Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Welcome to Glock Forum at

Why should YOU join our forums?

  • Reason #1
  • Reason #2
  • Reason #3

Site Description

back 2 the future

Discussion in 'Band of Glockers' started by paltiq, Jan 30, 2006.

  1. horge

    horge -=-=-=-=- Lifetime Member

    Jan 22, 2004
    almost home
    Hi paltiq :)

    JMO, YMMV, etc:

    Strategypage has a less than stellar rep in the defense
    community. Having said that, the central fact of the report
    is true, though the manner of presentation is slanted
    and sensationalist.

    Not every USDOD study or program survives the long wait
    to fruition. Sometimes technological developments overtake
    a program, which then dies a quiet death.

    For perspective on how long things take to see any daylight:
    The earliest US Army 9mm Parabellum sidearm program was
    begun in 1947! Actual fielding of the platform (Beretta 'M9')
    took nearly 40 years. Recent US military orders for more
    Beretta M9's, reaching into 2010, tend to discourage any
    suspicion that the .45 will be back in general Army
    issue soon, let alone EVER.

    The chief issue with .45's is that they are inextricably
    associated with M1911's, both for design supremacy AND
    off-the-shelf readiness to participate in contact bids.

    The M1911 is not an idiot-proof weapon that can be handed
    out with minimal training. This is why LE the world over,
    when abandoning revolvers, chose to stick largely with DAO
    or at least DA triggers and multiple safeties.

    The M1911's SA trigger is one of its core virtues, and yet
    goes against the safety-mindedness so central to bid specs
    for regular troops (most of whom are issued a rifle only)
    and non-frontliners (who might be better served by a
    carbine than a pistol).

    Supposedly, the M1911 takes more training to master
    with regard to safety, to effective use vs. recoil, and
    to field servicing. For Special Forces operators who ARE
    highly-trained, the M1911 and its .45 ACP cartridge are not
    uncommon TOE inclusions. The same is true for LE SWAT and HRT.

    Performance vs. safety:
    On a battlefield, the former can take precedence.
    Within our own cities, it is the latter.
    Unless of course, we're talking about high-speed specialists
    among LEO's who KNOW they're entering a 'micro-battlefield'.

    The PNP knows this.
    That is why PNP's standard issue is a DAO 9mm.
    PNP's SAF and SWAT however can get an M1911A1 platform in .45 ACP.


  2. isuzu


    Jul 3, 2005
    North America
    Not just yet. US troops were even issued Ruger 9mm pistols in Iraq. If I'm not mistaken, it's the KP95D15. The feedback on the performance and reliability of those pistols is very positive.

    The US would spend so much in changing calibers. There's even talk that the 5.56mm would be replaced by another caliber.

    I think it's just plain rumor. I would believe it when the US Armed Forces make it official.
  3. horge

    horge -=-=-=-=- Lifetime Member

    Jan 22, 2004
    almost home
    Not just talk, hehe, but to hell with that 6.8mm horse-doody...

    I was shocked (SHOCKED, I TELL YOU, SIR!! :D)
    at the other INTErMEDIATE technologies already at hand.

    The 20x85mm HEAB out of the XM29 are range-fused via microchip.
    If an enemy is behind solid cover, just shoot above the
    sorry individual's position, and the shells will detonate
    precisely above the target and rain shrapnel down on him.

    I saw the demonstration on the Military Channel and I
    was cackling like a madman for a good hour or two.

    Particle-beam weapons should be around in a decade.
    Man, just power down the beam and you have a targetting dot.
    Triggerpull, the amps roll in, and you get a smoking hole in
    the target.

    I think I'd love to see that kind of stuff in IPSC Open.
  4. isuzu


    Jul 3, 2005
    North America
    Yup, Horge! All the 6.8mm hooplah! Hahahahaha!
  5. The Russians continue to experiment with and improve on their military rifles and cartidges.

    In 1949, they invented and adopted the 7.32x39mm AK 47 using a stamped receiver.

    In 1951, they produced and adopted an AK using a machined receiver due to structural problems with stamped receivers.

    Then in 1959 they modified the AK into the AKM, upgrading the design and using an improved stamped steel receiver.

    Then they developed in 1974 the 5.45x39mm AKM which they called AK-74 to keep pace with the US M16 rifle (low recoil impulse).