Will military replace Beretta anytime soon? - Page 4

Slugthrower · September 16, 2008, 09:38 AM

Since FN is providing the military with M16 rifles, 249 SAWs, and M240B GP machineguns, it would make some sense to provide pistols as well. The FNP series is pretty good pistol, despite the overblown problems that the error net tends to perpetuate.

Changing of caliber, so long as we are a part of NATO, probably will not happen. It is an odd thing that 9mm Parabellum vs .45 ACP is still going. I can see where it may be a little better but not so much so to warrant going back to a 8 shot full sized 1911 pistol, especially when using FMJ, that has more recoil than the average soldier will wish to cope with. There is little training done with pistols, other than orientation and qualification. For many it was the same with the M16.

I forget where and when I read about the "stopping power",for what that is worth, of a 9mm and .45 in FMJ form, but it was about a 4%-6% difference(60%vs66%), this was many years ago. Big woop, having twice as many shots per magazine than the typical .45 makes choosing a combat pistol easy for the military's needs. I know there are many pistols in .45 ACP that hold 13 shots. Do they fit the average hand that will be encountered in the service? Most likely not in my experience. The M9 could use a little trimming down in the grip department too, IMO. Since the recoil is near non existant with the 9mm it isn't as much a factor for control though.

We have to understand that most who enter military service are not experienced with firearms and need to have a entry level caliber that is both accurate, gentle and reasonably effective for combat. The stress of combat is going to make shooting as accurately as possible exceedingly difficult and therefore is going to favor a pistol which holds more ammunition, rather than one that has alot of mythology surrounding it and needs more skill and training to use as well.

Side note.

I love the CQB angle for the use of pistols and rifles or even shotguns. When we stop being PC in our wars and do it the way it should be done all this CQB/CQC garbage won't be needed. Toss a few M67 frags into each room and let it clear the room for you. If they won't come out and play then level the building with cannon rounds. This searching houses is stupid when using Regular Army troops or Marines for that matter. CQC is the realm of special operations and should remain so. When a hammer is used as if it is a wrench there will be problems.

I would love to respond to the shortcomings of the M16, but it isn't the topic of this thread. I will therefore abstain from such.

JuanCarlos · September 16, 2008, 10:46 AM

Quote:

We have to understand that most who enter military service are not experienced with firearms and need to have a entry level caliber that is both accurate, gentle and reasonably effective for combat. The stress of combat is going to make shooting as accurately as possible exceedingly difficult and therefore is going to favor a pistol which holds more ammunition, rather than one that has alot of mythology surrounding it and needs more skill and training to use as well.

This. I came into the Army having never fired a gun in my life, of any kind, except a paintball gun maybe twice. I didn't even own a pellet gun as a kid. The M9 was ridiculously easy to shoot. Recoil, what recoil? Obviously I've fired many different pistols since, and I'd still suggest that the M9 was one of the easiest to shoot...depending, of course, what your standard is. Which, for the Army at least, was simply putting holes in torso-sized targets...placement wasn't a focus.

I think a lot of people are really exaggerating the importance of the choice of sidearm for the Army anyway. Nobody actually uses the damn thing. I went over with an infantry battalion, and the bulk of ours were carried by the officers, who all carried rifles as well if they went outside the wire. I think the only people that carried them as primary weapons were maybe the medics and our chaplain.

September 16, 2008, 09:38 AM	#76
Slugthrower Senior Member Join Date: October 22, 2006 Posts: 823	Since FN is providing the military with M16 rifles, 249 SAWs, and M240B GP machineguns, it would make some sense to provide pistols as well. The FNP series is pretty good pistol, despite the overblown problems that the error net tends to perpetuate. Changing of caliber, so long as we are a part of NATO, probably will not happen. It is an odd thing that 9mm Parabellum vs .45 ACP is still going. I can see where it may be a little better but not so much so to warrant going back to a 8 shot full sized 1911 pistol, especially when using FMJ, that has more recoil than the average soldier will wish to cope with. There is little training done with pistols, other than orientation and qualification. For many it was the same with the M16. I forget where and when I read about the "stopping power",for what that is worth, of a 9mm and .45 in FMJ form, but it was about a 4%-6% difference(60%vs66%), this was many years ago. Big woop, having twice as many shots per magazine than the typical .45 makes choosing a combat pistol easy for the military's needs. I know there are many pistols in .45 ACP that hold 13 shots. Do they fit the average hand that will be encountered in the service? Most likely not in my experience. The M9 could use a little trimming down in the grip department too, IMO. Since the recoil is near non existant with the 9mm it isn't as much a factor for control though. We have to understand that most who enter military service are not experienced with firearms and need to have a entry level caliber that is both accurate, gentle and reasonably effective for combat. The stress of combat is going to make shooting as accurately as possible exceedingly difficult and therefore is going to favor a pistol which holds more ammunition, rather than one that has alot of mythology surrounding it and needs more skill and training to use as well. Side note. I love the CQB angle for the use of pistols and rifles or even shotguns. When we stop being PC in our wars and do it the way it should be done all this CQB/CQC garbage won't be needed. Toss a few M67 frags into each room and let it clear the room for you. If they won't come out and play then level the building with cannon rounds. This searching houses is stupid when using Regular Army troops or Marines for that matter. CQC is the realm of special operations and should remain so. When a hammer is used as if it is a wrench there will be problems. I would love to respond to the shortcomings of the M16, but it isn't the topic of this thread. I will therefore abstain from such. __________________ History is a freak show and a dark comedy. Mankind is a spectacle all to itself. Play your role, let the jesters play theirs. In the end...who has the last laugh?