M9 Replacement: Back in the News

[Shooter5]

http://www.armytimes.com/article/20130723/NEWS04/307230008/Testing-M9-replacement-start-next-year

Once again, testing/evaluation program for replacing the M9 and M11 service pistols may begin in 2014 if Congress approves.

[Bill D]

Since I don't want to subscribe, they won't let me read it!

[p246]

My son said one rifle squad was T & E ing G lock 17's last training cycle in his regiment.

[dave]

Can not read article but they are still considering a 9m/m? I thought they had learned by now!

[p246]

got to keep our boys in NATO happy...

[Nick Riviezzo]

Dave, what are you kidding? The people behind the "armor plated desk"never know,or really care, what the trooper behind the trigger needs.At the Flag Rank dicision level they're only interested in the "political " solution. That's the solution that gets another star! Nick

[Shooter5]

The field is wide open for design and caliber for now to include 40 and 45. Modular designs (which may include switch calibers) may be considered. Also; Many, many DOD units have been using various Glock models for many, many years.

Let's try this one:

http://www.airforcetimes.com/article/20130727/NEWS04/307270003/Testing-M9-replacement-start-next-year

[Major Tom]

A Glock? Ya gotta be kidding!

[Richard H Brown Jr]

Make it a 1911a1 frame with 9mm and .45 acp slide bits and mas. Just swap out when you want to change calibers. ... Course it'll have to be a specially designed frame to play with the ejector differences. Oh and a .22 for short range training purposes.


RHB

[Major Tom]

With all the excellent, reliable 45acp pistols out there; I see no reason to keep 9mm pistols for the military. Why pump a a full magazine of 9mm in an agressor when 1-2 45 rounds will put him down for good.

[Shooter5]

Not kidding on the Glocks: thousands have been purchased by DOD for mil units and are being used every day. The 9mm caliber will be very difficult to overcome simply for logistics and NATO interoperability issues.

[Guamsst]

Been arguing this allot lately but the 9mm logic seems to be 2 to the chest, one to the head no matter what and repeat until job is done. That initself indicates a lack of faith in the round to me.

I could care less what we go to as long as they actually look at stopping power (WITH FMJ) and reliability. Seriously, with FMJ the difference between .45 and 9mm is massive.

[Shooter5]

Regardless of caliber, any pistol cartridge has much less power than rifle caliber rounds. Furthermore, any review of trauma data by any cause clearly demonstrates capacity for humans to absorb tremendous amount of damage. Therefore, the expectation that a pistol shot, any pistol shot, can reliably and immediately cause incapacitation is merely a pipe dream. That remains true of rifle, artillery or motor vehicle accidents. As in anything, shot placement is paramount...but CNS shots can never be guaranteed past point blank distances in a dynamic environment.
Therefore: modern professional technique usually acknowledges these facts and instead advocates multi-round shot count when engaging threat adversaries: if the target is worth one, a double tap, a 2 and 1; then it just may be well worth it to use the whole magazine if applicable. That goes for rifle engagements, as well, especially at CQB distances and even more so with 5.56/Green-tip ammo.

[Tuna]

There is still the big problem that the standard FMJ .45 cannot over come. It is not a penetrator when compared with the 9mm. And with cheap body armor become more common place in the sand piles the 9mm is the better of the two rounds. But as stated any pistol is a poor second compared to a rifle. The big problem with the 5.56 today is the green tip standard rounds that while they do penetrate they are just too stable and do not release enough of their energy before they exit. That was the great thing about the older M193 from the 1 in 12 twist M16. It would tumble inside and do a lot of damage. But because it was too devastating by European standards we dropped it in favor for what we now have.

[rickgman]

Tuna, The M193 ammo had increased terminal ballistic performance due to the fact that it fragmented after yawing around 45 degrees. The projectile actually fractured along the cannelure. This created at least two separate wound channels. The M885 ammo also yaws (as do virtually all modern military rifle rounds) and frequently exits the target base first. It, however, does not fragment so it leaves a single wound channel. And by the way, the reason that the M193 cartridge was replaced by the M885 cartridge was due to improved penetration and long range accuracy of the M885 cartridge.