Three Kings

[k9870]

45 GAP is such a pointless cartridge that nobody asked for. And I do not want the miltary using glocks. If anything, we should issue some good 1911s. Maybe Dan Wessons.

[Gunmaster45]

Some cops in my area carry Glock 37s in .45 GAP. It is kind of a dumb cartridge, all it is is a shorter ACP round, just so Glock can brag about another caliber on the list.

[k9870]

My citys cops carry USP45s, the stste guys G22s, and portland, bnig city next to me where i lived, 4506s with 230gr hydrashoks

[jdun]

Originally Posted by k9870

They are not getting XD45s, one of my friends is a marine and uses an m9a1. Three are army, and carry a standard m9. And yes, they are all deployed. Pistols may be expensive, but so are b-2 stealth bombers, and we still buy them.

Small arms don't win wars. Heavy weapons and better train personnel that use them do. I never said military personnel are not issue M9. I said the majority of them don't and that is a fact.

Another fact is that the majority of military personnel are not front line troops. In fact only a small portion are. IIRC there was a report that stated that for every front line troops there are 10 military personnel that supported him.

The 400,000 M9 contract are not deliver at once. While I have not seen the contract, if it like contacts of the past it will be completed within 10 to 20 years. Do not expect that there will be 400,000 M9 in the military when the finial lot is shipped. It will be far less because by that time due to wear, damage, lost, or destroy, either in training or in combat.

[k9870]

Well when you add in rear troops, yeah i can see how most wouldnt have them, i was thinking troops in war zones, where they do have handguns. As for small arms not winning wars, they sure do help, for the price of a single stealth bomber we could replace all m16s/m4s with newer, modern weapons like the SCAR

[Excalibur]

Some of my Marines buddies were training in the M16A4s before they got discharged and they didn't really like it all that much. Most of them prefer the A2.

[k9870]

The a2 is well liked, I know a couple people who took it over the m4, saing the A2 worked better with FMJs due to increased velocity, they could get more effective range, and accuracy, the longer sight radius was easier to use. My friend carries an A2 with ACOG on the carry handle, saying if his ACOG breaks he can still keep shooting with some decent accuracy, unlike the Flat top assemblies many people seem to have

[jdun]

Originally Posted by k9870

Well when you add in rear troops, yeah i can see how most wouldnt have them, i was thinking troops in war zones, where they do have handguns. As for small arms not winning wars, they sure do help, for the price of a single stealth bomber we could replace all m16s/m4s with newer, modern weapons like the SCAR

It's not that simple. Money isn't the problem, time is. It take a very long time to equip the entire military with new small arms. It takes a very long time to retrain every military personnel to use the new platform. From field repairs to clearing malfunctions. It takes a very long time to get enough spare parts for the Armory.

The SCAR isn't a new weapon system. It's an AR18/G36/XM8/ACR/SA80/etc. A new body for an old design. It also made out of plastic. Go ask the Germans how their G36 hold up in Afghanistan.

Excalibur what don't they like about the A4? It preformed extremely well in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The problem with putting optic on top of the carrying handle is height. It's a 3 inch difference between the bore and scope. It is not an ideal way to mount optics.

[k9870]

I wish the miltary had teh "it takes time and training and money so lets not do it " attitude back when we had m14s so we wouldnt be stuck with the m1 today.

[ManiacallyChallenged]

I agree that the .45 GAP is kind of pointless, but it's still lighter and smaller than the .45 ACP, which is kind of the point of the 9mm in the first place.