Except didn't they just win the CSASS contract?I think it's just a waste of their efforts and time, trying to deal with our US military and it's slanted testing and low ball pricing demands.
I don't know how many rifles were ordered but I'm under the impression that was a limited, small quantity contract. I think HK should have entered the VP series for testing. Honestly that's the only pistol in their line up that could get close to military pricing. At the end of the day they probably didn't want to be bothered with our US military in the pistol trials. It wasn't long ago that they were having a tough time meeting production demands for their European mil/law enforcement contracts. There were even rumors that HK was going to delay shipments for civilian purchase at one time last year so they could keep up. I never noticed a shortage on the shelves though. I'd say HK is running full production as it is on the VP line.Except didn't they just win the CSASS contract?
Personally I think the VP9 with a frame mounted thumb safety that works in the right direction would be a reasonable option to the Glock. But if I was H&K, I wouldn't be jumping at the chance to get spun up for nothing again either.Can't really blame them after the XM8 project.
This^^^^^^^^^^^Delta, MARSOC and SEALs already use Glock as a primary sidearm. Multiple military forces in the world, notably Brits, use them too. It is just a matter of time. They'll probably come up with some sort of regulations like condition 3 only for all but active operations carry. They'll keep M9 for as long as possible just on logistic and financial grounds but when they switch, it'll be a striker.
I don't believe it is a matter of thinking at the moment. I believe it will become a matter of existing operational experience later. "The SOCOM has run these for years without much issues, and by the way, they are much cheaper" cannot not become an argument when M9's time is up.SOF thinking is not Big Army thinking...Yes, the Glocks are well used now in Spec Ops but that has no impact on what the Overall military procurement system wants.
In 2 years.....they absolutely do not use it as their sidearm as of yet. That's the issue with people and rumors on boards it changes daily. Go up to anyone in a team they're still rocking the MK24 or MK25. If the glocks come, they're coming full force in 2 years. Army and MARSOC are a different story.Delta, MARSOC and SEALs already use Glock as a primary sidearm. Multiple military forces in the world, notably Brits, use them too. It is just a matter of time. They'll probably come up with some sort of regulations like condition 3 only for all but active operations carry. They'll keep M9 for as long as possible just on logistic and financial grounds but when they switch, it'll be a striker.
to be fair, credible sources to get such information is still awful these days. I hardly even trust internet "publications" that report such things - they're based off just as little evidence, with the only difference being this person posted an article rather than a forum postIn 2 years.....they absolutely do not use it as their sidearm as of yet. That's the issue with people and rumors on boards it changes daily. Go up to anyone in a team they're still rocking the MK24 or MK25. If the glocks come, they're coming full force in 2 years. Army and MARSOC are a different story.
Correct me if I'm wrong (or to put it more plainly), but wasn't the XM8 just the product of breaking the failed OICW's weapon back into the two components with the XM8 being the assault rifle portion? And with their foot in the door, HK had a chance to circumvent the traditional channels for procurement/replacement of the M4/M16 and supply the XM8? And there was no way in hell Colt and those military higher-ups that were in bed with Colt were going to take it lying down.XM8 was a different story. Yes, high risk that the Army would buy anything new to replace the M4 and M16 BUT that opportunity was dropped right in HK's hands by the then new PEO BG. No one would have walked away from being paid to develop, produce and deliver what could have been the Army's new family of rifles and 40mm grenade launchers to the tune of 800K to 1M piece. it was a sole-source contract that died due to expected political pressure from within the Pentagon, DA and from industry competitors.
G3Kurz
From Larry Vicker's recent live Q&A (which probably is the most credible source we'll get on the internet imo), yes, that's about what happenedCorrect me if I'm wrong (or to put it more plainly), but wasn't the XM8 just the product of breaking the failed OICW's weapon back into the two components with the XM8 being the assault rifle portion? And with their foot in the door, HK had a chance to circumvent the traditional channels for procurement/replacement of the M4/M16 and supply the XM8? And there was no way in hell Colt and those military higher-ups that were in bed with Colt were going to take it lying down.