# hand guns



## rookie in training (12 Jul 2004)

my question is why is it not permitted for NCM's to carry a hand gun. i mean yes we have our c7 or whatever you choose to specialize for your weapon of choose but why cant we have an extra side arm??


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (12 Jul 2004)

Certain NCMs do get to carry sidearms it depends on your duties. MPs carry sidearms, helicopter flight crews, NLBP members and if you look you will see combat arms types carry them depending on the nature of their duties. The cost would be extrememly high if you wanted to issue every ncm with one, not to mention the training that will be involved.


----------



## Arctic Acorn (12 Jul 2004)

When you get into theatre the supply types will have a spreadsheet with a list of position numbers and what type of weapon goes with the position (C7, C9, Pistol, etc), and it's usually set in stone. It's probably different with the battlegroup, but thats how augmentees on Palladium were issued weapons. For us, pistols were in short supply (all the staff weenies usually snap them up), so you usually have to have a real reason to get one. Plus, you have to have the training on them. Thats how it was at the NSE base in VK, Bosnia. Someone else will have to confirm if thats what they do in the 'Ghan.


----------



## Jarnhamar (12 Jul 2004)

VK WAS really strict with handguns, especially the NSE. They tried telling out guys from the battle group who were going on gate that we wern't allowed to use pistols. Why? The gate commander or SF commander (whoever)  didn't have one so he didn't want us having them.

The NSE totally did not trust their soldiers with weapons.  In my platoon we regularly swapped pistols when someone went on leave, when someone was going on a road trip, when we were switching up search teams/security teams when we were on OPs.  If someone is going to stay in camp the whole tour and work in an office, give them a friggin C7 rifle and let the guys who need them use the pistols.


----------



## Infanteer (12 Jul 2004)

First, you don't "choose" to specialize in your weapon of choice.  You are taught and assigned weapons as the Army requires.

Second, as an infantry soldier, I've been assigned a pistol many times, depending on the duties.  Search Man on a Cordon-and-Search, Ammo Escort, C-6 Gunner, etc.  A sidearm will be issued if the job requires it.  Otherwise, I wouldn't worry about carrying the extra weight.


----------



## KevinB (12 Jul 2004)

You line serial will depend upon what you get.
031's NCO's, Wpn Det get pistols - the rest don't


----------



## Infanteer (13 Jul 2004)

> SF commander



We always got a kick out of pulling into VK and watching the Rear-Ech types start scrambling with those ridiculous "SF" patches they had to wear.  We called them the Special Forces.



> The NSE totally did not trust their soldiers with weapons.



And I can see why.  Watching these guys handle the things was painful.  I had to clear a pistol for one girl for fear that she would blow her hand off in her feeble attempt to do so.  Can't blame them though, it's the "can't do" attitude that sees regular range training as unnecessary for support types.


----------



## Arctic Acorn (15 Jul 2004)

We had a Dutch driver on our staff who had a double negligant discharge when clearing into Tuzla. How the hell do you do that? 

'Rock out with your Glock out!'    :threat:


----------



## Smoothbore (15 Jul 2004)

What's so cool about carrying a Browning Hi-Power when you've got one of the finest assault rifles out there?


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (15 Jul 2004)

It has nothing to do with the "coolness" factor at least I hope it doesn't. It has to do with practacility and mission needs. You would not be carrying a C7 through the holds of a ship looking for contraband cargo, even an MP5 gets in the way, a P225 does not.


----------



## Redeye (15 Jul 2004)

I've never understood that phenomenon either - troops will go all crazy over a pistol, but much more massive stuff is common dog for them.   I remember riding the bus to a change of command parade for which I was carrying a pistol and having what seemed like every troop on the bus wanting to get a chance to "see" it like it was so fascinating.   It's just a pistol!


----------



## Arctic Acorn (15 Jul 2004)

Oh gee, I'm suddenly inspired...

TOP 10 OVERHEARD REASONS WHY A PISTOL IS BETTER THAN A C7 ON OP PALLADIUM (Staff Weenie Version)

10) "There are no stoppage drills..it's just point and shoot, right?"
9) "I find big guns intimidating..."
8 ) "Hey, I'm used to low shooting scores."
7) "It's WAAY easier to clean than a rifle..."
6) "The pistol makes me feel cool."
5) "That rifle is AWFUL heavy..."
4) "The staff at the McDonalds in Zagreb always get antsy when I walk in to get my happy meal with a slung rifle."
3) "I only got issued 20 rounds and 3 mags with a pistol...it's just easier to keep track of it all." 
2) "When I drive to the PX in Sarajevo, I can't seem to put it in a spot that doesn't block my coffee mug." 

and the number one reason: 

1) "Lugging around a broken down C7 stuffed in a duffle bag when I go drinking in Zagreb on weekends is SUCH a pain in the ass..."


----------



## Joe_McSweeney (16 Jul 2004)

would a person be able to bring one of their own on ops? Ofcourse, you would have to have either the PAL or the POL.


----------



## MJP (16 Jul 2004)

NO, you use what's issued.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (16 Jul 2004)

I wish though.


----------



## KevinB (16 Jul 2004)

MJP said:
			
		

> NO, you use what's issued.



Unfortunately true...

I would bring my Kimbler TLE .45 and/or Novak Custom BHP.

and my....


