# Colt Awarded Contract For New MARSOC Pistol



## pardus (Jul 25, 2012)

The Marine Corps’ elite special operations and reconnaissance units will field thousands of new .45-caliber pistols over the next four years, military acquisition officials confirmed Thursday.​The service awarded a $22.5 million contract to Colt Defense for its M1911A1 Rail Guns. The deal was finalized Wednesday night, according to Barb Hamby, a spokeswoman for Marine Corps Systems Command in Quantico, Va. Precise details are expected to be released Thursday evening, but there is widespread speculation the order will total some 4,000 firearms.​The pistols will be manufactured at Colt’s plant in West Hartford, Conn., and delivered to the Marine Corps by 2017, Hamby said.​Designated the M45 Close Quarter Battle Pistol by the service, Colt’s Rail Gun takes a tried and true platform used since World War I and outfits it with a rail at the front of the receiver that can be used to mount the flashlights, lasers and infrared devices preferred by today’s special operations forces. While fundamentally unchanged since its inception, the weapon does use the company’s newer series 80 firing system, developed during the 1980s to increase safety by adding a firing pin block that prevents the discharge of a live cartridge if the gun is dropped or banged.​The weapon Colt submitted for this contract competition includes a dual recoil spring assembly, meant to reduce recoil. It was furnished in a desert tan color and featured a Cercoat finish designed to reduce reflection and prevent corrosion. The pistol also features more stainless steel parts, which should help it withstand the harsh environments where special operations and reconnaissance Marines operate — particularly in and around saltwater.​It’s not immediately clear whether Colt’s final prototype also includes all these flourishes.​While standard operating forces throughout the U.S. military use the NATO-standard Beretta M9 pistol, elite military and law enforcement units, including Marine special operations and force recon, have continued to use the 1911. While it requires more maintenance and care than many modern semi-automatic pistols, it is revered for its accuracy and performance in the hands of skilled shooters. Its .45-caliber rounds also pack a heavier punch than the 9mm NATO rounds used in the M9.​Other company’s that competed for the contract included Springfield Armory out of Geneseo, Ill., and Karl Lippard Designs of Colorado Springs, Colo.​http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/2012/07/Marine-corps-marsoc-new-colt-45-caliber-pistols-071912/


----------



## SkrewzLoose (Jul 25, 2012)

Is this a follow on to this thread about the (then upcoming) MARSOC .45?


----------



## Brooklynben (Jul 25, 2012)

FINALLY the 45acp is being brought back!  This is good news.


----------



## AWP (Jul 25, 2012)

Nice pistol, too bad they suck:

http://soldiersystems.net/2012/07/20/marsoc-winning-colt-guns/


----------



## pardus (Jul 25, 2012)

That is disturbing. I'd hope the Corps picked the best pistol of the bunch though. I'd also hope the Corps goes to Colt and says "WTF!? Fix this shit so it never happens again."


----------



## 0699 (Jul 25, 2012)

Surprised they didn't get it painted in a MARPAT pattern...


----------



## DA SWO (Jul 25, 2012)

Brooklynben said:


> FINALLY the 45acp is being brought back! This is good news.


Why?

There are so many capable .45 systems available, why go with one that was initially deemed unacceptable?
Is the Marine Corps so steeped in tradition that they ignored more capable systems so they can claim to be the last Combat Force using a 1911?


----------



## Th3 Maelstr0m (Jul 25, 2012)

Freefalling said:


> Nice pistol, too bad they suck:
> 
> http://soldiersystems.net/2012/07/20/marsoc-winning-colt-guns/


 
Dear god. That's pretty disturbing, especially for a custom job. I'd be really interested to read a report on the ins & outs that led to them deciding on a 1911. 12k & the frame is cracking? I wonder how their torture test compared to some done on a glock or m&p:

http://www.theprepared.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=90&Item

http://pistol-training.com/archives/998


----------



## Marauder06 (Jul 25, 2012)

First it was "we want our own uniforms" now it's "we want our own sidearms."

I wonder if this is going to spark a services-wide "arms race" like MARPAT did.


----------



## CDG (Jul 25, 2012)

I thought I posted this earlier.....  4,000 pistols at a cost of $22.5 million for the contract comes out to $5625 per pistol.  That seems pretty pricey.


