Army boss takes aim at bureaucracy over sidearms

A place to talk about all things military, paramilitary, tactical, strategic, and logistical.
User avatar
PawPaw
Posts: 4493
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 8:19 pm

Re: Army boss takes aim at bureaucracy over sidearms

Post by PawPaw »

JKosprey wrote:G19 and be done with it.
I pretty much agree with you, but I'd have said G17. Either way, be done with it.
Durham68 wrote:The M9 and M16a2 are just too damn big. Must have been a pack of 6'+ soldiers testing those things.
The first military rifle I toted was a Vietnam era M16A1. Pretty good rifle, but worn out. The second military rifle I toted was an M14. Fine battle rifle, but big, heavy. Still a fine rifle. The third military rifle I toted was an M16A2. Fell in like with the damned thing. Easy to shoot, very accurate, they actually got that one right. The M16A2 was pretty close to a true "rifleman's rifle". It was very easy to hit targets out to 500 meters with iron sights. At the time, I was 5'10" tall, weighed 170 lbs. I had no problem using the A2. Preferred it over other rifles.

Oh, and the soldiers who carried the Garands across the beaches at Normandy were, on average, 5'6" tall and weighed 155 lbs.
Dennis Dezendorf
PawPaw's House
User avatar
randy
Posts: 8334
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 11:33 pm
Location: EM79VQ

Re: Army boss takes aim at bureaucracy over sidearms

Post by randy »

Aesop wrote:When he suggests appointing a weapons board composed of the editorial board of Guns & Ammo, and any 25 combat arms sergeant majors from the Army and Marines, along with a MCPO from the Seal teams, and supervised by a single chief warrant officer from Ordnance...
Throw in a rep from Combat Control or the PJs and I vote aye.
...even before I read MHI, my response to seeing a poster for the stars of the latest Twilight movies was "I see 2 targets and a collaborator".
User avatar
JKosprey
Posts: 1295
Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2008 8:57 pm

Re: Army boss takes aim at bureaucracy over sidearms

Post by JKosprey »

"Too big" really depends on the mission. I liked the A2 better than the M4, but I traded in my A2 for an M4 when I could, because the length of the rifle would get in the way if I needed to treat a patient. If I'd have been over in Afghanistan, where a long-range firefight was a good possibility, I probably would have kept the A2.

As for the M9, I found it unremarkable. I have big hands and long fingers, so it fit me just fine, but there's nothing about it that's particularly memorable. My biggest issue is that it's really heavy considering it's only a 15 shot 9mm. That's why I'd vote for the glock 19 over the 17. Either would do the job, but the 19 will fit more troops hands while only losing 2 rounds to its big brother.
User avatar
JAG2955
Posts: 3044
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 9:21 pm

Re: Army boss takes aim at bureaucracy over sidearms

Post by JAG2955 »

Aesop wrote:
Durham68 wrote:The M9 and M16a2 are just too damn big. Must have been a pack of 6'+ soldiers testing those things.
WTH, over???

If you consider the M-16A2 "too big", Ruger makes a fine assault rifle in .22LR, called the 10/22. :lol:
Presumably at some point in your life, you've handled an M1903, an M1 Garand, and/or an M-14? Just for actual comparison?

The A2 was the first M-16 in a quarter-century of trying that wasn't an unmitigated POS out of the starting gate, finally correcting most of the serious deficiencies of the original design. (And to prove the point about bureaucracy designing a horse, adding in the wholly asinine three-round burst bastardization.)
All the subsequent M-4gery series did was admit, for the Army primarily, that any sort of serious riflery was considered an ancillary pursuit which was functionally optional for 99.998% of their troops. Given that, they should just adopt AK-47s, and be done with it.
No, it is. It needs a collapsible buttstock in the worst way. Put on a plate carrier, or if you're really feeling masochistic, an MTV, adjusted properly, then try to get eye relief on an ACOG/RCO. You'll be mounting the ACOG in the farthest rear position, and you'll still have scope shadow and be craning your neck uncomfortably. It's too long to get in and out of up-armored HMMWVs. It's a little easier in MRAPs, but still not ideal.
Aesop wrote: On the OP topic, the general has finally noticed that the inmates run his asylum. Welcome to the Army, sir.

