Talk:Heckler & Koch USP

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Counter Strike Source[edit]

I think that this article should offer a screen shot from the popular video game, Counter Strike Source, because that is what every Counter Terrorist is issued with in the game.Defy You 03:17, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the weapon, not the game. The fact that the USP appears is your favorite video game (and another endless list of others) does not add anything to article. It already mentions the common appearance of the pistol in popular culture, even with a couple examples, and that's more than enough. --Squalla 04:19, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

US Special forces?[edit]

It is true it is used by them beside MK-23 Mod 0 ?--Max Mayr 15:04, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

From what I could find, it looks like some Special Operations forces have USP Tacticals that they sometimes use. Nburden (T) 16:23, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
SF use pretty much anything they want to, I'd imagine. A "standard issue" doesn't exist for them. 214.13.173.15 (talk) 01:23, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The SEALS have a few, but all they do is sit in the armory gathering dust because noone wants to use a foot long, akward pistol —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.198.219.104 (talk) 00:43, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Silencer/Sound Supressor[edit]

I noticed it said "citation needed" for that bit where the silencer for the Mark 23 will not fit on the USP Tactical. I have a source, it's my USP Tactical owners manual which states quite clearly in bold text "The MK23 sound suppressor cannot be attached to the USP45 Tactical pistol!" with exclamation point. It adds (but not in bold) "A specifically designed sound suppressor is available for the USP45 Tactical pistol." This information can be found on page 40 of the HK USP SERIES OPERATOR'S MANUAL. So how would I cite this as a source, or can someone do it for me? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.74.245.106 (talk) 01:40, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can cite it, it doesnt have to be online, publications are fine.

e.g

HK USP SERIES OPERATOR'S MANUAL - Page 40 (Heckler and Kock) (Year of publication) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.36.93.46 (talk) 15:41, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

P8 merge[edit]

I put up tags to integrate the P8 into this article. Same pistols, different name. The P8 also has plastic opaque magazines and a safety lever that was rotated 180 as requested by the Bundeswehr. Koalorka (talk) 17:20, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I completely support this merge. A different control lever setup and barrel are not enough to warrant a seperate article. Nburden (T) 17:30, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support per WP:GUNS#Variants. Good catch Koalorka finding the P8's article.--LWF (talk) 20:32, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In-flight discharge[edit]

Should it be mentioned that this is the weapon that was discharged on US Airways flight 1536? Jdkessler (talk) 19:27, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not unless it can be shown that the incident to which you refer had an effect on the USP.--LWF (talk) 19:31, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It should be noted that Greg Alter of the Federal Air Marshall Service noted that "This is an extremely safe and reliable weapon, It's not going to discharge on its own, is the bottom line." The USP and USP Compact are equipped with a firing block safety that can only be disengaged when the trigger is pulled completely to the rear, which would can only be accomplished with a intended trigger pull. This allows the transfer arm to travel upwards, pushing the spring-loaded safety out of the way of the firing pin. Also, the inertial firing pin present in the USP can only discharge the primer when hit by a full hammer drop, which again can only be accomplished by a full intended trigger pull, which also disengages the firing pin safety. The only possiblity of this being a weapon error would be if the hammer was cocked back, and the sear of the hammer failed, causing the hammer to fall against the firing pin, at the same time as the internal firing pin block failing as well. Since there are no other documented accidental discharges of the USP to give this case any merit, it's clear that he pilot simply mishandled the weapon.

Bobbed hammer[edit]

The article states, about the bobbed hammer: "This reduces possible snag from the hammer on a holster or clothing while the pistol is being drawn, but still allows the USP Compact to be cocked from a decocked or half-cocked position even in the absence of a spurred hammer." In fact the USP Compact hammer is completely uncockable from a totally decocked position. It's flush with the back of the frame. From half-cock, it may SORT OF be cocked with difficulty. 68.101.130.214 (talk) 09:29, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I partially agree with the article - you can certainly cock it from the decocked position and it is not flush. Not as easy as a spurred hammer, but not that difficult. I disagree with the article, and the the other comment for that matter, in that there is no half-cocked position on a USP Compact. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.41.1.236 (talk) 00:31, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

the hammer is bobbed enough to not hook on clothing or a holster. when decocked, the rubber pad supplies ample grip to cock the firearm. when the hammer is dropped, as in dry-fired or when a cartridge misfires, the hammer is flush with the rear of the slide, not the frame.

the article is completely accurate on this (non-)issue.Automatictransgression (talk) 05:51, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes -- the article is COMPLETELY correct. The USP compact with a bobbed hammer cannot be cocked (without pressing the trigger or using tools) when decocked This is not the case when the hammer is half cocked. The bottom line: The article is correct. 06:34, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

"...cannot be cocked (without pressing the trigger or using tools) when decocked..."?!?

interesting. you are still missing the point: when one DECOCKS the hammer, an action that takes place when one presses downward on the combination safety/decocker (NOT when the weapon is dry-fired), the DECOCKED weapon's rubber-backed bobbed hammer is still able to be cocked. dry-firing is not decocking. it is dry-firing. and a person who tries to lower a bobbed hammer all the way manually is probably going to get a broken thumb and have to answer to putting a hole through whatever the muzzle is pointing at.