----------



## Danjanou (16 Jul 2004)

KevinB said:
			
		

> MJP said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Remind me never to get Kevin ticked off at me..... ;D


----------



## Spr.Earl (17 Jul 2004)

LOL   ;D
 When I was there (97) my W.O. tried to get us both issued 9mm's as we traveled quite a bit doing route recce's,proving our route's but alas to no avail      

Just try and bail out of a LS with a rifle     ;D : ??? LOL
So we just shut up and got along with it and did our job and hoped for the best and our God's did look after us in the end.  

Do do your job and smile guy's.


----------



## MG34 (17 Jul 2004)

The usual scale of issue for pistols along with a C7 or support weapon is as follows at least in my unit both on tour and not:

Section Commanders
Wpns Det
Certain Officers (Staff weenies and the CO and his group incl. the RSM) PL Commanders are expected to carry a rifle as they are in the fight as much as the troops.
LAV Crews
Veh drivers (if there are enough to go around)

I have carried a sidearm since I was a MCpl Section Commander,most of the brownings sit on the shelves in the lock up though when deployed on exercise,on tour everyone who is entitled carries them.(see above list)


----------



## brihard (24 Jul 2004)

I just graduated my SQ course on friday. The parade was intended to be a simple company dismissal parade, with a quick blurb from the OC, however one of the candidates from my course happened to have invited his father down for the parade. His father came down in uniform, and we found out that he's the brigadier general in charge of (or at least heavily involved in) new procurements for land force.

Generals being generals, he was quite happy to chat with the troops after the parade. I'm a bit of a kit hound, and ended up chatting with him about some of the new gear we'll be seeing soon. Besides CADPAT gortex bunny suits, and G-Wagons for the reserves as of next spring, he told us that the entire concept of handguns is being reevaluate by the military, adn that they are now looking into a new Personal Defence Weapon initiative.

Similar programs have gone on in the states, and they have some neat new pieces of kit. though he didn't have many details to give us, I was able to confirm taht one of the four main contenders is the H&K MP-7 PDW.

It fires an H&K proprietary caliber, the 4.6 x 30mm round. It's an extremely compact submachine gun. With the stock closed, it's only 34 cm long, and the forward pistole grip folds in as well. Empty, it weighs 1.5kg- nice and small. The round can be effective out to 200m, and is in either 20 or 40 round magazines. There's a small picatinny rail on the top rear of the weapon.

It's an interesting concept for and SMG- It's a gas-operated rotating bolt design, reputedly very similar to their G36. 

It would be safe to assume that the FN P90 is another competitor for the PDW concept- It's proven with an established reputation, and also fires a low-caliber high-velocity round, with large mag capacity. Bigger, though, but on the other hand, we already know from allies that it works, whereas the MP-7 reamins unproven.

I'm unlikely to get any more info on this, but hopefully some of you in the know can work with this and see if there's any more tidbits about the CF looking into the PDW concept. It would be very cool to see some new small arms in the CF, a good compromise between pistols and SMGs. It seems that an entire new genre of weapons is being developed...


----------



## KevinB (25 Jul 2004)

> Preliminary Evaluation of the Terminal
> Performance of the 5.7x28 mm 23 Grain FMJ Bullet
> Fired by the FN P-90 , Using 10% Ordnance Gelatin
> as a Tissue Simulant.
> ...


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (25 Jul 2004)

Interesting post Brihard because the last I heard the PDW project was all but dead. The navy was considering getting onboard to outfit the Boarding Teams if the weapon was deemed suitable for Boarding Ops.


----------



## 1feral1 (25 Jul 2004)

In all of the three units I have been posted to, I have yet to see an officer carry a pistol. My current Regiment does not even have pistols.

All ranks carry rifles (or else LSWs), although I have never seen an officer with an LSW either.

The belief here is a rifle has more range and fire power than a 9mm pistol, and snipers see holsters as officers, and hence targets.

Even the CO carries a F88.

However there are pistols in the system, mainly the MkIII and L9A1 BHPs, but the odd Inglis is still in svc too. Also USPs, Glock 19s, and Beretta M9s (suppressed with KA QD supressors)

Cheers,

Wes


----------



## Jarnhamar (25 Jul 2004)

Wes I worked for a great officer who had that opinion. No matter where he'd go he'd always have a rifle. I remember a few times when I was his driver he'd hand me his pistol to wear, grin and suggest he drivies while i carry his map.  Now thats leadership  
He also ALWAYS carried his own radio (The whole 522 man pack) when on operations and even through work up training, he didn't mess around. (This might might also default to the reason he would hand me his pistol heh)

Re the FN P-90 and friends. With all the hassel we've had to go to to get new helicopters (We still won't see them until what, 2008 - 2012?) and all the dicking around with the C7/striker/etc.. I can't really see anything being adopted. It's probably pretty negitive but all i see this as is a way to spend some money, make little contracts with companies, give some army/civilian people a little pet project. Before any money is spent on something like this it would be nice for us to atleast have all the pistols we need.

The P-90 does seem to be a hit in hollywood though. The team members on stargate use them quite a bit, looks pretty awkward though.


----------



## CertifiedNutter (25 Jul 2004)

I thought the cf helped do testing on the P90 in the early phases but never had the coin to buy them. If they are going h&k why not get a bunch of ump's or mp5ks in 9mm for other tasks also? Since the sig and brownings do seem a bit hazardous in the wrong hands. Heck even IMI could easily make a cf uzi with armour chewing 9mm dirt cheap compared to a expensive mp-7 or P90. And pistols for every soldier would be too chaotic unless the war was on :threat:. From my veiw as a hobbiest though the best route available would be FN five-seven pistols with 20rd mags, cheaper than subs and more practical.


