Handguns and Ammunition Forum banner

The .45 ACP is Back!?

3072 Views 17 Replies 8 Participants Last post by  pff
Up to 645,000 of 'em!?

Solicitation number : H92222-05-R-0017
Title : 10 -- Joint Combat Pistol (JCP) System


General Information

Document Type: Presolicitation Notice
Solicitation Number: H92222-05-R-0017
Posted Date: Aug 26, 2005
Original Response Date: Nov 29, 2005
Current Response Date: Nov 29, 2005
Original Archive Date: Oct 14, 2005
Current Archive Date: Oct 14, 2005
Classification Code: 10 -- Weapons
Naics Code: 332994 -- Small Arms Manufacturing

Contracting Office AddressOther Defense Agencies, U.S. Special Operations Command, Headquarters Procurement Division, 7701 Tampa Point Blvd, MacDill AFB, FL, 33621-5323


The USSOCOM intends to issue a solicitation to obtain commercially available non-developmental item (NDI) Joint Combat Pistol (JCP) system, Caliber .45 (ACP). The Program will use full and open competition to fulfill the JCP requirement.
The JCP will be delivered in accordance with specification entitled "Performance Specification Joint Combat Pistol" to be provided with issuance of the solicitation.
Two configurations of the pistol will be required.
One configuration will have no external safety and the other configuration will have an external safety.
The Combat Pistol System consists of: a Caliber .45 pistol and its ancillary equipment including: Magazines (standard and high-capacity); Suppressor Attachment Kit for operation of the pistol with and without sound suppressor; Holster; Magazine Holder (standard and high-capacity); Cleaning Kit; and Operator's Manual.
The contract type will be an Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) issuing Firm-Fixed Price (FFP) delivery orders. The contract period of performance shall be Five (5)years with an option to extend for an additional Five (5) years.
The Minimum Quantity is 24 each Engineering Test Units (ETU's), 12 each with external manual safety and 12 each without external manual safety. The estimated Maximum quantities are: 45,000 no external safety JCP configuration and 600,000 JCP with the external safety configuration; 649,000 Holsters; 96,050 Standard Capacity Magazines; 192,099 High Capacity Magazines; 667,000 Magazine Holders; 132,037 Suppressor attachment kits; Provisioning Item Order, Technical Data Package and associated Data.
Transportation shall be F.O.B. Destination.
The solicitation will require, free of charge to the government, delivery of 24 each product samples along with a concise written proposal all due on the closing date stated in the solicitation. The 24-each product sample from the successful offeror may be accepted as the Minimum Quantity. Any subsequent delivery orders for JCP's will order between 50 each and 200,000 each with a maximum monthly delivery rate of 5,000 each.
Any subsequent orders for the ancillary items will require delivery to commence within 60 days after receipt of order. The product samples and written proposal will be evaluated on a best value basis and the Government will reserve the right to award to other than the lowest priced offeror and other than the highest technically rated offeror.
Product samples from unsuccessful offerors will be returned to the offerors upon request and at the offeror's expense. The Government cannot guarantee the condition of the product samples after testing.
All responsible sources may submit a proposal, which shall be considered by the agency.
The Government intend to issue a draft solicitation. Notifications, Solicitation, and other communication will be posted via FEDBIZOPS.
Questions may be emailed to Contract Specialist, Mr. Pfender at [email protected].
See less See more
1 - 18 of 18 Posts

Man, if they didn't write this RFP for Glock then I'm not a .45 ACP fan.
Doubt we see another 1911, but I could be happy with a full size single stack Glock in .45ACP. The G21 is just to big grip wise for a lot of folks, but meets the "high cap" requirement very handily. Also, they already make a holster and mag pouch holders for the pistols.
Don't see any competition that even comes close. Unless you think Para-Ordinance would fill the bill...I don't.
It would be interesting to read their justification for reverting back to the .45 ACP. I have no dog in this 'fight', so to speak, I'm just curious about what the official government rationale is.
Hi there,

It kind of sounds like a "ringer" since the H&K SOCOM is already in service with alot of the specifications and features outlined in the synopsis.

As to the justification of returning to the .45 ACP, well I guess, like Catbird, "I have no dog in this fight" as well. Maybe history is repeating itself?