the term half-cocked, which you continue to misuse in regard to this modern weapon, refers to a slightly-safer way to carry a muzzle-loaded weapon. a trigger pull of roughly the same weight as when the gun is fully-cocked will still allow the hammer of a half-cocked gun to drop, resultantly either striking the cap or sparking the powder pan on a flintlock, but too lightly in either instance to effectively fire the weapon. you know...going off half-cocked. incidentally, in the case of a flintlock, doing so will also cause a 'flash in the pan'.

why would someone go to the trouble of adding the line "...the USP Compact cannot be cocked from a dry-fired position..." in the first place? it is a) kind of a nit-picking throwaway statement, even if b) there would be ever any reason in practical use to do so, which there is not. Automatictransgression (talk) 07:37, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This discussion lead me to get my USP40 and check out the firing mechanism/safety again. I know there are variants to the USP firing mechanism to appeal to the philosophy of most possible users. My USP40 does not have a half-cock hammer; it has a rebounding hammer. Also, there are two types of conventional "half-cock"--one is a half cock position designed to catch the hammer if it is partially pulled back and accidentally released, in order to stop the hammer before it can hit the firing pin or percussion cap: pulling the trigger will release the hammer from that sort of half-cock. My son's Paraordnance pistol has such a half-cock. Most hammer fired guns I have or have owned with "half-cock safety" (Marlin 39 and 336, Winchester 94, Colt 1851, Remington 1858, Colt 1911, various muzzleloading rifles from H&A and CVA) have a deep notch that captures the sear: pulling the trigger cannot release the hammer from this sort of half cock unless something is broken. My USP has a rebounding hammer with a trigger activated hammer block; it does not have a half cock position on the hammer. I suspect this is true of most other variants. Naaman Brown (talk) 19:41, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

EKAM counter-terrorist unit of the Hellenic Police[edit]

This weapon is also used by Special Anti-Terrorist Unit (EKAM)of the Hellenic Police. For more info see wiki page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.166.210.113 (talk) 22:58, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia cannot use itself as a source, and none of the sources at Special Anti-Terrorist Unit list the USP as a weapon used by EKAM. See: (1) and (2). ROG5728 (talk) 23:10, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

USP Compact starting timeline[edit]

In the Variants section the text states that the Compact is introduced in 1996, yet further down in the article in the USP Compact sub-section the date changes to 1994. So which is it? Monoblocks (talk) 15:32, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bundeswehr complains about cracks in P8 receivers[edit]

I have heard today on German TV (and they filmed someone handling a slideshow printout with the photos) that the Bundeswehr is complaining about cracked P8 frames, but I don't have any additional information. 2001:7E8:C04A:FD01:223:54FF:FE15:1831 (talk) 00:06, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User Update[edit]

Acording to the Wikipedia page "List of individual weapons of the New Zealand armed forces" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_individual_weapons_of_the_New_Zealand_armed_forces the Heckler & Koch USP is used by the New Zealand SAS, hence I believe that it should be added to the user list. I would do it myself but I was just checking if it was all ok. Feel free to add that Coolgeek96 (talk) 08:49, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

10-round magazines for USP 45 Compact[edit]

HK made a 10-round magazine in .45ACP compatible with both the HK45 Compact and the USP Compact. Shall we add somewhere in the article (perhaps the infobox under magazine capacity) that the USP 45 Compact, which normally holds 8 rounds, can hold 8 or 10? Blemo 23 ɸ TALK • CONTRIBUTIONS • EMAIL • MESSAGE 04:38, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Anyway, I put it in the article myself. I have the link to said magazine here. Blemo 23 ɸ TALK • CONTRIBUTIONS • EMAIL • MESSAGE 04:42, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

HKPRO[edit]

I have deleted several citations to HKPRO.com. It is not a reliable source for Wikipedia articles because its articles are anonymously posted and there's no discernible editorial review process. See WP:V for general rules, and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Firearms#HKPRO/ hkpro.com for a specific discussion of this source. Rezin (talk) 23:47, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

H&K USP users update[edit]

The H&K USP is inter alia used by the Hungarian Police, too.

source:

http://magyaridok.hu/belfold/harminc-negyven-evesek-rendorsegi-pisztolyok-587485/


The previous article should verify it. (Magyar Idők is a serious newspaper in Hungary.)

I'm a newcomer here, I wouldn't touch the original article....please, edit it ;) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Szebenyovszky Tamás (talk • contribs) 06:39, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in Heckler & Koch USP[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Heckler & Koch USP's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "auto":

  • From Bundeswehr: (www.dw.com), Deutsche Welle. "Germany to expand Bundeswehr to almost 200,000 troops - DW - 21.02.2017". DW.COM.
  • From Germany: "Gross domestic product – at current prices – 1991 to 2015". Statistische Ämter des Bundes und der Länder. 5 November 2016. Archived from the original on 5 November 2016. Retrieved 6 July 2016. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |deadurl= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)
  • From United States: Long, Heather (September 12, 2017). "U.S. middle-class incomes reached highest-ever level in 2016, Census Bureau says". Retrieved September 18, 2017 – via www.WashingtonPost.com.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 12:58, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Commons files used on this page have been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page have been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. Community Tech bot (talk) 04:21, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Heckler_%26_Koch_USP&oldid=1207605599"