Go Back   DefensiveCarry Concealed Carry Forum > Related Topics > General Firearm Discussion
Register Forum Rules FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read
Forum Donations DefensiveCarry Store DefensiveCarry Gallery USGO Gallery Related Links Forum Help & Extras

General Firearm Discussion The place for general firearms and shooting discussions that may not fit well in the forums focusing on concealed carry.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old April 20th, 2007, 01:41 PM   #1
Member
 
Arisin Wind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 208
Arisin Wind
USAF Wants A New Side Arm

From the Air Force Times:

Air Force lays out specs for its next handgun

By Seamus O’Connor - Staff writer
Posted : Friday Apr 20, 2007 10:00:40 EDT

The Air Force is asking gun makers for their input on the design of the next handgun for airmen.

The service issued a memo Monday laying out its demands. The service wants a weapon with a baseline caliber of .45, though gun is required to be reconfigurable for multiple bullet sizes. The ideal weapon would have a service life exceeding 25,000 rounds and has a grip that can be tailored for any user, according to the memo.

In addition, the memo set out specifications for an accompanying silencer. The device must be able to reduce discharge noise to 140 decibels at least, weigh no more than 10 ounces and have a service life of 3,000 to 10,000 rounds.

The required monthly production rate is 7,500 handguns, starting six months after the forthcoming contract is awarded, the document said.

The information brought in by the memo will be used to create a request for proposals at a yet unannounced time.

Gen. T. Michael Moseley, Air Force chief of staff, first introduced the idea of new Air Force handguns at a House Appropriations Committee hearing in February. An unspecified portion of the $7 billion Air Force supplemental budget request is set aside for handgun acquisition.
Arisin Wind is offline  
Old April 20th, 2007, 01:49 PM   #2
VIP Member
 
Cupcake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Michigan
Posts: 2,381
Cupcake is a forum contributor
I want to wish good luck to US manufacturers, but who really manufactures here anymore? Hi point?
__________________
www.zerotoathlete.blogspot.com
My journey to fitness.
Cupcake is offline  
Old April 20th, 2007, 01:54 PM   #3
VIP Member
 
OPFOR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Baghdad
Posts: 2,280
OPFOR is a forum contributor
Why does the USAF need a 'built from scratch" handgun? They can't find one among the THOUSANDS of designs already out there? I thought the military was getting away from all the "we have to build/design it ourself" crap that eats up so much time and money, and moving towards off-the-shelf technology.

Just buy Glocks, and spend the millions and millions of dollars they'll save training their airmen how to use them properly...
__________________
"It makes no difference what men think of war, said the judge. War endures. As well ask men what they think of stone. War was always here. Before man was, war waited for him. The ultimate trade awaiting its ultimate practitioner. That is the way it was and will be. That way and not some other way."
OPFOR is online now  
Old April 20th, 2007, 02:07 PM   #4
JD
Senior Moderator
 
JD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Bedford County Virginia
Posts: 7,916
JD is a forum contributor
Talking

See HERE for previous thread.

As for the Chair Force needing new sidearms...doesn't everybody?
JD is offline  
Old April 20th, 2007, 03:28 PM   #5
Distinguished Member
 
pogo2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Southwest
Posts: 1,948
pogo2
Puzzling specs

Quote:
The service wants a weapon with a baseline caliber of .45, though gun is required to be reconfigurable for multiple bullet sizes.
This is a little puzzling. Does the writer mean only .45 caliber but different bullet weights, such as 180 to 230 grains? Or is his comment about "multiple bullet sizes" meant to say the gun must be able to handle 9mm and .40 S&W in addition to .45 ACP?

Perhaps they should look at the S&W M&P gun as a candidate. It is made in the US, has different backstrap inserts for different hand sizes, is reasonably priced, and should eventually be available in all 3 major semiauto calibers.
pogo2 is offline  
Old April 20th, 2007, 03:39 PM   #6
VIP Member
 
Rob72's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: OKC, OK
Posts: 2,840
Rob72
Quote:
Originally Posted by pogo2 View Post
This is a little puzzling. Does the writer mean only .45 caliber but different bullet weights, such as 180 to 230 grains? Or is his comment about "multiple bullet sizes" meant to say the gun must be able to handle 9mm and .40 S&W in addition to .45 ACP?

Perhaps they should look at the S&W M&P gun as a candidate. It is made in the US, has different backstrap inserts for different hand sizes, is reasonably priced, and should eventually be available in all 3 major semiauto calibers.
Could actually be read either way. Different weights (and thereby powder charges) will affect cycling with a can on it.

I would expect, though, that they mean being able to switch between calibers, since most of the world is 9mm. Maybe a return of the modular breechface?

Plain stupid, really. We didn't sign the Hague Accords, IIRC, and "Rules of War" is a dated concept, post-massed-forces combat. Shoot real rounds, do real damage. Put out an XTP HP in 124 gr, or a Hornady V-Max in .223, and I do believe mortality would rise a tad.
Rob72 is offline  
Old April 20th, 2007, 04:18 PM   #7
VIP Member
 
SammyIamToday's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Lexington, KY
Posts: 2,077
SammyIamToday is a forum contributor
Quote:
Originally Posted by pogo2 View Post
This is a little puzzling. Does the writer mean only .45 caliber but different bullet weights, such as 180 to 230 grains? Or is his comment about "multiple bullet sizes" meant to say the gun must be able to handle 9mm and .40 S&W in addition to .45 ACP?

Perhaps they should look at the S&W M&P gun as a candidate. It is made in the US, has different backstrap inserts for different hand sizes, is reasonably priced, and should eventually be available in all 3 major semiauto calibers.
Probably means .22lr. They have or had kits for the M16's that did the same according to a couple Chair Force vets I know. I thought it was kinda silly, but I'm a jarhead. :)
__________________
...He suggested that "every American citizen" should own a rifle and train with it on firing ranges "at every courthouse." -Chesty Puller
SammyIamToday is offline  
Old April 20th, 2007, 10:35 PM   #8
VIP Member
 
Cupcake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Michigan
Posts: 2,381
Cupcake is a forum contributor
Quote:
Originally Posted by SammyIamToday View Post
Probably means .22lr. They have or had kits for the M16's that did the same according to a couple Chair Force vets I know. I thought it was kinda silly, but I'm a jarhead. :)

That might make sense. I've heard this .22 story from guys in before and after I was, But we fired 5.56 nato rounds when I was in.
__________________
www.zerotoathlete.blogspot.com
My journey to fitness.
Cupcake is offline  
Old April 20th, 2007, 10:41 PM   #9
Senior Moderator
 
srfl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: FL
Posts: 6,136
srfl is a forum contributor
Closing this...since we already have an existing thread.
__________________
USAF: Loving Our Obscene Amenities Since 1947
srfl is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:37 AM.


Hosted ByTranquil Hosting

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Template-Modifikationen durch TMS Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0
Copyright DefensiveCarry.com © 2004-2008