Sort of vague wording to me. "High Capacity" could mean a 10-11 rd 1911 mag, there are reliable ones out there. Plus, since it's USSOCOM, why wouldn't they use the 1911 again? It's not for general issue, though the "no external safety" schtick is a tricky one, and where Wes is probably right on the money on Glock, or for something similar such as the Springfield.
It would be interesting to read their justification for reverting back to the .45 ACP. I have no dog in this 'fight', so to speak, I'm just curious about what the official government rationale is.
Their justification is that an extremely high percentage of AARs (After Action Reports) contain the message that the 9mm is inadequate as a "stopper".

The troops seem to be universally clammoring for more power in a pistol and when a recomendation is mentioned in an AAR it usually specifically mentions the .45 ACP. Still most of the AARs simply mention the inadequacy of the 9mm without a specific caliber recommendation.

I have read quite a few AARs in the last few years. I have not read one that stated the 9mm was adequate. That does not mean I think these are infallibe sources of information, it just means the folks up the chain of command are seeing a LOT of complaints.

I don't think there's going to be such a significant difference in power as the troops are expecting. Somebody needs to tell these guys that a pistol is never going to hit like a rifle. I love handguns as much as anybody, but if I was in a position where I had an option of a pistol or a carbine, I'd take the carbine every time. If I was at the front and had a reliable M16, I'd see if I couldn't find a way to trade a sidearm for some extra 5.56 magazine pouches, and the magazines to go with them.

People need to learn that the one-shot-stop is a legend, (or at least an anomally) when it comes to pistols.
Actually, I don't think a lot of this is theory nor will many be surprised. There are what some would find to be a pretty high percentage of .45s in theater (note that the Col. who captured Sadaam was packing an old G.I. 1911a1 by preference). With which to compare.

While rifles are decidely easier to shoot, have longer range and will penetrate *some* chance barriers better (some they will not which is why we choose the 5.56 in Law Enforcement) - the 5.56 does not necessarilly stop people quicker with equal hits to the high chest than does .45 ball (though it certainly does seem to do a little more damage). It is probably better with more periferal hits. It does not damage bone as much however.

The big advantage is that you can place more hits - more accuarately with the carbine. That is the main reason most would prefer it for CQB.

I cannot locate it on my computer or on the military net but once upon a time there was a nifty little document which listed the number of "center mass" (whatever that is???) hits to incapacitation for the military calibers with ball ammo. IIRC it went like this:

7.62 Nato (M68) - 1.2 rnds.
.45 ACP - 2 rnds
5.56 (M193) - 3 to 4rnds (cant remember which but that certainly agrees with the range what I am hearing from the guys coming back - we tell folks to expect it to take 3-5 *good* hits)
9mm - 6 rnds (that also agrees with some first hand reports). I have a student in one SF unit who called back the first week he was in Afghanistan to report that 9mm ball has the same effect on a Taliban as "a fly hitting a light bulb." On his two subsequent trips to the sandbox the took first a compact .45 then a full sized Govt. Model.

I am assuming that this compilation was based on unarmored targets... light body armor should change that drastically.

Again, that is based on memory (which is sketchy at best but the order of effectiveness was what got my attention). I keep looking for this study but have not run across it yet.

See less See more
I have a hard time believing those numbers.

Here's why: .45 x 2 = .90 .355 x 6 = 2.13. Since pistol ammunition travels too slowly for temporary cavity to have as much effect on a target's vitals as a rifle, permanent cavity is the primary method by which a target will be defeated. Besides, even if we factored in temporary cavity, the 9 is faster, which would be to its credit, and the .45's detriment. I refuse to believe that it requires twice as much permanent cavity to get the same result from a 9 as from a .45. If the .45 can kill a man with .90' permanent cavity, then 9mm can too.

I think that several things are happening here, to get these kinds of results:

1. .45s are used by special forces, who by-and-large, are better shots, and therefore, are getting better placement.
2. When soldiers use their 9mms against an opponent, and they don't get a one, or two shot stop, they panic, and fire roughly twice as many shots as would be necessary to actually eliminate the threat (.355 x 3 = 1.065, which is close to the .90 that will obviously suffice, since it seems to do fine with the .45)
3. Deeper magazines mean that the troops are more willing to take extra shots after an enemy has begun to stumble, and go down, despite their not being necessary. One will not generally spare the extra three "up yours" or "making sure" shots against a stumbling opponent when those three shots would almost be half of one's seven-round magazine capacity.

After all, I don't know a human being who I believe would still be kicking after three chest shots from a 9mm, even with ball ammo.

