Joint Combat Pistol
Les has the skinny on SOCOM’s request for a joint combat pistol in 45ACP. They want a shot counter, which I find a bit odd. Reading the specs, it’s difficult to find a gun that fits the bill. So, let’s play a game. Which gun do they want?
1911 – Out since it’s not DA/SA or DA.
Sig – Out due to mag capacity
Glock – Out due to modular grip
H&K – Out due to modular grip
S&W M&P/Walther – Could be in but I’d guess it’s too new and not enough testing
What do you guys think? I’m guessing H&K and Glock will offer modular grips or Sig will work something up.
Update: Or those LDA 1911s by Para.
November 28th, 2005 at 12:17 pm
The Para LDA? Is it essentially a striker fired weapon with a funny hammer? It certainly ain’t DA/SA, nor is it DAO.
Maybe Beretta will offer the new PX4 Storm in .45ACP. Or possibly the new Ruger P345 is in the running.
November 28th, 2005 at 12:39 pm
Ben: striker-fired is one of the options.
The modular grip is a should rather than a shall, so guns could pass without it as long as they otherwise accommodate the 5% to 95% hand size requirement.
I’m guessing the doublestack Para LDAs probably couldn’t do that, BTW. I’ve shot them and the handle is pretty darned beefy.
November 28th, 2005 at 1:21 pm
I can’t pull up the specs, but I wouldn’t be suprised if the H&K P2000 doesn’t fit the requirements (minus the shot counter) to a T. I’m pretty sure that the XM-8, H&K’s entry for the new US assualt rifle, has a shot counter and that it recorded the date and time each shot was fired. The government seems hellbent on throwing money at H&K.
November 28th, 2005 at 1:42 pm
Les: I know striker fired is one of the options, I read your post π
I’m simply not sure under what catagory the LDA falls. Is it really just a funny SA or is it a funny striker fired weapon?
November 28th, 2005 at 2:01 pm
It’s striker-fired (meaning that it’s partially cocked by the slide action, with the remainder of the cocking done by the trigger), but with an external hammer rather than a striker. That’s why it has such a light trigger, and why it doesn’t have second-strike capability. (Second strick isn’t the right word, which isn’t coming to me right now. Basically, you can’t just pull the trigger to get a second strike on the primer like you can with a true DA.)
November 28th, 2005 at 6:45 pm
Yo, how’s ’bout some links (& pictures) so’s us dumb-uns can know what’ch’all are yakkin’ ’bout?
(I love leaving pictures of firearms on my PC at work, then letting visitors “accidentally” see the screen. It’s beyond fun. FYI, I do computer work for an automotive finance company – uptight as they get. How uptight? Well, let’s just say that after Sarbaines / Oxley became law, we had to change less than 1% of our processes – we are more strict than the FedLaw requires….)
heh
November 29th, 2005 at 7:32 am
“Its striker-fired … but with an external hammer rather than a striker.”
Les, I love ya’ to death, man, but what you just said is the equivalent of, oh, “It’s turbocharged, but with the turbo driven by a belt off the crankshaft, instead of by exhaust gasses.” π
November 29th, 2005 at 9:10 am
sorry for a silly question: why is a “modular grip” necessary for military use, but not provided by H&K/Glock?
November 29th, 2005 at 9:24 am
Not sure why it’s necessary other than to allow 95% of users to be able to operate it.
November 29th, 2005 at 9:34 am
Tam, blame the NIJ, not me. π They’re the one who decided to call Glock-style actions “striker-fired.”
November 29th, 2005 at 9:47 am
The NIJ does not apply that term to the LDA Paras.
It’s kind of hard for a pistol to be “striker fired” when it doesn’t actually have a striker.
The LDA is just another one of those recent action designs that doesn’t fit the old paradigms of “SA” or “DA’ (although, from a strictly mechanical standpoint, it’s about as “double action” as a Ruger Blackhawk.)
To expound a bit (from out behind the shop counter), the LDA is completely pointless, exists only to placate the nerves of people who get the vapors at the sight of a cocked hammer, causes more problems than it solves, is mechanically fragile, and once the current batch is gone from the sales counter, won’t be carried as a regular stock item at the shop, being more of a service headache than its worth.
November 29th, 2005 at 9:48 am
PS: Can you tell that they’ve caused me a ton of grief? π
January 30th, 2006 at 11:11 am
[…] Readers of SayUncle already knew about the Joint Combat Pistol (see here and Les’ post here) but I think this is the first report that didn’t come from a gun board. […]