----------



## CF_Lifer (26 Jul 2004)

Very, Very Nice Pistol.


----------



## jonsey (26 Jul 2004)

Nice weapon.


----------



## CF_Lifer (26 Jul 2004)

Yeah, FN makes alot of Good Weapons. The CF seem to like them too......C1 (FN FAL), C2 (LMG Version of FN FAL), C6 (FN MAG), C9 (FN MINIMI), FN Browning Hi-Power.


----------



## KevinB (26 Jul 2004)

Gee I guess we should make all our purchases based on aesthetics then?  :  Rather than functionality or need.


----------



## jonsey (26 Jul 2004)

Who said anything about desciding based on asthetics?


----------



## KevinB (26 Jul 2004)

Well USNSWC Crane,the RCMP and FBI have concluded the PDW's are terminally ineffective...

So I am wondering what woudl then be the criteria for adoption if effectiveness had been ruled out.

Maybe I am being an ashole here - but it really pisses me off when someone looks at a picture and makes a judgement - without having fired it, and without knowing the characteristcs of it - or the characterictics of thr system the army is seekign to replace.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (26 Jul 2004)

Kevin you are not being an as*hole you are being practical and a realist. Please continue,god knows its needed for posts like this.


----------



## CF_Lifer (26 Jul 2004)

I've never fired that model of pistol, but it is made by FN, and as far as I know, they make pretty competent weapons. I dont know what the 5.7mm (am I right?) round is like, does anyone have any info? Kevin?

Andrew


----------



## KevinB (26 Jul 2004)

Andrew,

Understood - FN does make good kit and an acquaintance of mine now works for FN and an engineer (he used to work for KAC) in both pistol and now LMG (Mk46 and Mk48)

 The problem is the round - I posted LCdr Gary K. Roberts (one of the foremost wound ballistics researchers) findings on the 5.7x28 round previously.  As well the reports mirrors the RCMP and FBI testing *"Use of the 5.7 x 28 mm is
a good way to ensure mission failure."*  the HK MP7 round has simialr ballistics as well the short M16 variants by M2Corp are near identical.


----------



## KevinB (27 Jul 2004)

Fabrique Nationale's 5.7x28mm round, and Heckler & Koch's 4.6x30mm round, neither of which
approaches the lethality of the 5.56x45mm NATO SS-109. For an assessment of the PDW, see Charles M.
Hayes, â Å“Personal Defense Weapons â â€œ Answer in Search of a Question?,â ? Wound Ballistic Review 5,1
(Spring 2001), pp. 30-36.


----------



## CF_Lifer (27 Jul 2004)

That 4-inch Barreled (M16A2 type is it?) chambered in 5.56 I'd assume? Looks like a competent PDW. Utilizing already existing Upper and Lower C7 Receivers, as well as Telescoping Buttstocks. Yes, I heard about the problems with the MP7. What about the P90? I doubt they would make a good Field weapon. I'm sure they preform well in Tactical Situations, where the missions are short, and no dirt and grit are a constant issue. 

Andrew


----------



## KevinB (27 Jul 2004)

The M2 Corp PDW's are a modular platform - however the velocity that the C77 bullet is refduced to atthe muzzle makes for a very ineffective terminal performer - just little .22 holes like some one was stabbed with an icepick.
 All of the curent PDW's suffer from a problem that while they may penetrate armour - they do not casue damage in human tissue - so You might have to shot a guy 10-20 times to incapacitiate him/her.  Problem lies here that when you need to use a pistol or PDW you need to stop the threat PDQ - not in 5 min...

 There is ammuntion available that could do both from a short 5.56mm or 9mm platform - kicker is that the JAG reveiw on it does nto look good for it could be insinuated that it violates the Hague Conventions 


> The principal provision relating to the legality of weapons is contained in Art. 23e of the Annex to Hague Convention IV Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land of 18 October 1907, which prohibits the employment of "arms, projectiles, or material of a nature to cause superfluous injury". In some law of war treatises, the term "unnecessary suffering" is used rather than "superfluous injury." The terms are regarded as synonymous. To emphasize this, Art. 35, para. 2 of the 1977 Protocol I Additional to the Geneva Conventions of August 12, 1949, states in part that "It is prohibited to employ weapons [and] projectiles . . . of a nature to cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering." Although the U.S. has made the formal decision that for military, political, and humanitarian reasons it will not become a party to Protocol I, U.S. officials have taken the position that the language of Art. 35(2) of Protocol I as quoted is a codification of customary international law, and therefore binding upon all nations.
> The terms "unnecessary suffering" and "superfluous injury" have not been formally defined within international law. In determining whether a weapon or projectile causes unnecessary suffering, a balancing test is applied between the force dictated by military necessity to achieve a legitimate objective vis-ÃƒÂ -vis suffering that may be considered superfluous to achievement of that intended objective. The test is not easily applied. For this reason, the degree of "superfluous" injury must be clearly disproportionate to the intended objectives for development and employment of the weapon, that is, it must outweigh substantially the military necessity for the weapon system or projectile.
> The fact that a weapon causes suffering does not lead to the conclusion that the weapon causes unnecessary suffering, or is illegal per se. Military necessity dictates that weapons of war lead to death, injury, and destruction; the act of combatants killing or wounding enemy combatants in combat is a legitimate act under the law of war. In this regard, there is an incongruity in the law of war in that while it is legally permissible to kill an enemy combatant, incapacitation must not result inevitably in unnecessary suffering. What is prohibited is the design (or modification) and employment of a weapon for the purpose of increasing or causing suffering beyond that required by military necessity. In conducting the balancing test necessary to determine a weapon's legality, the effects of a weapon cannot be viewed in isolation. They must be examined against comparable weapons in use on the modern battlefield, and the military necessity for the weapon or projectile under consideration.
> In addition to the basic prohibition on unnecessary suffering contained in Art. 23e of the 1907 Hague IV, one other treaty is germane to this review. The Hague Declaration Concerning Expanding Bullets of 29 July 1899 prohibits the use in international armed conflict:
> ...


