US Air Force and the M18

[Slater]

Looks like the USAF is foregoing the M17 altogether. Plus, I guess it just looks cooler than an M9:

"The new M18 costs the Air Force about 1/3 of what it would cost us to buy an M9 today."

https://www.aflcmc.af.mil/News/Artic...force-handgun/

[FightinQ]

Great decision, it's darn fine sidearm even though secondaries don't win gunfights in the mil, but more importantly, it makes sense to use what the other services are already using, makes the logistics burden pain free when in far away lands and things break or mags/holsters needed.

[everready73]

Not a bad deal. Included test and and engineering for about $177 each. The paid 22.1 mil for 125k.

[CRAMBONE]

Didn’t the USMC also do this or was it just MARSOC?

[Delta-3]

I believe the Marines also went with the M18. As far as I know, only the Army uses the bigger M17.

[Interrupt]

"The new M18 costs the Air Force about 1/3 of what it would cost us to buy an M9 today."

And probably works about 1/3 as well, too.

[FightinQ]

"The new M18 costs the Air Force about 1/3 of what it would cost us to buy an M9 today."

And probably works about 1/3 as well, too.

"okay"

[mark5pt56]

"The new M18 costs the Air Force about 1/3 of what it would cost us to buy an M9 today."

And probably works about 1/3 as well, too.

Which means you "probably" have zero experience with the platform.

[ST911]

"The new M18 costs the Air Force about 1/3 of what it would cost us to buy an M9 today."
And probably works about 1/3 as well, too.

The M17/18 is not equivalent to the balance of the 320 line and its many variations and production standards.

[ST911]

"The new M18 costs the Air Force about 1/3 of what it would cost us to buy an M9 today."
And probably works about 1/3 as well, too.

The M17/18 is not equivalent to the balance of the 320 line and its many variations and production standards.