Air Force dropping the M9 for .45ACP - Page 3 - XDTalk Forums - Your HS2000/SA-XD Information Source!

Cryogaijin · 05-17-2007, 06:23 AM

Trigr: try quoting some info that is less than 12 years old. Simply is not accurate anymore.

China has imported some Su-35s, and have you seen the capabilities of those? They're damn nice aircraft, and some of the prettiest things flying. Quite capable and modern.

ichy_trigger · 05-17-2007, 06:46 AM

I think the 9mm is sufficient for self defense using hollowpoints but I think in FMJ form, its underpowered in caliber. At least the small caliber 5.56 has extreme velocity and fragments upon tumbling.

Good for the USAF!

TRIGRHAPPY · 05-17-2007, 01:26 PM

Quote:

They're damn nice aircraft, and some of the prettiest things flying

One purchase does not an Air Force make.

Also, "pretty" don't win wars. Just look at the A-10 and B-52.....they're 2 of the ugliest creations of man (besides Michael Jackson's nose)....but they put foot to ass when it counts.

jbyrd · 05-17-2007, 01:27 PM

I heard that S&W is holding off on sending out their M&P .45ACPs because of Military testing. I have not had first hand experiance with the M&P but I heard that it is a great shooter.

As for the M9. I was issued on in Iraq. It shot okay when we were at the range, but when it came down to the real thing ours misfired everyother shot. I think it may have been that we were issued bad ammo, but it left a bad taste in my mouth for the M9.

10mm Sonny · 05-17-2007, 04:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jbyrd

I heard that S&W is holding off on sending out their M&P .45ACPs because of Military testing.

Ummm... What?

orionshooter · 05-17-2007, 05:37 PM

I simply dont see this congress (or any other for that matter) spending 80 million dollars equipping the USAF with new .45's while we have grunts (who are actually in the fight) still shooting M9's

No offense to you airmen, but shouldnt the guys doing the fighting and who return hostile fire on a daily basis just to stay alive deserve priority on better equipment?

Heck, if I believe what I read, at present we barely have enough money to fund the basic equipment needs of our front line troops. If that's true, what sense does it make to spend what little we have to get the USAF new sidearms?? This expenditure would be an outrage.

On the other hand, if the USAF gets its 80 million dollars in new .45's, maybe all of the recipients should be sent to Iraq to show everyone what they can do with their new guns.

If we arent going to bring our troops home, then let's at least give those in harm's way the best damn fighting tools we can and let everyone else wait.

jeepinbanditrider · 05-17-2007, 05:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by orionshooter

I simply dont see this congress (or any other for that matter) spending 80 million dollars equipping the USAF with new .45's while we have grunts (who are actually in the fight) still shooting M9's

No offense to you airmen, but shouldnt the guys doing the fighting and who return hostile fire on a daily basis just to stay alive deserve priority on better equipment?

Heck, if I believe what I read, at present we barely have enough money to fund the basic equipment needs of our front line troops. If that's true, what sense does it make to spend what little we have to get the USAF new sidearms?? This expenditure would be an outrage.

On the other hand, if the USAF gets its 80 million dollars in new .45's, maybe all of the recipients should be sent to Iraq to show everyone what they can do with their new guns.

If we arent going to bring our troops home, then let's at least give those in harm's way the best damn fighting tools we can and let everyone else wait.

Yet we still throw billions of dollars at programs like the JSF the F-22, ect. It blows my mind. If we even cut these programs back to HALF speed just imagine the money we could save in just one year.

Back during the Cold War I could see spending big bucks on military hardware becuase we seriously thought we were going to have fight the Russians who had comparable (at the time) technology.

What the hell are we going to do with a STEALTH FIGHTER when the enemy dosen't even have radar to begin with.

I'm not saying kill the programs entirely our military needs to evolve to stay at the top of the hill.

Broadside · 05-17-2007, 05:57 PM

I was in during the transition from .45 to 9mm. The 1911's were so loose but still worked. The M9's we were issued worked great which is why I bought a 92FS. I never saw any problems with any of the issued weapons we had except the M60 barrels which were cracked due to heat and blanks.

M2XD · 05-17-2007, 08:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by orionshooter

I simply dont see this congress (or any other for that matter) spending 80 million dollars equipping the USAF with new .45's while we have grunts (who are actually in the fight) still shooting M9's

No offense to you airmen, but shouldnt the guys doing the fighting and who return hostile fire on a daily basis just to stay alive deserve priority on better equipment?

Heck, if I believe what I read, at present we barely have enough money to fund the basic equipment needs of our front line troops. If that's true, what sense does it make to spend what little we have to get the USAF new sidearms?? This expenditure would be an outrage.

On the other hand, if the USAF gets its 80 million dollars in new .45's, maybe all of the recipients should be sent to Iraq to show everyone what they can do with their new guns.