 COL W. Hays Parks USA


----------



## 1feral1 (28 Jul 2004)

About the FN C1, well did you know that Canada was the first country to adopt and mass produce it? Its by far different from its FAL cousin, and if I remember right its a few things like the piston, and carrier and breech block which look similar, but beyond that, the FAL was a different kettle of fish. Different trigger gp, pistol grip, lowere reciever, gas reg, plug,and stock, etc, etc.

So, dont go calling it a FAL, thats an insult to the tonnes of Cdn engineering which went into the rifle back at the CAL plant in Ontario.

The C1 was an 'inch ptrn' of the design, and other countries to produce the inch ptrn was the UK and Australia. The UK never produced the C2, but stuck to the L4 BREN in 7.62mm NATO.

India cheated and built a version of theirs called the 1A1, and it has designs from both inch and metric versions. All not under licence either, which had FN Herstal having kittens for yrs.

As for the C2, the Aussies also produced this version known as the L2 or AR as they called it here. Several Cdn purchased components such as the the front sight ears, bipod assy, carrying handle, and the original C2 body cover mounted rear sight ( not adopted on the C2A1) too.

A note on the Cdn Browning High Power pistol too, this was made by John Inglis (a la washing machine company) during WW2 in Canada, between about Jan 44 to the wars end, and ALL T series Inglis pistols in CF service are ALL watime made. Not bad after being over 60 yrs old, eh.

Yes some parts interchange between it and its FN herstal parent pistol, but wartime manufacturing, and 'inch' conversion, plus a few other hickups have created some problems. Even the thread size is different on the lower for the grips, along with a few other things too.

Cheers,

Wes


----------



## CF_Lifer (28 Jul 2004)

Yeah, I think its time the CF adopted a new Pistol. The Browning HP has served us long enough. It is still a Competent Service Pistol, but cant match the quality of say a SIG P225, or P226 (Personally, I love the P226, and its going to be the next Pistol my dad buys. I think in .40, so to make it a competent IPSC Pistol)


----------



## MG34 (28 Jul 2004)

The Sigs are nice to be sure ,however they will not be issued as a general service pistol for a few reasons. There are tons of unissued brownings sitting around in the supply system,more than enough to last a few more decades.The current issue service 9mm Ball is too "hot" for the Sigs and wears them out prematurely and causes damage.Sure tha ammo could be changed but that would take money.The pistol replacement and PDW projects are all but gone,simply put there is no cash.The 2 prime contenders the FN P-90 and HK MP7 have not proven to be anymore effective than 9mm or 5.56mm. The FN 57 pistol has yet to be proven,given it's dismal performance in soft tissue (once again no better than 9mm)I would not hold my breath for one. There is nothing wrong with the Browning,it is old but it works..If it ain't broke ..


----------



## Troopasaurus (28 Jul 2004)

I'm fairly confident that if the service pistol is replaced it will only be firing a 9mm NATO standard round. There is a reason for the NATO standard round, thus i cannot see the use of a non standard round pistol even if there is better performance out of other rounds.


----------



## AmmoTech90 (28 Jul 2004)

I have to disagree about the 9mm Ball being too hot for the Sig MG34.

The practice round used by in the Sig is identical to the 9mm Ball round except for its primer.  The primer used in older 9mm Ball lots was not as sensitive and the lighter strike of Sig sometimes caused excessive misfires.  The current 9mm Luger FMJ round used in Sigs overseas and for practice has identical components to a 9mm Ball round, except for the primer, right down to the propellant.  And considering that MPs spend a whole lot more time on the range than most (or should) firing the FMJ round I would think that if the was a weapon compatibility problem it would be addressed.  In fact it was, by introducing new ammo for the Sig.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (28 Jul 2004)

We never had any problems with the P225 using the current 9mm ball whilst we were in the Gulf at all and we were shooting everyday.


----------



## MG34 (28 Jul 2004)

How many rounds fired a day?? The 9mm Luger is not the same round as the issued ball,put it on a cronograph and see the difference for your self.The issue ball has a higher velocity and sharper recoil than 9mm Luger. The Sig were designed to fire 9mm Luger nt military issue ball.This is evident in the fact the round had to be changed. Other units have been using the Sig series longer than the Navy or the MPs,the problems with IVI Ball and the Sigs have been identified for quite some time.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (28 Jul 2004)

About 50-100...yes I know not that much but again we never had any problems with it. Who has used the P225 longer in the CF then the MPs and NLBP?


----------



## NavyGrunt (28 Jul 2004)

I shot about 200 rounds about a month ago. No problems at all. Besides being waaaay to tiny for my hands and feeling a bit light I like it.


----------



## AmmoTech90 (28 Jul 2004)

Ex-Dragoon,

The unit that must not be named.  : (possibly)  ;D

MG42,

Once again I have to disagree.  The 9mm Luger FMJ used by the CF for training and use in the Sig overseas is made from the same components as the 9mm Ball Cdn Mk1 except for the primer.  In fact Ball is authorized for non-MP use in the Sig.


----------



## CF_Lifer (28 Jul 2004)

RopeTech said:
			
		

> I shot about 200 rounds about a month ago. No problems at all. Besides being waaaay to tiny for my hands and feeling a bit light I like it.



I got to fire some SIG P225s at NSCC, and I liked them. And I have pretty big hands. I like the P226 alot too, it has to be the most comfortable pistol I've ever used. They give a bit more kick than the Browning, having a shorter barrell, but it doesn't take long to get used to.  I'll agree with you, the  SIGs aren't as heavy as a Browning, or a US M9. The body's of the SIGs being made of Plastic. (Plastic isn't it? Or a Polymer?? I'm not sure)


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (28 Jul 2004)

LOL good point Ammo Tech...although I thought they went with the P226/228.


----------



## CF_Lifer (28 Jul 2004)

Does anyone know where to get a Good Quality, CADPAT Drop Leg Holster? Preferrably one that can hold A Couple 9mm Mags too? (Browning Hi-Power type). NOT FAKEPAT. ]
Thanks

Andrew


----------



## AmmoTech90 (28 Jul 2004)

All three weapons P225/226/228 share a very similiar mechanism.  Straight 9mm Ball can be fired from any of them.


----------



## Slim (28 Jul 2004)

*the most comfortable pistol I've ever used.*


For comfort the CZ75 is a great gun to hold and, although you don't really see them that much anymore, they were very easy at one point to get in a gun shop.

IT chambers 9mm and was made (I believe) as a Czech copy of the Browning High Power. Reasonably accurate, I don't remember off hand the mag capacity.


----------



## NavyGrunt (28 Jul 2004)

Im almost positive it was the P225. You could be right though. Of course if you are I dont know how I passed the written test on it.....seeing as I dont know its name. ;D


----------



## CF_Lifer (28 Jul 2004)

Slim said:
			
		

> *the most comfortable pistol I've ever used.*
> 
> 
> For comfort the CZ75 is a great gun to hold and, although you don't really see them that much anymore, they were very easy at one point to get in a gun shop.
> ...



I've Heard alot of good about those CZ75s. Alot of people favour them in IPSC. Although I haven't seen too many of them around. I'd like to try one sometime.


----------



## Jarnhamar (28 Jul 2004)

Whats IPSC?


----------



## Gryphon (28 Jul 2004)

well, as long as we're dreaming, why don't we just petition the CF to get us Desert Eagle Magnums each?  :


----------



## CF_Lifer (28 Jul 2004)

Ghost, IPSC -International Pistols Shooting Competition. With Duty (Service) and Open Classes. Duty has to be a stock Pistol, with no Modifications. Open is kinda of self-explanatory....you can have whatever you want, ported barrels, scopes, rails, all the Bells and Whistles. 


Yeah, Desert Eagles, now there's Firepower..... I think a .50 rounds is a little excessive.


----------



## brihard (31 Jul 2004)

OK, so for thsoe up to date on new weapons, how about a semiautomatic Beretta Cx4 Storm Carbine? One of the optional calibres is 9x19mm, with an up to a 20 round magazine. Yiou can get it in .40 S&W and .45 ACP if you want as well. It's a ncie looking weapon, basically a carbine in pistol calibre; Shoulder stock for stability, 16 inch barrel, 31 inch total length.  I'm sure that for a military contract they could shorten the barrel, and/or the stock. It comes with optional picatinny rails for modularity, too. Very easy field strip. Safety, magazine release, cocking handle, and ejector can all be switched left/right. Altogether, with a bit of Canadian adjustment, it looks like it could fulfill a PDW need. And of course, since it fires standar pistol rounds instead.

http://www.cx4storm.com/index.aspx


----------



## brihard (31 Jul 2004)

Oh, hey, I just realized I can attach pictures...


----------



## CF_Lifer (31 Jul 2004)

Yeah, I saw those Berettas a couple of months ago. I bet they're pretty expensive though. CF doesn't want to dish out much cash.....they cant spend what they dont have.


----------



## MG34 (1 Aug 2004)

CF_Lifer said:
			
		

> Ghost, IPSC -International Pistols Shooting Competition. With Duty (Service) and Open Classes. Duty has to be a stock Pistol, with no Modifications. Open is kinda of self-explanatory....you can have whatever you want, ported barrels, scopes, rails, all the Bells and Whistles.
> 
> 
> Yeah, Desert Eagles, now there's Firepower..... I think a .50 rounds is a little excessive.



Correct me if I am wrong but didn't you say you were an IPSC  Range Officer or at least had a Black Badge??

"(Qualified RSO with the ORA/DCRA, did the Course run by Keith, as well As IPSC Black Badge and RSO Qualified)"

How then can you not know a frigg'n thing about it?? IPSC stands for International Practical Shooting Confederation.There is no "service "Class,but the following:

Standard,Production,Open and Modified Classes as well as  Revolver Class. "Duty " is not a class but a sub class pertaining to equipment that allows serving police and military members to compete with their issued equipment.


----------



## CF_Lifer (1 Aug 2004)

As in Service, I meant Duty.....I think Duty and Service are the Same Thing...aren't they? Being a Stock Pistol, off the Line. Having nothing done to it? And then there's an Open Class, where people use the "Space Guns".


----------



## Jarnhamar (1 Aug 2004)

And the plot thickens....

Good points MG34.


----------



## NavyGrunt (1 Aug 2004)

MG34 said:
			
		

> CF_Lifer said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Busted.......


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (1 Aug 2004)

As only you would know.....?


----------



## NavyGrunt (1 Aug 2004)

I would know what Bruce?


----------



## Jarnhamar (1 Aug 2004)

Should we say "welcome back" wetgrunt or is your choice of a name just coinsidence to a certain paramedic/sailor/police officer from out west, in the navy, who loved MP5s. 

Who got called on being a poser and made quite an ass of himself in parting I might add.


----------



## MG34 (1 Aug 2004)

CF_Lifer said:
			
		

> As in Service, I meant Duty.....I think Duty and Service are the Same Thing...aren't they? Being a Stock Pistol, off the Line. Having nothing done to it? And then there's an Open Class, where people use the "Space Guns".



Ummm no,it is obvious you are over your head here.Duty/Service are not Classes in IPSC they are used in other shooting sports such as PPC.The class you are attempting to describe in IPSC is Standard,or Production where the modifications to the competitors firearms are severly restricted or not allowed at all. The Duty in IPSC related to the fact that a serving police /military/security,etc person is entitled to wear his duty holster for example a thigh holster which other competitors are not allowed,as long as they are in full uniform to include body armour,vests,etc that they would wear in the executuion of their duties..get it DUTY. They are still restricted to register in what ever class their firearm falls into usually Production (factory double action pistols) Standard (factory single action pistols with very minor modifications to sights,grip allowed) or revolver (self explanitory).
 The matches they shoot at Connaught,Borden etc are SERVICE PISTOL COMPETITIONS different rules and certainly not IPSC.
Hope this clears this up for you.Please contine baffling us with B/S at your earliest convenience. ;D

And it is RACE GUN not SPACE GUN :


----------



## CF_Lifer (1 Aug 2004)

Hey, Take it easy There Sgt. I'm Dreadfully sorry I got the Acronym Messed up, I've only ever shot 1 IPSC Match, and only got IPSC RSO qualified so I could take my turn RSOing at Competitions. (Although I dont know how I'm goinig to get my other 2 points to keep the RSO title). Thanks for clearing up the Weapon Categories for me....it doesnt really matter, I never plan on using a "RACE Gun" (I'm sure there are lots of different names for that class).


----------



## MG34 (2 Aug 2004)

This stuff would have been covered in detail on your IPSC RO course,time to hit the books I think. keep at it though it is a great sport I've benn doing it fora while now and still enjoy it.


----------



## Slim (2 Aug 2004)

MG34

Good Catch!

Slim


----------



## NavyGrunt (2 Aug 2004)

Silly Ghost.

Heres a post to clarify-

Yes I'm Wetgrunt, yes I'm ropetech. Yes my REAL name is right there. In print. I figured I'll give you my real name instead of "hiding" behind an internet moniker. As for being a Paramedic I never said that. I said I worked in EMS. I worked an ambulance the minimum I had too to keep certified. As did everyone in my fire department. Yes I was a firefighter. Yes I was a traffic cop. Yes I did a brief(very brief) stint with Alberta's correctional service, And yes I am waiting for a transfer from the primary reserve Navy to the reg force as an infanteer. 

As for you ghost, any further "calling out" you want to do you can PM me. that goes for everyone else as well. Im certainly "no poser".

As for looking like an ass when I left. i won't dispute that. But Im here and im using my real name. And I will share my opinion in a respectful and less abrasive way. The mods and I have already been over this. 

Cheers Ghost,

Goodluck solving mysteries, and catching posers in the future Scooby-doo


----------



## portcullisguy (2 Aug 2004)

CF_Lifer said:
			
		

> Ghost, IPSC -International Pistols Shooting Competition. With Duty (Service) and Open Classes. Duty has to be a stock Pistol, with no Modifications. Open is kinda of self-explanatory....you can have whatever you want, ported barrels, scopes, rails, all the Bells and Whistles.



IPSC = International PRACTICAL Shooting Confederation  See www.ipsc.org

I am personally not a big fan of this shooting discipline because of their open class.  They don't do a lot of duty class shooting in Canada, because most of those people go to PPC instead (Police Practical), which is a totally different ball game.  IPSC supposedly had "realistic" scenarios, but most of the shooting is done with high-speed, low-drag .45 ACP pistols with 2-lb triggers, bevelled magazine wells, red dot sights, and hand-loaded ammunition with just enough powder to get the bullet to the targets, usually 7 m or less.

If you shot at me with an IPSC gun and I was 50 feet away, I wouldn't even duck.  :-*

For those of you who are still interested, if you have a Canadian Firearms Licence (restricted class) you can join a local gun club.  Most will have an IPSC black badge course, which is required to compete in Canada.  Some of the big events have pretty good prizes, but personally, if they';re going to have a "practical" shooting competition, I would want to see it done with "practical" guns and scenarios.  If you are ever in a real gun fight, you are unlikely to have your high-speed $3,000+ IPSC match pistol handy.


----------



## MG34 (2 Aug 2004)

I am not sure if youi are just uninformed,a troll or an idiot there portcullisguy. Either way you have no idea about what you are talking about.
IPSC ammunition is regulated just so such low power ammo is not allowed.PPC (Police Pistol Combat) is not practicle shooting but a series of static range exercises.
 The heavily modified Open guns are not the norm.Unmodified factory handguns such as used in Standard,Production and Revolver Classes are the most popular.All classes only compete with each other,so there is no adavantage gained except the shooter's skill. There is no need for an open gun to shoot IPSC any handgun 9mm and over is allowed.
I have several IPSC handguns  and access to a range come on over and stand 50 feet away if you want...idiot. :


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (2 Aug 2004)

Play nice guys or Uncle Ex will take away your guns and send you to your rooms for a time out.


