Why don't more of our armed forces use silencers?

[rh71]

Buck_Naked - curious - where's this knowledge coming from ?

 

[jlee]

Originally posted by: Buck_Naked
Picture of a S.A.S.S. candidate with a suppressor...

Link

In an attempt to make my point that modern suppressor designs either have no effect or can improve accuracy, and that using a suppressor does not require the use of subsonic ammo.

I am beginning to wonder if my posts even get read....

If the firearm is completely silent and the bullet passes the speed of sound, you're still going to get the 'crack' as it breaks the sound barrier..

 

[rudder]

Originally posted by: iamtrout
???

I believe there is something in the Geneva convention about using silencers.

 

[AdamSnow]

Silencers can only be used so many times before they stop silencing...

They would need to be replaced all the time.

 

[BuckNaked]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: Buck_Naked
Picture of a S.A.S.S. candidate with a suppressor...

Link

In an attempt to make my point that modern suppressor designs either have no effect or can improve accuracy, and that using a suppressor does not require the use of subsonic ammo.

I am beginning to wonder if my posts even get read....

Just because someone makes one for that gun doesn't mean that it works good for that application. It just means that there's a dollar to be made by doing it. A supersonic bullet will still make a loud noise, even if the gun has a suppressor.

Yes, the bullet will still crack when it goes supersonic, but the suppressor still makes the origin of the shot extremely hard to detect.

The Army is looking for a replacement for the M24 sniper system, and started trials in March or April of this year for the S.A.S.S. (Semi Automatic Sniper System), with candiadates from several manufacturers. I believe that one of the requirements of the solicitation is that the rifle include a suppressor, but I am not sure on that, as I haven't seen the requirements of the original solicitation.

I posted a link to one candidate, here is another : Link

KAC also has an entrant based on the Mk. 11 Mod 0 Link which has been used by Naval Special Warfare for some time, including the use of a suppressor.

And in another post above, the SPR or Mk. 12 Link has been in use for some time including use with a suppressor. I think that demonstrates that suppressors are effective and are seeing increased use within the military, at least within the Spec. Ops community...

 

[Ns1]

Originally posted by: bradruth

Originally posted by: Mo0o
What you really want to do is going ahead and engage in a series of jumps and crouches while moving side to side. This allows you to dodge the enemy's bullets.

That's right. Then after you waste the opfor you spraypaint his body and crouch-hump his corpse.

hahahahhaaha

 

[PingSpike]

It seems that for the majority of our armed forces, the costs would outweigh the benefits.

 

[Hammer]

reduces accuracy and range, and they aren't useful in all situations

 

[LordMorpheus]

Originally posted by: bradruth

Originally posted by: iamtrout
Squad sees a group of enemies unaware of their presence. Squad picks them off. Confusion sets in because no one knows where the shots are coming from. Much safer for the squad because enemy doesn't know where they're at.

Squad gets in a situation with heavy resistance. Two groups go out on sides to flank and wittle away silently at the enemy as they are focused on the main group. Much safer for the ones doing the flanking.

Squad infiltrates. Instead of gunshots that give away the infiltration they go in quietly and pick people off as they see them. It's not so run-and-gun. Unsuppressed guns would give away the position of the squad to enemies in the whole building, including ones on different floors, ones that are sleeping, ones outside.

This all sounds way too video-game inspired. The situations where suppressors would be benefitial are really limited to special ops, which is where they're already used. Air/armor/artillary support are cornerstones to modern combat. "Picking enemies off" isn't as easy as a mouse click. It takes serious marksmanship to hit your target at a long distance, which a suppressor would detract from. Also, tracers are used for a reason, and the heavy machine gun couldn't be silenced, so there goes your suppressive fire for a flanking maneuver.

Yeah. Anyone who makes a decision to use/not use a silencer has way more experience than you, and it is probably a free choice. I'm sure if smart people felt silencers would help our forces, they would get them . . . Its not like its a 300,000 dollar peice of equipment.

