The U.S. Air Force has followed the Army in adopting the SIG M18 handgun, based upon SIG’s very popular P320 modular handgun system. And now, the USAF has begun issuing the new handgun to some of its personnel.
JOINT BASE SAN ANTONIO-LACKLAND, Texas (AFNS) — The Air Force Security Forces Center, in partnership with the Air Force Small Arms Program Office, has begun fielding the new M18 SIG Sauer Modular Handgun System to security forces units as part of the Reconstitute Defender Initiative and its effort to modernize weapon systems and increase warfighter lethality.
Image via U.S. Air Force.
The M18 replaces the M9 Beretta, which has been in use for more than 30 years. This new weapons system is also projected to replace the M11-A1 Compact used by the Air Force Office of Special Investigations and the U.S. Army M15 General Officer pistol used for military working dog training.
The modular design of the M18 provides improved ergonomics, target acquisition, reliability and durability to increase shooter lethality.
A key benefit of the M18 is that it can be customized to individual shooters with small, medium or large handgrips.
“This is going to help shooters with smaller hands. It also has a much smoother trigger pull, leading to a more accurate, lethal shooter,” said Staff Sgt. Richard Maner, 37th Training Support Squadron armory noncommissioned officer in charge at Joint Base San Antonio-Lackland, who had an opportunity to test the weapon. “The M18 is a smaller platform weapon, but it gives the shooter more capabilities over the bulkier, larger M9 pistol.”
Besides being rugged and reliable, the Beretta 92, aka the Beretta M9, was known for its heft and girth. SIG’s modular inter-changeability make the gun significantly more adaptable to a variety of shooters and situations. The swappable frames allow those with petite hands, as well as bear-like paws to utilize a grip that will give each of them better control and, as a result, better accuracy.
Meanwhile, the Russians announced their new military pistol in recent months. And unlike the Americans’ SIG SAUER M18 built to help Americans maximize their handgun shooting skills, the new Russian “Boa Constrictor” has a single grip and double-action only trigger. But the Russkies let us know that their new pistol will pierce Reynolds Wrap heavy duty aluminum armor at 100 yards. Assuming their soldiers can hit a man-sized target at that range.
I would be pissed if I was giving up a P229 (M11-A1) for that.
Good point.
The USAF only issues the M11 to their OSI officers. OSI does investigations for security clearances, and some very limited law enforcement type investigations. The very definition of “carried often, fired never”. Weight is I believe the same to within an oz.
For OSI, the M18 is probably a better choice. At least it doesn’t have a DA/SA trigger.
DA/SA Sig Sauer trigger with SRT > the slack fest followed by creep show that is the P320 stock trigger.
we have some pilots that have them as well.
“OSI does investigations for security clearances, and some very limited law enforcement type investigations. The very definition of ‘carried often, fired never’.”
This is not true in the slightest. Background checks for security clearances are a minority of what AFOSI does. Large portions of OSI manning at every Air Force base are dedicated to counterintelligence and criminal investigations. I have worked closely with those guys, and they are far from paper-pushers.
I was never in the military, but I have shot the M9 and 320. I am surprised the 19x or the FN weren’t chosen over the Sig. It’s good to see our military buying weapons that might help our troops make it home alive. I’ve heard a few horror stories of M9s not working in the field during crucial times.
That could have to do with age. It seems like the difference between good stuff and junk is age provided a bit of time to get the teeth cutting out of the way has passed.
The M9 is a great Pistol but I’m sure one that’s been to hell and back with questionable maintenance shows its age pretty quick.
Winning a military contract is probably the easiest way to ruin your product’s reputation. Unlike garrison armies the US military trains and deploys almost all the time. Our gear gets beat up. In 10 years soldiers and airman will be conplaining about how crappy the M17/M18 is because by then the pistols will have multiple lifetimes worth of use. That may be the reason that Army wanted a modular pistol. They are probably thinking they can just replace frames and barrels as needed and keep the inventory fresh.
It jerks my tail that the USA can’t make a pistol that Our military could use. Uniforms from Malaysia, Ordnance from Singapore, boots are probably proudly Made in China. One hell of an independent country we’ve got here.
The company might be German but the 320 is made here.
Just like our rifles, FNH is a Belgium company but the rifles are built in the USA
It’s amazing how you don’t realize that almost all the gear we wear has to be made in the USA. Guns, boots, uniforms. It’s called the Berry Amendment.
Glad someone said it. Had no idea New Hampshire wasn’t in the US……
Berry Amendment, Second Amendment, First Amendment, take your pick. Not all the stuff is Made in USA, believe what you want. Bottom line believe money.
I like instead of realizing you don’t know what you are talking about. You just double down on your idiotic statements. Our uniforms, standard issue arms, boots, ammo are all US made.
Money is exactly WHY they are made in the US. Congress likes money in their district much more than they like saving it in budgets.
Always funny when someone’s response to being educated is to pretend that they’ve got secret knowledge and that the people who are actually knowledgeable are just sheep, though.
That’s true if it’s issued. If it was bought with a clothing allowance or with their own money the question is if it meets the regs.
Reebok boots seemed to me to be popular with the Air Force personnel I have encountered. Reebok might be a UK company but everything Reebok makes is made in China.
So now our female war fighters will have a firearm especially sized for them? I thought we wen to war to protect our women and children so they didn’t have to experience that particular horror. I realize historically there have been some famous women warriors, but those have been regarded as an anomaly and not the model. Oh well.
and now according to a federal judge in Texas, women are also subject to the draft. NOT a good idea.
@ Billy Bob, “I thought we wen(t) to war to protect our women and children.” Haahaha LMAO; Thanks for that laugh Billy Bob, good one.
@Jon, “and now according to a federal judge in Texas, women are also subject to the draft. NOT a good idea.” No, it’s a great idea, you “White Knighter”. Women have been asking for this for decades, remember they can do anything a man can, and gender is fluid; These are their ideas.
I cant tell if you are being sarcastic or not but ill play this game.
I dont live in the fantasy land where gender is fluid and women can do anything men can do (and vise versa). I live in the real world where most women are more emotionally fragile and physically inferior to males. I am not saying that women are inferior and men are superior. They are simply built/designed for a different purpose than men. Sure they can train themselves to be physically and emotionally stronger than men but those women are the exception and not the standard. If those few want to go fight in a war, let them (just make sure they are separate from the men). Dont force all women to fight in a war because a loud few live in a fantasy land.
Ive seen what the typical women does on deployment to Bagdad and can tell you that they have no place on the front lines or in combat or in any type of life or death situation. I can also say that a woman, regardless of appearance, is also a huge distraction for any male (especially Joe) who has had months of abstinence.
See the reply below, as after repeated attempts my reply would not post. Found out the word P>>U>>S>>S>>Y is blocked by TTAG software. You think it would tell you that, rather than reposting multiple times.
No, but they will have a sidearm that can more easily fit their hands with the proper backstrap. Other than the argument that girls have cooties, what exactly would be the problem with that?
Being former USAF SP (SF), this is a great move. Regardless that Glock fans had a tantrum over the selection :), I like the P320. I have 5 of them and I carry one every day. The only problem I ever had was a warn out striker spring after 10k rounds on one of the earliest releases of the pistol. Other than that, warn out magazines and bad reloads aside, these guns have been flawless for me, and trust me, I worked them. Hopefully, the USAF has improved its training regiment. Going from a double action pull to a striker fired gun requires a lot more discipline.
Maybe I just have an older, jaded military experience, but how long is any unit going to have a bunch separate frames lying around, just to give the individual shooter the “just right” handgun grip size? Does the military cater to people that much nowadays? The joke while driving the humvees was that the driver’s seat had three adjustments; way too low, not quite right, and way too high.
Zzzzzpppp Pock Ping Ping, Seat still ain’t low enuff,,, ;>}
Good gun. Glocks work well but even without using a backstrap I somehow manage to not get a good grip AND get slide bite. I could see the SIG being more usable.
@Jon,
Good reply and I agree with most, here is where we differ “…Don’t force all women to fight in a war because a loud few live in a fantasy land…” It is Not a loud few, it IS the majority of women and they have been doing it for decades. Don’t believe? Search for the red state, blue state maps under the criteria, if only women voted versus if only men voted. Obama would never have been elected. They have become the face of tyranny in America.
For far to long men have shielded women from their own actions(I did as well), not only can this not be the case(by women’s own decisions), but doing so will only hasten this republics demise. Women, which is in their very nature, want their decisions free from any personal repercussions. As Jordan Peterson point out, women have removed men’s ability to “fight back”; as women are the only ones able to (honey badgers). (Watch the movie The Red Pill, if you haven’t already, it will give you an understanding of what dire striates a generation of men are now in).
The DNC/Progressives have targeted these “emotionally fragile” women and succeed in creating a fifth column, and it is beyond a shame. This conservative vs. progressive war is just as much a war of the sexes. Therefore I understand you protecting you and yours (as will I), however, all other pussy passes are hereby revoked.
