Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Afghanistan vets criticize M-9 reliability, lethality
Stars and Stripes ^ | 20 December 2002 | Mark Oliva

Posted on 12/20/2002 3:37:26 PM PST by 45Auto

Soldiers who fought in combat in Afghanistan are saying they want a better pistol. The one they have now, they say, isn’t doing the job.

An unclassified U.S. Army “Lessons Learned” report indicates some soldiers were dissatisfied with the performance of the M-9 9 mm Beretta pistol, the Army’s standard-issue sidearm — the same one used by soldiers during operations Anaconda and Mountain Lion in Afghanistan.

Nine soldiers completed surveys for the M-9 pistol. Only one reported firing his pistol in combat “to engage targets of opportunity at 15 me-ters.” No combat malfunctions were reported.

However, just 63 percent of soldiers surveyed said they felt confident with the M-9 and trusted its reliability. That compared with almost 90 percent who felt the same way about their M-4 rifles, even though they share similar complaints about lack of knock-down power.

Some soldiers criticized the pistol’s effectiveness. One said the 9 mm rounds were “inaccurate and not powerful enough.” Three soldiers indicated they wanted the Army to field a more powerful round.

Veterans who’ve used this gun have complained to Washington. Retired Col. David Hackworth, an author and vocal critic of military policy, wrote an open letter to Congress in July calling for more reliable weapons to be issued to the military.

“We went into Vietnam with a bad weapon, the M-16 rifle, which was responsible for killing thousands of our soldiers,” he wrote. “What the M-16 was to Vietnam, the Beretta is to Afghanistan. And a soldier with no confidence in his weapon isn’t the most motivated fighter.”

Hackworth said one Afghanistan veteran wrote him that, “I had to pump four rounds into an al-Qaeda who was coming at me before he dropped."

“Our issue M-9 pistol (Beretta M92F) is proving itself unreliable,” another wrote to Hackworth. “They are constantly breaking. To make matters worse, the 9 mm hardball round we use is a joke. It is categorically ineffective as a fight stopper, even at close range."

Some soldiers are coping by packing heftier .45-caliber pistols, similar to those used by generations of soldiers and Marines since before World War II. Such .45s remain in the U.S. military inventory, but the origin of those used in Afghanistan — military issue or privately owned — remains unclear.

What’s not unclear to several of those using the older weapon is its value. “It saved my life,” one Army Ranger told Hackworth. “I hit a number of enemy 30-40 yards away who went down immediately from my .45 rounds. With a Beretta, I wouldn’t have made it because of the far-too-light 9 mm bullet, play in the action and its limited range.”

A Special Forces sergeant in Afghanistan wrote to Hackworth, “The large-caliber, slow-moving .45 bullet puts the bad guys on the ground. Lighter stuff like the Beretta’s 9 mm will, too — eventually — but on the battlefield you almost always have to double tap, and in close combat a gunfighter hasn’t the time or the ammo to lose firing two rounds.”

The Army says it’s too soon to rush to judgment against the pistol. No changes are in store to replace the M-9 for soldiers, but Army Lt. Col. Robert Carpenter, the project manager for the weapons reports, said more interviews are on the way to figure out just where the problems lie.

“We are taking the opportunity just this past week to review the raw information and re-interview the same units, to include leaders and all the way up through the logistics channels in order to identify any areas that may require support,” he said — but added, “I don’t know of any immediate changes to be implemented.”

Nor is everyone convinced the M-9 needs to go. It’s the bullet, they say, that’s no good.

For instance, in a famous civilian case in the States, an expert testified that the bullets had low lethality.

Ken Cooper, a New York state-certified law-enforcement pistol instructor, testified in the infamous Amadou Diallo shooting by New York City police in 1999. Cooper said police fired 19 9 mm full-metal-jacket bullets — the same ones used by the U.S. military — into Diallo. Of those, Cooper said, just three had any effect on his body; only one of those was fatal.

