US Army fields SIG M17 & M18 pistols

[Nightstalker865]

Another angle on what Grant posted.

https://sofrep.com/98976/dod-evaluat...iddled-issues/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[YVK]

All of this happened AFTER the trials. SIG had already won. That means it passed the Army drop tests.

The way I understand GAO report on Glock protest, this is incorrect. The contract was awarded after initial reliability testing (section M, that Glock also disputed and GAO in principle agreed) but before operational testing. Glock argued that all testing should have been done before awarding the contract.

The protester also contends that it is unclear whether the Army intends to complete the section H evaluation prior to award of the production CLINs. Glock Supp. Comments, May 9, 2017, at 1-2. The Army asserts that the Sig Sauer handguns “(both compact and full size) will undergo all possible Section H Source Selection testing,” prior to general distribution of the handguns. Supp. AR at 1-2.

[1168]

A requirement in the contract was to OPTIMIZE the handgun for the "go to war round", ie the 147gr HP round.

Both pistols passed that testing, with flying colors. The Army says that the system is still good to go for warfighting.

The issue is the 115gr TC FMJ ball round. If I were a betting man, I would put money on the shape of the projectile being the main culprit, as TC generally doesn't feed as well as RN bullet profiles.

Varying reports from people involved in the fielding says it does fine with 124gr NATO ball as well.

Do the math.

TC rounds generally feed the same as hollowpoints, which these articles claim work ok.

I’ll be interested to hear more about this TC 115gr. Maybe its loaded lightly? Why in the $&@% would the Army choose a 115gr for training and a 147gr for war, anyway?

What about the double ejection thing?

[HardToHandle]

Why in the $&@% would the Army choose a 115gr for training and a 147gr for war, anyway?

It is the Army... so “costs less” is the #1 answer. Is that not the entire reason SIG was selected - minimally qualified but less expensive?
115gr FMJ is original Parabellum clambering and commonly available IIRC.
124gr is the NATO standard and consequently held in war stocks throughout the world. Arguably 115 to 124 is closer than 124 to 147 for maintenance of point of impact.
M9 is still standard issue and will likely still be on the line when today’s Kindergarteners are signing enlistment papers. I am not aware if the 147gr/ Berretta M9 teaming was part of the most recent competition, but doubt it was.

The joint service project rolled out the Beretta M9 that was shooting a bullet one way and the slide into the shooter’s face. The US Army doubled down then on a known faulty weapons system. Expect the same on a handgun with a track record of not being drop safe and unable to feed the most common ammunition types.

[EzGoingKev]

The joint service project rolled out the Beretta M9 that was shooting a bullet one way and the slide into the shooter’s face. The US Army doubled down then on a known faulty weapons system. Expect the same on a handgun with a track record of not being drop safe and unable to feed the most common ammunition types.

The M9 was adopted in 1985. The slide issue did not show up until a few years later.

[26 Inf]

The M9 was adopted in 1985. The slide issue did not show up until a few years later.

True, traced to slides made in Italy before the factory in the US was completed. According to the linked GAO report the slide is supposed to last 7,000 rounds.

https://www.gao.gov/assets/110/102286.pdf (NOTE: the link is not the source of the info below)

In September of 1987 the slide of a civilian model Beretta 92SB pistol fractured at the junction where the locking block mates into the slide. The broken half of the slide flew back at the shooter (A member of the Navy Special Warfare Group) injuring him. (NSIAD-88-213) In January and February of 1988 respectively, 2 more military model M9 handguns exhibited the same problem, injuring 2 more shooters from the Navy Special Warfare Group.

All three shooters suffered facial lacerations. One suffered a broken tooth and the other two required stitches. (NSIAD-88-213)

The Army was doing unrelated barrel testing on current production civilian model 92SB pistols and military model M9 pistols and ran into the same slide separation issue. They fired 3 M9 pistols 10,000 times and inspected the weapons with the MPI process for evidence of slide cracks. They discovered that one of the weapons had a cracked slide. The Army then decided to fire all of the weapons until the slides failed. Failure occurred at round number 23,310 on one weapon, 30,083 on another, and 30,545 on the last weapon. (NSIAD-88-213)

Examination of the NSWG slides and the Army slides showed a low metal toughness as the cause of the problems with slide separation. The Army then began to investigate the production process of the slides. (NSIAD-88-213) At the time the frames of the M9 pistols were produced in the US, while the slides were produced in Italy. There are reportedly documents from the Picatinny Arsenal that report a metallurgical study blaming the use of Tellurium in the manufacturing process for the low metal toughness of the Italian slides, but I have been unable to independently verify this information.

After April of 1988, however, all slides for the M9/92 pistols were produced in the US. (NSIAD-88-213) As a part of the contract requirements, the Beretta Corporation had to build a plant inside the United States to produce the M9. It naturally took some time for the US plant (located in Accokeek MD.) to get into full production swing, so the Italian plant made the slides for a time.

Several GAO reports and testimony from GAO staff before Congressional Sub-Committees (NSIAD-88-213, NSIAD-88-46, NSIAD-89-59 are a few…) report the total number of slide failures at 14. Three occurred in the field with the NSWG and the other 11 occurred in the test lab. Only 3 injuries resulted from the slide separation problem. The Beretta Corporation changed the design of the M9 pistol so that even if a slide fractured, the broken half could not come back and hit the shooter causing injury.

Of the 14 slide separations reported, only 4 took place at round counts under 10,000. (NSIAD-88-213) No further slide fractures were reported after the change to the US manufactured slides.

http://www.sightm1911.com/lib/history/true_story_m9.htm

[Arctic1]

In speaking with people familiar with fielding of systems to the US mil, ECP's are pretty normal prior to full fielding.

In addition, the report is from FY 2017, so all the issues reported happened prior to Sept of last year.

Fielding to the 101st and 1st SFAB happened after Sept 2017, so the Army has been working to fix the issues that were adressed in the report.

Final note, lowest bidder is a myth. There are requirements that have to be met, and award criteria are often weighted differently. A more expensive product can be awarded a contract if quality is better, assuming award criteria is stacked that way.

[southswede]

The way I understand GAO report on Glock protest, this is incorrect. The contract was awarded after initial reliability testing (section M, that Glock also disputed and GAO in principle agreed) but before operational testing. Glock argued that all testing should have been done before awarding the contract.

The protester also contends that it is unclear whether the Army intends to complete the section H evaluation prior to award of the production CLINs. Glock Supp. Comments, May 9, 2017, at 1-2. The Army asserts that the Sig Sauer handguns “(both compact and full size) will undergo all possible Section H Source Selection testing,” prior to general distribution of the handguns. Supp. AR at 1-2.

The contract also had a modularity requirement that Glock does not have. My guess is that this is why Glock lost the contract and the protest.

[LDB]

I just hope it's truly the best choice for the troops and not a financial decision. Our troops deserve the best possible in everything.

[YVK]

The contract also had a modularity requirement that Glock does not have. My guess is that this is why Glock lost the contract and the protest.

That may be indeed true. Also true is that the SIG's modularity implementation was given a priority over reliability. SIG offering two guns, compact and full size, around same FCUs is what that modularity amounted to, but the reliability benchmarks for the compact were significantly lowered. See Glock protest GAO report for details.