What would you replace M9 with? The Army is looking at .357, .40, and .45ACP

LTC Paul Labrador I agree with almost all you have posted here. But recently this old dog has learned a few new tricks. Some of what I say here will not hold up due to costs, supply etc. but in a perfect world I believe all line troops should be issued and trained with a pistol. Under 25/50m depending on your skill level a pistol can provide significant suppressive fire to a buddy if your primary weapon had stopped running for whatever reason and his is in need of clearing a stoppage/malfunction.

My old thoughts were "strictly defensive" and I carried a single stack .45 for decades. Since running training scenarios featuring the above I have come to believe in a rifle/pistol weapons package that compliments one another. Students are likewise enthused with the amount of fire they can continually put down range with out interruption, when working in pairs.

All of that wind passed, I prefer the .40 (that I shoot in a Glock LS) nice cross section and capacity, plus the LS gives a longer site radius and better accuracy.

Implementing any of this would probably take 50 years due to training changes, costs and pure political BS, but it's an interesting thought.

The 9mm is common and one of the cheapest rounds out there. They could gain a bit going to a 10 but it has a low expansion rate and pokes holes rather than delivering the energy. They got rid of the .45 so it would be stupid to go back. .40 is very common but as Maj Miller pointed out, a very expensive change over.

If they want more power than they have then they could buy ammo with a little +p on the back.

If they REALLY want to save money, lets cut back on Obama's greens fees and vacations.

40, more stopping power, and more capacity than a 45. Plus, it is large enough for people with big hands, yet small enough for those with smaller hands. If they adopt a tactical one like H&K or Sig has, it would be a major upgrade over the M-9. Don't get me wrong, I love a 45, but for practical purposes, the 40 would be the best suited for the majority of the Army troops.

One of the biggest problems with the Army's choice in pistols is not the pistol. It is the crappy training. It is a check the box, push as many people through as you can with outdated tactics. If the Training was actually realistic and the tactics were up to date with companies like CSAT, Tiger Swan and MagPul you would see a great improvement in the ability of soldiers to hit their targets. At the end of the day only hits in the CNS make bad guys stop doing what they were doing. Currently, the Army has a Human sized target at 25 Meters and all you are required to do is keep the rounds on paper. The target should be changed along with the tactics/training, if they want to invest all this money in a new sidearm/service pistol.

Finally......BUT it would cost too much to improve the M9 berreta we currently have. It would cost effective to purchase or replace the current stock. In my opinion I do believe ALL members of the force should have sidearms when performing duties and be accurate and efficient with said pistol. I do believe Glock or Springfield xd would be a good choice, but the military is too into safety we have to have a decocking mechanism if that is the case then why not buy Sig Sauers, M11 for all and call it a day

Try SRM 12/16 A 12 gauge 16 round shot gun, Google it and watch video.
The SLE 12 is semi auto or auto select.
I believe a rifled barrel firing sabot slugs will stop most combatants in thier tracks.

The M1911A1 45 cal. pistol was A knock down weapon. Just how many weapons and types of ammo do we need the troops to carry?
The Tanker has M14, M240, 9mm now.
If we go back to the M1911A1 then we should go back to theM3/M3A1 .45 cal machine gun. (grease gun)
Maybe the answer isnt a close combat weapon but why is there a need?
More Claymores,Beehive and A-10 may limit close in combat. Hollow points or Shredders may also be the answer for the 9MM.

I would go with the Glock 20. The ballistics on that round is amazing! With the 10mm, you have stopping power that exceeds the .45 while carrying 15 rounds. However, my first choice would be training, so that we would have better shooters.

Sig Sauer P320 Striker Fire in .40 S&W.

I understand with only 7 rounds why the Military did away with the M1911 but they should of kept the 45cal round 9mm just lacks stopping power.