“Controlled expansion rounds would have had a much more pronounced effect and therefore effective result,” he said.

Cooper favors the M-9 as a durable weapon — but carries a .45-caliber handgun. He said there are trade-offs; no one bullet will meet every requirement.

“It is not the caliber or gun that is primary in effectiveness,” he said. “The larger the round, the more tearing of blood vessels and dumping of kinetic energy. The military is restricted to using, in general application, hardball rounds. Even the larger .45 in military ball does little more than the abused 9 mm. A better bullet design combined with a well-trained operator makes a lethal and effective weapons system.”


TOPICS: Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: m9v45acp
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-125 next last
Hackworth notwithstanding, I personally perfer the .45 ACP to the 9mm; but I wouldn't want to get hit with either one, especially at close range.
1 posted on 12/20/2002 3:37:26 PM PST by 45Auto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: 45Auto
Hackworth is a prick , but the M9 sucks!!!! We need to return to the .45 because it has better stopping power.
2 posted on 12/20/2002 3:47:58 PM PST by Sparta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 45Auto
The 9mm is just a .45 set on "stun."
3 posted on 12/20/2002 3:54:03 PM PST by Knitebane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sparta
Maybe so, but it is more important to use weapons that please Euroweenies. Do ya want the French madattcha?
4 posted on 12/20/2002 3:55:35 PM PST by Warren
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Sparta
As I pull on my asbestos knickers, I must ask: Wasn't it said when they were still debating the 9mm becoming our primary sidearm, that it was because the women in our AF found the .45 ACP too large for their hands, too much recoil, etc? I seem to recall this. I'd like to see some expert fact and opinion on this. Thanks. Doc
5 posted on 12/20/2002 3:56:56 PM PST by doxteve
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: 45Auto
...police fired 19 9 mm full-metal-jacket bullets...

FMJ??? I find that incredible. Why the he!! would police not be using hollow points?

Correct me if I'm wrong but wouldn't the stopping power would be a lot better and the reduced overpenetration minimize danger to bystanders? FMJ for police use just doesn't make sense to me.

6 posted on 12/20/2002 3:58:59 PM PST by Bob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 45Auto
"Nine soldiers completed surveys for the M-9 pistol."

9? 9???? Nine soldiers makes for a scientific study leading to conclusive proof??? Hack, get a real job, and not one of any scientific value.
7 posted on 12/20/2002 4:00:01 PM PST by PatrioticAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 45Auto
As a VietNam vet who carried a .45 pistol, illegal M-1 carbine, M-79 and an M-16,I will disagree with Hackworth as to the M-16 causing "thousands" of our troops to die. There were problems but I'm not sure it was in the thousands My best weapon was the M-16, my worse was the M-1
I preferred to use the M-79 and our chopper pilots quickly switched BACK to the bulky .45s after horror stories about the snub-nosed .38s that could not put a Charlie down like a .45. Of course, my most favorite weapon was a 105, fired by Americans or Thai Cobras. We had ton of options in the cav.
8 posted on 12/20/2002 4:01:24 PM PST by caisson71
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 45Auto
I'd like to see a .45 in the field as well, but there are a couple of caveats: first, most of the 1911s left in inventory are pretty worn-out by now, and second, while seven-in-the-stack, one-up-the-spout is a bit passe these days, the staggered box mags of the Para-Ordnance description result in a grip that is quite thick by comparison, and some troops may not take to that without extra training.
9 posted on 12/20/2002 4:03:20 PM PST by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sparta
Same old same old ball ammo in one or the other doesn't do a very good job. With good ammo they work just as well. It is amazeing that most of the people who are complaining didn't even use it in combat. The one that did had to shoot the guy 4 times so what it dosen't take long to shoot some one for times you could even do it before the first had time to take effect. Unless you brain or spine your target instant stops are not the norm with any pistol. If the m9 is so bad all come it defeated all the others in testing. It is no worse then the others and better then a lot. Remember in combat the other guys guns never stop working and always hit harder then yours.
10 posted on 12/20/2002 4:04:30 PM PST by riverrunner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: doxteve
My 10 year old likes to shoot my Gold Cup, and isn't half bad with it. I don't shoot hot loads, but it does fit in his hand quite well. The 1911 is one of the best ergonomically designed auto pisols ever. I own enough pistols to know.
11 posted on 12/20/2002 4:04:35 PM PST by RKV
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: 45Auto
I like the .45 auto, in fact, I like it a lot but I also think the Beretta is a fine weapon and in some ways even better than the Colt.

