and accessories.

. Glock. A longtime favorite among many special operators, the latest variants

include modular grips and shorter trigger distances. The recoil spring also has been

replaced with a dual recoil spring assembly to reduce recoil and increase life cycle.

But the venerable Glock does have its detractors, the industry insider said -

primarily because the pistol lacks an external safety. In addition, there is no

metal-on-metal contact in the magazine catch-recess area, causing magazines to wear

out faster and sometimes drop out of the gun.

. Colt and Springfield. Both companies are competing to replace the Marine Corps' M45

Close Quarter Battle Pistol. If the winner becomes a program of record before the

Army opens its selection process, then it would be in the running. But Colt's variant

is a single-action, cocked and locked pistol, which is not popular with many folks in

Big Army.