Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: US Military's Joint Combat Pistol program
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4
otomik
http://www.fbo.gov/spg/ODA/USSOCOM/SOAL%2D...ttachments.html

Specifications for the new JCP are detailed, right down the color but curiously no mention of weight (perhaps some steel 1911s will be in the running). The caliber though it's not subject to debate, it will be .45ACP!

now that the XM8 is dead, rampant speculation on the JCP can begin!
stevebugge
And knowing how Goverment procurement goes, it ought to be available in the field around 2015.
Austere Emancipator
Which makes it just the right age to be a classic in the world of SR3/SR4.
ShadowDragon8685
How long will it be until Raygun extrapolates the SR3 stats from that sheet?
stevebugge
Actually this could easily be the gun that becomes the model for the original Ares Predator. Whoever the ultimate contract award goes to would have a contract that would be an attractive acquisition for a developing Ares Arms
Austere Emancipator
And the lack of a weight specification handily explains why the Ares Predator weighs over 2kg!
Arethusa
But the length specification rules out that 10" barrel!
Raygun
QUOTE (otomik)
perhaps some steel 1911s will be in the running

Not looking good there...

QUOTE (Attachment 01- JCP Specification)
3.4.1.Action:  The JCP shall function in double action/single action (DA/SA) or double-action only (DAO) including Striker-Fired Action (SFA) (T).  The JCP should have a modular action mechanism that allows reconfiguration at the unit level without modification to the weapon’s major assemblies (O).


QUOTE (ShadowDragon8685)
How long will it be until Raygun extrapolates the SR3 stats from that sheet?

Several pistols on my website appear to be capable of meeting these specifications, Notably the HK USP45 (full-size/Tactical) and SIG-Sauer P220 (most likely candidates), though the CZ97 and Baby Eagle .45 could also fit the bill. There are a number of guns that I don't have on my site that would also fall under these specifications. The Glock 21 cannot at present be configured for DA/SA, so it doesn't meet the action specs. The only commercially-available gun I can think of that meets these specifications as-is is the SIG-Sauer P220ST.
otomik
[QUOTE=Raygun,Nov 23 2005, 06:25 PM] [QUOTE=raygun]The only commercially-available gun I can think of that meets these specifications as-is is the SIG-Sauer P220ST. [/QUOTE]
why the 220ST and not the 220R?

the interchangable backstrap objective makes it seem like just about every company is going to have to go back to the drawing board.
Critias
If the ticket on most HK's wasn't a little high, I'd say they've got it. As is? I'm betting on Sig taking this one home.
otomik
QUOTE (stevebugge @ Nov 23 2005, 05:59 PM)
Actually this could easily be the gun that becomes the model for the original Ares Predator.  Whoever the ultimate contract award goes to would have a contract that would be an attractive acquisition for a developing Ares Arms

great idea, a lot of the pictures of the predator show extended mags, more recent pictures show it as a smaller gun that could possibly fit the 9.65' max length (same length as the H&K SOCOM).

some of these requirements are pretty futuristic
QUOTE (JCP)
3.7.6. Weapon Shot Counter.  The JCP should have a weapon shot counter to record shots fired (O).  The shot counter, if provided, shall have a data collection device that connects the shot counter to a computer.  The shot counter, if provided, shall have a Microsoft compatible software program that works in conjunction with the shot counter and the data collection device to allow the weapon data to be downloaded and stored on a computer.  The shot counter, if provided, shall not interfere with any operations of the JCP.
just like ALIENS, love.gif
Kagetenshi
I will stab them all.

~J
Arethusa
This shot counter bullshit is going to turn this in XM29.1
RunnerPaul
Why do I have a sneaking suspiscion that it'll end up looking like Master Chief's Magnum from Halo 2? After the XM8 and all.
ShadowDragon8685
You can never go wrong making things look like they should be being carried by the Master Chief. smile.gif
mmu1
What a damn waste of money... Special operations types can already pretty much pick and choose their guns, so they don't need this (especially because these one-size-fits-all schemes usually don't yield such great result), and in the armed forces at large, what sidearm you've got matters fuck-all. Maybe they ought to spend some money on ultra-modern bayonets as well. sarcastic.gif
Arethusa
Pistols are being used much more these days, as our military is essentially engaged in an occupation role. Between MOUT and MP type duty, having a good pistol matters infinitely more than it does in large scale military operations over open, traditional military terrain. Of course, would be nice to have a rifle without direct gas impingement. But that would just make too much sense.