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: Buck_Naked

Yes, the bullet will still crack when it goes supersonic, but the suppressor still makes the origin of the shot extremely hard to detect.

I guess that makes sense, the sound from the bullet will just echo all over the place and you'll be left wondering where it came from.

 

[Tab]

What makes silencers so expensive? Does anyone have a cut out of it? It doesn't look much more than a metal tube..

 

[MiniDoom]

They also create backpressure in the gun. That leads to cycling problems and more carbon buildup to clean.

 

[Hammer]

Originally posted by: Tab
What makes silencers so expensive? Does anyone have a cut out of it? It doesn't look much more than a metal tube..

its more than that, on the inside there's baffles that force the air into a circular motion. this muffles the sound.

 

[Spike]

Originally posted by: rdubbz420
They also create backpressure in the gun. That leads to cycling problems and more carbon buildup to clean.

I bet you like creating "backpressure" even if it is more to clean up...

 

[mwtgg]

I guess when an Abrams MBT is rolling up, a suppressor on your sidearm isn't going to help very much.

 

[MiniDoom]

Originally posted by: Spike

Originally posted by: rdubbz420
They also create backpressure in the gun. That leads to cycling problems and more carbon buildup to clean.

I bet you like creating "backpressure" even if it is more to clean up...

hahaha....7/10.:beer:

 

[rh71]

Originally posted by: Hammer

Originally posted by: Tab
What makes silencers so expensive? Does anyone have a cut out of it? It doesn't look much more than a metal tube..

its more than that, on the inside there's baffles that force the air into a circular motion. this muffles the sound.

http://people.howstuffworks.com/question112.htm

 

[Spike]

Originally posted by: rdubbz420

Originally posted by: Spike

Originally posted by: rdubbz420
They also create backpressure in the gun. That leads to cycling problems and more carbon buildup to clean.

I bet you like creating "backpressure" even if it is more to clean up...

hahaha....7/10.:beer:

Sorry, couldn't resist. I don't have all that many immature comments here so I have to make them count.

 

[TRUMPHENT]

Originally posted by: iamtrout
???

Money?

You would be better off with platoons of well trained archers using modern versions of the long bow today. Battlefield direct fire weapons and the ammunition they use must rely on kinetic energy to do their work. Attempting to suppress the noise they make is so counterproductive as to to laughable.

It is the visible launch signature that is the demon. The US Army encountered smokeless powder in the Spanish American War. Spanish troops had Mausers. The US was using blackpowder rolling block rifles. Later they got the Krag Jorgensen.

During WW2, the Japanese navy dazzled the US Navy with its flashless powder. The IJN did use a relatively silent, long range weapon, the Type 91 Torpedo.

Soind suppressors are logical for a very narrow range of missions and appropriate weapons. Muzzle flash suppression is the holy grail.

 

[cerebusPu]

link from surefire about their M4 silencer.
http://www.surefiresuppressors.com/suppressor_science_intro.html

how does a suppressor affect accuracy?
Assuming a properly designed suppressor like the M4FA, the answer is accuracy improves - groups tighten up, sometimes significantly, sometimes modestly. The reason is that a well-designed suppressor acts like the world's best muzzle crown, releasing the bullet with perfectly even pressure on the base of the bullet.

what affect does a suppressor have on muzzle velocity?
A suppressor increases the bullet's velocity, by about 30 to 50 fps, because the extra length of the can behaves somewhat like additional barrel length. While the gas seal behind the bullet is not bore-size tight, the hole in the suppressor is only a few thousandths over bullet diameter, allowing a bit more opportunity for the propellant gases to accelerate the projectile.

 

[BuckNaked]

Anyone interested in a little more info on suppressors should read the article above that cerebusPu linked to. Surefire makes great stuff, but tends to hype there stuff a bit much, but a good read as far as basic intro stuff.