• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

NEWS USAF Fighter And Bomber Crews Get Modified M4 Rifles That Fit Under Ejection Seats

HuggyU2

Well-Known Member
None
I seriously doubt there is really a 'need' for this other than to boost morale.
How often in the past 20 years have aircrew from the Naval Services engaged the enemy with their issued weapon after being shot down?
Not much of a need, I'd say.
So are you willing to just dispense with it all together and save the hassle?

Feel free to keep your M9 strapped to your 1980's designed SV-2, as you strap in to your ejection seat in your 1960's-designed harness. Those items work fine too, so why upgrade?
 

Flash

SEVAL/ECMO
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
How often in the past 20 years have aircrew from the Naval Services engaged the enemy with their issued weapon after being shot down?
Not much of a need, I'd say.
I referenced how many times USAF and USN aviators have used their personal weapons in the past 50 years earlier in the thread and the answer remains the same, there ain’t much of a need at all. But a pistol is still nice to have just in case, and one that doesn’t really add much cost, training or complexity at all to the kit we already carry day to day.

Feel free to keep your M9 strapped to your 1980's designed SV-2, as you strap in to your ejection seat in your 1960's-designed harness. Those items work fine too, so why upgrade?
And feel free to read the first 10 or so pages of this thread where a few of us argue why this may not be the be use of resources and space. It’s a professional disagreement, simple as that. FYI, most if not all of Naval Aviation hasn’t used the M9 for 20 or so years now.

Personally I’ve never had a problem with the SV-2, even when walking/waddling to my jet with my helmet on instead of waiting for the big blue crew bus to chauffeur me there.
 

Griz882

Livin' On the Right Side of the River From Pags!
pilot
Big difference between a need and a want, given the history I cited earlier in this thread I seriously doubt there is really a 'need' for this other than to boost morale.
You could say the pilots "want" a fancy break-down rifle to eventually give to an enemy fighter...maybe what the AF "needs" is a heavily armed, slow mover that can defend a downed pilots position and the arriving rescue helicopter.
 

Jim123

DD-214 in hand and I'm gonna party like it's 1998
pilot
Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good black rifle with a collapsible stock at your side, kid. Unless you're trying to singlehandedly take down an AT-AT on an ice planet, then an ancient weapon is what you need, along with a Batman zipline thingie and one of those thermal detonators.
 

nittany03

FUBIJAR
pilot
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
How often in the past 20 years have aircrew from the Naval Services engaged the enemy with their issued weapon after being shot down?
Not much of a need, I'd say.
So are you willing to just dispense with it all together and save the hassle?

Feel free to keep your M9 strapped to your 1980's designed SV-2, as you strap in to your ejection seat in your 1960's-designed harness. Those items work fine too, so why upgrade?
We also haven’t issued the SV-2 in probably 13 years.
 
Top