U.S. military wants a new pistol


Time to get rid of it?


Article here: http://www.military.com/daily-news/2014/07/03/army-wants-a-harder-hitting-pistol.html?ESRC=todayinmil.sm

The story is that the Berettas and SIG's are getting old, they fire a round without enough stopping power and so forth. A pistol is of slight importance in the military, unless you happen to be the one armed with it when trouble occurs. It then, doubtless, seems plenty important to you. So I'm all in favor of the military having good pistols.

Personally, I see little wrong with either pistol the forces are using. If effectiveness is the big issue here, perhaps putting a flat nose on the 9mm FMJ bullet would be something to explore. Other ammunition innovations that stay within the letter of the law of the Hague convention could be tried out, as well. A spoon nose profile could be tried, or a bullet balanced strongly rearward to encourage early yawing.

Abandoning the 9mm NATO cartridge would in one way be a bad idea. It is a cartridge in widespread use in many places around the world, making supplies of it easy to come by. That it is so widely used forces a conclusion that a lot of people have found something right with it. As to what that good thing is, I think the 9mm sits right on the balance point between power on the one hand and controllability on the other. It is about as much cartridge as people can handle if they are briefly trained on the pistol.

The article mentions that the troops are having trouble with the Beretta's safety lever, applying it when they do not mean to when racking the slide. That has been a well known thing you need to watch out for since that style of safety appeared in the 1920's. It can hardly be that the Army did not know about it when the Beretta was adopted. It is a train the brain issue, not a mechanical defect. The supposed problem of the too-long trigger reach on the Beretta is easily solved. Just cock the hammer.

Anyway it appears that we are off to the circus with yet another weapon selection program that will generate a lot of entertainment for gun cognoscenti. If I ran the circus the soldiers would get some sort of light DAO trigger, no external safeties to fool with and an improved 9mm bullet. But that's just me. The clustering bureaucrats will see to it that the selection process will produce lots of controversy for gun bloggers to cover. Stay tuned.

Comments

  1. OldCommander1911July 9, 2014 at 2:47 AM

    The Hague Convention thing is is something that almost everyone gets wrong. The US only uses FMJ to reduce the flak from France and the Dutch. The US is not bound by the Conventions because we never signed them. Even if we had signed them, they still don't apply unless BOTH combatant parties are signatories. So nobody we are fighting at the moment gets any consideration.

    They could start using something equal to Critical Duty (or better) tomorrow.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A moldy oldie review: The Singlepoint sight

Image
"I don't know just what it is, but I'll let you have it cheap." So said the fellow at the gun show, and that is how I came to have this thing in my collection. The Singlepoint is an ancestor of today's red dot sights. It created a stir back in the seventies. It was discussed in the English  Parliament . Its moment of fame came on the Son Tay  raid in the Vietnam war. It even got writeups in  Popular Mechanics  and  Popular Science , honors reserved for things that were maximally cool. By modern standards, though, it's a pathetic gunsight. It was a good try for its time, no doubt. It is an occluded eye gunsight (OEG), meaning you can't see through it. When you look in the end you see a black field with a red dot floating in it. You look at the target with your other eye and your brain merges the two images into one. Thus, you see the red dot superimposed upon the target. Well, sort of. It doesn't work perfectly. The effects of  pho...
Read more

Classic gun review: First generation Thompson Center Contender

Image
Including a pictorial on how to change barrels The Contender is a break action single shot. You can set up the gun as a pistol or carbine, depending on your tastes. Barrels are interchangeable and available in many calibers. The gun reviewed is an older model, made in the seventies. There is a more recent "G2" second generation model with numerous changes to the mechanism. In between the early model shown and the present G2, there were several variations in parts and design, most significantly a redesign of the barrel latch to make the gun easier to open. The review gun lacks the easy-open feature. More about that later. The Contender figured in a  Supreme Court case , which established that having a pistol and parts to convert it to a rifle did not amount to possession of an illegal short barreled rifle. Thus in a small way the Contender has a place in gun rights history. Of course, it is still illegal to assemble the pistol barrel to a receiver which ...
Read more

The Williams Foolproof sight -- it really is!

Image
I have these classic micrometer peep sights on two rifles, at present, and they are good gear! This type of sight has been around approximately forever. The company makes numerous versions to fit a great many firearms. On some guns you will need a taller front sight when you install a peep sight but this is by no means true of all. It used to be old graybeards would look at my peep sighted rifle, nod approvingly and say to me, "See ya got a Foolproof. Good, good..." Now I am the graybeard saying that to younger folks. There is a great deal to approve of. The windage and elevation settings are finely adjustable. They ride on screw shafts and the setting have countable clicks and a visible index. Adjustments are supposed to be in minutes of angle and fractions, but of course that will vary with the length of the barrel, as a matter of simple geometry. Since I have this sight on a rifle that is longer than normal, and on another one shorter than normal, nothing works out to ev...
Read more