If he was serious, he'd simply eliminate the pistol top to bottom, make everyone carry the M-4, and spend the savings on ammo for actual training and qualification. Like any serious army would.
Agree with you there. Of course, I'd go so far as to say an 11.5" barrel one with a slightly shorter collapsible stock, like LWRCI's Compact Stock, for support troops. Vicker's slings all around.
Aesop wrote: And with respect to the general's position, his math sucks balls.
"$17M on the credit card" would get "every soldier, sailor, airman, and Marine" a roughly $17.00 pistol, worth every penny you put into the gumball machine to buy it. I think next time he talks about numbers, he should either refer to someone who graduated sixth grade for subject-matter expertise, or else take off his shoes and get down to some serious calculating. He is an innumerate moron, and promoted far beyond any explanation of the Peter Principle, however right he may be about the endless regulations in weapons specs.
If he meant to imply he could, for that price, get a total of 34,000 actual sidearms, which may well be all that he needs, he has a bare chance of being right.
The 17 million price point comes from the cost of testing, I believe. For TWO YEARS of testing commercial, off the shelf pistols, that probably exist in my gun safe. Hell, I wish someone would have called me up and asked for my opinion.
Aesop wrote: When he suggests appointing a weapons board composed of the editorial board of Guns & Ammo, and any 25 combat arms sergeant majors from the Army and Marines, along with a MCPO from the Seal teams, and supervised by a single chief warrant officer from Ordnance, and who shall collectively and by majority vote have thirty days in seclusion to carte blanche test and select the next service sidearm for the next 30 years, based on utility, functionality, durability, reliability, accuracy, and cost, you'll know he's serious.

We'd also have new pistol before the first of May this year.
*Puts on Captain bars*
For fuck's sake, do not involve a Sergeant Major in ANYTHING, unless you want a really, really dumb answer. Grab a Marine Gunner, but make certain that they have experience in small arms. Some of them know only missiles, or mortars, for example.
*Removes Captain's bars*
Sorry, so many, many bad experiences.

Here's the way this test and selection should go:
A board is assembled, and they're put in a room with a Glock 17 and an M&P 9. They have 30 days to shoot the pistols and try to break them. At the end of the test, a coin will be flipped, heads for Glock, tails for M&P.

Whichever is selected would be a fantastic choice, and so much better than the M9. My money is on the M&P9 for the better safety, sights, grip, and people don't think the Glock is made here.
User avatar
PawPaw
Posts: 4493
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 8:19 pm

Re: Army boss takes aim at bureaucracy over sidearms

Post by PawPaw »

JAG wrote:*Puts on Captain bars*
For fuck's sake, do not involve a Sergeant Major in ANYTHING, unless you want a really, really dumb answer. Grab a Marine Gunner, but make certain that they have experience in small arms. Some of them know only missiles, or mortars, for example.
*Removes Captain's bars*
Sorry, so many, many bad experiences.
I have known several good Sergeants Major, but most of them were in the Guard or Reserves. One was a practicing attorney who had parlayed the GI Bill into a J.D. after Vietnam service and stayed in because he liked the Infantry. He was a great Sergeant Major. Ran a big REMF reserve outfit with an iron fist.

The other was a Guard CSM who had also parlayed his GI Bill into a Master's Degree in some management field, but loved the military and all things GI with a passion. Great guy, who trained good soldiers. He was the CSM of a Guard armor battalion, and got promoted up to brigade.

But, of all the Sergeants Major I worked around, those two were the only ones that were worth a shit. Most of the rest weren't worth their chow bill.
Dennis Dezendorf
PawPaw's House
Langenator
Posts: 1155
Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2010 2:10 pm

Re: Army boss takes aim at bureaucracy over sidearms

Post by Langenator »

You sure involving the Gunner Mafia is the best idea? Didn't they keep Uncle Sam's Misguided Children using the M16A2/A4 with iron sights for the longest time? In addition to being the ones responsible for the stock length on same.

Speaking of which, I've shot qual in IOTV using an A2 with iron sights with no issues. But I'm a bit over 6'2" with long monkey arms.

I'm honestly not sure why getting a replacement for the M9 is so important. Big picture, figuring out how to deal with losing the use of cluster munitions, replacement/upgrade for pretty much everything on tracks in the inventory, new tube artillery, upgrading/replacing the TOW, replacing the current generation of helos, and revitalizing air defense (especially counter drone) are all higher priority than infantry small arms of any sort.

That's with my gold oak leaf from my cube four floors below LTG McMaster's office.
Fortuna Fortis Paratus
User avatar
308Mike
Posts: 16537
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 3:47 pm

Re: Army boss takes aim at bureaucracy over sidearms

Post by 308Mike »

Langenator wrote:That's with my gold oak leaf from my cube four floors below LTG McMaster's office.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: ;) ;) ;)

http://www.duffelblog.com/2014/12/hr-mc ... ured-army/
Gen. H.R. McMaster Injured After Leaping Off Roof Wearing Homemade Wings

FORT EUSTIS, Va. — Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster is in stable condition at the Fort Eustis clinic after he sustained serious injuries while making an attempt to fly late Sunday evening, sources confirmed.

Army officials confirmed that the leap was not a suicide attempt, as had been suggested by some, but merely an attempt to experience flight using innovative techniques.

McMaster reportedly crafted the “wings” using feathers from a ripped-open pillow, popsicle sticks, and Elmer’s glue. After the glue dried, he strapped them onto his back and walked through his offices and a nearby barracks, flipping fellow soldiers off and yelling “so long, losers whom I’ve always hated!”

