HI

The problem of 9mm vs. 45 calibers is relatively unimportant in the military (any military) of today. It really is just like the US Army worrying itself sick about a saber for the cavalry. Some companies have come up with a lot better solution to the pistol for today’s soldiers and Marines that don’t need or desire to carry an assault rifle. LOAD and LOCK! A number of thoughts and hopes. 1st-“Don’t count your chickens ’til they’re hatched” We have to write/contact/input the testers and decision makers and let them know We wish the .45 ACP.

Second-For the hundred, no thousand plus time a 9mm bullet is .355 cal, a .45 is BIGGER thus it makes a BIGGER hole in the prospective. This implies more blood loss- which means the enemy gets killed and the American hopefully returns and tells his grandkids about reality land versus the “High-Tech” star wars game players.

3rd-For the devoted 9mm types on the market(yes you with the coco-puffs) browse the FBI report about the “Miami Shootout”, and they traded within their 9mm pistols, due to facts of bullet wound examinations. 4th-Check-out the winners of most all pistol matches: Almost everyone uses a 1911/1911A1 in .45 ACP! Remember folks-We are discussing the MILITARY of the USA…Sight Picture/Sight Alignment!

There exists a reason that a lot of of the militaries that have tested it have rejected it. Now, if the military wants an inferior primary weapon, the weapon already exists in the inventory. Pistolet Glock 19 ‘s the SOCOM pistol created by HK, which for offensive purposes is a whole lot much better than the P90.

Note that this contract is being let by USSOCOM. That means it is for a sidearm, not a primary weapon. And as a sidearm (meaning a secondary weapon carried by someone who also posesses primary weapon, usually a rifle), the M1911 .45 is more advanced than the P90 also to the HK and definitely to the Beretta. Avoid being surprised in case a Glock wins this contract.

I don’t expect Glock to win a US military contract – the American military doesn’t seem to like the idea of a pistol without multiple external safety levers and mechanisms. Glock pistols, great because they could be, use simple, idiot-proof internal safety mechanisms. If the Army did go with a Glock, it will be interesting to see if they would adopt the brand new 45 GAP cartridge.

Same caliber bullet, even available in exactly the same bullet weights, loaded into a shorter case – to allow for a smaller handgun that takes advantage of modern propellants. Personally, i don’t like Glock. I’ve large hands and shoot pistols with a double handed grip. Personally, i like the Colt 1911A1 series for its balance, weight, and comfort. But that’s me. Think about the USP .45? SOFs of course have been utilizing the Mk23 for quite a while.

Who buys isn’t always who gets. The Army’s Automotive Tank Command has bought pistols for the USAF for example.SOCOM is the buyer; everybody will probably get these. That’s what the “joint” in Joint Combat Pistol means. SOCOM sure doesn’t need up to 645,000 pistols over 10 years. Some things already are set. They spent the final year or so with market surveys, field suitability tests, etc looking at what’s on the market, trying stuff, deciding what they wanted.

THE NEAR FUTURE Handgun System program wanted adjustable grips, accessory rail, threaded bbl, modular/variable trigger operating-system (SA to DA to DAO). The SOF Combat Pistol program wanted a 45 ACP and could have settled for another 1911. Those were combined into this Joint Combat Pistol (JCP) program.

They want a 45 ACP, not just a 45 GAP. Don’t be surprised if Glock can’t even compete depending on what the facts are for the trigger operating system. Some folks think that they had the HK USP full size and compact Tactical/P2000 in mind if they wrote the specs. Details will be in the RFP (obtain proposals) that happens next.