Frankly I’d be amazed if we replaced any small arms right now that wasn’t absolutely necessary, we’re about to go from an “Army of excellence” to an Army of “Good Enough”. We’re going to be broke, maybe even post-Cold War broke.
About every meeting I attend has budget doom and gloom interlaced. There’s a chit-load of broken equipment and stuff that’s just plain worn out that will either be returning from theater or turned over. On top of that the brass has other modernization priorities.
Or an "Army of all we can afford."
The should start using the Desert Eagle. How's that for close quarters combat. LOL.
If glock could get a contract he could figure a way to put another safety on the thing. My vote is " BYOG "
The 9mm will not go away far to many NATO Countries use it. Will we see more .45 ACP? I suspect we will for some uses
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
In the day of semi-automatic grenade launchers and predators drones I believe a better side arm is a very low priority on their "what we need to spend money on" list. The exception of course will be for special operations units.
Since the military is confined to FMJ rounds I always wondered why they didn't go with something with a little more penetration like a long barreled .357 Sig. They are the ones most likely to engage someone wearing body armor after all.
If I had to choose a sidearm firing FMJ bullets, it'd be chambered in .45 ACP. Since the bullet isn't going to expand, I want it to start out as big as possible, right?
Personally, I'd pick the HK45. It was designed to fit the US military's requirements from the get-go, has both an external safety and a decocker, has second-strike capacity, and manages to make the .45ACP cartridge as easy to fire as 9mm.
You may want to double-check your facts.
Most .357 Sig rounds will be defeated by Level II Body Armor.
Most .44 Magnum rounds will be stopped by Level IIIA.
The FN 5.7 round (the one that's marketed to the military buyers - not the one available to civilians) falls somewhere between Level III-A and Level III...and although the NIJ classification system is a little bit counter-intuitive, that means that the military 5.7 round is actually harder for body armor to stop than a .44 Magnum.
Pinnacle Armor Ballistic Chart
I highly doubt there is any validity to the military changing to anything. And if they do, it won't do anything to settle any caliber wars. The .mil is running ball ammo which, in 9mm is far less than ideal. If they were using modern ammo we wouldn't be having this conversation.
The notion that a Glock isn't reliable enough or doesn't have the sales is laughable... literally. I laughed when I read the comments. I see Glocks everywhere I turn. If any gun could be named the most popular, the Glock would be it... specifically because you can do anything to them and the run. That is true of many modern guns, but Glock is the one that managed to win the reliability banner. That said, the .mil isn't going to pick a gun that doesn't have an external safety and isn't likely to pick one that doesn't use a hammer. Tradition runs deep, even when it serves no purpose. Too many decision makers at the DOD would scream about those stupid plastic guns!!