PDA

View Full Version : Transition to Striker-Fired Pistols



jnc36rcpd
12-06-2014, 04:52 PM
We currently issue the SigSauer .40 226 and 239 in DA/SA configuration. We are planning to transition to the FNS-9 without manual safety. State training regulations are suprisingly vague about length, content, or even if a transition course is required. Any thoughts on minimum and optimal length of training? How about content? Donations of cash, beer, and lesson plans are gratefully accepted. Thanks and be safe.

ToddG
12-06-2014, 05:14 PM
Having provided transition training for a number of large agencies and having been involved in a federal agency's transition planning, I'd suggest the following:


Transition training is a necessity, especially when switching from TDA pistol to an SFA. The manual of arms is significantly different enough that you cannot expect the average non-shooter patrol officer to pick one up and figure it out on his own.
Ideally, I'd send at least one department FI to whatever trainer certification program the manufacturer has (assuming FN has such a program). The company has probably thought this stuff through in much more detail and has more experience getting people up to speed on its guns. Such training also provides some liability protection for the department as opposed to having your FIs just "figure it out on our own."
I'm a very big believer of selling the officers on the new gun. All the FIs should be on the same page regarding a purposeful message that the department put a lot of time and effort into choosing the best possible weapon and that everyone thinks it's awesome. This is primarily a matter of building confidence among the officers. In particular, you're going to have to address the 40->9mm issue especially since many in your department probably remember making the opposite transition not so long ago.
The primary things I'd address are the changes to the manual of arms. Most of that could be done in a classroom. Although barring some specific reason not to, at the very least I'd do some familiarization live fire just to build confidence and then put everyone through the department qualification course (for liability reasons if nothing else). note: this might be an opportunity to redesign the qual course if allowed by state law
Length of training doesn't have to be long but at the same time could be used as an opportunity to get in some extra general marksmanship/tactics training under the guise of "getting a new gun." If management will let you have an extra day to improve that stuff, I'd take it and run.

GJM
12-06-2014, 09:32 PM
We currently issue the SigSauer .40 226 and 239 in DA/SA configuration. We are planning to transition to the FNS-9 without manual safety. State training regulations are suprisingly vague about length, content, or even if a transition course is required. Any thoughts on minimum and optimal length of training? How about content? Donations of cash, beer, and lesson plans are gratefully accepted. Thanks and be safe.

Off topic but related -- I would understand what magazine release is coming on those pistols. With the standard profile mag release, it is not a question of if, but when the magazine will drop by unintentional contact. FN has a smaller profile button, and I also re-profiled the opposite side of the release on a few pistols.

I found the FNS .40 to be accurate, reliable, and soft shooting.

jnc36rcpd
12-07-2014, 11:52 AM
Thanks for the responses. We currently have four instructors road testing the weapons. I believe the magazine release issue has come up. I'll ensure we look at the low-profile button.

I think we have sold the troops on the new weapon. The multiple cracked frames and other issues with the current pistol have convinced many of the officers that we need something else. Both the firearms instructors and the other "gun guys" in the department are strongly in favor of the transition to 9mm.

I suspect we will have a day of training. I'd like to get more, but I'd like to have a unicorn as well.

Hambo
12-07-2014, 12:09 PM
A day isn't bad. Knowing how chiefs think though, I'd try to weasel, I mean sell, admin on the necessity of a "transition" training day that does not take the place of qualification. That way you can almost get two days with transition and qualification. Maybe even beef up qual since you have a new pistol...

Just trying to out think the brass.

LSP972
12-07-2014, 01:43 PM
Todd nailed it; there is much more to this than having the troops sign a property control form and then shooting the qual course.

I am curious as to the reasons why you guys selected this particular pistol.

.

jnc36rcpd
12-07-2014, 04:56 PM
The decision was made to evaluate various pistols to see if any might better meet our needs than the current platform. Weapons tested included SigSauer (229, 229DAK, 250), Smith & Wesson (M&P40, M&P40c), Glock (G-22,G-23) and FNH (FNX-40, FNS-40). Not being one of the cool kids, I have no idea why H&K or Beretta were not considered. I'm also somewhat befuddled why we tested a compact Smith, but not a baby Glock. Some of the weapons had issues, but the M&P and FNS were well-regarded by the test group which was designed to include a variety of personnel. Those who liked the FNS really liked it. Tha said, we were going to go with the M&P until an FNH dealer matched Smith's price. About this time, it was also decided to transition from .40 to 9mm. We currently have four FNS-9's riding with various instructors.

One stumbling block may be the front office thinking it would be a good idea to transition to the FNS-9 over different budget cycles. It took us three years to fully transition from 9mm SIG pistols to he .40 version. I would not look forward to going through that again with two different manuals of arms and magazine capacity.

Kyle Reese
12-07-2014, 05:03 PM
In this (http://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?11515-FNH-FNS9-Two-Weeks-and-2-265-rounds/page17) thread, you can follow some of the issues that I had with my FNS-9. It's off being repaired, but exhibited reliability issues with duty / carry ammunition very early on, and was deadlined at 2,804 rounds.

What practice / duty loads will you guys be issuing for the FNS-9?

jnc36rcpd
12-07-2014, 07:04 PM
Ammunition for pistol and rifle is on the agenda for January's firearms instructor meeting. Those with the FNS-9 are currently using 147 grain Federal HST. That's not because we felt that was necessarily the best load. When we had multiple issues with our .40 pistols and were putting simulator-converted and personal 9mm pistols on the road, we needed to get ammunition quickly. I suspect it was ordered because we used to issue 147 grain HydraShok way back in the day.

LSP972
12-07-2014, 08:29 PM
Sounds like you guys have a real soup sandwich of a situation there. The Sigs started cracking all at the same time? Or did it take a while for management to wake up?

Thanks for the information, and good luck with the transition.

.

MD7305
12-07-2014, 09:46 PM
I went through a similar transition back in 2013, we switched from Sig 229 to Glock 22s. I was forced to only 8 hours to cover transition to new guns, new holsters, and WML. I TOTALLY felt we needed at least 24 hours but budget and manpower ultimately won over. I received some info that was reportedly a USMS transition course as well as some Glock Inc. related materials. Lots of drills, trying to incorporate draws from the new holster as much as possible. Malfunctions, reloads, weak hand, strong hand, everything. I used both sources to develop a lesson plan that fit my time limit. By the end of the class our guys had adapted to new ALS/SLS holsters, a new gun and a WML. It was a non-stop, loaded to the gills 8 hours though. All officers % went up on scores. I've purposely tried to further develop and test proficiency on range days. As a whole our guys accepted the striker guns well, most hated the Sig save me and two others.

As a side note, we tested the FNS .40. It was liked but at that time no duty holsters were available and no agencies had issued them yet so there was little info. That seems to have changed. Good luck!

jnc36rcpd
12-08-2014, 02:07 AM
It was a true soup sandwich, LSP972. For whatever reason, we do our armorer cleaning and inspection in the last three months of the calendar year. Staggering it throughout the year would make more....well, let's stay on point.

During the 2013 inspection, some thirty-plus of our eighty some pistols were discovered with cracks under the grips. While no weapons failed in firing, our training cadre and command staff took the issue seriously. We rolled with a variety of personally owned weapons, newly mated upper/lower combinations, and weapons retrieved from the simulator. Some officers actually traded off weapons at shift change.

While it may be a fault of our firearms records system, neither we nor SigSauer were ever able to determine a commonality of the failed weapons. It did not seem that age nor heavy usage were correlated with the pistol failures. Numerous hypotheses were suggested, but none made sense. We did not shoot significantly more or less in 2013. There were no changes in ammunition. The failed weapons were of various ages. While the vast majority of failures were 226's, at least one 239 suffered a crack. There were not significant changes in the instructor or armorer staff. It has been suggested that our armorers tightened the grip screws too much during the last annual inspection, but I don't believe we are the only department with armorers with such great upper body strength that they crack frames. Moreover, if there were no significant changes in the armorer staff, wouldn't these changes have occurred previously? The only significant change in weapon maintenance was the purchase of a new sonic cleaner. Being at a loss, would that start cracking frames?

SigSauer did step us for us. They were quick to supply new frames, new weapons, and new grips. Their representative states that he is as befuddled as we are despite SigSauer testing of failed guns. I was a SIG fanboy for many years. While I appreciate their response to our issue, I'd like to know why the guns are failing.

LSP972
12-08-2014, 06:22 AM
The only significant change in weapon maintenance was the purchase of a new sonic cleaner. Being at a loss, would that start cracking frames?



Well, there was that whole "hydrogen embrittlement" thing from a few years back, where some claimed that sonic cleaners were bad juju in the long run… but IIRC that was only in regards to polymer frames. I never paid any attention to it, since it was a GlockTalk subject of hot interest...:rolleyes: Maybe there was something to it??? The sheriff's office here runs their G22s through a BIG industrial sonic cleaner annually; they have no issues that I am aware of.

That's bizarre. We used a lot of Sigs for twenty years (issued them for 12 years- P220s and P228s; prior to that it was personally owned P226s and a few P228s) and AFAIK we never had any cracked frames.

That afore-mentioned S.O. was issuing P226R DAKs in 9mm when I retired and went to work for them. Every one had to be returned due to mis-machined frames; they came back with made-in-Germany frames. But they ran okay after that.

.

Chuck Haggard
12-08-2014, 08:17 AM
Are you guys locked in to the FNs John??, seems like that is the case. From experience with the gun at the range and going to the armorer school the FNS makes me hinky. Perhaps it's an unwarranted reaction, but the striker and firing control parts are small and unnecessarily complicated IMHO.

Anyway, we did a two day transition here when we dumped the 3rd gen S&Ws and went to the Glocks, I can send you my class outline.

jnc36rcpd
12-08-2014, 12:12 PM
LSP, we used another sonic cleaner for years. While I would have dismissed the idea of a sonic cleaner damaging guns as urban legend, that is the only unique commonality I can postulate. Like your outfit, we have used SigSauer products for over two decades. While we have had problems with occasional weapons along the line, the cracked frames (almost all under the grips) remain a mystery to us.

Chuck, we're not financially locked in, but I think we are emotionally. We initially purchased only five FNS-9's to avoid taking a bath if they didn't work out. That said, we seem stricken by FNS fever. The five weapons in stock haven't been carried that long and certainly haven't been shot that much at all. I frankly doubt we put a thousand rounds through any of them. I'm also concerned when I read Fred's evaluation and your remarks on the weapon's complicated internals. I suggested the risks of going to a new platform, but we are smitten with the FNS.

On the positive side, Baltimore County Police recently transitioned to the FNS. While their firearms staff obviously love the weapon, I recommended that we contact their FOP for a street perspective. As far as we can determine, the FNS is doing well in that much larger department. I am hopeful that the FNS will work out for us.

Chuck, I'd love to get a copy of your transition program.

CanineCombatives
12-08-2014, 09:16 PM
Man, I've been in on a decent volume of testing of the FNS with several departments when they hit the market a couple years back, the last couple sentences in all of those reports said that operator proficiency across all skill levels decreased with the FNS over the glock that those agencies were issuing at the time, ergonomics are decent but the trigger, namely the reset and user interface (mag release, slide stop) were all a step backwards. As mentioned when torn down a very complex array of tiny parts comprise the striker trigger/hammer assembly. Reliability was not a problem but the long reset caused a lot of short stroking on splits.
I realize I'm just a voice in the crowd but I will always steer any department I'm training with away from the FNS. But for whatever it's worth, I would really implore you guys to pick up the phone and call sig again and ask them to send you some P320's for T&E before making a commitment to FNS. I've been testing the P320 since last summer after 23 years as a glock guy, it's the only striker pistol from any manufacturer that has actually increased operator proficiency over the glocks. The trigger is really something to behold for a striker design, ergonomics and user interface is pure sig which is to say perfect, accuracy is flat out amazing, and last but certainly not least, sig is making deals with agencies that have had me shaking my head, as in amazing deals.
It sounds like you guys are very close to a deal on the FNS but this isn't an acquisition like new laptops for the cars, this is a really big deal for obvious reasons, it would be really unfortunate if you guys didn't at least get a few P320's and spend a couple weeks just running the hell out of them before finalizing the decision. It might sound like an overblown statement but this pistol really is a game changer, sig will also provide you guys with a list of agencies that have adopted the P320 and or approved them for use.
After 23 years all of my glocks are safe guns, a year ago I would have bet the farm that could never happen.

KevinB
12-09-2014, 09:03 AM
John - check your PM's

I would echo CC's comment about the FN polymer guns --
Glock or M&P would be my first looks for a 9mm gun - but I have no experience with the Sig P320, also based on a thousnad rounds or so, and a bunch of other happy folks shooting them, the HK VP9 may be worth a look.

Chuck Haggard
12-09-2014, 09:16 AM
People in agencies often take the short view "I like this gun" and that's it. LE issued weapons IMHO need to be looked at as a system, which includes armorer training and parts support, Sim guns, compact models, etc.

I'd run with the M&P most likely if I was in charge of an agency, due to all the above, and the fact that the M&P Cs and the Shield are part of their line.

jnc36rcpd
12-09-2014, 05:44 PM
I did suggest the value of a system of weapons such as the M&P series, but we're heading down the FNS slope without brakes. I think it is preferable that an officer stay with an identical manual of arms for off-duty/back-up. This proved problematic with SigSauer as their weapons are so expensive (and heavy) that most officers opted for Glocks for OD/BU use. With the FNS, you're stuck with the fullsize pistol. I have read about an FNS compact, but I can't find it on the FNH website nor have I ever seem one in the wild.

Canine, if any of those departments would be willing to release their findings to another agency, I'd be grateful to hear about it. I will contact SigSauer regarding the 320.

CanineCombatives
12-09-2014, 09:13 PM
Sent you a PM with some further info.

runcible
12-12-2014, 09:31 AM
jnc36rcpd,

To follow through on our conversation on the other board, we didn't use a sonic cleaner before\during\after our failure pattern started manifesting, and we're still managing the followout from it. We're looking at a fleet-wide replacement now, including those produced from previous lots. After the various problems with the P232's and P239's even before these, we'll see...

Unexpectedly: http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2014/12/12/fnh-releases-fns-9c-fns-40c/

"FNH has announced that they will be releasing compact models of their FNS line.

They are available right now on Slickguns.com for $499.99.

No word on capacity but they seem very similar to the M&P compacts so I suspect they will hold 12 rds in 9mm and 10 in .40S&W.

The FNS compacts have all the same features as a full size FNS. The descriptions does mention snag free controls and a large front dot. We shall see how large it is compared to the stock FNS and FNX."

Kyle Reese
12-12-2014, 09:35 AM
Here (http://www.highplainsgunshop.com/hpgs-deal-fn-fns-9c-40c-select-model?tracking=5327316c36041) they are, and the ad claims that they will start shipping 15 Dec 2014.

Runcible is correct- 12+1 for the 9x19 & 10+1 for the .40 S&W. I've found the stock sights on the full sized model to be less than ideal for precision shooting at distance, FWIW.