----------



## Jarnhamar (2 Aug 2004)

Ruh Row

I knew you'd be back. They alllllll come back.
Kidding of course, welcome back wetgrunt.

I think you should have just used your origional username, kinda seemed like you were trying to sneak under the radar.  No one is making you use your real name of course but to each their own. Iwouldn't use it if i were you but thats just me.
 I liked some of your comments and opinions, others not as much. I think as long as you accept some people will have different opinions and don't get too emotional over it you'll be fine.

Looking forward to seeing some good posts from you. Good choice on going infantry too


----------



## scm77 (7 Aug 2004)

Back to the pistols. 

Since buying Canadian is always nice how about Para Ordnance Stealth Hi-Cap 9mm?

They're modeled after the 1911, and everyone knows the quality of those.

The one pictured is in .45 I can't seem to find a picture of the 9mm.  

Here's a link to 9mm info.
http://www.paraord.com/pages/lda_highcap.html#lda_highcap_stealth_9

Holds 19 rounds...very nice. :cam:


----------



## KevinB (7 Aug 2004)

My experiences with Para Ord have not been good - I have seen way to many Lemons.

 I think the Army is set on the Sig P226 - buying Canadian should onl be done if their is a superior product here - as the Army is not (at least should not be) a welfare system for Canadian Industry.


----------



## MG34 (7 Aug 2004)

Amen to that Kevin,Paras are nice but would not be a good choice for a service pistol.The P-226 is good to go out of the box,no modifications required,and has an excellent reputation in military and police circles as it is in service with dozens of countries already.


----------



## mudgunner49 (16 Aug 2004)

MG34 said:
			
		

> The Sigs are nice to be sure ,however they will not be issued as a general service pistol for a few reasons. There are tons of unissued brownings sitting around in the supply system,more than enough to last a few more decades.The current issue service 9mm Ball is too "hot" for the Sigs and wears them out prematurely and causes damage.Sure tha ammo could be changed but that would take money.The pistol replacement and PDW projects are all but gone,simply put there is no cash.The 2 prime contenders the FN P-90 and HK MP7 have not proven to be anymore effective than 9mm or 5.56mm. The FN 57 pistol has yet to be proven,given it's dismal performance in soft tissue (once again no better than 9mm)I would not hold my breath for one. There is nothing wrong with the Browning,it is old but it works..If it ain't broke ..



I'm not sure where you are getting your information regarding the rate of wear on the Sig line of pistols, however I can state categorically that you are WRONG!!   What reasoning do you use when coming to the conclusion that the current CF 9mm is to hot for a weapon produced using modern techniques and modern materials, but won't wear out a 60 year old pistol in short order???   If it ain't broke, don't fix it??   I have shot a number of Brownings into the ground in competition and the primary reason that most of them went down was simply the fact that they were old and worn out... metal fatigue and parts breakage.   They are not all that they could be ergonomically, and the sights, quite frankly, SUCK HUGE!!   A combat handgun should at the very least be usable in low light which means, at the very least, night sights...

Don't for a minute think that I'm knocking the BHP as I have had a number of nice examples of this pistol.   My current one is a very nice Belgian customized lightly by Austin Behlert before 1990.   However, I also own a couple of Sigs, several Glocks and a Beretta or two, and a suitcase full of 1911's in various calibres, and most if not all of these pistols are better for military usage than the Browning...

YMMV

Blake


----------



## tacsit (16 Aug 2004)

Listen up to mudgunner, he most definitely knows what he's talking about. Welcome to the board bro!


----------



## mudgunner49 (16 Aug 2004)

CF_Lifer said:
			
		

> Ghost, IPSC -International Pistols Shooting Competition. With Duty (Service) and Open Classes. Duty has to be a stock Pistol, with no Modifications. Open is kinda of self-explanatory....you can have whatever you want, ported barrels, scopes, rails, all the Bells and Whistles.
> 
> 
> Yeah, Desert Eagles, now there's Firepower..... I think a .50 rounds is a little excessive.



That's Iternational PRACTICALShooting Confederation.  There are categories for handgun, shotgun and rifle...


Blake


----------



## Marine837M (16 Aug 2004)

Reading the posts is very interesting....I do like the Browning High Power a formidable weapon,well balanced and nice to shoot...however I must say I recently fired a Sig 226 and found that an awsome weapon.

Marine837M


----------



## Slim (16 Aug 2004)

I cut my teeth learning to shoot a single action Browning. But now I must confess I'm a die-hard Glock fan!

Slim


----------



## Lance Wiebe (16 Aug 2004)

Back in my youth, I owned and fired quite a few handguns, and entered into several IPSC events, although I tried to commit myself mostly to the three gun events.  Some of those American pistoleros were very, very good.

My own weapon was a customised Browning HP, complete with two barrels (from the factory), Pachmyer grips, three dot sights, ambidextrous safety, and some more stuff.  I never once had a stoppage, which is a good thing, shooting minor caliber was difficult enough.

I liked the Sig 226, although it didn't have the "feel" (balance)I liked, but that can be gotten used to quite easily.   The Glock, I would sooner leave alone, thanks.  Maybe it was just the early ones (I did my shooting in the 70's and 80's), but lots of stoppages and breaks started occuring with the Glock owners after about 10,000 rounds down range.