----------



## policemedic (Jul 25, 2012)

Freefalling said:


> Nice pistol, too bad they suck:
> 
> http://soldiersystems.net/2012/07/20/marsoc-winning-colt-guns/


 
I own one with some 5000 rounds through it, and I'd disagree with you. The Rail Gun, aside from its use of the Series 80 parts, is an excellent production 1911.

Now granted, 5000 rounds isn't 12K. I'd expect the guns to last much longer than that, although I'd expect them to need gunsmith attention throughout their lifespan (that's the nature of the 1911).

I'm going to have to read the entire testing protocol, and see how the rest of the guns did. I'm interested in what may have caused the (unacceptable!) failures. Was it poor metallurgy, some weird kind of production issue, or a ridiculous testing protocol?



pardus said:


> That is disturbing. I'd hope the Corps picked the best pistol of the bunch though. I'd also hope the Corps goes to Colt and says "WTF!? Fix this shit so it never happens again."


 
Colt's reputation for quality control has seen a resurgence over the past few years and they've been putting out better and more reliable pistols than they ever have. In my opinion, and admittedly judging on a small sample size (my pistol and a few others), the Rail Gun is one of Colt's best. Colt has a number of veterans on staff. I'm sure none of them want to put substandard guns in the hands of combat troops. I'm equally sure Colt doesn't want to the black eye that will come with putting out crap.

They'll fix it.



SOWT said:


> Why?
> 
> There are so many capable .45 systems available, why go with one that was initially deemed unacceptable?
> Is the Marine Corps so steeped in tradition that they ignored more capable systems so they can claim to be the last Combat Force using a 1911?


 
I may be forgetting something, but I don't remember the 1911 being thought of as unacceptable. I believe the switch to the M9 POS and the 9mm had to do with standardizing equipment with other NATO forces.

With that said, I agree that there are other capable .45s out there. I'd argue the HK45 would fill the role nicely without some of the pitfalls associated with a 1911.




CDG said:


> I thought I posted this earlier..... 4,000 pistols at a cost of $22.5 million for the contract comes out to $5625 per pistol. That seems pretty pricey.


 
Even with the Cerakote, and assuming it's the non-IR reflective stealth coating used on LWRC's M6IC, $5625 does seem to be a bit much. I got mine for a HK USP45 and a few hundred cash.


----------



## Polar Bear (Jul 25, 2012)

Gee how about a Glock 21 and 5 rattle cans to change colors. People need to quit reinventing the wheel.


----------



## AWP (Jul 25, 2012)

policemedic said:


> I own one with some 5000 rounds through it, and I'd disagree with you. The Rail Gun, aside from its use of the Series 80 parts, is an excellent production 1911.
> 
> Now granted, 5000 rounds isn't 12K. I'd expect the guns to last much longer than that, although I'd expect them to need gunsmith attention throughout their lifespan (that's the nature of the 1911).
> 
> ...


 
I agree with you and don't want anyone to think I'm a 1911 hater; far from it.

For the pistols to have the failures that they did is unacceptable (as you mentioned). I'm a little curious how the contract was awarded with weapons that, for whatever reasons, failed. The reality is that there is a contract and numerous weapons DID fail.

Maybe that $5600 a copy included lifetime frame and slide replacements...kind of like buying the protection plan at Best Buy or wherever?


----------



## policemedic (Jul 25, 2012)

Freefalling said:


> kind of like buying the protection plan at Best Buy or wherever?


 
Yeah...somehow that always trebles the price  ("You don't want the extended 5-yr protection plan on your new iPhone case?  It's only $150 for 5 years and it will cover the cost of a new case so you're never inconvenienced.....")

You bring up a good point, though.  If the Colt pistols experienced these documented failures, how badly did the other guns do that Colt was still judged contract-worthy?  Or was the contract awarded after taking other factors into consideration in addition to the gun's performance?


----------



## Etype (Jul 25, 2012)

CDG said:


> I thought I posted this earlier..... 4,000 pistols at a cost of $22.5 million for the contract comes out to $5625 per pistol. That seems pretty pricey.


That price is just fucking retarded.


Polar Bear said:


> Gee how about a Glock 21 and 5 rattle cans to change colors. People need to quit reinventing the wheel.


There's not a damn thing wrong with a pistol that works every time you pull it out of the holster.