QUOTE (ShadowDragon8685)
You can never go wrong making things look like they should be being carried by the Master Chief. smile.gif

Sure you can. Hand that man an F2000 with a doubled mag capacity and the first he does is turn it into the world shittiest sub machinegun. I could do more damage with a .22LR Mac10.
ShadowDragon8685
Of course, why not just issue our troops SMGs for an occupation role? Hmmmmmmm? Why not something simple and durable that's stood the test of time?

Or do they just not want to see American soliders carrying an Uzi?
mmu1
QUOTE (Arethusa @ Nov 23 2005, 04:35 PM)
Pistols are being used much more these days, as our military is essentially engaged in an occupation role.  Between MOUT and MP type duty, having a good pistol matters infinitely more than it does in large scale military operations over open, traditional military terrain.

Maybe. But what advantages can they possibly come up with over any number of off-the-shelf pistols out there that'd justify starting a whole new program and competition? Especially since, if I understand correctly, they're not even considering switching to a new cartridge.

Also, if they want to make a pistol for MOUT, let them do that, instead of trying to come up with a gun that's magically going to be the answer to everyone's prayers. This just smacks of OICW and XM-8 all over again.
mfb
you mean like the M4 that they're already issuing (SMG, carbine, same difference)? an SMG/carbine is not a sidearm, and it's a sidearm that they're looking for here. SMGs/carbines don't fit comfortably with the gear attached to a pilot's flight suit, for instance.
Kagetenshi
QUOTE (mmu1)
Maybe they ought to spend some money on ultra-modern bayonets as well. sarcastic.gif

Ultra-modern bayonets on pistols.

My god, I think we're on to something here.

~J
FlakJacket
QUOTE (ShadowDragon8685)
Or do they just not want to see American soliders carrying an Uzi?

Riiight. Because of course that isn't going to bring up any nasty comparisons or symbolism. sarcastic.gif Aside from that I'm sure that there are much better weapons out there than the Uzi.
RunnerPaul
QUOTE (Kagetenshi)
Ultra-modern bayonets on pistols.

My god, I think we're on to something here.

Squall Leonhart unavailable for comment.
ShadowDragon8685
It's heavy for an SMG, has good recoil, and a high-cap mag. It's nigh-perfect for the environment they're in.
Raygun
QUOTE (otomik)
Why the 220ST and not the 220R?

Mostly because I'd forgotten that there was a P220R. That might work too, though I'm not sure that the aluminum receiver would live up to the threshold 20,000 round service life.

QUOTE
the interchangable backstrap objective makes it seem like just about every company is going to have to go back to the drawing board.

Yeah, I missed that. However, it is an objective, not considered absolutely necessary. It's just a "nice to have". I think it would be totally superfluous for a military sidearm, but that's just me.

QUOTE (Arethusa)
This shot counter bullshit is going to turn this in XM29.

Absolutely. File under "fucking silly" and "useless".

QUOTE (mm1)
What a damn waste of money... Special operations types can already pretty much pick and choose their guns, so they don't need this (especially because these one-size-fits-all schemes usually don't yield such great result), and in the armed forces at large, what sidearm you've got matters fuck-all. Maybe they ought to spend some money on ultra-modern bayonets as well.

The problem here, mmu1, is that the Berettas that are currently in joint service (and matter fuck-all) are wearing out. It's getting to be time to replace them in bulk. If you're going to have to replace them anyway, you might as well do so with equipment that is capable of meeting modern requirements. At the very least, I think a light mount could be useful for everyone.

I see nothing wrong with them spending money to find out what will work best and I hope they continue to do so, so long as they learn from the failures.

QUOTE
Maybe. But what advantages can they possibly come up with over any number of off-the-shelf pistols out there that'd justify starting a whole new program and competition? Especially since, if I understand correctly, they're not even considering changing to a new cartridge.

After 20 years of using the 9x19mm, going back to .45 ACP is pretty much going to amount to moving to a new cartridge. Aside from that, It appears to me that they already have a commercial pistol in mind (in the P220ST/P220R). However, considering the fact that this would amount to a very large contact, they want to allow other companies to compete for that contract in order to see if any of them can meet their objectives. This is where XM8 when wrong. There was no competition.

