Why do militaries still issue handguns, when their role is primarily to serve as a back up for a primary arm?
Why not just arm troops with a PDW similar to a PLR-16 with a wire stock?
>takes the same mags, and ammo as primary
>substantially more powerful than a conventional handgun
>when engineered from the ground up, partially parts compatible
Even though the size is a bit larger than a conventional handgun, it's still compact enough to be handy. Weight wise at 54 ounces it's only twice as heavy as a Glock 17. The weight difference would likely be made up by not having to carry separate handgun mags, or ammo.
Not too much larger than a normal handgun, especially with a flush 10 round magazine.
>>28650991
You're a retard
>>28651027
>Not too much larger
It's fuckhuge and only semiautomatic.
It would be better to arm them with a cutdown smg like the mp7 than that shit.
>>28651027
>not too much larger
Confirmed for never having had to lug around infantry bullshit.
LOOK at the goddamn picture. Would you really want the extra weight when you're already carrying everything from plated to extra batteries?
>>28651093
>>28651118
You could just carry it in a scabbard. And three handgun magazines would make up the weight difference.
Pistols are for last ditch "oh shit my rifle's dry/fucked up/gone" or for room to room clearance where a rifle would be awkwardly long. Given their relatively limited use, there is no real need to make them xboxheug and it would be foolish to make them heavy.
>>28651165
But it would be lighter when you account for ammo.
I absolutely approve of all soldiers being issued a pistol sidearm. I think it should be mandatory to have a service pistol with a couple of mags. I don't approve of this bullshit... it's neither a good rifle or pistol. Kel Tec has some great ideas but I'm not keen on this one. Check out the SU-16C, you might like it better.
Maybe one day a beefed up P90 will replace AR style rifles, but not today.
>>28650991
I like my SU-16 but I can't figure out the point of the PLR-16
>>28650991
Because we carry enough shit.
>>28651160
>three magazines
Why? Nobody who is legitimately doing combat operations does this.
>weight
How about accounting for the extra unwieldy bulk when getting in/out if vehicles or clearing rooms?
I'm done. This thread was created by an inexperienced teenager who thinks COD is an accurate portrayal of combat.
>>28651194
>mandatory to have a service pistol with a couple of mags
Is every civilian this delusional about the infantry? FYI soldiers don't carry pistols.
>>28650991
Price,Weight,Price.
>>28651245
Seems like support units wouldn't mind the extra weight as much.
>>28651270
Right, so support units (fat guys who don't shoot at enemies) could be sooper prepared for a rifle failure.
>>28651270
Everyone minds the extra weight. I would take out my plates and use a boonie hat instead of a kevlar if i had a choice
>>28651245
I know that.
That's why I said my opinion is that they should carry them. A pistol with two spare mags is just an extra pound.
Like >>28651165 says, it's just for shitty situations.
It's true that no soldier should have to use a pistol... but how often does everything go right?
>>28650991
This is a bait thread? Also some militaries did/do issue machine-pistols, PDWS, and subguns to vehicle and other crews which is fine since they're not lugging them around much. However to suggest that all handguns should be replaced by PDWs and other small full auto guns is retarded. Some people are perfectly fine with a handgun and it's not like a rifle or carbine is far away from reach if you need it anyway.
>>28651311
>how often does everything go right?
With their M4s? 99.99% of the time with live ammunition through a well maintained rifle. Vietnam meme pls go...
I remember a story someone told me about a marine saying the Beretta was a shit pistol because he tried removing kebab 200 yards out with one.. lol it didn't work so he didn't like the pistol.
>>28651305
Carry it in place of a rifle, like a PDW. It has the advantage of having common mags and ammo with the primary service rifle.
The PLR-16 is just an example of the concept, something purpose built could be slightly lighter and more compact.
>>28651327
So all the stories I've heard about military rifles being shitty from being rode hard and put up wet were all lies, huh?
>>28651327
Also, it's better to have and not need than need and not have.
>>28651327
I've seen enough AR-15 firing pin's break, and lugs shear, that I wouldn't want to solely depend on it. Especially one that's been thrown around, and has 15,000 rounds through it.
>>28650991
ITT: people who don't realize the handgun is only so officers don't have to carry a "heavy" rifle around.
>>28651352
Yes
>>28651360
Try your "logic" somewhere else.
I was apart of a 72 hour clearing operation of a town in northern Iraq. A buffalo was hit by an IED so we had zero water resupply. Someone died as a result. Guess what, nobody was like "dur better carry two camelbacks just in case, better to have the extra one and not need it" etc. etc.
It's not even close to realistic.
