Common sense would say a pistol that’s not double action first shot, single action second shot. DAO or Glock type action would be sensible as a military piece. I can’t think why a Glock wouldn’t work for them, or a S&W M&P. I love the 1911’s, and shot one competitively for years, but I also think there are better options now, for military use. It is nearly impossible to train new recruits (or for that matter great shooters) to make two quick hits, one DA and one SA on target. The DA/SA was and still is a bad idea. The HK USP is available with several triggers/action, the most common can be either DA/SA or carried cocked and locked like a gov’t 1911. I’m not so sure that the politically correct crowd likes seeing a hammer back when holstered though! Somehow a striker fired, hammerless design is less fearsome, at least with liberal ‘logic’. Obviously an oxymoron
“The DA/SA was and still is a bad idea.”
I shoot a DA/SA (Taurus 92) and the shooting sport I lamely attempt to pretend I am competing in lets me put it my holster hammer back, safety on and pretend it’s a single action. Of course, that’s what I do because that first DA trigger pull sucks SO BAD.
“Glock type action would be sensible as a military piece”
Lots and lots of Armies agree with you on that. Glock is a stupendously well proven military sidearm. The good thing about long drawn out Army test would be that is give S&W, HK or whoever a chance to prove that there “Glockish” handguns are as good.