If we arent going to bring our troops home, then let's at least give those in harm's way the best damn fighting tools we can and let everyone else wait.

The USAF has a fair number of troops on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan at the moment. I know, many of them take the Combat Convoy Course Training at Camp Bullis, where I also do some training. They are taking up duties that the Army is just too shortmanned to fill

Of course the numbers are nowhere near as many as the Army (not sure about the Marines as they never stand still long enough to count), but consider that most "grunts" don't carry handguns as primary weapons whereas it is a lot more common in the USAF.

But I agree with you, this is a ridiculous thing to bring up when T. Mike (CSAF) is crying that he can't pay his troops. As someone who was pushed into retirement to help pay for the F-22, I know firsthand that the USAF will take a shiney new jet over people anyday. And now that I am out, I carry .45s all the time!

Cheers! M2

deepdiver · 05-17-2007, 09:18 PM

I talked to 2 recently (within 5 years) retired AF line officers, (each with 30+ years) who still work with DoD, about this topic when it came up last month on the forum. They had the same opinion but one was more poignant than the other.

"Spend a bunch of money to get .45s instead of 9mms for the Air Force? Why? Do the .45s rust more slowly when they aren't used?"

05-17-2007, 06:46 AM	#22
ichy_trigger XDTalk 5K Member Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Dayton, Ohio Posts: 8,065	I think the 9mm is sufficient for self defense using hollowpoints but I think in FMJ form, its underpowered in caliber. At least the small caliber 5.56 has extreme velocity and fragments upon tumbling. Good for the USAF! __________________ "The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself." http://militarysignatures.com/signatures/member2645.png

05-17-2007, 05:37 PM	#26
orionshooter XDTalk Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: At 8000 feet in the Colorado Rockies Posts: 43	I simply dont see this congress (or any other for that matter) spending 80 million dollars equipping the USAF with new .45's while we have grunts (who are actually in the fight) still shooting M9's No offense to you airmen, but shouldnt the guys doing the fighting and who return hostile fire on a daily basis just to stay alive deserve priority on better equipment? Heck, if I believe what I read, at present we barely have enough money to fund the basic equipment needs of our front line troops. If that's true, what sense does it make to spend what little we have to get the USAF new sidearms?? This expenditure would be an outrage. On the other hand, if the USAF gets its 80 million dollars in new .45's, maybe all of the recipients should be sent to Iraq to show everyone what they can do with their new guns. If we arent going to bring our troops home, then let's at least give those in harm's way the best damn fighting tools we can and let everyone else wait. __________________ ___________ XD45 Compact/Tac Para Ordnance SX1445 S&W PC 952-2 - Performance Center S&W PPC9 - Performance Center S&W 52-2 Caspian 1911 Walther P99 Colt Python [6"] Steyr M40 Sig 230SL Walther PPK/S Pardini GT45 - HP32 SP22 SW 340PD Hammerli 208 & 215 CZ 75 Tactical Sport Last edited by orionshooter; 05-17-2007 at 05:42 PM.

05-17-2007, 05:57 PM	#28
Broadside XDTalk 2K Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Colorado Posts: 2,935	I was in during the transition from .45 to 9mm. The 1911's were so loose but still worked. The M9's we were issued worked great which is why I bought a 92FS. I never saw any problems with any of the issued weapons we had except the M60 barrels which were cracked due to heat and blanks. __________________ XD - 9 Subcompact XD - 357 Service w/ SA Custom Carry Pro Pkg SA - Mil Spec 1911 A1

05-17-2007, 09:18 PM	#30
deepdiver XDTalk 1K Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: SE Missouri Posts: 1,585	I talked to 2 recently (within 5 years) retired AF line officers, (each with 30+ years) who still work with DoD, about this topic when it came up last month on the forum. They had the same opinion but one was more poignant than the other. "Spend a bunch of money to get .45s instead of 9mms for the Air Force? Why? Do the .45s rust more slowly when they aren't used?" __________________ XD .45 Service Compact

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

05-17-2007, 06:23 AM	#21
Cryogaijin XDTalk 100 Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 277	Trigr: try quoting some info that is less than 12 years old. Simply is not accurate anymore. China has imported some Su-35s, and have you seen the capabilities of those? They're damn nice aircraft, and some of the prettiest things flying. Quite capable and modern.

05-17-2007, 01:27 PM	#24
jbyrd XDTalk Newbie Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 7	I heard that S&W is holding off on sending out their M&P .45ACPs because of Military testing. I have not had first hand experiance with the M&P but I heard that it is a great shooter. As for the M9. I was issued on in Iraq. It shot okay when we were at the range, but when it came down to the real thing ours misfired everyother shot. I think it may have been that we were issued bad ammo, but it left a bad taste in my mouth for the M9.