The 52-year-old general is the commander of the Army Capabilities Integration Center (ARCIC), which handles Force Management for the Army. ARCIC is a sub-command of TRADOC, the command which handles training for all soldiers in the entire Army. All changes to equipping, fielding, manning, training and recruiting are generated by, and approved at, ARCIC.

McMaster is also the hero of the fabled “Battle of 73 Easting,” the tank battle of the Desert Storm campaign. A captain at the time, McMaster’s company of M1 Abrams tanks happened upon a large Iraqi Republican Guard armor unit on Feb. 26, 1991, and in the ensuing battle, his company destroyed more than 80 enemy tanks, while American forces lost zero.

According to senior defense officials, McMaster apparently mounted the roof of ARCIC Headquarters using a ladder in the fourth-floor stairwell. After gauging the wind with the standard licked finger method, he backed up ten or twelve steps, screamed “Attica!” and charged headlong at the ledge. Witnesses report that he was flapping madly the entire time. Once he was out over the open air, he hung in empty space for almost ten seconds.

This was a long enough time for him to turn in mid-air toward observers and pull out a sign which read “YIPES!” before plunging to earth.

McMaster sustained a broken left leg, broken left collarbone, several broken ribs and spinal bruising. He also got a severe case of Piano Teeth, but that has since worn off. Army Spokesman Col. Bob McDonald assured reporters that McMaster would make a swift recovery and will soon be back at work.

“It’s actually much less serious than earlier this year,” said McDonald, “when the general tried to demonstrate those rocket skates for the Chief of Staff. Or last year, when he attempted to show the Vice President the effectiveness of our hole-making black paint. He gave himself a concussion charging headfirst into that wall.”

For his part, McMaster is optimistic and looking forward to returning to work, although he did have one complaint.

“I was having a pretty good time, since my battle brought my Xbox in here,” he said while gesturing from his hospital bed at the TV, where he had Grand Theft Auto V paused. “And eating lots of jello, and letting the pretty nurses fluff my pillow. But then Gen. Odierno came to visit and brought all my homework. Now it’s not as much fun.”
POLITICIANS & DIAPERS NEED TO BE CHANGED OFTEN AND FOR THE SAME REASON

A person properly schooled in right and wrong is safe with any weapon. A person with no idea of good and evil is unsafe with a knitting needle, or the cap from a ballpoint pen.

I remain pessimistic given the way BATF and the anti gun crowd have become tape worms in the guts of the Republic. - toad
User avatar
Mike OTDP
Posts: 2418
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 11:42 pm

Re: Army boss takes aim at bureaucracy over sidearms

Post by Mike OTDP »

Langenator wrote:If you read the whole statement, he correctly puts blame where a whole lot of it belongs - lawyers.

The massive specifications and detailed testing protocols are exist because, almost inevitably, one or more of the companies whose offering wasn't chosen will go to court, claiming they should have won, and Uncle Sam's lawyers need to be able to say, "See, right here, on pages 1,362-2,769, of the request specs, it shows why we selected Brand X instead of the plaintiff's offering."
This. I've been involved in the source selection process, and a tremendous amount of effort goes into avoiding a successful protest. We desperately need new acquisition laws.
User avatar
mekender
Posts: 13189
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 9:31 pm

Re: Army boss takes aim at bureaucracy over sidearms

Post by mekender »

JKosprey wrote:As for the M9, I found it unremarkable. I have big hands and long fingers, so it fit me just fine, but there's nothing about it that's particularly memorable. My biggest issue is that it's really heavy considering it's only a 15 shot 9mm. That's why I'd vote for the glock 19 over the 17. Either would do the job, but the 19 will fit more troops hands while only losing 2 rounds to its big brother.
My biggest problem with the M9 is the same one that I have with the 92fs and its various knock-offs... It is basically the only main stream pistol, still in production, that has a manual safety that slides upward... So for any service members that are in the reserves or NG that have regular jobs in a PD or any number of other agencies public or private, they will almost certainly be using a pistol that has a safety that moves in the opposite direction (if they work for a place that uses pistols with safeties). Especially considering how many agencies use some form of Sig pistol with a manual safety.
“I no longer need to run as a Presidential Candidate for the Socialist Party. The Democrat Party has adopted our platform.” - Norman Thomas, a six time candidate for president for the Socialist Party, 1944
Langenator
Posts: 1155
Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2010 2:10 pm

Re: Army boss takes aim at bureaucracy over sidearms

Post by Langenator »

308Mike wrote:
Langenator wrote:That's with my gold oak leaf from my cube four floors below LTG McMaster's office.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: ;) ;) ;)

http://www.duffelblog.com/2014/12/hr-mc ... ured-army/
Gen. H.R. McMaster Injured After Leaping Off Roof Wearing Homemade Wings
He actually is a great guy to have as a boss. (OK, big boss - he senior rates my senior rater.) Although it can be exhausting, because he's [Boston] wicked smart [/Boston] and his brain runs about 4x faster than most people in the building. Plus he can jump from one problem set to another without stopping to catch his breath.
Fortuna Fortis Paratus
Post Reply