Posted on 07/05/2014 12:47:51 PM PDT by virgil283
"Soldiers who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan have complained that the 9mm round is not powerful enough to be effective in combat.
“The 9mm doesn’t score high with soldier feedback,” said Easlick, explaining that the Army, and the other services, want a round that will have better terminal effects — or cause more damage — when it hits enemy combatants.
One of the major goals of the MHS effort is to adopt a pistol chambered for a more potent round than the current 9mm, weapons officials said. ..."
(Excerpt) Read more at neveryetmelted.com ...
All you have to do is to follow the money.
Ask yourself, who benefitted financially among our congress critters when US Armed Forces changed from .45ACP to 9mm Luger?
Probably the same guys and gals who also promoted those silly wind turbines and solar panels.
Being a congress critter can be a very lucrative business.
In the Philippines, General Pershing’s troops proved that this fine weapon did a great job of dropping raging ragheads.
I don’t think there is really anything wrong with the Beretta model 92. It won over everything except the Sig P226 in test after test. First by the Air Force, then by the Army, then again by the Army.
The Beretta is simply reliable. I have heard that the Army got ahold of some bad mags for a while and the grip is just a little large for some people. The Browning Hi-Power and Sig P-226 feel much better in my hand. The Germans found the 9mm just fine in two wars.
They don’t call it ‘’man stopper’’ for nothing. Bring it back.
The reason the 1911A1 has survived so long is a rare combination of things: a .45 ACP will stop even a hashish-hopped, leather band wearing Muslim fanatic, something a .38 was far less likely to do (Philippine Insurrection); it could survive and function in extremes of cold and heat, wet and dusty dry; it almost never jammed; it had a barrel end safety, a grip safety, a slide safety, a sear disconnect, half cock safety, and firing pin safety.
The sidearm they need has already been invented
My Dad had one of these through most of my formative years. It was fun to shoot. My issue with is was it wasn't reliably accurate at a range of just over six feet.
It seemed designed to work in any environment, but also seemed to have quite tolerant ranges in its few moving parts.
While I imagine that the military does have the right to use expanding ammunition against terrorists and the like since none of that lot have signed any treaties nor even considered abiding by them, it’s probably a logistical concern as much as anything. Sorting out which bullets could be used on which targets would be rather annoying, and it’s easier to just generally stick to the treaty provisions even if you are fighting non signatories.
It someone with a 9mm round and it goes into them. Hit them with a .45 caliber round and it cuts them in half.
FMJ is preferable for infantry combat because a wounded soldier is a drain on an enemy, while a dead soldier isn’t. FMJ is also better for penetrating enemy cover.
The open slide always looked dicey to me, especially in a dusty environment.
The 1911s I've shot were more accurate than I am.
Thanks for the correction.
I once shot a coon out of a tree with a .45acp. I hit him twice in the thorax and he still had plenty of fight left in him after he hit the ground.
Much ado about nothing. I never carried a pistol in combat, even when it was my assigned weapon. Only a rifle did what I needed done. Those who truly need a pistol for something other than as a symbol of authority or as a personal defense weapon already have what they want. Special Operations forces choose the weapon that they want and they often choose a Sig Sauer in various chamberings. When I was spending my own money, I bought a Sig Sauer P228R in 9mm. Don’t quite know why the Army chose the Berreta over the Sig, but they did and its been OK. My list of stuff that I need/want would be pretty long by the time I got around to picking what pistol I needed.
I find that hard to believe. What kind of raccoon can stand up to a .45?
Is it any wonder why we don’t win wars anymore?
It was the Hague Convention of 1899 and the United States did not sign so in reality we are not covered by the Convention. For some reason we seen to follow most of it, sometimes to our detriment.
The Beretta and the SIG were the only two to pass the tests. Interestingly the original ones by the Air Force and the later ones by the Army all came to the same conclusion.
Beretta won the contract because they made a better offer.
I have seen photos of German Waffen SS men carrying the Browning Hi-Power. I have also read that it was a favorite of theirs.
Whenever a female caller asked how he was, he would answer, 'virile, vigorous and POTENT!'
I don’t mean to be unkind but when you said a .45 auto would cut a man in half, I knew you had never shot anything with one.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.