Test
@Jon,
Good reply and I agree with most, here is where we differ “…Don’t force all women to fight in a war because a loud few live in a fantasy land…” It is Not a loud few, it IS the majority of women and they have been doing it for decades. Don’t believe? Search for the red state, blue state maps under the criteria, if only women voted versus if only men voted. Obama would never have been elected. They have become the face of tyranny in America.
For far to long men have shielded women from their own actions(I did as well), not only can this not be the case(by women’s own decisions), but doing so will only hasten this republics demise. Women, which is in their very nature, want their decisions free from any personal repercussions. As Jordan Peterson pointed out, women have removed men’s ability to “fight back”; as women are the only ones able to (honey badgers). (Watch the movie The Red Pill, if you haven’t already, it will give you an understanding of what dire striates a generation of men are now in).
The DNC/Progressives have targeted these “emotionally fragile” women and succeed in creating a fifth column, and it is beyond a shame. This conservative vs. progressive war is just as much a war of the sexes. Therefore I understand you protecting you and yours (as will I), however, all other p..u..s..s..y passes are hereby revoked.
I can’t wait till it gets to my SFS.
I would be pissed if I was giving up a P229 (M11-A1) for that.
Good point.
The USAF only issues the M11 to their OSI officers. OSI does investigations for security clearances, and some very limited law enforcement type investigations. The very definition of “carried often, fired never”. Weight is I believe the same to within an oz.
For OSI, the M18 is probably a better choice. At least it doesn’t have a DA/SA trigger.
DA/SA Sig Sauer trigger with SRT > the slack fest followed by creep show that is the P320 stock trigger.
we have some pilots that have them as well.
“OSI does investigations for security clearances, and some very limited law enforcement type investigations. The very definition of ‘carried often, fired never’.”
This is not true in the slightest. Background checks for security clearances are a minority of what AFOSI does. Large portions of OSI manning at every Air Force base are dedicated to counterintelligence and criminal investigations. I have worked closely with those guys, and they are far from paper-pushers.
I was never in the military, but I have shot the M9 and 320. I am surprised the 19x or the FN weren’t chosen over the Sig. It’s good to see our military buying weapons that might help our troops make it home alive. I’ve heard a few horror stories of M9s not working in the field during crucial times.
That could have to do with age. It seems like the difference between good stuff and junk is age provided a bit of time to get the teeth cutting out of the way has passed.
The M9 is a great Pistol but I’m sure one that’s been to hell and back with questionable maintenance shows its age pretty quick.
Winning a military contract is probably the easiest way to ruin your product’s reputation. Unlike garrison armies the US military trains and deploys almost all the time. Our gear gets beat up. In 10 years soldiers and airman will be conplaining about how crappy the M17/M18 is because by then the pistols will have multiple lifetimes worth of use. That may be the reason that Army wanted a modular pistol. They are probably thinking they can just replace frames and barrels as needed and keep the inventory fresh.
It jerks my tail that the USA can’t make a pistol that Our military could use. Uniforms from Malaysia, Ordnance from Singapore, boots are probably proudly Made in China. One hell of an independent country we’ve got here.
The company might be German but the 320 is made here.
Just like our rifles, FNH is a Belgium company but the rifles are built in the USA
It’s amazing how you don’t realize that almost all the gear we wear has to be made in the USA. Guns, boots, uniforms. It’s called the Berry Amendment.
Glad someone said it. Had no idea New Hampshire wasn’t in the US……
Berry Amendment, Second Amendment, First Amendment, take your pick. Not all the stuff is Made in USA, believe what you want. Bottom line believe money.
I like instead of realizing you don’t know what you are talking about. You just double down on your idiotic statements. Our uniforms, standard issue arms, boots, ammo are all US made.
Money is exactly WHY they are made in the US. Congress likes money in their district much more than they like saving it in budgets.
Always funny when someone’s response to being educated is to pretend that they’ve got secret knowledge and that the people who are actually knowledgeable are just sheep, though.
That’s true if it’s issued. If it was bought with a clothing allowance or with their own money the question is if it meets the regs.
Reebok boots seemed to me to be popular with the Air Force personnel I have encountered. Reebok might be a UK company but everything Reebok makes is made in China.
So now our female war fighters will have a firearm especially sized for them? I thought we wen to war to protect our women and children so they didn’t have to experience that particular horror. I realize historically there have been some famous women warriors, but those have been regarded as an anomaly and not the model. Oh well.
and now according to a federal judge in Texas, women are also subject to the draft. NOT a good idea.
@ Billy Bob, “I thought we wen(t) to war to protect our women and children.” Haahaha LMAO; Thanks for that laugh Billy Bob, good one.
