Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 56
  1. #1
    ginkgo is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    9

    Report From Iraq - Beretta

    A co-worker just returned from an 18 month tour in Iraq with the Army. He worked in administration in the Green Zone, but still went on weekly police work outside the zone. Regarding the Beretta sidearm, and all equipment, Army deploys teams of people constantly who evaluate gear performance. Beretta has not been singled out for reliability issues. Army is looking into going back to 45 cal, because the 9mm is viewed as less than positive in stopping power. Most infantry don't carry the sidearm, only the rifle. Men in turrets on vehicles like APC's and tanks use the pistol and not rifles. Word is that enemy take 'half a dozen' steps when hit by 9mm instead of being stopped. Double tapping is the rule. Army Times magazine repeats that Army is evaluating the return to 45.

  2. Ads
  3. #2
    Baldy's Avatar
    Baldy is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Port St.John,FL.
    Posts
    6,741
    I read the other day where the government just ordered something like 176,000 more Beretta's. So I don't think they are going anywhere soon.

  4. #3
    Shipwreck's Avatar
    Shipwreck is online now HGF Forum Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Beretta City, Texas
    Posts
    10,734
    Well, the whole test system that had all the gun companies competing to be the new supplier has been cancelled. So, they will be keeping the Beretta for now at least.

    Many people on the HK Pro site hope that HK will still release their 45 next year despite the cancellation...

  5. #4
    Hal8000's Avatar
    Hal8000 is offline Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Royal Gorge, Colorado
    Posts
    531
    Being limited to just "Ball" ammunition, I would take the .45ACP any day over the .9mm...
    To bad our guys cannot have decent ammunition along with a other wise, fine pistol...

  6. #5
    rection47 is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    29
    Quote Originally Posted by Shipwreck View Post
    Many people on the HK Pro site hope that HK will still release their 45 next year despite the cancellation...

    Isnt the MK23 a 45? Ive read that that gun excels in all aspects, as a sidearm, why wouldnt the military just use that?

  7. #6
    Shipwreck's Avatar
    Shipwreck is online now HGF Forum Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Beretta City, Texas
    Posts
    10,734
    Because its too damn big. Ever try to hold one.

    They need something that even women can use.

    And, in black, its a $2k gun.

  8. #7
    Mike Barham's Avatar
    Mike Barham is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Arizona, baby!
    Posts
    5,081
    As I understand it, the few HK Mk. 23s in inventory mainly stay locked up in arms room vaults. There's very little point in that pistol. For the size and weight, you can almost carry the vastly more effective M4 or, if you need a quiet weapon, a suppressed MP5.

    Most special ops types seem to prefer 1911s if they have a choice, though the SIG P226 is in use by SEALs and lots of guys carry the M9. I've talked to a few elite types who have been to the Big Sandbox, and none have even mentioned the Mk. 23.

    Army SECFOR and MPs are all issued pistols. These guys comprise a very large number of the soldiers patrolling Iraq. They get M9s. Army and Marine infantry generally just have a rifle or machinegun and LOTS of ammo.

    I realize this is a handgun board and everyone here likes pistols, but pistols are basically inconsequential weapons on a battlefield. A pistol is nice to have, but keep in mind that for the weight of a pistol and a couple of spare mags, you can carry two more 30 round M4 magazines, which is so much more effective in a firefight that comparisons are ridiculous. The main reason to have a pistol seems to be fulfilling the requirement to be armed at all times (even in secured areas) without being burdened with a long arm.

    It's funny how things change. When the 1911 was general issue, everyone moaned that it kicked hard and was totally inaccurate. So we went to the Beretta. Everyone was pleased for a few years. Now everyone claims it's a peashooter with unreliable mags. You can't please anyone, I guess.

    If I had to shoot hajji with a pistol loaded with ball ammo, I'd prefer to do it with a .45 than a 9mm. However, most military people quite honestly can't shoot a pistol well enough to even hit hajji, so I think I'd rather give them 16 chances to hit him versus eight.
    Employed by Galco Gunleather - www.galcogunleather.com / Veteran OEF VIII

    Donate to the Christian and Stephanie Nielson Recovery fund: http://www.nierecovery.com/.

    All opinions, particularly those involving politics and Glocks, are mine and not Galco's.

  9. #8
    js's Avatar
    js
    js is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    NC, USA
    Posts
    3,064
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike Barham at Galco View Post
    As I understand it, the few HK Mk. 23s in inventory mainly stay locked up in arms room vaults. There's very little point in that pistol. For the size and weight, you can almost carry the vastly more effective M4 or, if you need a quiet weapon, a suppressed MP5.

    Most special ops types seem to prefer 1911s if they have a choice, though the SIG P226 is in use by SEALs and lots of guys carry the M9. I've talked to a few elite types who have been to the Big Sandbox, and none have even mentioned the Mk. 23.

    Army SECFOR and MPs are all issued pistols. These guys comprise a very large number of the soldiers patrolling Iraq. They get M9s. Army and Marine infantry generally just have a rifle or machinegun and LOTS of ammo.

    I realize this is a handgun board and everyone here likes pistols, but pistols are basically inconsequential weapons on a battlefield. A pistol is nice to have, but keep in mind that for the weight of a pistol and a couple of spare mags, you can carry two more 30 round M4 magazines, which is so much more effective in a firefight that comparisons are ridiculous. The main reason to have a pistol seems to be fulfilling the requirement to be armed at all times (even in secured areas) without being burdened with a long arm.

    It's funny how things change. When the 1911 was general issue, everyone moaned that it kicked hard and was totally inaccurate. So we went to the Beretta. Everyone was pleased for a few years. Now everyone claims it's a peashooter with unreliable mags. You can't please anyone, I guess.

    If I had to shoot hajji with a pistol loaded with ball ammo, I'd prefer to do it with a .45 than a 9mm. However, most military people quite honestly can't shoot a pistol well enough to even hit hajji, so I think I'd rather give them 16 chances to hit him versus eight.
    Extremely good point.
    "bing bang boom! hair out...hamburger time" - William Murderface

  10. #9
    Revolver's Avatar
    Revolver is offline Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    897
    I'd rather have with me the '16A2. Better marksmanship training is desperately needed but seems to have dropped to the lowest of priorities. I'm indifferent toward the M9. Granted, it isn't the best choice for what it is but it gets the job done.

  11. #10
    Hal8000's Avatar
    Hal8000 is offline Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Royal Gorge, Colorado
    Posts
    531
    Well, after all, a pistol is really for fighting your way back to your rifle anyway....

  12. #11
    Mike Barham's Avatar
    Mike Barham is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Arizona, baby!
    Posts
    5,081
    Quote Originally Posted by Hal8000 View Post
    Well, after all, a pistol is really for fighting your way back to your rifle anyway....
    If you end up down to only a pistol in Iraq, you are in about the deepest kaka imaginable. There's probably no rifle to fight your way to, since the only reason you'd be using the pistol is if your primary weapon went down for some reason (out of ammo, blown up, or in a burning Humvee). You'd have to pop hajji and take his AK.

    Everyone knows how to run an AK, right?
    Employed by Galco Gunleather - www.galcogunleather.com / Veteran OEF VIII

    Donate to the Christian and Stephanie Nielson Recovery fund: http://www.nierecovery.com/.

    All opinions, particularly those involving politics and Glocks, are mine and not Galco's.

  13. #12
    nukehayes's Avatar
    nukehayes is offline Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Stationed in San Diego, home is Newark, OH
    Posts
    488
    The army is worried about stopping power with their Beretta M9?
    What about their friggin' Rifle? .223 = really fast .22 not much stopping power there. I think they need to adopt that new chambering 6.8x43 for their rifle. I realize less ammo capacity but its better to drop an enemy with one shot than to use 4 to do the same job. My buddy is over there right now and has written to me about the total lack of stopping power he has with his rifle. Oh well, I definately want the military to go back to the 1911, but I don't think it's going to happen, and being in the Navy, I know how long it would actually take for anything like that to happen. Oh well, I can still dream and pray that my buddy stays safe and makes his shots count.

