Joint Combat Pistol program, are we the real winners?

[jsquared]

So the Army's Future Handgun System program and the Special Operations Forces Combat Pistol program, aka the combines Joint Combat Pistol (and later just Combat Pistol) program, is pretty old news. In a nutshell for those not familiar, the Army and SOCOM wanted to field a new pistol to replace the M9. The basic requirements were that it be a modular .45ACP pistol with night sights capable of accepting a suppressor and accessories. Some secondary requirements, related mainly to SOF, were things like a dark earth finish with black slide, captive takedown pins, ability to fire in DAO or DA/SA, etc.

SOCOM originally wanted 50,000 pistols, and the Army ramped the requirement up to 645,000 with the goal to replace the M9.

This is where the different arms manufacturers come in. 50,000 pistols for the government is a nice order, and 645,000 is a freakin deal of a lifetime, so pretty much all major handgun manufacturers developed a pistol to enter into the competition for selection. The thing is, one requirement of the program is that the pistol be a non-developmental item, meaning it had to be at least closely based on an off-the-shelf pistol already developed and being sold. This led to a each manufacturer taking one of their existing pistols and designing a combat pistol around it. The following is a partial list of the pistols that were developed specifically for the program:

* Heckler & Koch HK45C

* SIG P220 Combat

* Ruger P345

* Smith & Wesson M&P

Cont.....

 

[jsquared]

...



* Glock 21SF

* Beretta Px4 Storm

[Broken External Image]:

* Taurus PT 24/7 OSS

[Broken External Image]:

* Fabrique Nationale FNP45 USG

[Broken External Image]:

* Para-Ordnance LDA 1911

So, long story short, the Army backs out of the program, and drops the requirement back to 50,000 pistols specifically for SOCOM. The program is officially scrapped shortly after, with the Army deciding to stick with the M9 for now due to budget constraints. I believe SOCOM bought a small number of the HK45's that were offered after doing some internal trials but I am not sure.

Whats left are a whole slew of combat pistols from the biggest manufacturers that have no reason to exist. So, these manufacturers decide to see how the public would feel about buying these pistols to recoup some of the money spent in developing them. This is why, seemingly all at once, every major pistol manufacturer released a flat dark earth high capacity pistol chambered in .45ACP with an accessory rail and night sights for sale to the public.

I am a huge fan of offensive combat pistols so I was stoked to see all of these new offerings coming out. It is also nice that a lot of these pistols are loaded with awesome features, some of them only found on the model designed to be entered into the military pistol program, and they are usually not that much more expensive than their standard, off-the-shelf cousins (with a few exceptions). And, it gave us a lot of unique offerings in an otherwise pretty standard lineup from the handgun makers. For these reasons I think consumers benefited a lot from the failure of the program.

 

[SpeedyR]

as far as I know the FN offering was the FNP-45 Tactical and the HK was the Mark 23, but that might have just been the SOCOM part of the program? I know that they also had to be ambidextrous which is what I was really excited about and I liked the higher capacity. I've always liked the glock 40's as it seemed to be the best "compromise" between capacity and knockdown but this one takes the cake.

I just bought one of the FNP 45 tactical and really like it. it's my first 45 auto as I just have never liked any 1911 style pistol (my first semi auto pistol was a walther PPK/s 22lr and just never understood why you would make a gun without a decocking lever). But that's just me.

[Broken External Image]:

I like the fact that it's 15 rounds, full ambidextrous, threaded barrel, raised night sites, and still fits my hand. I would have liked the HK Mark 23 (the other main entry) but the FN was about half the price and easier to find. things I don't like- hard to find a holster for it (lefty) and magazines are $50 each. oh yeah and then you also want to put a red dot sight on it, and that's another $400. and then a suppressor. it gets bad right about here...

but nice to see the civilian market get some trickle down from the military quickly.

 

[jsquared]

With the FNP Tac Im guessing it was either a result of the manufacturer looking specifically at the SOCOM requirements, or jumping the gun during the trials and starting development on the final product before the competition even started. The revised JCP req's specifically call for a black or grey non-reflective slide, which would put the FNP Tac out of the running (although thats easy enough to fix). Then again the FN USG and the HK45C dont have threaded barrels, which was another requirement of the JCP program. So really who knows, but im thinking the initial entrants from FN and HK were the FNP USG and the HK45C, and while the program was ongoing they started in on developing the actual pistol to be fielded if they won the competition. From that we get the FNP Tac and a revised Mk23 that would fit into the JCP program reqs.

 

[ngcsugrad09]

FYI, these have both been cancelled.

 

[jsquared]

FYI, these have both been cancelled.

So, long story short, the Army backs out of the program, and drops the requirement back to 50,000 pistols specifically for SOCOM. The program is officially scrapped shortly after, with the Army deciding to stick with the M9 for now due to budget constraints.

 

[RamRoddoc]

Yes sir we are the winners. Without competition the herd would never improve. We all benefit from trial and errors of the arms makers.

Heck, who wouldn't want a better .45 ACP sidearm. The military (ours and others) have repeatedly downsized their side arms until actual conflict and hard use. Then and only then within the constrictions of rules of warfare (no hollow points) do they realize they screwed up by downsizing to 9mm, 38 etc. On the other hand good performance ammo in those rounds do very well but the our G.I. only gets FMJ and 9mm in 115 grain FMJ is lacking on the battle field when compared to hardball 230 grain .45 ACP.

 

[Aimless]

On the other hand good performance ammo in those rounds do very well but the our G.I. only gets FMJ and 9mm in 115 grain FMJ is lacking on the battle field when compared to hardball 230 grain .45 ACP.

NATO 9mm is 124gr and it is loaded hot. So it is basically 124gr +P FMJ.

 

[ngcsugrad09]

I like to think of it as a simple summation.

 

[Mr. Rogers]

i always wondered why only the m&p45 came in fde. now i know.