1911s are good competition guns in divisions above production, but I hope the Marines are planning on going to war and not competing.  Exposed hammers and external safeties are not something any combat pistol should have.


----------



## 0699 (Jul 25, 2012)

Etype said:


> *There's not a damn thing wrong with a pistol that works every time you pull it out of the holster*.


 
This.


----------



## Etype (Jul 25, 2012)

If your pistol was primary weapon system, if it was what you fought with and devoted the bulk of your maintenance to, a 1911 would be a great choice. However, when I climb a wall and fall down into a mud puddle, I'm protecting my rifle, I'm really not paying any attention to what my pistol hits on the way over or how dirty it gets. When I have 2 hour turn around to do maintenance and sleep, I don't want 2 weapon systems that I have to completely disassemble, clean, and lube.

If you were choosing a pistol to shoot a bullseye competition, a 1911 would be a great choice. However, when a fighting man draws his pistol, it's because something has gone terribly wrong. He may not have done any maintenance on it last night, he just fell on it and the rear of it is now caked in wet sand, _but it has to work._


> Its .45-caliber rounds also pack a heavier punch than the 9mm NATO rounds used in the M9.


 
This is such a BS line. I can't believe, with everything we now know about ballistics, quotes like this are still so common. Unless you are shooting 180 or 165 gr .45, it's still a subsonic round- so the only difference is you're punching a 2mm larger hole, but you are sacrificing the hydraulic shock achieved by a supersonic 9mm round. If the bigger bullet argument had any significance, then a revolutionary era .75 cal musket would have better terminal ballistics than a modern .308, but that's just not the case.


It's about fucking time the military at the institutional level gets smart on these kinds of things and stopped proliferating bullshit that we knew to be untrue 20 years ago.


----------



## DA SWO (Jul 26, 2012)

CDG said:


> I thought I posted this earlier..... 4,000 pistols at a cost of $22.5 million for the contract comes out to $5625 per pistol. That seems pretty pricey.


4000 is the initial buy, I believe the 22.5M was for an estimated 12K buy.



policemedic said:


> I own one with some 5000 rounds through it, and I'd disagree with you. The Rail Gun, aside from its use of the Series 80 parts, is an excellent production 1911.
> 
> Now granted, 5000 rounds isn't 12K. I'd expect the guns to last much longer than that, although I'd expect them to need gunsmith attention throughout their lifespan (that's the nature of the 1911).
> 
> ...


 
I emboldened the part I am responding to.  1911 was not deemed unacceptable (the contract specs drove every one to a 1911).  The Colt was initially deemed unacceptable.

The failures were all pretty much similar, and there is some belief that Colt "tweaked" the design which led to a systematic slide failure by 12K rounds.  

H&K, M&P, and other .45's were not tested because of the design specs.  The Marines wanted a Colt .45 and they have one.


----------



## policemedic (Jul 26, 2012)

SOWT said:


> 4000 is the initial buy, I believe the 22.5M was for an estimated 12K buy.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
I'm tracking now.  I thought you were referring to the period in the 80's when the 1911 was phased out and the M9 POS was phased in.


----------



## Salt USMC (Jul 26, 2012)

4,000 seems like an awful lot of pistols for such a small command.  MARSOC has, what, like 2,700 Marines on its T/O?  And its not even up to 100% yet.  Are they planning on giving every swingin dick a .45?


----------



## DA SWO (Jul 26, 2012)

Deathy McDeath said:


> 4,000 seems like an awful lot of pistols for such a small command. MARSOC has, what, like 2,700 Marines on its T/O? And its not even up to 100% yet. Are they planning on giving every swingin dick a .45?


Probably.
Is MARSOC Looking to get bigger?  4K might be in anticipation of an increase, or just an aknowledgement that the pistols will fail and they are buying maintenance spares ahead of time


----------



## Brooklynben (Jul 26, 2012)

SOWT said:


> Why?
> There are so many capable .45 systems available, why go with one that was initially deemed unacceptable?
> Is the Marine Corps so steeped in tradition that they ignored more capable systems so they can claim to be the last Combat Force using a 1911?


  My comment wasn't about any particular ".45 system", it was about the round itself.  I suppose this all goes back to the days of raging debates when the military first went from the 1911 45acp to the Beretta 9mm.  I happen to be of the Jeff Cooper mindset that the 45acp round itself is superior in putting people down.