If I was to carry concealed today, I would still consider the BHP, but would most likely take the Para Ordinance 9mm.

What was the POS Sig?  The 225?  Memory failing again.............


----------



## Armour (26 Aug 2004)

Ghost778 said:
			
		

> VK WAS really strict with handguns, especially the NSE. They tried telling out guys from the battle group who were going on gate that we wern't allowed to use pistols. Why? The gate commander or SF commander (whoever)   didn't have one so he didn't want us having them.
> 
> The NSE totally did not trust their soldiers with weapons.   In my platoon we regularly swapped pistols when someone went on leave, when someone was going on a road trip, when we were switching up search teams/security teams when we were on OPs.   If someone is going to stay in camp the whole tour and work in an office, give them a friggin C7 rifle and let the guys who need them use the pistols.



Give me my rifle any day I preferred to have it with me over a hand gun. The only time in on tour I carried a Pistole and it was not by choice was when In Kiseljak when If we wanted to go to town we had to carry it in place of rifle as to make a friendlier jester to the locals and seam less thrthreateninget me say I didn't go to town much as felt naked with out my rifle. but there was a great pizza place across the road form camp that went to a lot.    If there is a situation that requires me to use a hand gun when I have a rifle then i must say things are bad.


----------



## CDNBlackhawk (26 Aug 2004)

I got my restricted firearms license about 7 months ago, originally for employment purposes but then i didn't follow through with  it because was waiting for military to call me.

I have been thinking about buying a pistol for some time for sport shooting,  i got two questions: whats a good pistol to start off with buying and is their any gun clubs up in Petawawa that i could go to, to do some shooting.

thanks


----------



## GGHG_Cadet (26 Aug 2004)

You should start off with a .22 and get your technique (sight picture and trigger control mainly) down and then move up to larger calibers.


----------



## KevinB (26 Aug 2004)

Blake,  A certain unit found that the 9mm ball (SMG pressure stuff) was kicking the crap out of aluminum frame SIG's.
  The BHP's are steel and thus (in theory) more resistant the battering but the more than +P+ ammo.

 The new Steel framed SIGs (and conviently with Light rail) will solve this issue.


----------



## Scratch_043 (26 Aug 2004)

Blackhawk, what employment purposes would those be??

I can not think of many reasons for having a restricted firearm at work, unless you work at a gun shop, as a police officer, and a few others.

I am just curious as to why an employer would require you to have a restricted PAL.


----------



## CDNBlackhawk (26 Aug 2004)

BRINKS


----------



## mudgunner49 (27 Aug 2004)

KevinB said:
			
		

> Blake,   A certain unit found that the 9mm ball (SMG pressure stuff) was kicking the crap out of aluminum frame SIG's.
> The BHP's are steel and thus (in theory) more resistant the battering but the more than +P+ ammo.
> 
> The new Steel framed SIGs (and conviently with Light rail) will solve this issue.



Kevin.

I had not heard that - of course I'm not putting 20 000 rounds of high pressure stuff thru my Sig.  Got the pictures... outstanding!!!


Stay safe,

Blake


----------



## Scratch_043 (28 Aug 2004)

*CDN*Blackhawk said:
			
		

> BRINKS


ah, I see, thanks.


----------



## MG34 (28 Aug 2004)

"I'm not sure where you are getting your information regarding the rate of wear on the Sig line of pistols, however I can state categorically that you are WRONG!!  What reasoning do you use when coming to the conclusion that the current CF 9mm is to hot for a weapon produced using modern techniques and modern materials, but won't wear out a 60 year old pistol in short order??? "

I guess I wasn't WRONG!! eh? No big deal just make sure of your facts before you post.  On BTW the Sigs were cracking at the locking block along with a few slide failures due to the ammo being too hot.The 9mm ball is not loaded to SAMMI specs but is hotter.Just put a few through a chrono and see for yourself.


----------



## Satelliteslayer (31 Aug 2004)

I remember, a while back it was stated that lab rats got cancer from drinking milk, they drank an equivalent of more than 4 litres per day for more than 10 years..........

As a proud SIG P-226 owner I can say that I have stuffed just about anything I can get my hands on down the throat of that puppy and it didn't choke once.

Did I fire 10K+ rnds of +P SMG ammo through it...... NO.... who would???

Is it a great pistol....yes, is it the best in the world.................................... would I trust my life to it... you bet ya.

Should DND adopt the SIG P-226.... of course they should.... spare parts will abound  ;D


----------



## Servicepub (7 Sep 2004)

As long as the CF have over 15,000 Brownings in stock, and a wastage rate of less than 500/year, there is no hope that Treasury Board will approve money to purchase ANY replacement pistol.
Nice to dream though.


----------



## KevinB (9 Sep 2004)

Well they should issue out some of those stocks cause the 8T on my hip as I type this is a litte beat up...
Not to mention we dont have enought here at this time.

But as an operational user of the pistol I have no complaints or desire to switch (well given an unlimited budget I would go with the Sig P226)


----------



## chrisf (13 Sep 2004)

Arctic Acorn said:
			
		

> We had a Dutch driver on our staff who had a double negligant discharge when clearing into Tuzla. How the heck do you do that?
> 
> 'Rock out with your Glock out!'      :threat:



And hang out with Wang's Ak-47 out. (Wang is a guy I know in the Chinese Army).


----------



## Scratch_043 (14 Sep 2004)

Just a Sig Op said:
			
		

> And hang out with Wang's Ak-47 out. (Wang is a guy I know in the Chinese Army).



yeah...sure he is....


----------

