British Army switching over to the Glock 17
 

After almost sixty years of using the Browning High Power the British Army is switching over to the Glock 17. Not being political here. Just thought some would findit interesting. The Brits are pretty conservative when it comes to small arms and this is a big change for them. They're not changing calibers of course, but still.

They said one of the big selling points was that the soldiers can safely carry one in the chamber, pull it out of the holster and start to shoot it without having to hit a safety lever or rack the slide. Evidently they've had some unpleasent experiences in Afghanistan

Article here (love the silly but catchy title).

A little surprised they didn't decide on SIGs, since that's what the SAS has been using for over 20 years, but the Glock isn't a bad choice given their needs.

Is the cord attached to the pistol really necessary? I would think it would snag on things.

They also said that it is faster to shoot a Glock than a Hi Power. I don't see how other than not having to work an external safety switch

I would personally rather have a SIG than a Glock, but i can understand their decision. First off you have the bottom line that the Glock is cheaper. I would also say that it is more idiot proof for a mass issue service weapon than the SIG requiring less training, along with less to possible go wrong.

The Glock is also arguably tougher and more reliable than the SIG, and I think this is one of the underlying reasons for not going for a proper order of P226s. The current UOR P226s that the UK got are absolutely knackered, and the magazines in particular cannot be filled to capacity or else they bind up and fail to feed. This is mostly due to the fact that the pistols have been intensively used and shared around, and the magazines were commercial OTS rather than mil-spec, but it still may have left a bad impression in terms of durability.

Yes, yes the Glock is a good weapon. And yes it is cheap.

But is anyone else just a tad nostalgic about the Hi-Power going away?

The British seem to drag their feet when it comes to sidearms. They stuck with the Webley and Enfield into the sixties, well after most countries had switched to automatics.

Are officers still expected to purchase their own sidearms? If not, is that still even an option?

I loved the Browning, all the photos that were comparing the old L9A1 to the Glock did was get me to remember how great the Hi-Power was (assuming you can get a friendly armourer to "accidentally" remove the magazine safety).

No, the only pistol you will ever have in the British forces is an issued one. Seeing as how all pistols are 99.9% illegal in the UK for private ownership, that system wouldn't really work anymore.

It's my understanding that the British had to carry the BHP with an empty chamber and had to rack it when preparing to use it. At the close range of a pistol fight that can be a pretty critical time. They'll be able to carry the G17 loaded with one in the chamber all the time.

The Glock design works. It's a utilitarian pistol designed to be used by those who aren't gun people and also designed to function under bad conditions.

I think that sometimes those of us who are immersed in the gun culture (which I think is very true for those who frequent this forum) tend to forget that not everyone is that interested in firearms, but they need a firearm because of the their work or for protection. They don't want to learn how to work a 1911A1 or a BHP or even a Beretta 92 (which by the way is a pistol that I actually like). They want a simple and easy to operate pistol or revolver (S&W Model 10 for example) that will go bang when they press the trigger.

I have two Glocks and that is probably all I will ever own. I keep toying with the idea of buying a Glock 35 or a Glock 17 just because, but then I find a real nice S&W Model of 1899 M&P (exposed ejector rod) a K-38 4 screw or a pre-war Colt Officer's Model Target or a S&W Model 745. Those I want and the money I have saved up for the Glock just goes to something else I really want. So I've conluded that my two Glocks are strictly tools to me and that is that.

Anyway that's what a Glock pistol is to me. A good solid reliable tool which I use and I have seen work for others.

Meanwhile I have more money saved up an a line on real nice Colt Offical Police with a 4" heavy barrel. Unusual and something that I want in my collection. So no Glock 17 this time either. Oh well.

Yeah, the English, and to some extent the Americans, never really embraced the manual safety on a single-action pistol.

My Grandpa Eli was a machine gunner in WWII. And he said that he would chamber a round at night before he went to sleep and engage the safety, but when he woke up, he would revert to Condition Three.

JCordell makes a very valid point. Most folks who strap on a gun for a living aren't shooters as we all are, for the most part.

Heck, my PDM never fired anything bigger than .22 LR at Boy Scout camp before he went through Basic. And he just took to it.

I too am a fan of the Beretta. I like big, solid steel handguns. I got away with shooting in Single Action when I shot for score with it. I even used it once in lieu of my carbine. Got myself a shiny trinket for it, too.

My only problem with the M-9 is the 9x19 FMJ is crappy self defense round.