>>28651396
>not drinking each-others urine
>>28651406
Fuckin thought about it...
>>28651406
>not making out with each other to keep your mouths moist
>>28651385
Why do I see so many pictures of infantry carrying m9s and a rifle?
>>28651396
>man died from not having water
>you don't think it's a good idea to carry extra water in the fucking desert
Do they even teach basic boy scout principles anymore?
You're right though, it's not realistic. What's realistic is soldiers dying from stupid shit that's easily preventable.
>>28651458
Produce pics of enlisted "infantry" carrying pistols on patrol.
>>28651458
Either they are gunners who somehow actually got the pistols they deserve, they are officers, or it's a photo op.
>>28651478
>implying extra water from the trucks wasn't gone before the second day started
Again, clearly you have no experience with this sort of thing...
>>28651516
>not having proper logistical support
>>28651529
Bait.
>>28651529
Read:
>>28651396
>A buffalo was hit by an IED
>>28651551
Just send another one
Imagine hadji with a knife coming around the corner and grabbing your rifle while you clear their tiny shitty adobe huts. Imagine trying to quickly unholster the monster from the OP-pic while being engaged hand-to-hand.
>>28651579
>I'm out of bullshit
![iPeirKp[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/R5Tvzfr.png "iPeirKp[1].png")
>>28651579
>>28651529
>>28651478
>>28651360
>Michael Wittmann
It's better to have a gun and need it, than it is to not have a gun and not need it.
-Ricky
>>28651480
>doesn't get it
>>28650991
>54oz
>only twice
>not considering where it is sitting
>54oz not so bad
You are either the /fit/est dude on the planet or have neither military nor backpacking experience.
>>28651165
I wouldn't got as far as to say it would be foolish to make them heavy.
An SP-01 gains a lot as a service pistol by being heavy.
But I wouldn't go any heavier or bulkier.
>>28651762
Manlet detected
>>28651165
I heard pistols are for "motivating" your men. That said, i am in a conscription based army
>>28651200
>the point of the PLR-16
Range toy or robbing gas stations with bullet proof glass
>>28650991
Give them M1 Carbines :^)
>>28651027
>Not too much larger than a normal handgun,
>>28652277
very gud
>>28652205
If pistols are for officers to motivate their men... grenades are to pacify officers.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fragging
>>28651245
USMC 0311 05-09
I carried a pistol.
>>28650991
>Weight wise at 54 ounces it's only twice as heavy as a Glock 17
ONLY TWICE AS HEAVY???
How much of a retard are you?
>>28651491
This. Saw gunners and M240 gunners in our light unit got the M9 as their back up. Normal squad/platoon soldiers got their M4 and that's it unless you had a 203 attached to your rifle. Other than that, it was Officers and some random people if they had extras to issue out. I'm not talking Scout platoons, SF, Rangers, this or that because I don't know much about what they carried for the most part. But just normal LI platoons..that is all that got it. Then the PLT SGT and PL got a handgun and my PLT SGT's M9 spent most of it's time not ever being carried so he didn't have to worry about it ever. If you were to add in the extra weight of whatever OP posted to our normal gear, we would have people falling out left and right and bitching and morale would suck. It's bad enough when you have a cherry LT saying he wants us to carry our rucksack around on top of our LBV, kevlar, gloves, eye pro, knee pads, elbow pads, body armor, 7-10 mags, cleaning kits, batteries, NODs, paq 4, spread the machine gun ammo around to every one, smoke, flares, 203 rounds, chem lights, extra radio batteries, this that everything under the sun. You see grown men fall over like turtles stuck on their backs and god forbid you have to take a shit on patrol. But don't worry, only walking 16 miles around the town today to meet with this retarded fuck and no you guys aren't allowed to wear those non issued boots that are 1/3 of the weight!
>>28652733
Why don't troops and veterans petition the Pentagon for an equipment revision? Aluminum cartridges, aluminum mags, polymer ammo links, lighter boots, all gear uses li-ion batteries, shit like that.
Hikers watch ounces, why wouldn't the military?
>>28652747
It would do no good, honestly. Nobody listens to joe. Plus there is the stigmata of not wanting to seem like a puss so you suck it up and ruck on. The people that make those decisions don't usually know much about real life. Not to mention the manufacturing, testing, fielding and supply of anything new is outrageous.
>>28652747
Weight is not high on the list of important things when writing the specs.
Durability and function are more important.
All I want is kit that works as it should and is hard to break.
Cost is a consideration. A hiker may not balk at paying an extra ten dollars to save an ounce but when you have to buy one hundred thousand items saving ten dollars each is important.
>>28650991
>only twice as big and twice as heavy
>>28651245
>>28652402
>soldiers
>USMC
I've never tried to speak for you guys friendo.
>>28650991
I made the MIL/LE suggestion to Keltec a few years back. Im looking at converting my SU-16 to full auto, Legally, but im not disclosing how on 4chan.
>>28651200
Its wildly impractical, and a huge whack of fun
>>28650991
i want one of these but /k/ says its unreliable. dammit /k/
>>28651171
Are you actually implying that you wouldn't have to carry ammo for a rifle caliber pistol, or is it that 5.56 weighs less than 9mm?
ITT people who don't realize that PDWs as a concept began life as a service weapon to be issued to support troops who may need to maneuver their weapon in a vehicle, such as a truck driver/88Mistake.
>>28651118
>Confirmed for never having had to lug around infantry bullshit.
Thread
OP your thread is retarded and you should feel bad for asking such a dumb question.
>>28652897
This.
Also if you make the kit lighter they will just add more shit to make up for the weight.
It's not a "here's a packing list of stuff, if you make it physically lighter that's cool."
It's "oh you made your packing list lighter? That means you have more room here's some more stuff!"
>>28654332
>It's "oh you made your packing list lighter? That means you have more room here's some more stuff!"
Yep.
People talk about high tech polymor telescopic blabla ammo and are like ''that means they get to carry less''
Nope, it means that they will just carry more ammo instead. The weight will stay the same and nobody is going to care if you carry 100 pounds or more.
>>28650991
Because officers still need to execute cowards
>>28653979
You're already carrying it for the primary
>>28650991
My M9 was the only thing I liked about the USMC and they took it from me because I don't rate shit
>>28656405
Anon, can you explain this?
>>28651093
That is actually EXACTLY what the MP7 was intented as: A sidearm with more effectiveness than a 9mm pistol with military ball.
Where militaries and agencies are fucking up is trying to use it as a primary weapon.
>>28651352
Yes. That or they're 60+ year old stories from Vietnam.
Also any uniformed military that "rides their rifles hard and puts them away wet" deserves to lose. And the US military, not even the POGest of POGs, does that.
>>28650991
It's a status symbol. Officers like them
Just because you use the overkill perk in CoD doesn't mean taking a secondary that bulky and heavy in real life is a good idea
>>28656464
i use LAW, fuck dem spy planes and apaches senpai
>>28652402
I bet you also carried either an M240 or an M249.
>yes I know the Marines for whatever faggot retarded reason has a separate distinct MOS for machine gunners, but I also know that only about 1/3 of people stuck with an MG are machine gunners by MOS
>>28651352
Rifles issued in training are as shitty as possible without being dangerous on purpose in order to convince soldiers they can't afford to scrimp on maintenance.
Most soldiers never carry a rifle to war or shoot as much as an infantryman, so they never learn how reliable the gun actually is.
>>28656441
it's heavier than op's idea, and doesn't take the same ammo or mags
>>28651379
>Especially one that's been thrown around, and has 15,000 rounds through it.
This is your rifle in basic, it is not your rifle in war.
>>28652747
Because the Air Force needs a couple thousand new fighters that will never fight and the Navy needs another dozen $4bn littorals to blow up sandniggers and their $500 rowboats.
Also because all flag officers need their own private Lear jet.
>>28652907
>only 3x as big and nearly 4x as heavy
FTFY
>>28656415
I'm not a high enough rank and my new company doesn't give anybody an M9 unless they are Staff NCO's or ossifers
>>28656502
It's also select fire and the ammo weighs significantly less.
>inb4 you're already carrying 5.56 AR mags
7 to 10 of them. Add in a 5.56 AR-mag compatible sidearm and automagically policy will be to carry 11-15 of them. On top of the added weight you literally don't have enough room on your kit for 15 fucking AR mags.
>>28650991
I think POG's like myself are better served by handguns and PDW's or PCC's.
A staff NCO human resources guy would do just fine with an M9, but an Intel guy like me who likes to go outside the wire to do my job well would be better off with a PDW or PCC.
>>28656653
MOS?
>>28656668
Guess.
>>28656725
35 something, i dont know
>>28656653
Agreed. The S1 personnel just need M9s and two bullets each, because they will probably miss the first shot.
>>28656730
Guess! You're no fun at all!
35L? 35F? 35M?
>>28656785
Just trying think of who has a legit excuse for a pistol to be a better option. 42A came to mind.
There's people in combat arms, combat support, and service support that could use a pistol.
Remember when Kel-Tec rifles and PLR's were around the sub-$500 range?
