quote:

Originally posted by MacGyver:
It's interesting that the Air Force specifically sounded off. Have the other branches said anything different (or anything at all) about the same subject?

quote:

So while I don't see many new P320 agency adoptions in the future, with the P365 being a better option for a Sig duty gun, the P320 will continue in service for a while with existing adopters.

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:
The 320 is fine. I don't blame the military/TXDPS/etc. for sticking with what they've already invested in.

I just don't use my P320 any more because the new larger format P365s like the XMacro and Fuse do everything a P320 does but better. (And without the associated social media driven drama/stigma.)

So while I don't see many new P320 agency adoptions in the future, with the P365 being a better option for a Sig duty gun, the P320 will continue in service for a while with existing adopters.

quote:

Originally posted by FenderBender:

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:
The 320 is fine. I don't blame the military/TXDPS/etc. for sticking with what they've already invested in.

I just don't use my P320 any more because the new larger format P365s like the XMacro and Fuse do everything a P320 does but better. (And without the associated social media driven drama/stigma.)

So while I don't see many new P320 agency adoptions in the future, with the P365 being a better option for a Sig duty gun, the P320 will continue in service for a while with existing adopters.

2nd the 365 is basically the perfect handgun for me.

quote:

Originally posted by Jupiter:
They got a lot right with the P365 but in its current form, it ain't it for a duty weapon.

quote:

Originally posted by captain127:
Unless a consistently dangerous situation is confirmed ( incidents thus far have been mostly isolated and not reproducible) sticking to your guns pun intended makes sense. In a large organization like the USAF the monumental investment in guns holsters magazines armorer classes spare parts and individual service member training outweighs anything else. Honestly I did two deployments with the M9, and the switch to the 320 seemed like a waste to me. Not really gaining anything that could not be overcome with more training which the military is notoriously weak on pistol training

quote:

Originally posted by SIGguy229:

quote:

Originally posted by captain127:
Unless a consistently dangerous situation is confirmed ( incidents thus far have been mostly isolated and not reproducible) sticking to your guns pun intended makes sense. In a large organization like the USAF the monumental investment in guns holsters magazines armorer classes spare parts and individual service member training outweighs anything else. Honestly I did two deployments with the M9, and the switch to the 320 seemed like a waste to me. Not really gaining anything that could not be overcome with more training which the military is notoriously weak on pistol training

The M9 was a horrible gun for a desert environment--the open slide design allowed all kinds of sand and grit into the gun. When I was issued a G19, I was very happy to make the switch. Unfortunately, I missed the M17/M18 rollout as I was retiring--but I'd take the M18 over M9 any day...but the G19 would be a hairs-width second.

I also took responsibility for getting my own training beyond what the USAF was providing (which was shit, TBH--nothing more that qualification training, not employment). Then I was assigned to units that did no-shit weapons employment (and no, not "secfo"). I'm sure our USAF experiences were very different.

quote:

Department of War Confirms Modular Handgun System (MHS) is Safe and Reliable

By CPE Ground Army

Despite public speculation and online misinformation regarding the pistol's safety, Project Manager Soldier Lethality (PM SL), the Department of War’s official lead for the Modular Handgun System (MHS), confirms that there has never been a mechanically-caused accidental discharge. All investigated incidents of alleged "uncommanded discharges" have been traced back to the trigger being pulled.

Rigorous Testing and Safety by Design

The MHS, comprised of the M17 (full-size) and M18 (compact) 9mm striker-fired pistols, is a thoroughly tested, safe, and reliable weapon system for the modern Warfighter. Since the first systems were fielded to the 101st Airborne Division in 2017, the MHS has replaced the legacy M9 and M11 pistols and is now in service with over 400,000 pistols across the U.S. Army, Air Force, Marine Corps, and Navy.

The MHS was designed with four internal safety mechanisms (primary sear notch, secondary sear notch, striker safety lock, and a disconnector safety mechanism) and features an external ambidextrous manual safety, bringing the total number of safety mechanisms to five.

