The Army's Inglis High Powers

[Cameron SS]

That seems like a very sad/ironic assertion, esp. given J. Mitic's published account about the lengths CF drivers (ostensibly in a "combat zone") had to go to get issued a sidearm (or any firearm)...





Was it Groucho Marx who asserted that "military intelligence" was a contradiction in terms?...




But, hey, those prisons...

An assertion I reluctantly have to agree with. The weenies at DLR that determine requirements for the Army are not front line combat troops and I doubt if a single one of them had ever fired a shot in anger.

Its unlikely that they would approve a mixed fleet due to our militaries small size and so it would definitely be a one size fits all approach.

The issue with J mitics tour and pistols is that the CAF still uses 1890s era policies to determine allocation. If you are officially a driver on the orbat then you were almost guaranteed to get a pistol. If you were simply a dude on a small team that had to beg borrow and steal to get a vehicle then chances are you had to whore yourself out for a pistol as well. Most honest LAV drivers would hand their pistol off to a door kicker, but the problem is that your average joe in the company isnt much better on the pistol then officer he wants to take it from. Or the clerk at KAF that only wants a pistol because its too much hassle carrying around a rifle all day.

Before CAF buys a new pistol they need to seriously modernize what they think they need pistols for, and how they allocate them, and then train everyone accordingly. Without that rethink, buying any new pistol will be underwhelming.

 

[Cameron SS]

That seems like a very sad/ironic assertion, esp. given J. Mitic's published account about the lengths CF drivers (ostensibly in a "combat zone") had to go to get issued a sidearm (or any firearm)...





Was it Groucho Marx who asserted that "military intelligence" was a contradiction in terms?...




But, hey, those prisons...

An assertion I reluctantly have to agree with. The weenies at DLR that determine requirements for the Army are not front line combat troops and I doubt if a single one of them had ever fired a shot in anger.

Its unlikely that they would approve a mixed fleet due to our militaries small size and so it would definitely be a one size fits all approach.

The issue with J mitics tour and pistols is that the CAF still uses 1890s era policies to determine allocation. If you are officially a driver on the orbat then you were almost guaranteed to get a pistol. If you were simply a dude on a small team that had to beg borrow and steal to get a vehicle then chances are you had to whore yourself out for a pistol as well. Most honest LAV drivers would hand their pistol off to a door kicker, but the problem is that your average joe in the company isnt much better on the pistol then officer he wants to take it from. Or the clerk at KAF that only wants a pistol because its too much hassle carrying around a rifle all day. Most officers still believed they were carrying pistols simply as a symbol of authority, and as a symbol there was little requirement to actually be proficient.

Before CAF buys a new pistol they need to seriously modernize what they think they need pistols for, and how they allocate them, and then train everyone accordingly. Without that rethink, buying any new pistol will be underwhelming.

 

[woodchopper]

Before CAF buys a new pistol they need to seriously modernize what they think they need pistols for, and how they allocate them, and then train everyone accordingly. Without that rethink, buying any new pistol will be underwhelming.

this is something I agree with.

Everyone should have a pistol, If they don't need it on a patrol then it can be left back in the FOB.

And everyone should be qualified on pistol. So many times I have been on the range coaching troops that have never shot a pistol but now need to qual PWT2 or 3 for a deployment.


My last deployment was with a small contingent and we didn't have any rifles, only pistols. I managed to find a range and get in 2 range days, some interesting shooting.

 

[bearhunter]

CameronSS wrote: An assertion I reluctantly have to agree with. The weenies at DLR that determine requirements for the Army are not front line combat troops and I doubt if a single one of them had ever fired a shot in anger.

I think I understand your intent so don't take this as a slam.

When stressful situations happen, shots are very seldom fired in anger IMHO. Depending on the situation, every other emotion pertaining to it will come into play, especially FEAR and even guilt. Anger??? I won't say it doesn't happen but again, IMHO, it's very far down the list of emotions going on at the time.

REMFs also have a job to do with the tools they are given. Often those tools are lacking effectiveness. We all understand the ramifications of that lack of effectiveness.

IMHO, I would feel well armed with a properly functioning P35 under stressful conditions, of course after proper training on maintenance and handling.

Funny, I was speaking with a long time friend that just retired from the US Marine Corp, after 30 continuous years of service. He needed permission to reup for the last five. He considers himself to be an REMF in his own words.

I asked him about his issue sidearm, which he informed me was a standard Model 92 Beretta. I asked him if he had any issues with failure to feed. He laughed and said NO, because I only use my magazines for what they're intended for. He told me failures to feed were pretty common with "some" of the pistols because of the alternative common uses by the people they are issued to. Every thing from screwdrivers to bottle openers, to contraband storage units etc.

I'm not sure how he got away with it but he was issued a brand new pistol when he was given his assignment close to twenty years ago. He managed to retain that pistol for the rest of his enlistments. Of course, he had to turn it back in when he retired.

The issues with the Canadian P35s definitely have a basis in fact. I don't doubt that for a minute. I also believe, as woodchopper suggested, lack of training as well as lack of interest have a lot to do with those failure issues.

 

[D-BOMB]

In my thus far limited use of them in the CAF, they all seem to be reliable with a caveat being magazines in proper spec. A Sgt acting as my units QM unofficially instructed us that the policy for a defective 9mm or C7 magazine was to place it on a concrete floor, and swiftly crush it with a good stomp of the boot. This way proven unreliable magazines are removed from our stores. Honestly a contract to Mecgar for some new mags would likely quell this issue as much as I want new shiny kit...
My 2 cents.