The Beretta is about as reliable as a pistol can be. It is more reliable than the M1911. That is not a criticism of the Colt as it is famous for it's reliability, but the fact is the Beretta has done better in tests conducted by the U.S. military.

12 posted on 12/20/2002 4:08:45 PM PST by yarddog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 45Auto
A 9mm is fine for shooting Europeans, but to kill a real man you need a .45.
13 posted on 12/20/2002 4:13:56 PM PST by El Sordo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 45Auto
It's funny how history repeats itself. Earlier this century our boys had trouble stopping Moro tribesmen in the Phillipines with their .38 Colts, which led the military to adopt a .45 later on, and now our boys are having trouble knocking down Muslims in Afghanistan with their 9mm's (also a .38, sort of). Assuming there is any truth to these stories, that is.
14 posted on 12/20/2002 4:19:03 PM PST by Batrachian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 45Auto
IMHO the use of a handgun in combat is lunacy. To make clear; NO REGULAR SOLDIER SHOULD EVER BE ISSUED A HANDGUN. Soldiers should either be issued a main battle rifle or a shortstocked sub-machine gun or carbine. Handguns may have their place for doctors, pilots and others who have little need for a weapon other than personal protection in rear areas, but regular troops need a decent round in a decent weapon which can engage targets to a minimum of 100 meters.

In the hands of a pro a pistol is good to 60-75 meters, but the regular pistol shoot is only good out to 15 to 20 meters. Longer ranges need a stock. Short carbines or sub-machine guns are the ticket. Leave pistols for the REMF'ers and issue effective weapons.

H&K MP5, the Colt short carbines and other major makers have weapons which will serve. If they don't, lets develop one. It can't be that hard, this is America for goodness sake. We can build almost anything, we can certainly build a decent carbine or sub-gun

15 posted on 12/20/2002 4:19:31 PM PST by Dogrobber
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: El Sordo
Good....very good!
16 posted on 12/20/2002 4:19:59 PM PST by caisson71
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: 45Auto
The problem with the 9mm is that most al Queda haven't seen thousands of movies. They don't understand that you are SUPPOSED to fall down when you are shot and instead keep on fighting.
17 posted on 12/20/2002 4:20:31 PM PST by Blood of Tyrants
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dogrobber
I guess statistically the pistol is unimportant in war, but a creek which averages a foot deep can have some very deep holes.

I think Sgt. York was very glad he was carrying a .45 auto, (I have also heard he was doing so against regs.)

18 posted on 12/20/2002 4:22:43 PM PST by yarddog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Dogrobber
I expect what happened is that they ran out of 5.56mm or had a jam and "went to gun" with the pistol. I agree that a sub-gun would be useful, maybe an Uzi in .45 if you needed a sidearm/backup as opposed to a pistol.
19 posted on 12/20/2002 4:25:58 PM PST by RKV
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: 45Auto
To make matters worse, the 9 mm hardball round we use is a joke.

Perhaps it's time to rewrite the Geneva Convention to allow the use of expanding bullets in combat. The idea of using "safer bullets" never made a lot of sense to me. Loaded with +p hollow points the 9mm will stop as well or better than a 45 FMJ.

20 posted on 12/20/2002 4:31:04 PM PST by Hugin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-125 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson