What are your thoughts on the Army deciding to get rid of the Beretta M9?

SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 08 Dec 2015 17:16:13 -0500

http://m.military.com/daily-news/2015/01/09/army-rejects-m9a3-proposal-opts-for-new-pistol.html

According to the above article, the Army has decided not to include the new and improved Beretta M9A3 in its testing for a new sidearm. This means that the Beretta will no longer be used after the Army chooses a new sidearm. What are your thoughts on this?

U.S. Army weapons officials will not evaluate an improved version of the service's Cold War-era 9mm pistol, choosing instead to search for a more modern soldier sidearm.
In early December, Beretta USA, the maker of the U.S. military's M9 pistol for 30 years, submitted its modernized M9A3 as a possible alternative to the Army's Modular Handgun System program -- an effort to replace the M9 with a more powerful, state-of-the-art pistol.
The improved M9 features new sights, a rail for mounting lights and accessories, better ergonomics and improved reliability, Beretta USA officials said.
But by late December, it was all over for Beretta's engineering change proposal for the M9. The Army's Configuration Control Board decided not to evaluate the M9A3, according to a source familiar with the decision.
The move clears the way for the Army to release a pending request for proposal that will launch the MHS competition.
Program Executive Office Soldier would not comment for this story until Army Public Affairs has approved a statement, PEO Soldier spokesman Doug Graham said Thursday night.
The Army began working with the small arms industry on MHS in early 2013, but the joint effort has been in the works for more than five years. If successful, it would result in the Defense Department buying nearly 500,000 new pistols during a period of significant defense-spending reductions.
Current plans call for the Army to purchase more than 280,000 handguns from a single vendor, with delivery of the first new handgun systems scheduled for 2017, according to PEO Soldier officials. The Army also plans to buy approximately 7,000 sub-compact versions of the handgun.
The other military services participating in the MHS program may order an additional 212,000 systems above the Army quantity.
The effort is set to cost at least $350 million and potentially millions more if it results in the selection of a new pistol caliber.
Beretta USA officials said they have not received official notification of the Army's decision.
"Obviously, they didn't take a whole lot of time on this," said Gabriele De Plano, vice president of military marketing and sales for Beretta USA, reacting to the news of the Army's pre-Christmas decision after the M9A3's December 10 unveiling.
Army officials "didn't ask a single question; didn't ask for a single sample" for evaluation, De Plano said.
The Army maintains that the M9 design does not meet the MHS requirement. Soldiers have complained of reliability issues with the M9. One problem has to do with the M9's slide-mounted safety. During malfunction drills, the shooter often engages the lever-style safety by accident, Army weapons officials say.
The M9A3's "over-center safety lever" can be configured to act as a de-cocker, a change that eliminates the accidental safety activation, De Plano said.
As part of the joint requirement process for MHS, Army weapons officials did a "very thorough cost-benefit analysis" that supported the effort, Army weapons officials said. The old fleet of M9s is costing the Army more to replace and repair than to buy a new service pistol, officials said.
The M9A3 is not a perfect pistol, De Plano says, but the Army should at least evaluate it.
The M9 pistol can be "improved for hundreds of millions less than a new MHS pistol," De Plano said. "We can sell them this new pistol for less than the M9 pistol."
Beretta currently has an open contract for M9s that the Army awarded in September 2012 for up to 100,000 pistols. Deliveries of about 20,000 have been scheduled, leaving 80,000 that could be ordered in the M9A3 configuration for less than the cost of the current M9, De Plano said.
"Why not do a dual-path like they have done in other cases," De Plano said.
The Army was determined to do just that when it set out to search for a replacement for the M4 carbine. The service launched a competition to evaluate commercially available carbines while, at the same time, it evaluated improvements to the M4.
In the end, the service scrapped the competition and ended up adopting the M4A1 version used by special operations forces.
"They could explore this," said De Plano, by ordering 10 M9A3s. "What's the downside?"