QUOTE (ShadowDragon8685)
Of course, why not just issue our troops SMGs for an occupation role? Hmmmmmmm? Why not something simple and durable that's stood the test of time?

Because then you have to train them to use and maintain it. It's also yet another piece in the logistical puzzle. That's something they really don't have the time for right now, especially when they can use M4s that work reasonably well in that role.
hobgoblin
QUOTE (otomik)
some of these requirements are pretty futuristic
QUOTE (JCP)
3.7.6. Weapon Shot Counter.  The JCP should have a weapon shot counter to record shots fired (O).  The shot counter, if provided, shall have a data collection device that connects the shot counter to a computer.  The shot counter, if provided, shall have a Microsoft compatible software program that works in conjunction with the shot counter and the data collection device to allow the weapon data to be downloaded and stored on a computer.  The shot counter, if provided, shall not interfere with any operations of the JCP.
just like ALIENS, love.gif

ugh, why do they have to specify that it requires a microsoft windows software for the download of the shot counter data?
SL James
Because the DoD uses Windows-based PCs? Nah.
Kagetenshi
It's still an incredibly stupid requirement, given that making it compatible with all OSs should be trivial with this kind of task.

~J
Arethusa
QUOTE (Raygun)
QUOTE
Maybe. But what advantages can they possibly come up with over any number of off-the-shelf pistols out there that'd justify starting a whole new program and competition? Especially since, if I understand correctly, they're not even considering changing to a new cartridge.

After 20 years of using the 9x19mm, going back to .45 ACP is pretty much going to amount to moving to a new cartridge. Aside from that, It appears to me that they already have a commecial pistol in mind (in the P220ST/P220R). However, considering the fact that this would amount to a very large contact, they want to allow other companies to compete for that contract in order to see if any of them can meet their objectives. This is where XM8 when wrong. There was no competition.

I'm not sure I completely agree with that. Bureaucracy is the mother, brother, any other of all fuckups. Just take a look at the mess with the SCAR program and what happened to Robinson with the XCR. I'm not saying they would've won had it been fair, but...
Ed_209a
If I was designing the shot counter, I would have it use a proprietary system to count and date/time stamp the shots, then on command, compile the info into an ASCII text file and squirt it out either a USB or firewire port.

I haven't seen an OS yet that cannot read .txt

Regarding the Uzi, I wont dispute it's value as a weapon, but PLEASE save me from having to hear the political uproar over American troops carrying Israeli weapons into a Muslim country.
Kagetenshi
Text, XML, binary data, pig latin if they must, just so long as they document it. Preferably write their software for all platforms as well, but if someone can spend a few hours to hammer out their own version that's fine too.

~J
Arethusa
How about they just don't do it in the first place, since it's really really stupid guys ok.
Kagetenshi
Because even if they don't do it at all, the stupidity behind that part of their specification will remain.

Incidentally, why do you say it's stupid? I can think of uses for it, though I'll grant that I don't know whether there are systems in place already to handle the uses or what disadvantages (I'm trying to think of some) there might be.

~J
Arethusa
Because there is no way to do it without adding unnecessary bulk and overcomplification in an environment where unnecessary bulk and overcomplification get you killed. This is something that is almost guaranteed to go wrong, and whether that means jams, nonfunctioning weapons, or simple inaccuracy, it is barely useful in a fight and does nothing simple discipline, a tactical reload, and some holes punched through the mag cannot.

Microsoft specifications are dumb, but they are only a small part of a veritable tapestry of idiocy.
Kagetenshi
Well, ok, I wasn't thinking in terms of that. I was thinking more of load-tracking across a weapon's lifespan rather than a zOMG DIGITAL READOUT.

I don't know how much bulk it would add, but as far as I can tell if well-designed a total failure of this system would just mean loss of data for that weapon.

~J
Herald of Verjigorm
Judging from the quoted specifications for the shot counter, it's looks to be more for maintenance purposes. When certain thresholds are reached, the weapon goes in for rework and replacement, check whenever you get back from the range or a combat zone. If the counter reads an error, send it in then too.

I may have missed some inferred or stated bit, I didn't read the whole spec list.
otomik
QUOTE (Herald of Verjigorm @ Nov 24 2005, 02:32 AM)
Judging from the quoted specifications for the shot counter, it's looks to be more for maintenance purposes.  When certain thresholds are reached, the weapon goes in for rework and replacement, check whenever you get back from the range or a combat zone.  If the counter reads an error, send it in then too.