Yeah, fuck paying what some of these assholes are asking for now.
Costs twice as much
Weighs more
Less compact
Slower draw
>>28657258
m, since you go outside
>>28650991
OP, I sort of get your idea, but I think issuing troops this AND an M16A4/M4 isa bit much. If non-frontline troops got one (Arty, Intel, Supply and Logistics) in place of their pistol as a PDW then it could gel. Kinda like the same way the M1 Carbine got issued to some dudes INSTEAD OF their Garand or 1911
>>28651352
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YAneTFiz5WU
https://youtu.be/PYfGq1yk66Q?t=6m30s
thread/
don't worry santa claus still isn't real and the sun will come up tomorrow
>>28651063
Well that's me convinced.
>>28658181
>stunt mud
you can't fool me Ian, father Hk told me only piston ARs can do that
>>28651529
ikr, should have gathered more minerals before training those four infantry units, amirite
>>28657364
Not him, but all three have the potential to leave the wire depending on the specific deployment (analyst in a CIST, HUMINT collector in a THT, CI Agent also in a THT or doing site exploitation).
That and to be a good analyst it really is advantageous to get a feel for where you're working.
But the military is really bad about thinking that intel weenies should be shut in a dark room and given SIPR/JWICS access and then just point at things to shoot and blow up.
But when your function is as a hammer everything is a nail etc.
>>28658342
Oh and I forgot Tiger Teams.
It's a 7-8 man team of one or two all source analysts, a GEOINT/IMINT analyst, a SIGINT analyst, two HUMINTers, and one or two CI Agents deployed as a team that can just "plug in" to a slot with a unit that needs direct intel support. The idea is that you can take a Tiger Team and send them on a 3-6 month TDY wherever they're needed, CONUS or OCONUS, and then rotate teams out as needed with a small footprint.
Unfortunately it's not a popular concept. My unit was originally organized this way, but it was too effective for the CoC so they decided to scrap it in favor of putting all the analysts in one company, HUMINTers in another, and CI Agents in another.
>>28658181
>comments are about how the mud isn't "normal mud" and that's why the ak failed
>muh european mud
>muh romanian ak
>muh modern ak
>muh 50 years of history
>"The 'myth' of the unreliability of the AR platform has cost many a solider their lives."
i'm gonna puke make the laughter stop please
>>28658384
do they recruit for this or do you just get assigned? i cant imagine a run-of-the-mill 35g doing great in this kind of environment
>>28658824
It was just how my specific unit was originally organized before it was stood up as part of 470th MI Brigade.
>>28658867
sounds wicked, are there any others that GEOINT/SIGNINT gets to go outside the office?
>>28658896
>sounds wicked, are there any others that GEOINT/SIGNINT gets to go outside the office?
Well with SIGINT there are SIGINT collection systems, but IIRC that's a separate MOS or is part of one of the two SIGINT MOS that are being rolled together into SIGINT analyst.
With GEOINT/IMINT you're analyzing collections from very specialized GEOINT/MASINT platforms more often than not, so not really.
>>28658928
thanks for the info, i've been on the fence about 35G or N
>>28658946
If you where to go with G you should look for going to FMV (Full Motion Video) or MASINT (Measurements and Signatures INT) courses.
FMV can lead to good money as a civilian and MASINT used to be an additional skill identifier. One of the 35Gs in my unit went to MASINT course and got the identifier, but that was almost 8 years ago so things could have changed since then.
SIGINT is good too.
Honestly I usually suggest 35F (All Source) only because there are a lot of different things you can end up doing as an All Source Analyst, and that can change depending on the unit or deployment. So there is a lot of variety in the products you will work on and the subjects you will cover. And you're expected to be a SME even as a junior enlisted.
For example:
When I was deployed to Iraq in the J2 I worked on a lot more short term products and concentrated on a specific AO (Baghdad city).
When I was at the G2 level I was working on regional products for MENA. So instead of just documenting SIGACTs and creating daily products (or products for SIGACTs that were pretty significant) I was writing papers, working on long term strategic and operational products etc. In both cases though I was trusted to actually know what I was talking about and some products I worked on were part of high level daily briefs and effected policy in Iraq and the MENA region.
My impression from being deployed with 35Gs and 35S/Ns is that they are subject to a shit load of micromanagement and are always doing pretty much the same thing.
I will admit that I do have some bias here though.
>>28659078
awesome stuff man, thank you so much.
also, there's a lot of interest in >>28648713 for intel guys, if you're ever bored. thanks again, i have a lot of reading to do
>>28658384
Fuck CI... Army won't let me reclass into CI because I'm an E-6...