What everyone wants, and in my opinion, tries to construct, is a set of statistics or figures that will make them feel all warm and fuzzy about their chosen caliber. In reality, however, no caliber warrants a warm, fuzzy feeling. All of them warrant little besides dread, as we all know that when the time comes that we actually have to use one, someone else's warm, fuzzy caliber is likely directed at us, as well. The scary thing about this is not that they are completely right, and we are completely wrong, or that we are completely right, and they are completely wrong. The scary thing is that both sides of this exchange are at least a little bit right, and that little bit is enough that either one can kill the other.

In reality, all of the numbers that I've posted here mean absolutely nothing. None of this means anything unless you hit your target, and survive the fight.
See less See more

All numbers should be viewed with skepticism. However, having shot in excess of 2,000 critters and also having collected every bit of info I could on shootings for some 35 years, I don't have any trouble with the figures in the "study" in a general sense.

I have numerous cites of failures of 9mm JHPs (let alone ball) failing with up to 106 hits (in that case - San Bernadino CA S.O. - the coroner reported that 50 of the hits were in lethal areas). While I personally think no pistol rounds (perhaps short of the newer S&W and the Linebaughs) are "powerful" I also know from experience that neither are many rifle calibers.

But I would warn against trying to put some sort of number value on "power"...there are simply way too many variables. What is hit inside the body and the mental attitude of the subject is far more important than physics. It is probably that we must refine our idea of a "good hit" down to details... some even think a hit to the top of the heart is more effective than a hit to the bottom of the heart and I don't think I can argue against that, though I am not sure I buy it completely.

About the only thing we might conclude is that Kinetic Energy has nothing to do with effectiveness and that Temporary Cavity probably has nothing to do with it under most circumstances (there are probably exceptions - and bearing in mind that TC usually is proportional to PC).

Onward and upward,
See less See more
That's what I'm saying: people are using too broad a definition of a good hit.

It's not that I wouldn't rather have a .45, or expanding ammunition, if possible, but that I would rather not rely on either of those factors.

They might give me a slight edge, and all, but what I really think matters is whether I'm getting really good hits.

No one is going to dispute that a shot through the heart or brain is, barring a miracle, always a kill-shot. Caliber and expansion only really come into play when you're not hitting enough vitals, and are depending on blood-loss from nonvital areas to slowly bring down an attacker.

Where a lot of the discrepancy in the number of shots may come from is lungshots. Those will kill a man, but they take time. The amount of time can be significantly reduced by making bigger holes, or more of them, though.

Large caliber is good. Skill is better than caliber, however, and luck is better than both.


As an addendum to that last statement, I'd like to say that obviously, it's best to be lucky, skillful, and carry a big gun.
See less See more
<snip>As an addendum to that last statement, I'd like to say that obviously, it's best to be lucky, skillful, and carry a big gun.
I cant argue with that

See less See more
Draft specs for the JCP system are out:

Draft Request For Proposal for Industry Comment: Response Due 09/15/05 01


Some highlights:

45 ACP

DA/SA, DAO, or SFA (striker fired action)

W and W/O safety

Std capacity/at least 8 and and high capacity/at least 10 magazines

MIL-STD-1913 accessory rail

2,000 MRBS/5,000 MRBF

20,000 round service life

Mean radius of 10 shot group at 50m no lmore than 3.15 inches

Suppressor attachment kit

Should fit hands from 5th - 95th percentile; modular grip adjustment is
desired, not required

So the HK USP needs a 1913 rail, the P2000 a safety, the Glocks/XDs/SIGs
need a safety...
See less See more
When people talk about effectiveness of the 5.56, it would help if they would specify the particular round: M193, M855, 262mk2, etc. They are not all the same in performance. There is data to suggest that the M855 is less effective than the M193, and especially from the short 14.5" barrels that are more and more common. We need to compare apples to apples.

It would be much better if the Military would just step up to the plate and admit they made a Huge Mistake by giving up the 1911 and Bring it Back.

The 1911 would even boost the Soldiers morale (1911's Have Class), while being forced to carry one of the latest & greatest will lower morale in a lotta cases.

Going into Battle is a scary thought, Going into Battle with out a Browning Designed Pistol on your side is a Horrifying thought.

Maybe their conscious will get the best of'em and they'll admit their mistake and bring The 1911 Back... Not that it has totally left Action to begin with.

Take Care,
Agree wholeheartedly!!!, though it doesn't look like even America's Best is going to get them unless they bring their own with those REQ's.
Some folks who have recent firsthand experience with both .45 and 9mm said that both killed about the same but the .45 tended to be a slightly better stopper.

I assume with ball ammo, but not sure of that.



[edited to add] interesting how the .308 stacks up; coulda told them that 30 years ago.
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.