Before fielding, the MHS underwent extensive Production Verification Testing, where over 200 pistols fired more than 1.5 million rounds. This testing regimen included evaluations for reliability, durability, accuracy, rough handling, drop safety, and performance in extreme environmental conditions. Early in this process, engineering changes were implemented to address and rectify all initial drop-test concerns, and these updates were applied to every MHS pistol before it was fielded.

To ensure quality and safety during production, the government performs Lot Acceptance Testing (LAT) for each production lot. During LAT, Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) Quality Assurance Representatives (QARs) randomly selects a statistically significant number of samples from each production lot to undergo LAT. If any weapon fails LAT, the entire lot is rejected. All lots of weapons produced to date have passed LAT prior to being fielded to warfighters.

Investigating Field Incidents

When a potential uncommanded discharge is reported in the field, the Army follows a stringent investigation protocol to determine the cause. According to the Army Safety Management Information System 2.0 (ASMIS 2.0), reported firearms mishaps account for less than 0.006% of all MHS pistols issued.

When a report is filed within ASMIS, the weapon is promptly shipped to the contractor in the same configuration as it was when the incident occurred. Once the weapon arrives at the contractor’s facility, the Combat Capabilities Development Command (DEVCOM) Small/Medium Caliber Weapons Branch Chief is notified. DCMA will have the contractor open the box to verify the serial number. After the serial number is verified, the weapon is escorted and secured under U.S. Government property control pending the investigator's arrival. Once the investigator is present, the weapon is brought out of the property cage and the investigation begins.

The investigation process is meticulous:

Visual inspection of the weapon in its current state
Examination of the weapon to check all safeties, internal and external, are functioning correctly
The weapon is taken into the range where it is functionally tested with live ammunition. At least 1 (One) 21 round magazine is used to verify proper function of all safeties.
After the range, the weapon is moved back to the armorer’s bench where the striker operation is thoroughly tested
Finally, the weapon is broken down to each individual part to ensure all the parts look normal.
After this, the weapon is cleaned and returned to the original unit.


To date, all investigated incidents of alleged "uncommanded discharges" have been traced back to the trigger being pulled, and not due to an issue with the firearm. Investigators have been unable to induce a discharge without disengaging the manual safety and pulling the trigger.

Joint Service Confidence

Most recently, a review of the MHS was initiated after the Air Force reported a potential "uncommanded discharge" involving the tragic loss of an Airman. As the lead for the MHS program, PM SL immediately engaged with our Air Force partners to assist in developing and implementing a Supplemental Inspection Criteria (SIC) as a precautionary action to investigate the incident and validate the weapon's integrity.

The USAF’s SIC effort mandated a 100% inspection of the DAF's "in-use" M18 inventory. It is confirmed that of the nearly 114,000 pistols inspected to date, none exhibited any conditions that could have led to an uncommanded discharge.

PM SL is confident that the MHS pistol continues to meet and exceed that standard for the entire Joint Force. The DAF's Director of Security Forces, Brig. Gen. Brian Filler, affirmed this, stating, “It can now be stated that the M18 is safe and reliable for DAF missions.”

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:
Now the Army has also issued a statement supporting the M17/M18 MHS as "safe and reliable" and refuting "public speculation and online misinformation":

quote:

Originally posted by cslinger:
While I think the P320 thing was blown out of proportion and I think a slightly heavier or redesigned (dingus) trigger would have "fixed" the issue so to speak what did folks expect the Air Force and Army to say even if it was even more widespread?

"aahhh we fucked up? Sorry bout' that. You know General so and so works for SIG and he was a good guy so we figured........but shit happens, we fucked up and will now be procuring 11 million Glock 45's blah blah etc. etc."

I mean the damn things would have to be going off like grenades in the holsters weekly for .MIL to say anything different/change direction.