I may have missed some inferred or stated bit, I didn't read the whole spec list.

actually though, I'd rather people replace parts in maintenance on a needs based fashion rather than according to standards set in laboratory conditions (it sounds like a McNamara inspired idea meant to substitute good armorer's evaluating weapons). a digital readout would be kind of distracting and the same kind of functionality can be built in more simply (clear mags/grips and or the CZ99's tactile low ammo counter thingamabob)

yes Uzi's aren't politically palatable, and by extension neither would the Baby Eagles
Raygun
QUOTE (Arethusa)
I'm not sure I completely agree with that.  Bureaucracy is the mother, brother, any other of all fuckups.  Just take a look at the mess with the SCAR program and what happened to Robinson with the XCR.  I'm not saying they would've won had it been fair, but...

Yeah, that was pretty rediculous. But I still think that if you're planning on doing this kind of thing, it's better to get several manufacturers involved, competing against each other, then pick the best product. I don't think these specifications are as "out there" as many have been in the past. I also think it could be possible to get something good out of this, so long as the silly shit (i.e. the shot counter) doesn't get out of hand.

Speaking of the shot counter, I'm with Arethusa. I think it's pretty worthless, though apparently for different reasons. It's not supposed to be an active counter with a readout that shows the mag capacity. Rather it's a maintenance aid that tells how many rounds the gun has fired total. But what's going to happen when the thing hits 5,000 rounds? Is a light going to turn on? Is it going to start playing the Star Spangled Banner? How does it tell the difference between a round fired and the slide cycled manually? Sometimes shit wears out and breaks. Sometimes shit last a long time. Having something that says "this is how many rounds have been through this gun" helps about nil when you're going to have to examine parts individually anyway. It's silly. Just do it the old-fashioned way and track the damn serial numbers and maintain them in lots over time.

As for the "Microsoft compatible" line, it doesn't say that the information output can't be cross-platform compatible, just that it has to be compatible with Microsoft products (ostensibly because maintenance personnel, like 90% of the rest of the world, are likely to be using Windows-based systems to collect the data). The people who are going to be putting this stuff together are likely to be smart enough to figure that out.
Arethusa
If it's a maintenance tool, it's a lot less retarded, but I do agree with you that it's still useless. There is nothing it can do that a trained armorer or gunsmith can't, unless you count possibly fucking the weapon up severely.
Herald of Verjigorm
One thing that we should be able to agree on is that no one involved in the design wants the weapon to fail in combat. Whether a shot counter can be used in a rational manner (precise results in a statistical study of non-lab component wear to determine the mandatory rework times) or not (replace at 4,212 shots regardless of condition) is up to those who make the arbitrary rules.
Kagetenshi
QUOTE (Raygun)
As for the "Microsoft compatible" line, it doesn't say that the information output can't be cross-platform compatible, just that it has to be compatible with Microsoft products (ostensibly because maintenance personnel, like 90% of the rest of the world, are likely to be using Windows-based systems to collect the data). The people who are going to be putting this stuff together are likely to be smart enough to figure that out.

Evidence and experience points to no on that one, sadly.

~J
mfb
if i were going to implement a maintenance-oriented shot counter program, i wouldn't bother storing the "lifetime shots fired" data on the weapon itself. i would store it in a file on the armorer's computer. i would have it perform the count based on two factors: a) whether the weapon cycled, and b) whether there was sufficient recoil for a shot to have been fired. the count isn't going to be exact, but it's not going to be so far off that the data would be useless for the purposes it is gathered for. at the very least, it will be useful data for selecting the next generation of sidearms.

and, well, digital doohickeys in everything are next big thing. why not get a head start on it, if it can be done without inhibiting the workings of the weapon itself? the worst that can happen is that they'll gain some useful data on integrating such doohickeys with combat equipment. just look at it as paying the SOTA cost.
Raygun
QUOTE (Kagetenshi)
Evidence and experience points to no on that one, sadly.