@Jon, “and now according to a federal judge in Texas, women are also subject to the draft. NOT a good idea.” No, it’s a great idea, you “White Knighter”. Women have been asking for this for decades, remember they can do anything a man can, and gender is fluid; These are their ideas.
I cant tell if you are being sarcastic or not but ill play this game.
I dont live in the fantasy land where gender is fluid and women can do anything men can do (and vise versa). I live in the real world where most women are more emotionally fragile and physically inferior to males. I am not saying that women are inferior and men are superior. They are simply built/designed for a different purpose than men. Sure they can train themselves to be physically and emotionally stronger than men but those women are the exception and not the standard. If those few want to go fight in a war, let them (just make sure they are separate from the men). Dont force all women to fight in a war because a loud few live in a fantasy land.
Ive seen what the typical women does on deployment to Bagdad and can tell you that they have no place on the front lines or in combat or in any type of life or death situation. I can also say that a woman, regardless of appearance, is also a huge distraction for any male (especially Joe) who has had months of abstinence.
See the reply below, as after repeated attempts my reply would not post. Found out the word P>>U>>S>>S>>Y is blocked by TTAG software. You think it would tell you that, rather than reposting multiple times.
No, but they will have a sidearm that can more easily fit their hands with the proper backstrap. Other than the argument that girls have cooties, what exactly would be the problem with that?
Being former USAF SP (SF), this is a great move. Regardless that Glock fans had a tantrum over the selection :), I like the P320. I have 5 of them and I carry one every day. The only problem I ever had was a warn out striker spring after 10k rounds on one of the earliest releases of the pistol. Other than that, warn out magazines and bad reloads aside, these guns have been flawless for me, and trust me, I worked them. Hopefully, the USAF has improved its training regiment. Going from a double action pull to a striker fired gun requires a lot more discipline.
Maybe I just have an older, jaded military experience, but how long is any unit going to have a bunch separate frames lying around, just to give the individual shooter the “just right” handgun grip size? Does the military cater to people that much nowadays? The joke while driving the humvees was that the driver’s seat had three adjustments; way too low, not quite right, and way too high.
Zzzzzpppp Pock Ping Ping, Seat still ain’t low enuff,,, ;>}
Good gun. Glocks work well but even without using a backstrap I somehow manage to not get a good grip AND get slide bite. I could see the SIG being more usable.
@Jon,
Good reply and I agree with most, here is where we differ “…Don’t force all women to fight in a war because a loud few live in a fantasy land…” It is Not a loud few, it IS the majority of women and they have been doing it for decades. Don’t believe? Search for the red state, blue state maps under the criteria, if only women voted versus if only men voted. Obama would never have been elected. They have become the face of tyranny in America.
For far to long men have shielded women from their own actions(I did as well), not only can this not be the case(by women’s own decisions), but doing so will only hasten this republics demise. Women, which is in their very nature, want their decisions free from any personal repercussions. As Jordan Peterson point out, women have removed men’s ability to “fight back”; as women are the only ones able to (honey badgers). (Watch the movie The Red Pill, if you haven’t already, it will give you an understanding of what dire striates a generation of men are now in).
The DNC/Progressives have targeted these “emotionally fragile” women and succeed in creating a fifth column, and it is beyond a shame. This conservative vs. progressive war is just as much a war of the sexes. Therefore I understand you protecting you and yours (as will I), however, all other pussy passes are hereby revoked.
Test
@Jon,
Good reply and I agree with most, here is where we differ “…Don’t force all women to fight in a war because a loud few live in a fantasy land…” It is Not a loud few, it IS the majority of women and they have been doing it for decades. Don’t believe? Search for the red state, blue state maps under the criteria, if only women voted versus if only men voted. Obama would never have been elected. They have become the face of tyranny in America.
For far to long men have shielded women from their own actions(I did as well), not only can this not be the case(by women’s own decisions), but doing so will only hasten this republics demise. Women, which is in their very nature, want their decisions free from any personal repercussions. As Jordan Peterson pointed out, women have removed men’s ability to “fight back”; as women are the only ones able to (honey badgers). (Watch the movie The Red Pill, if you haven’t already, it will give you an understanding of what dire striates a generation of men are now in).
The DNC/Progressives have targeted these “emotionally fragile” women and succeed in creating a fifth column, and it is beyond a shame. This conservative vs. progressive war is just as much a war of the sexes. Therefore I understand you protecting you and yours (as will I), however, all other p..u..s..s..y passes are hereby revoked.
Looks like the Marines got it right to!
https://www.sigsauer.com/press-releases/u-s-marine-corps-adoption-of-m18-underscores-success-of-sig-sauer-modular-handgun-system-program/
Comments are closed.