----------



## policemedic (Jul 26, 2012)

Brooklynben said:


> My comment wasn't about any particular ".45 system", it was about the round itself. I suppose this all goes back to the days of raging debates when the military first went from the 1911 45acp to the Beretta 9mm. I happen to be of the Jeff Cooper mindset that the 45acp round itself is superior in putting people down.


 
Disclaimer- I carry a .45 ACP daily, and so my bias should be clear.

With that said...

Given modern bullet technology, and given a good hit, calibers other than .45 ACP will get the job done.  To paraphrase Larry Vickers, caliber is fine but accuracy is final.

Put a modern 9mm JHP in the heart, spine or brain and you'll put the bastard down.  Better yet, put several in and around the same place.

The biggest mistake the military made when they transitioned to the 9mm was not so much the caliber but the platform.


----------



## Teufel (Jul 26, 2012)

MARSOC and Marine Recon are all getting 45s.


----------



## Etype (Jul 26, 2012)

policemedic said:


> The biggest mistake the military made when they transitioned to the 9mm was not so much the caliber but the platform.


I thought that was worth repeating.


----------



## DA SWO (Jul 27, 2012)

One of the issue is the(US)  Military's insistence on an external safety, so that killed a large number of vendors, IIRC the RFI also called for a single stack magazine which killed all the good striker pistols off.

Hope you guys enjoy it.


----------



## The Hate Ape (Jul 27, 2012)

Etype said:
			
		

> This is such a BS line. I can't believe, with everything we now know about ballistics, quotes like this are still so common. Unless you are shooting 180 or 165 gr .45, it's still a subsonic round- so the only difference is you're punching a 2mm larger hole, but you are sacrificing the hydraulic shock achieved by a supersonic 9mm round. If the bigger bullet argument had any significance, then a revolutionary era .75 cal musket would have better terminal ballistics than a modern .308, but that's just not the case.
> 
> 
> It's about fucking time the military at the institutional level gets smart on these kinds of things and stopped proliferating bullshit that we knew to be untrue 20 years ago.


 
That was beautiful.


----------



## Etype (Jul 27, 2012)

SOWT said:


> ...also called for a single stack magazine which killed all the good striker pistols off.


That's right in line with my post about the military being 20 years behind the curve and believing the BS of a past era.


----------



## policemedic (Jul 27, 2012)

Now, I love the 1911.  In fact, for my mission it is just about perfect.  But the needs of a MARSOC Marine or Special Forces Soldier are different than mine.

It does have a few deficiencies compared to some other modern .45 ACP pistols.  Chief amongst these are lower ammo capacity and the need for a higher (and more technical) degree of maintenance.  The Glock 21, M&P 45, HK USP45 and HK45 are all examples of reliable .45 ACP platforms that are boringly reliable, and very accurate (the HK45 probably leads the pack here).  Each also has higher ammo capacity (but let's face it, it's a .45 ACP pistol and the size of the round is a factor in capacity).

I agree that specifying a single stack magazine and thumb safety pretty much dictated a 1911.  If they'd left the magazine style open, they could have had a pistol with a thumb safety and higher capacity that also required less maintenance.  But it wouldn't have been a 1911, and clearly that's what they wanted.


----------



## Etype (Jul 27, 2012)

policemedic said:


> I agree that specifying a single stack magazine and thumb safety pretty much dictated a 1911.


It seems as though the contest was decided before it began.

Carrying military issue 234 gr M1911 .45 ball is stupid, there's no other word for it. It's a less effective round than M882 due to it being subsonic and it weighs 205% more. They be much better off going with a 9mm 1911.


----------



## Marauder06 (Jul 27, 2012)

It seems like the specifications were specifically made to only allow for a .45, and most likely a Colt.  Single stack?  .45 caliber?  external safety?  Yeah, that considerably narrows the field.


----------



## AWP (Jul 27, 2012)

Colt, Springfield, Kimber, STI, SVI, Nighthawk, Sig Sauer...there are a few companies that make a single-stack, ext. safety, .45, etc. handgun. As soon as you put "single stack" in for the magazine type your options drop significantly.


----------



## Etype (Jul 27, 2012)

I guess this is sill 1960.