~J

I know you're disappointed by the results from the StrokeCounter™ in your cock, Kage, but let's not take it out on the designers, okay? ShadowDragon8685 assures me that the data is accessible (via knoppix) and accurate. biggrin.gif
Kagetenshi
If it doesn't make the BSD chick happy, it makes the StrokeCounter sad. grinbig.gif

~J
Vaevictis
As far as the counter is concerned, a few things:
(Note, not a gun expert, but am an electrical engineer (mostly), so I could design the counter component at least)

1. It's trivial to implement. A 32 bit non-volatile RAM flip-flop would take up next to no room, add a negligible amount of weight, and would require next to zero power -- it could be provided by a photovoltaic cell (for net zero moving parts) or counterweight so small as to be unnoticable.
2. If you design it in such a way that its failing will not alter the firing ability of the gun, then there's no drawback other than price. Again, something that should be trivial. The counter clock could be triggered by the trigger mechanically (pulling it closes or opens a circuit), or maybe by using the hammer and shell casing as a switch (switch opens or closes when the conductive hammer tip strikes the conductive casing). Again, it would be trivial to provide this.
3. The output pins would be where it gets hairy. You don't want RFID or anything like that (ping! Yep, there's a soldier out there in the darkness), so you have to provide some kind of physical port. I think this would be the hardest part, considering the harsh conditions the weapon will have to endure, and the fact that such ports are stereotypically fragile.

As far as it being useless, I can see all kinds of uses:
1. Maintenance milestones. If you keep track of these in terms of rounds fired, then the gun keeps track of when it needs to be serviced by a professional. If the gun keeps track, it reduces paperwork/logistics elsewhere. Soldier comes in after a detail (or mission, or whatever), plugs the gun in, software says, "You've hit a maintenance milestone, turn in the sidearm for service." Soldier does so, gun gets checked out and worked over, and if the service tech is competent, it's now a lot less likely to fail when it shouldn't.

(And don't kid yourself, when you run statistics on stuff like this, they can be the kind that DON'T lie. You ever wonder why everything seems to fail RIGHT after the warranty expires? You think that's a coincidence? They ran the numbers, and put the warranty expiration at that point for a reason.)
2. Information. After a mission, you always know when a soldier fired his/her sidearm -- or at least that the sidearm needs to be checked because it's not reporting right. Either way, you find out if it was fired. smile.gif
3. And yeah, it ain't nothing a professional gunsmith or armorer can't do, but the point is, in some cases, this reduces the need for one. It's a cost-saving measure. Reduce the expertise needed to keep something in trim and you reduce the cost of keeping it in trim.
Kagetenshi
QUOTE (Vaevictis)
3. The output pins would be where it gets hairy. You don't want RFID or anything like that (ping! Yep, there's a soldier out there in the darkness), so you have to provide some kind of physical port. I think this would be the hardest part, considering the harsh conditions the weapon will have to endure, and the fact that such ports are stereotypically fragile.

Near-range wireless device powered by a special insert into the magazine well? Standard magazine = no power = no transmission, but you still have contact cleanliness issues.

~J
Vaevictis
QUOTE (Kagetenshi)
Near-range wireless device powered by a special insert into the magazine well? Standard magazine = no power = no transmission, but you still have contact cleanliness issues.

shrug, at that point, might as well just transmit the data over the contacts and skip the wireless.

Yeah, it can be done, but as I'm sure you've noticed, it's *always* the ports that have pins that break, corrode, or otherwise refuse to play right. :/ Like I said, output ports are stereotypically problematic smile.gif
Kagetenshi
The reason I include the wireless is because I figure simple power is at least somewhat harder to break than data.

That and I'm trying to give Arethusa apoplexy smile.gif

~J
ShadowDragon8685
Why use pins? Can't data be transmitted by a simple exposed wire strip, the kind of thing that you see in printer cartridges?

Of course, that would require a special reader unit. Not that big a deal, but do they want these guns to plug DIRECTLY into your USB port?
Vaevictis
Well, to be honest, I consider any exposed metal designed to be an electrical connection of some kind to be a "pin".

If it's a literal pin, it bends; if it doesn't bend, it'll still do other things, like probably corrode, or get bent out of shape, get filthy, or some other nonsense. About the best thing I can think of is like those cell-phone recharger stations you used to see about 5 years ago, those are pretty durable.

I'm not saying that it's a super hard problem or anything, it's just the hardest *of* the problems associated with the counter, and it always seems to be one people overlook (as evidenced by how often I/O ports tend to break).

The counter itself is trivial. The switch is only slightly less so. Designing a durable and functional I/O port on a weapon designed to be carried or stored in environments ranging from -40C to 120C, subject to sand, humidity, immersion in water, etc... That's a bit harder.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Dumpshock Forums © 2001-2012