New Army sidearm program advances
FORT BELVOIR, Va. (July 8, 2015) – The U.S. Army moved closer to releasing its long-awaited solicitation for a new, modern handgun system when it hosted a fourth industry day for interested vendors earlier today at Picatinny Arsenal, N.J.
The Army named the new weapon the “XM-17” Modular Handgun System. It will replace the current M9 standard Army handgun with a more state-of-the-art weapon system.
“More than 20 companies attended the event,” said Debi Dawson, PEO Soldier spokesperson.
Federal procurement restrictions do not allow the disclosure of the names of firms participating, she added.
The government presented changes to its latest draft solicitation for the XM-17 that were posted to the Federal Business Opportunities website on June 8 under Solicitation Number W15QKN15R0001, according to Dawson.
At the event today, among changes discussed was policy that now opens up the competition to rounds other than ball (full metal jacket) ammunition.
A representative from the Army Judge Advocate General’s Office discussed the decision in detail during the event.
Richard Jackson, Special Assistant to the U.S. Army Judge Advocate General for Law of War, told attendees that federal, state, local and military law enforcement elements routinely use expanding and fragmenting ammunition in their handguns due to the increased capability it provides against threats.
“Expanding the XM-17 Modular Handgun competition to include special purpose ammunition will provide the Warfighter with a more accurate and lethal handgun,” he said.
“Other types of ammunition allow the XM-17 Modular Handgun System to be optimized by vendors, providing a more capable system to Warfighters across the spectrum of shooter experience and skill level.”
Through the upcoming competition, the Army intends to replace the M9 with a more modern handgun system.
“Handgun technology has advanced significantly thanks to lighter-weight materials, ergonomics and accessory rails since 1986 when the M9 entered the Army’s inventory,” Dawson said.
“The Army is seeking a handgun system that outperforms the current M9 system. It also must be modular, meaning it allows adjustments to fit all hand sizes.”
The Army is encouraging Industry to optimize commercially available gun, ammunition and magazine components in order to provide a system for maximum performance.
Current plans call for the Army to purchase more than 280,000 of the new handguns from a single vendor. Deliveries are scheduled to begin in 2018.
The Army also plans to buy approximately 7,000 compact versions of the new handgun.
Dawson said that other military services participating in the XM-17 program may order an additional 212,000 systems above the Army quantity.
The draft solicitation spells out likely procedural and schedule details that responding vendors will have to follow to participate in the competition.
Opening up ammo to more than just ball…finally.
Truth about guns is repoting the army wants hollow points
Yeah, does anyone know if this is accurate?
hollow point ammunition is prohibited from use in international warfare by the Hague Convention of 1899
Not quite
http://www.thegunzone.com/hague.html
we didnt sign it sooo your point plus its only when fighting between the nations that signed it
More to the point, if you, as a signatory nation, ally with a non-signatory, you lose protections.
So, we start throwing prohibited ammo downrange, the Brits and anyone else with us are also considered non-signatories and lose nice things like POW status and prohibitted targeting of medics.
That’s why national policy has been to generally act like we are signatories.
We haven’t signed the mine convention either.
We have a long standing publicly stated position of adhering to many treaties. Just because we didn’t “sign a treaty”, it isn’t grounds for suddenly breaking a century of international law. At a minimum it would require a public repudiationof our previous adherence.
The Hague conventions don’t just apply to conflict between signatories. The convention guides signatories on how they conduct war.
For a more in depth understanding of the issue try the below read by MAJ Joshua F. Berry’s (JAG USA) in Military Law Review . He believes we should leave the Hague conventions but explains how it could be done. It’s a legal brief so its dry but is full of useful info, precedent and fact. https://www.jagcnet.army.mil/DOCLIBS/MILITARYLAWREVIEW.NSF/0/b5974c05f0a57579852578c70042d25f/$FILE/Article%203%20-%20By%20MAJ%20Joshua%20F.%20Berry.pdf
Yeah because No.262 certainly hasn’t seen extensive use.
Do you mean MK262?
Just because it has a SMK bullet does not make it ammunition designed to expand.
Rick
70grain, MK318, 255, 9MM hydroshock all been used. The military pays lip service to the whole expanding ammo thing.
Special Ops forces engaging terrorists are allowed to use rounds prohibited by the Hague conventions. (Mk 255 and 9mm Hydroshock)
Equating the whole “military” to special ops in unique situations isn’t anywhere near accurate. It’s the equivalent of equating the whole military with SOF because a small number of military members are SOF.
Mk318 is not a hollow point round. It is a hollow tip designed as such because of the way it’s manufactured (designed specifically for a USMC requirement to be effective against glass and allow the followup slug to act like a regular bullet. This is not how hollow points work).
Just because a round looks like a hollow point doesn’t mean it’s designed to function as a hollow point. If so flechette rounds would be considered sabot rounds.
Yeah sorry. My phone auto corrected.
Going to take a wild stab in the dark and say it has to do with MPs using JHPs since the Ft. Hood shooting.
Mac, suspect you are right as well as conducting counter terror operations against terrorists. Our SOF is authorized to use such ammunition in those cases.
Any word on what companies are offering a new pistol altogether?
Also is berretta trying to offer upgrades to the current version in hopes of keeping the contract?
I think they have the M9A3 in their back pocket, but they recently announced the APX which shows they are looking at this as a serious competition.
So much for the mighty Beretta PX4.
Beretta did try to offer the Army the M9A3 but the Army rejected it. There’s an article, from a while back, that discusses that.
Would any current handgun fit the bill?
Sig P320, Beretta APX, S&W teamed up with General Dynamics, and you know Glock will throw their hat in the ring.
Given that MPs have been authorized to use hollowpoints on duty, it seems to follow that hollowpoint capability would naturally be included in MHS criteria. Did the language of this announcement actually indicate JHPs would be a standard round, as opposed to use for “special purpose?”
Nice to see a rail mentioned. Marines have been buying railed M-9’s for years while the Army Technocrats continued with the same M-9 year after year.
Kind of like the belated adoption of the M4 and optics by the Marines…
Seems the Army isn’t the only service with technocrats.
Anyone want to put an Over/Under on the number of appeals, filings and lawsuits that happen AFTER the decision is made?
This.
I’ll go with three.
And I can see Lockheed Martin, GD, or Boeing getting their Borg fingers over these contracts as “prime vendor and integrator.” If there’s even a fractional RoR that makes it worth their while, they’ll buy or contract a gunmaker to make it happen.
Please give us Glocks.
Sorry but it will have a manual safety. Too many Butter-Bars can’t handle one without it.
Handgun training in the Army as whole is woefully underwhelming. Manual safety or not – if you don’t know what the hell you are doing you are doing no magic pistol is going to turn you into a gunfighter, or even a safe gun handler.
I am sure there are numbers out there – but I have to suspect that in the past 20 years Army pistols have likely shot just about as many Friendly Soldiers as enemy ones.
Rick
Its early – remove one of the “you are doing”s
Handgun training? We have that? In 25 years (active and reserve) including carrying and using an M9 in combat, I have never had ANY Army pistol training.
MAJ S – No pistol training? EVER!!! What specialties did you serve in especially in your over 10 years of commissioned service?
While it’s not impossible I suspect that says more of the units you served in than the Army.
The Army can do MUCH MORE (just like other services) when it comes to pistol training but many units conduct pistol training before every qualification range as well as pre-deployment. Then there’s the basic courses officers attend before going to their units. To not had any training in a pistol and reached the grade of Major has to be an anomaly.
I’ve heard many complaints about Army marksmanship training but the specific situations are important. By no means am I excusing the Army that has a cookie cutter approach to training (worse, among support units marksmanship training is considered a chore or distractor from the main mission). I wonder how many of those that complain about Army training especially in senior grades made a point of addressing it in their units like volunteering to run the range in question to ensure training was done.
They don’t shoot pistol at BOLC. Only times I have shot pistol is during qualification.
Which BOLC did you go to? Many BOLC’s don’t teach pistol. Some did and don’t anymore. Tough to understand how one become a field grade and gets no training on a pistol. That speaks to a lot of things including the individual.