Slick polymers have yet to be created so double stack magazines are unreliable. It's either the 1911 or a revolver, and everyone knows revolvers are for policemen.


----------



## Etype (Jul 27, 2012)

I also heard water cooled machine guns are back in fashion.


----------



## policemedic (Jul 27, 2012)

Etype said:


> I guess this is sill 1960.
> 
> Slick polymers have yet to be created so double stack magazines are unreliable. It's either the 1911 or a revolver, and everyone knows revolvers are for policemen.


 
Bwahahaha!

When I hit the street, back when streets were hard packed dirt and horses were tied to posts outside the general store, I was issued a S&W Model 10.  And I was grateful, damn it!


----------



## Etype (Jul 27, 2012)

policemedic said:


> When I hit the street, back when streets were hard packed dirt and horses were tied to posts outside the general store, I was issued a S&W Model 10. And I was grateful, damn it!


I bet.  Those brass cartridges were really fast to reload, and you could even get them wet!!!


----------



## Kraut783 (Jul 28, 2012)

heh...I miss my S&W 686 .357.  Looked cool with the wood grips........but it was the late 80's and porn mustaches were also in style...


----------



## Etype (Jul 28, 2012)

Kraut783 said:


> heh...I miss my S&W 686 .357. Looked cool with the wood grips........but it was the late 80's and porn mustaches were also in style...


Revolvers definitely compliment a certain style.  There's something pretty cool about an over-the-hill, over-weight detective in a suit with a cross draw revolver.


----------



## Crusader74 (Jul 28, 2012)

Were the Marines asked for their input?  Did they test the pistols on trail?  or was it some civil servant who decided?


----------



## policemedic (Jul 28, 2012)

I may be wrong but I don't believe the Marine Corps ever completely got rid of the 1911.  Didn't some special units hang on to them?


----------



## Red-Dot (Jul 31, 2012)

The .45 ACP is an awesome round. Don't know why they would not go with the H&K Mk 23??  It has all the 'extras" one would need...


----------



## The Hate Ape (Jul 31, 2012)

Thats what I keep under my toilet lid.


----------



## SkrewzLoose (Jul 31, 2012)

Isn't the MK23 the size of a small child before you add all the extra cool guy shit to it?


----------



## The Hate Ape (Jul 31, 2012)

I have a large toilet


----------



## SkrewzLoose (Jul 31, 2012)

That's what she...oh, wait a second...


----------



## DA SWO (Jul 31, 2012)

Red-Dot said:


> The .45 ACP is an awesome round. Don't know why they would not go with the H&K Mk 23?? It has all the 'extras" one would need...View attachment 6475


The Mk 23 is too fucking big to be useful.
IIRC H&K also had a non-standard rail system;meaning all weapon attachments came from them.

The new "MARSOC .45" will probably be a good backup weapon, but I think it will have teething problems and there will be some amazed Marines when they discover one round of .45 isn't the killing machine they were told it is.

In the end, shot placement is the determining factor.


----------



## Red-Dot (Jul 31, 2012)

The Mk23 is large,as it was designed to be shot with big, bulky gloves. I don't know if you have ever shot one, but they extremely accurate. And I'm a Glock fan!!
The USP is also a nice pistol, and should be given high consideration.


----------



## The Hate Ape (Jul 31, 2012)

Herstal Five-Seven for the win.


----------



## Etype (Jul 31, 2012)

Red-Dot said:


> The .45 ACP is an awesome round. Don't know why they would not go with the H&K Mk 23?? It has all the 'extras" one would need...View attachment 6475


I would put a bipod on it.


----------



## policemedic (Jul 31, 2012)

Red-Dot said:


> The Mk23 is large,as it was designed to be shot with big, bulky gloves. I don't know if you have ever shot one, but they extremely accurate. And I'm a Glock fan!!
> The USP is also a nice pistol, and should be given high consideration.


 
The Mk23 is an over engineered, very accurate, extremely large and heavy albatross.  It is a half pound heavier than the HK45, and that's meaningful because the HK45 incorporates many of the important features of the Mk23 and improves on others (such as having a standard 1913 rail).  It is also heavier, believe it or not, than the Colt Rail Gun MARSOC selected.  The USP _is_ a nice pistol, but in my view in .45 ACP it's been eclipsed by the HK45. 

