USAF seeks M18 subcompact conversion kit

[L-2]

Post 6,
Thanks for enlightening me on the actual request; and I'm also now more familiar with what SIG has to offer and what the Air Force wants. I was mistaken as to what the USAF wanted after only reading what was provided in Post 1 which indicated the "sub-compact" want. Sorry for my mistake.

I also saw a fellow LEO in my department install a backstrap with the wrong (shorter) pin. Another option for my department could have been to not even give out the extra backstraps w/longer pin; or show the troops ahead of time how to install the backstraps correctly with the longer pin when they issued us the, then new, Gen4s. Maybe the department is doing that now as that was maybe 8 years ago (back in ~2013).

[JSGlock34]

The 3.6" slide is only available with the Pro optics cut.

The solicitation reads like "Tell me you want a Mk27/G19 MOS without telling me you want a Mk27/G19MOS."

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....9-MOS-now-Mk27

That's much how I read the M18X release - SIG figuring if they can get M18X pistols into conventional arms rooms, SOCOM won't have a good reason to purchase the Mk27 Glocks.

Considering the procurement size and stated purpose, I'm wondering if these are intended for OSI?

[HCM]

That's much how I read the M18X release - SIG figuring if they can get M18X pistols into conventional arms rooms, SOCOM won't have a good reason to purchase the Mk27 Glocks.

Considering the procurement size and stated purpose, I'm wondering if these are intended for OSI?

OSI, at least the civilian agents, already has non-M18 P320s.

They could also be for lo viz ops by USAF Spec Ops personnel. Or those for whom a pistol is a secondary weapon.

https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/y...-great-powers/

[revchuck38]

That's much how I read the M18X release - SIG figuring if they can get M18X pistols into conventional arms rooms, SOCOM won't have a good reason to purchase the Mk27 Glocks.

Considering the procurement size and stated purpose, I'm wondering if these are intended for OSI?

OSI was my first thought. Way back in the mid-80s I was an Army CI agent in Germany. Our assigned handguns, which we weren't allowed to carry, were Detective Specials. Our OSI counterparts had custom 1911s built by one of the arsenals, cut down to what is now known as "Officer's Model" size. Going to special M18s would a) work better for their mission and b) fit in with their "special snowflake" image.

[RJflyer]

OSI, at least the civilian agents, already has non-M18 P320s.

Both the military agents and the 1811s can carry P320s (and most other 9mm pistols) as agency-approved POWs. The issued duty gun is still the M11 at the moment. For how much longer? No firm answer, but hopefully not much

[GyroF-16]

That's much how I read the M18X release - SIG figuring if they can get M18X pistols into conventional arms rooms, SOCOM won't have a good reason to purchase the Mk27 Glocks.

Considering the procurement size and stated purpose, I'm wondering if these are intended for OSI?

I’d hope they were for aircrew, especially those flying ejection-seat aircraft.
Because I’m here to tell you, putting a full-size M9 into a holster on the front of a survival vest took up a lot of space in an already-cramped F-16 cockpit. Just a shorter grip would have helped. I’d personally have loved a 92 Compact for that purpose in my era.
Smaller-but-usable pistols that accept the standard magazine are ideal in fighter cockpits.

[Shoresy]

I’d hope they were for aircrew, especially those flying ejection-seat aircraft.
Because I’m here to tell you, putting a full-size M9 into a holster on the front of a survival vest took up a lot of space in an already-cramped F-16 cockpit. Just a shorter grip would have helped. I’d personally have loved a 92 Compact for that purpose in my era.
Smaller-but-usable pistols that accept the standard magazine are ideal in fighter cockpits.

That was my first assumption as well, but the solicitation states:

"The government is seeking a source for a quantity of 3,015 each modification kits for the conversion of the M18 Modular Handgun System (MHS) to a Sub-Compact design to meet concealed carry requirements." (emphasis mine)

Unless there's a use for concealment after ejection (not my lane, so I may be way off), I don't think aircrew are the use case for these.

[Yute]

I am curious why big Army went with the M17 length. Not sure what the longer length gives to the vast majority of Soldiers who need a sidearm.

[HCM]

I am curious why big Army went with the M17 length. Not sure what the longer length gives to the vast majority of Soldiers who need a sidearm.

Tradition. The 1911 and M9 had 5" barrels so....

[jetfire]

Second, Fuck Task and Purpose. If you see something about small arms in Task and Purpose assume it's wrong.

Came here DIRECTLY to say this. The T&P article was so fucking stupid it hurt my brain. Trying to insert LEOSA as the justification for the USAF wanting to get the X-Compact configuration is completely pants on head dumb.

Reference: I am an active duty USAF Combat Arms Instructor, so let's get these two separate topics discussed.

First, LEOSA. The Big Air Force policy is that installation commanders have discretion to implement LEOSA as they see fit. The Wing Could could delegate that authority to write a police to the Security Forces commander, or he/she could write it themself. Regardless, what this means is that there are some bases that allow broad LEOSA privileges to all LEO personnel with a LEOSA card, included mil police, some which restrict carry to just military police and federal LEO off duty, and some which don't allow it all. One thing that is consistent, is that the DoD LEOSA implementation clearly states that it's for off-duty use and no government owned weapons will be used. So suggesting that the acquisition of 3k X-Compact frames has anything to do with LEOSA is fucking stupid.

Second, the actual acquisition: all USAF non AFSOC small arms/light weapons (SA/LW) goes through the Security Forces Center in San Antonio. Sometimes the center will get a wild hair up its ass because they got visited by the good idea fairy. The long-serving head of the program, the E7 who actually did the legwork, recently moved on to a new position, and we got a new guy. Maybe the new guy views the X-Compact module as an upgrade over the regular module and wants to test run them. I have no idea. I do however think it's completely pants on head retarded to order 3000 conversion kits when Sig can't even deliver our pistols on schedule. We were supposed to have completely phased the M9 out for Security Forces last year, and yet I'm still seeing them in on-duty holsters. I'm personally fine with that, since I think the M18 is a bag of trash made by incompetent dillholes, and that opinion has nothing to do with my deep and abiding love of the M9.

So tl;dr - Task and Purpose is fucking stupid, so is the M18 and buying these kits is dumb since we don't have all our shitty guns anyway.

The opinions expressed in this post do not represent official opinions of the USAF, the DoD, and should not be interpreted as such.