Many weapons are only fired in qualification eg. AT4. Some units work hard to incorporate simulators in other training.
-Does your unit run a pistol qualification range without pre-training?
-Does it not run concurrent training on the pistol range?
-How does your unit re-train those that don’t qualify with a pistol?
-Does your company leadership prioritize pistol qualification for those whom the pistol is their primary weapon and then encourage other soldiers to attempt to qualify on the unit’s pistols AFTER going through the unit’s training program?
I’ve seen active and even Guard infantry units do the above.
If a unit is running pistol ranges and not conducting good training it speaks to the leadership of that unit. Even a Second Lieutenant can volunteer to run the pistol range and do it “right” (NCO’s will typically jump at the opportunity to show their competence or develop it.)
If you aren’t getting trained before going to a range the leadership is failing. It’s an opportunity to shine LT are you taking advantage?.
Glock’s submission has en external manual safety according to the Glock rep at the Maneuver Conference.
Should we expect a winner announced in time for the Army’s birthday?
Specify which birthday….
HAHAHAHA
After announcing a winning selection they’ll end up instead implementjng a “superior” preexisting government developed design. Inter arma enim silent legis.
This is just an on-going process by design in order to keep contractors and their paychecks flowing. It is a sad, disappointing move to allow the bloated program office of the US Army to be the lead on this anyways.
Right now the front runners are STI (yeah that’s correct the 1911 builder) with their STX, the Sig Sauer 320 and the Beretta APX.
Glock and Smith and Wesson M&P were submitted but do not meet the criteria for being modular
I saw that article. Purely speculative because no one knows if S&W/GE made a MHS specific M&P. Even says that in the article. You are talking about the bearing arms article, correct?
As if a 1911 will ever compare to modern firearms in durability or reliability.
Yeah, over 100 years of meritorious service from the military 1911, the frame STILL in combat service to this day, and the weapon of choice for competition shooting, LE agencies, Spec ops, SWAT units, all the way down to civilians carrying it as the service weapon of choice.
Why? Because it WORKS. Mud, Blood, Dirt, Muck, Sleet or Snow, the 1911 delivers.
There is absolutely no reason the 1911, upgraded with modern materials, could not and should not be in this competition. It is a proven and reliable weapon system. And the modern .45 ACP FMJ is a proven man stopper. Can’t say the same of the 9mm.
The M9 was a piece of crap, and everyone I served with hated the damn thing. We were told the reason we had to give up our 1911’s was so that we’d be carrying the same ammo as NATO. How is carrying multiple calibers in combat side arms going to benefit the unit under fire? You can’t swap out ammo with your battle buddy if you’re carrying .45 ACP and your buddy is carrying 9mm. You going to take the time to change out the barrel and chamber if you’re out of ammo? Ridiculous.
This new trial is just another taxpayer funded giveaway to the MIC. It’s clear they’re not asking the troops what they want or need.
Link to the article?
http://bearingarms.com/top-three-contenders-u-s-militarys-xm17-modular-handgun-system-contract/
THANKS!
Agree, purely speculative.
I also noticed the “front runners” don’t have that external safety it the Army seems to consistently ask for.
How exactly did you come by this info, an how on earth is a steel frame 1911 “modular” when an M&P or Glock is not? Sounds like wishful thinking to me.
Nope. I refuse to get excited about this. Always ends in heartbreak (like “Army orders another 150,000 M9s” heartbreak).
Yup. The bean counters will screw this up…. after they spend $10 million. Not holding my breath.
The weapon makers will get richer, and the troops will get screwed. Again.
amen, every year they come out saying they’re going to have a new pistol competition and every year they just keep the m9.
SSD, have you heard anything more about the Canadian program?
The one point about 10,000 units being made in Canada did not give me the warm & fuzzies.
What Canadian program?
Pwgsc put out a proposal looking for bids for a new pistol. Part of it was a production run of 10,000 units to be made in Canada. What sort of quality do you think we’d get out of that. Or how much will each unit cost? Stupid.