  14. #13
    dogngun is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    67
    Very interesting thread, hope no one objects if I bring it back. I was in the Army in the 1911 era, 1968-1971.
    The pistols then issued were relics of WW II, dying of old age, and most guys who carried one wished for something a little newer and more modern.
    The 1911 is a great pistol, if you take the time to perfect your skills with it and learn its quirks. Many people find it difficult to shoot well-or at all.
    The DA 9mm was welcomed when it came into service, and I'd bet money (if I had any) that there are very few actual pistol users now in the military who
    would like to have it back.
    I am not anti-1911, I have owned several since I bought a WW II issue Remington Rand for $170 in 1972, but there are easier pistols for the average shooter to master and that is a big consideration when training troops.

    I also agree, if you are in a war and you are down to a pistol, you are in it up to the neck.

    Mark

  15. #14
    Chow Chow's Avatar
    Chow Chow is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    28
    The MK23 is not too big its just you guys that are too small to handle it

  16. #15
    DRAEGER is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    76
    I've seen a wide variety of the firearms currently being used in the Military, they are in sad shape. The M9 is like many of the variety of m16's and M4's over there. They are old, well used and many have been abused. It's not a wonder people complain about their service weapons. I also read that Beretta did receive a very large order for the US military, it does make sense considering it is something they have trained with, are fairly use to using and no retraining for the armor either.

    I am a big fan of the 45 caliber, although I more often carry 9mm for a variety of reasons. I prefer to use a full size pistol under most circumstances like the 92's and 1911's or my 24/7 (soon to be a 24/7 OSS too). I have larger hands. the size and weight feels better to me, plus I generally like shooting something closer to a 5" barreled firearm.

  17. #16
    Mike Barham's Avatar
    Mike Barham is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Arizona, baby!
    Posts
    5,081
    Quote Originally Posted by DRAEGER View Post
    I've seen a wide variety of the firearms currently being used in the Military, they are in sad shape. The M9 is like many of the variety of m16's and M4's over there. They are old, well used and many have been abused.
    I've seen very few weapons in "sad shape." As unit armorer, every carbine and pistol we issued went through my hands. While many of the pistols had somewhat worn finishes, all were perfectly functional. We actually had one brand new Colt M4 that malfunctioned intermittently due to a faulty extractor. That was an easy fix, though.

    I see lots of weapons here that have worn finishes, but that doesn't mean the weapon is abused. Hell, I take a worn weapon as a sign that the bearer probably has some serious experience under his belt. Here in Afghanistan, our weapons repair support facility is simply excellent. Any weapon that goes down can be repaired in a day, and if it can't they will just replace it on the spot.

    The main problem is the lousy magazines floating around in theater, especially for the M9. The Check-Mate mags suck, but it is very hard to get anything else. I had to have my wife send me some OEM Beretta mags for my personal pistol.
    Employed by Galco Gunleather - www.galcogunleather.com / Veteran OEF VIII

    Donate to the Christian and Stephanie Nielson Recovery fund: http://www.nierecovery.com/.

    All opinions, particularly those involving politics and Glocks, are mine and not Galco's.

  18. #17
    DRAEGER is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    76
    Mike,

    Why is it I just knew you would be the one to quote and reply to my comments... lol!

    I'm telling you, someday we need to do the beer and pizza thing

  19. #18
    TOF's Avatar
    TOF
    TOF is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northern Arizona
    Posts
    3,015
    [QUOTE=Here in Afghanistan, our weapons repair support facility is simply excellent. Any weapon that goes down can be repaired in a day and if it can't they will just replace it on the spot.
    [/QUOTE]

    I am curious Mike. What do the Fighting Men do while their weapon is sidelined for a day?

  20. #19
    DRAEGER is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    76
    Quote Originally Posted by TOF View Post
    I am curious Mike. What do the Fighting Men do while their weapon is sidelined for a day?

    Golf?

  21. #20
    Mike Barham's Avatar
    Mike Barham is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Arizona, baby!
    Posts
    5,081
    Quote Originally Posted by TOF View Post
    I am curious Mike. What do the Fighting Men do while their weapon is sidelined for a day?
    We have loaner M4s and (some) duplicate crew-served weapons. M9s aren't a big concern, since pistols are almost useless in battle, and we have yet to see one go down anyway.

