Use of Pistols in Combat

[commando552]

Originally Posted by Nyles

Sorry to disappoint guys, but most pistols are actually issued to support troops so they don't have to needlessly carry a rifle at all times. You don't really see many in the infantry.

In my experience it is the other way round. It may have been the case in the past that support troops would be issued pistols in lieu of a larger weapon, but in recent years there has been a shift to issuing them with carbines or PDWs. One reason for this is that it requires a much higher level of training to effectively use a pistol rather than a carbine or other shoulder fired weapon. Also with the increasing prevalence of body armour a pistol will not necessarily be effective.

In the British Forces pistols are only used by front-line troops who are expected to come into very close contact with the enemy, officers, specialists like machine gunners and snipers who's long is unsuitable for close personal defence, or people who are working in a confined space where they cannot carry a carbine. For this last point that pretty much narrows it down to just fast air pilots as armoured vehicle crews and helicopter pilots carry either full size L85A2s or L22A2s (they will also possibly carry a pistol as well as their carbine will be in a bracket and they may not have time to grab it before they evacuate the vehicle, but the go to weapon is the carbine).

I have personally fired a pistol in combat, but probably only two or three times. When driving I would unholster my pistol and put it on the dash in front of me when going through a particularly dodgy area so was quicker to get to than my rifle and could still drive one handed. However, if I was getting out I would go straight for my rifle. Bear in mind I wasn't actually meant to have a pistol. Someone had just managed to get their hands on some L9A1s which we smuggled out there when we deployed, and we ended up passing them on when we came home.

[k9870]

Id want a backup of some sort. Sure the "rather have extra mags" crowd is very vocal but mags dont do any good with a stoppage when someones right in front of you. Theres a reason every carbine course practices transitions

[Jcordell]

When I was on active duty with the U.S. Army (1993-2000) I was military intelligence. More specifically I was a 96R - Ground Systems Surveillance Systems Operator. I worked mostly with man-portable radars and REMBASS (Remote Monitered Battlefield Sensor Sytem). We worked in three and four man teams and usually got attached to other units. My team usually went to the division (10th Mountain Division) aviation and artillery elements for field problems and rotations down to Fort Polk, Louisiana.

Since we were often on our own we were actually had a pretty heavy selection of firepower. Two of us had M16A2 (in 98 we got M4 carbines), one of the team members had the M16/M203 and the 4th man had the M249 SAW. For a brief time we were all issued the M9 in addition to the other weapons. Then after a few months the Army decided only the SAW gunner needed the M9. A few months after that the Army took the M9's away and never gave them back. At least not as of 02/14/2000 - that was my ETS or end of service date.

So that's my experience with pistols in the Army. Well I was a tanker in the Idaho Army National Guard (88-93) and we were issued the M1911A1 until 92 when we got the M9. Before we switched over to the M1 tank we were still using the M3A1 "Grease Gun", but after we switched to the M1 from the M60A3 we turned in the Grease Guns and got one M16 per tank. We were expected to take the M240 that the loader could fire from his position if we had to abandon the tank. So between the M240, pistols and the M16 I guess the Army thought we would be okay.

[SPEMack618]

They didn't make the deployment with us, due to ammo incompatability, but being a Cav Scout, we had a full set of M-3 grease guns in the armory for our Brads, with much th same dispersion.

According to my Platoon Sergeant, who did take an M-3 to Gulf War One, thy had those forever xcept for a brief time when the tried to field the wierd CAR-15 armored vehicle crewman carbine thing.

I also thought it was neat that the M-3s were packed with a stick magazine pouch as well.

Each track was issued two grease guns and an M-16, with all the crew being issued Berettas.

[funkychinaman]

Originally Posted by Jcordell

So that's my experience with pistols in the Army. Well I was a tanker in the Idaho Army National Guard (88-93) and we were issued the M1911A1 until 92 when we got the M9. Before we switched over to the M1 tank we were still using the M3A1 "Grease Gun", but after we switched to the M1 from the M60A3 we turned in the Grease Guns and got one M16 per tank. We were expected to take the M240 that the loader could fire from his position if we had to abandon the tank. So between the M240, pistols and the M16 I guess the Army thought we would be okay.

I saw that there was an "Egress kit" for the M240D, but I can't find any pictures of it. What does it entail?

[commando552]

Originally Posted by funkychinaman

I saw that there was an "Egress kit" for the M240D, but I can't find any pictures of it. What does it entail?

A butt, bipod and a trigger group with a full length pistol grip. These are the parts that are removed, with the spade grips themselves on the right, and the part on the left being a trigger group with a short pistol grip that includes a linkage from the spade grips.

[AdAstra2009]

What Nyles said. Your basic infantryman does not get a sidearm. The Platoon leader, first sergeant, company commander, and M240 gunners are typically the only ones who are issued sidearms.
Most people who carry sidearms are noncombat personnel.

[SPEMack618]

Add grenadiers to that list as well.

And plus, had we been in Gulf War I, I would have carried a pistol in lieu of my M-4 because I would have been fighting in my "other" job as a Bradley gunner.