"U.S. Army new XM17 Modular Handgun System" Topic

"The Army moved closer to releasing its long-awaited solicitation for a new, modern handgun system when it hosted a fourth industry day for interested vendors at Picatinny Arsenal, New Jersey, July 8. The Army named the new weapon the "XM17" Modular Handgun System. It will replace the current M9 standard Army handgun with a more state-of-the-art weapon system.

More than 20 companies attended the event," said Debi Dawson, PEO Soldier spokesperson.

Federal procurement restrictions do not allow the disclosure of the names of firms participating, she said.

The government presented changes to its latest draft solicitation for the XM17, which were posted to the Federal Business Opportunities website, June 8…"
Full article here
link

Amicalement
Armand

So, I guess "pistol" was a bit too simple, and the acronym for it is a bit brief.

No doubt, the "Modular Handgun System" name is to help sell the premium in price taxpayers will be liable for, over and above the normal, retail sales price.

Gotta love the bureaucrats and marketing people, when they get together to put a plan like that in place.

Prepare yourselves for the F-35 of pistols. And yes, Mako, the more hi-tech they can make it sound the more money that will change hands as Defense and Industry continue the endless "Kissy-Kissy" that is bankrupting this country.

Actually I have seen all the competing weapons. Nothing F-35-ish but a few unexpected and truly thoughtful firearm designs. Baretta's entry will not win and neither will Colt's. Neither meet all the criteria. There are a few entries by companies you have likely never heard of that blew me away.

Hockler, it's not the defense industry that is eating all the money. That is a drop in the bucket compared to welfare spending. But that's a different conversation.

Warlock…..Let's not go there. Facts are slippery things when you get into comparing apples and oranges. Not that long ago the Army finally admitted that all the uniform changes that took place in the endless quest for cammies had cost a couple of billion over about five years trying to reinvent the wheel. The USMC even patented theirs to keep the Sister Services out. Stupid waste. Sure, in my town before I was 25 I watched the government build low income housing, tear it all down a few years later, build back housing that looked like the first batch, tear that down a few years later and repeat the folly a third time. Over about a seventeen year period three complete sets of housing. So there is no end to US Government folly. Point taken. I am far from being a lefty anti-military loon. If monies are wasted on welfare or whatever people don't die because of it. When Defense throws it away like they do young men and women die.

C'mon! Does it really need "stealth" technology"?

"Hockler, it's not the defense industry that is eating all the money. That is a drop in the bucket compared to welfare spending. But that's a different conversation."

Wrong on both counts, but right that it's an inappropriate conversation here.

Re: U.S. Federal spending, why not go to OMB's website and look at the historical budgets, rather than speculate?

PDF link

The budget for 2014 (in $ millions):
Military Programs:
Department of Defense--Military Programs – 577,898
Department of Homeland Security – 43,263
Department of Veterans Affairs – 149,074
Other Defense Civil Programs – 57,370

Social Programs:
Department of Health and Human Services – 936,012
Department of Housing and Urban Development – 38,527
Social Security Administration (On-Budget)- 81,184
Social Security Administration (Off-Budget) – 824,587

Gotta like those "off budget numbers.

Quoted from the report: "Though Social Security and the Postal Service are now off-budget, they continue to be
Federal programs. Indeed, Social Security currently accounts for about one-fourth of all
Federal receipts and one-fifth of all Federal spending."

Just to be clear -- VA is not part of DoD. Yes, the spending on VA services is directly related to DoD activities, but the two are separate entities.

On-topic: Why go through all this when they're just going to select some upgrade of the M9 or Sig 226? Personally, I'd prefer to see a version of a Glock with the addition of a positive safety. Rugged, reliable, and affordable.