The Mk23 is a cool pistol, but it isn't practical and in fact wasn't designed to be used as a general issue sidearm, even to SOF troops.  It's no longer made, and the SEALs replaced it with the HK45CT.


----------



## Etype (Jul 31, 2012)

If they are set on a .45 pistol, why not go with a rifle chambered in .30 carbine?  Why not a machine gun in .303 Enfield?


----------



## policemedic (Jul 31, 2012)

Meh. Just get a phased-plasma pulse rifle in 40-watt range and call it done.


----------



## Rapid (Jul 31, 2012)

I'm pretty sure mostly everyone despises the Mk. 23. Well, mostly everyone in SOF who has access to them. In the arms room. Where they should remain forever.


----------



## The Hate Ape (Aug 2, 2012)

No but seriously, whats wrong with the idea of using a five-seven?


----------



## DA SWO (Aug 2, 2012)

The Hate Ape said:


> No but seriously, whats wrong with the idea of using a five-seven?


Log guys want to avoid bringing new ammo into the system would be my guess.


----------



## Red-Dot (Aug 2, 2012)

308 in a pistol??

Here you go.  Well kinda...


----------



## Etype (Aug 3, 2012)

The Hate Ape said:


> No but seriously, whats wrong with the idea of using a five-seven?


I'd love to see it in some platforms other than the current.  It's a good round, I think they need a different pistol to shoot it.


----------



## HOLLiS (Aug 3, 2012)

I gather not many people know about Chesty Puller;





> Puller cracked his knuckles, loaded up his Colt 1911, and landed at the head of the 1st Marines at Inchon in September of 1950.  At the Battle of Choisin Reservoir, Puller and his men found themselves holed up in the town of Koto-ri, completely surrounded by ten full Divisions of Chinese Infantry hell-bent on killing every American they could find and then re-animating the dead bodies to fight as their undead army of the night.  Heavily outnumbered, and fighting in ball-freezing sub-zero temperatures, Puller’s troops broke the enemy lines, smashed through seven enemy divisions, and then stayed behind as a rear guard, bearing the brunt of the Chinese onslaught so that the rest of the Marines could complete their retreat (Puller refused to refer to it as a retreat, however, he preferred to call it, "attacking in a different direction").


 


> "All right, they're on our left, they're on our right,
> they're in front of us, they're behind us.
> They can't get away this time."


 
If a 1911 was what he used, then let the rest of the Marines use it too.   It is not the weapon, it is the person behind the weapon.


----------



## DA SWO (Aug 3, 2012)

HOLLiS said:


> I gather not many people know about Chesty Puller;
> If a 1911 was what he used, then let the rest of the Marines use it too. It is not the weapon, it is the person behind the weapon.


That would be a good reason for keeping the M9 then.


----------



## Etype (Aug 3, 2012)

HOLLiS said:


> If a 1911 was what he used, then let the rest of the Marines use it too. It is not the weapon, it is the person behind the weapon.


- Davie Crockett was really good with his flintlock, but I'd bet on any 18 year old PFC with an M4 against him.  
- It never hurts to have the best piece of equipment in your hands.  The 1911 was the best pistol we had in the Korean War, that's not the case anymore.
- Chesty also probably carried an M1 Garand, definitely not something I'd recommend to anyone these days.


----------



## HOLLiS (Aug 4, 2012)

I guess what is being eluded too is the answered in the question, " What do you want a pistol for?"

As someone who as a pack mule with no load limit, I would not want a pistol. It would be more weight. I would rather have more ammo for my M16. A funny thing happens in a fire fight, even if there was a shortage of firearms to begin with, they are always extra at the end.

Order of battle, Rock, something to fight with until you can get a knife.
..........................knife, something to fight with until you can get a pistol.
..........................pistol, something to fight with until you can get a rifle.

Rifle, fight is on.


----------



## DA SWO (Aug 4, 2012)

HOLLiS said:


> I guess what is being eluded too is the answered in the question, " What do you want a pistol for?"
> 
> As someone who as a pack mule with no load limit, I would not want a pistol. It would be more weight. I would rather have more ammo for my M16. A funny thing happens in a fire fight, even if there was a shortage of firearms to begin with, they are always extra at the end.
> 
> ...


Rifle until CAS is on-station.


----------



## Salt USMC (Aug 9, 2012)

Or until someone gets the mk-19 up


----------