    As far as maintenance, if a unit armorer can't fix the weapon, it gets evacuated to direct support. We'll give the soldier a loaner if he's going on a mission immediately (I know, I know, the rifle won't be sighted in for him - we just use mechanical zero). Since missions are sort of irregular, we may or may not issue another weapon. Depends on if he needs it right away or not, and if he has a pistol to carry around the base in the meantime.

    Since I am located on the same post as the direct support facility, I can physically bring it over and have them look at it. They can usually tell me on the spot if they can fix it. If yes, I'll just come back in a few hours or the next day and pick it up. If they say they can't fix it immediately, they'll just swap it for a functioning weapon.

    The soldier will obviously have to sight in the new weapon at the first available opportunity, but there are plenty of shooting opportunities here!
    Employed by Galco Gunleather - www.galcogunleather.com / Veteran OEF VIII

    Donate to the Christian and Stephanie Nielson Recovery fund: http://www.nierecovery.com/.

    All opinions, particularly those involving politics and Glocks, are mine and not Galco's.

  22. #21
    TOF's Avatar
    TOF
    TOF is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northern Arizona
    Posts
    3,015
    So who handles the "direct support facility"? Army or Civies?

  23. #22
    Mike Barham's Avatar
    Mike Barham is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Arizona, baby!
    Posts
    5,081
    Quote Originally Posted by TOF View Post
    So who handles the "direct support facility"? Army or Civies?
    Civilian contractors. Here at Bagram they are mostly Indians (dots, not feathers).
    Employed by Galco Gunleather - www.galcogunleather.com / Veteran OEF VIII

    Donate to the Christian and Stephanie Nielson Recovery fund: http://www.nierecovery.com/.

    All opinions, particularly those involving politics and Glocks, are mine and not Galco's.

  24. #23
    Peacemaker's Avatar
    Peacemaker is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Texas Gulf Coast
    Posts
    50
    Sounds like outsourcing at it's worst. Indians from india repairing american weapons? thats pretty lame.

  25. #24
    Mike Barham's Avatar
    Mike Barham is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Arizona, baby!
    Posts
    5,081
    Quote Originally Posted by Peacemaker View Post
    Sounds like outsourcing at it's worst. Indians from india repairing american weapons? thats pretty lame.
    I don't give a damn who repairs our weapons, as long as the weapons work. I could care less if purple-skinned Venusian dwarf elves fixed them, as long as the guys in my unit roll with operational weapons. The Indian guys are competent, quick, and polite - which is more than I can say for some of the Americans who work in, for example, the laundry facility.

    Keep in mind this isn't just an American mission. We have forces here from (in no particular order) Germany, Poland, France, New Zealand, Portugal, Egypt, Canada, The Netherlands, Korea, and probably some others I can't think of at the moment. If I were in a firefight, I'd be very glad to see the very tough Korean soldiers, as an example, come rolling over the hill to help me out.

    By the way, our pistols were designed in Italy (Beretta) or Germany/Switzerland (SIG-Sauer) and our M16s, M249s and M240Bs are made by FN, a Belgian company. Outsourcing, what?
    Employed by Galco Gunleather - www.galcogunleather.com / Veteran OEF VIII

    Donate to the Christian and Stephanie Nielson Recovery fund: http://www.nierecovery.com/.

    All opinions, particularly those involving politics and Glocks, are mine and not Galco's.

  26. #25
    Dave James is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Tidewater Virginia
    Posts
    81
    Mike some of the best post I have seen regarding the M9, have wondered how exactly they where holding up

    Spot on about the carry of "hand" guns in a war front, I played tunnel rat on a few occasions and had the old Victory model 38 spl or the 45 acp, didn't feel real comfortable with either

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Ads

Posting Permissions

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

Search tags for this page

beretta in iraq

,

beretta iraq

,

beretta m9 combat reports

,

beretta m9 in iraq

,

beretta m9 iraq

,
beretta ?rak
,

iraq beretta

,
m9 in iraq
,
m9 pistol in iraq
,
?rag beretta
,
?rak beretta
,

?raq beretta

Click on a term to search for related topics.