Response by SCPO Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 8 at 2015 5:27 PM

SCPO Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 08 Dec 2015 17:27:16 -0500

Not too smart. I carried the Beretta for years. It's a very good and very reliable semi-automatic weapon. I image that the DoD is thinking now of moving onto the 10mm or the .40 caliber, both of which I own and have also carried as a duty weapon. There is a little more punch with those two weapons, but 9mm semi-jacketed core lock Hydra Shock 125-grain ammo is a knock down, stay down bullet.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 8 at 2015 5:28 PM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 08 Dec 2015 17:28:31 -0500

Point and pull. As long as the weapon is effective.........and people can learn to use it properly and easily.........point and pull.

Response by LTC Paul Labrador made Dec 8 at 2015 5:44 PM

LTC Paul Labrador — Tue, 08 Dec 2015 17:44:12 -0500

There are better pistols out there. There are worse pistols out there. My personal preference is that I am not a big fan of the M9s. I find they too big for the caliber of gun that it is. I prefer smaller, more compact pistols with a low bore axis. Glock 23 (or similar) is my preferred archtype.

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 8 at 2015 6:45 PM

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 08 Dec 2015 18:45:02 -0500

I'm not a huge fan of the beretta, but I think the more interesting question is about moving away from a 9mm. I know when we got the 7.62 SCAR everyone was fighting over carrying the new rifle. Then reality set in. The gun was bigger, the mags were bigger, the bullets were bigger and it was all heavier! In addition to more bulk and weight, the team members carrying the SCAR were carrying 2/3 the basic load of the guys carrying a M4 because they couldn't fit 9 accessible mags on their kit. Everyone gets excited about more powerful rounds, but they have their drawbacks. Interesting debate.

Response by SGT David T. made Dec 8 at 2015 7:06 PM

SGT David T. — Tue, 08 Dec 2015 19:06:27 -0500

I HATE HATE HATE the M9! When I was the company armorer we had just one and I was fixing that damn thing every other day it seemed. No matter how many new parts I put on it, it kept breaking.

Response by SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 8 at 2015 7:21 PM

SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 08 Dec 2015 19:21:53 -0500

Can't say I liked the m9.

Response by CAPT Kevin B. made Dec 8 at 2015 9:54 PM

CAPT Kevin B. — Tue, 08 Dec 2015 21:54:51 -0500

Didn't like them when they first came in as I grew up on the M1911. The got dirtier easier, hated the slide safety, and it always felt underpowered. But then again, I mourned the 82mm taken away from us for the 60mm. Yes it was what the Marines used and it helped out the supply chain. But the Marines loved us when we had them.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 9 at 2015 12:00 AM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 09 Dec 2015 00:00:56 -0500

It is what it is. I would be good with giving the M9A3 a shot. Saves the Army a shit ton of money and it gets rid of the de-cocker (it's not a safety). Not to mention 9MM ammo is cheep so again seems more cost effective and the old equipment gets a face lift at the same time.

Response by SGT Jerrold Pesz made Dec 9 at 2015 12:19 AM

SGT Jerrold Pesz — Wed, 09 Dec 2015 00:19:28 -0500

No matter what we have people always want something else. I started with the M1911 in the military and then went through .357 Magnum revolvers, 9mm, .40 cal and then back to 9mm in other jobs. About 20 years ago I finally bought a Glock Model 17 and stayed with it when others changed to other things. Now the 9mm seems to be coming back. I have been reading all of the arguements about stopping power for decades but if you use the right ammo a 9mm works just great, is easy to shoot, reliable and you can carry a lot of ammo.

Response by PO3 Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 9 at 2015 12:43 PM

PO3 Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 09 Dec 2015 12:43:58 -0500

Is m-9 having problem? or there is an expect change in the battle environment? if not, why waste all the money?

Some company will make huge profit out of this. :)

Response by SFC William Swartz Jr made Dec 9 at 2015 12:54 PM

SFC William Swartz Jr — Wed, 09 Dec 2015 12:54:47 -0500

Took them long enough is my thought!!