Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 42

Thread: US Air Force and the M18

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    5,075
    Feedback Score
    0

    US Air Force and the M18

    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/
    Last edited by Slater; 06-23-20 at 18:01.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    287
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    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.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    1,348
    Feedback Score
    0
    Not a bad deal. Included test and and engineering for about $177 each. The paid 22.1 mil for 125k.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    DEEP SOUTH
    Posts
    1,476
    Feedback Score
    13 (100%)
    Didn’t the USMC also do this or was it just MARSOC?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    NW Ohio but Montana is always home!
    Posts
    243
    Feedback Score
    0
    I believe the Marines also went with the M18. As far as I know, only the Army uses the bigger M17.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    39
    Feedback Score
    0
    "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.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    287
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Interrupt View Post
    "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"

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    4,641
    Feedback Score
    22 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Interrupt View Post
    "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.
    GET IN YOUR BUBBLE!

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    4,383
    Feedback Score
    16 (100%)
    While I'll bash SIG and their "Drop Safe" stupidity regarding the P320, the M17/18 program is a big win for the US Military - and it would have been regardless if it was Glock who won instead of SIG.

    The Beretta M9 has done it's part and at the time, it did what needed to be done. But handgun tech has progressed quite a bit since then and a polymer, striker fired handgun is the standard these days.

    And the shorter slide M18 makes sense for the USAF, who would be arming security forces and aircrew, so space can be at a premium.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Midwest, USA
    Posts
    8,740
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Interrupt View Post
    "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.
    2012 National Zumba Endurance Champion
    الدهون القاع الفتيات لك جعل العالم هزاز جولة الذهاب

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •