USMC experiments with equipping every single gun in an infantry battalion with suppressors - Polidicks

[t]http://images05.military.com/media/news/equipment/marine-suppressor-900-ts600.jpg[/t] [QUOTE] In a series of experiments this year, units from 2nd Marine Division will be silencing every element of an infantry battalion -- from M4 rifles to .50 caliber machine guns. The commanding general of 2nd Marine Division, Maj. Gen. John Love, described these plans during a speech to Marines at the Marine Corps Association Ground Dinner this month near Washington, D.C. The proof-of-concept tests, he said, included Bravo Company, 1st Battalion, 2nd Marines, which began an Integrated Training Exercise pre-deployment last month at Marine Corps Air-Ground Combat Center Twentynine Palms. "What we've found so far is it revolutionizes the way we fight," Love told Military.com. "It used to be a squad would be dispersed out over maybe 100 yards, so the squad leader couldn't really communicate with the members at the far end because of all the noise of the weapons. Now they can actually just communicate, and be able to command and control and effectively direct those fires." Chief Warrant Officer 5 Christian Wade, the division's gunner, or infantry weapons officer, said the Lima companies in two other battalions -- 3rd Battalion, 6th Marines, and 3rd Battalion, 8th Marines -- now had silencers, or suppressors, on all their rifles, including the M27 infantry automatic rifles. All units are set to deploy in coming months. The combat engineer platoons that are attached to these units and will deploy with them will also carry suppressed weapons, he said. Suppressors work by slowing the escape of propellant gases when a gun is fired, which drastically reduces the sound signature. Used by scout snipers and special operations troops to preserve their stealth, the devices are also valuable for their ability to minimize the chaos of battle, enabling not only better communication but also improved situational awareness and accuracy. "It increases their ability to command and control, to coordinate with each other," Wade told Military.com. "They shoot better, because they can focus more, and they get more discipline with their fire." The noise of gunfire can create an artificial stimulus that gives the illusion of effectiveness, he said. When it's taken away, he explained, Marines pay more attention to their shooting and its effect on target. Wade said he is working on putting suppressors on the Marines' M249 light machine gun and M240G medium machine gun, using equipment from Marine Corps Forces Special Operations Command. The third and final objective will be the suppression of the .50 caliber heavy machine gun, he said. As the units conduct training and exercises with suppressors, 2nd Marine Division is collaborating with the Marine Corps Warfighting Lab to collect and aggregate data. Weapons with suppressors require additional maintenance and cleaning to prevent fouling, and the cost, nearly $700,000 to outfit an infantry battalion, might give planners pause. But Wade said he will continue to gather data for the next year-and-a-half, following the units as they deploy. And he expects the idea to have gained significant traction among Marine Corps leadership by then, he said. "When I show how much overmatch we gain … it will have sold itself," he said. [/QUOTE] [URL]http://www.military.com/daily-news/2016/11/22/corps-put-silencers-whole-infantry-battalion.html[/URL] [URL]http://www.businessinsider.com/us-marine-corps-experimenting-with-silencing-every-single-gun-in-an-infantry-battalion-2016-11[/URL] Here's what a suppressed M249 sounds like [video=youtube;XbbGphWI4x8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbbGphWI4x8[/video]

I'd imagine it also means that their hearing won't get so bad, so that's good.

War is too loud.

It's also arguable that a suppressor is the best combination of abilities of muzzle devices.

This should have been done a long time ago. It's effective for many more reasons than just stealth. For one it will greatly reduce battlefield confusion for the usmc while greatly heightening the confusion for enemies.

Seems like a good enough idea to at least test. And $700K to outfit a battalion sounds like a lot, but that's half the cost of a single Tomahawk missile, and we fire those off all the time. We should still test to see whether the improvement is enough to justify the expense and effort, $700K for each of the thirty-two infantry battalions adds up to a lot of money, but hey, look, that's exactly what we're doing. Test it in one battalion, see how it works and if there's a way to make it better or cheaper.

Just make them built in in the future.

That's because they're making room for the bikes with mounted miniguns :q: [media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7k2xa0k-bEE[/media] I'm surprised at how well a bike can handle the recoil of that thing, plus you can point easily just moving the handlebar

if this takes off i wouldn't be surprised to see the next generation of combat rifle come with integral silencers

One problem that might come up with this is that suppressed guns tend to get dirtier quicker. [QUOTE] A suppressor works by slowing down the gas through a series of baffles. The slower moving gas makes less noise as it is vented out of the can (can = slang for suppressor). The downside is that on a autoloading firearm once the action cycles and the spent cartridge is ejected there is more pressurize gas in the system than there would be without a suppressor. This gas, along with carbon, dirt, unburned power, is vented into the rifle action. Without a suppressor this still happens but the pressure inside the barrel is lower because the gas is vented faster.[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/06/09/suppressed-rifles-get-very-dirty/[/url] There is a new suppressor from Operators Suppressor Systems that uses a completely different design than a traditional baffle suppressor and directs most of the gases forward instead of back through the barrel and out the ejection port [video=youtube;c0uYVFj_M8Y]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0uYVFj_M8Y[/video]

Very interesting test, I wonder how this might affect ballistic effectiveness, yea engagements these days typically occur at shorter ranges, but you're slowing down the projectile regardless and it may hamper penetration when you need it. I look forward to the results.

[QUOTE=DETrooper;51419744]I'd imagine it also means that their hearing won't get so bad, so that's good.[/QUOTE] rip the ears of the Marines who work on the flight line also all the pour souls in Pensacola, having to listen to the blue angels blare 50 feet above them 24/7

[QUOTE=wystan;51419839]Very interesting test, I wonder how this might affect ballistic effectiveness, yea engagements these days typically occur at shorter ranges, but you're slowing down the projectile regardless and it may hamper penetration when you need it. I look forward to the results.[/QUOTE] Haven't we been having overpenetration issues with the M4 carbines at close range? Reducing the velocity might actually make them more lethal at urban-combat distances.

[QUOTE=gman003-main;51419843]Haven't we been having overpenetration issues with the M4 carbines at close range? Reducing the velocity might actually make them more lethal at urban-combat distances.[/QUOTE] I always assumed overpenetration was more of a civilian home defense issue, don't want to be accidentally shooting your neighbors and all. Still, a slow projectile will have a harder time defeating body armor (admittedly I don't think we're fighting a lot of people [I]with[/I] body armor), additionally for when those engages do happen at farther ranges you're going to have to deal with more travel time and bullet drop. I suppose you could always take the suppressor off but that may not always be feasible.

[QUOTE=wystan;51419864]I always assumed overpenetration was more of a civilian home defense issue, don't want to be accidentally shooting your neighbors and all. Still, a slow projectile will have a harder time defeating body armor (admittedly I don't think we're fighting a lot of people [I]with[/I] body armor), additionally for when those engages do happen at farther ranges you're going to have to deal with more travel time and bullet drop. I suppose you could always take the suppressor off but that may not always be feasible.[/QUOTE] a bullet does a lot more damage inside the body than straight through leaving a hole (unless it pierces a vital organ).

[QUOTE=wystan;51419839]Very interesting test, I wonder how this might affect ballistic effectiveness, yea engagements these days typically occur at shorter ranges, but you're slowing down the projectile regardless and it may hamper penetration when you need it. I look forward to the results.[/QUOTE] I'd like to point out that modern suppressors don't affect muzzle velocity. Some increase muzzle velocity, from tests done.

[QUOTE=wystan;51419839]Very interesting test, I wonder how this might affect ballistic effectiveness, yea engagements these days typically occur at shorter ranges, but you're slowing down the projectile regardless and it may hamper penetration when you need it. I look forward to the results.[/QUOTE] Suppressors don't actually slow down the bullet. In fact, with 5.56 NATO there is a very small increase in velocity according to some tests [t]http://truthaboutguns-zippykid.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/556box.png[/t] The perception that using a suppressor decreases bullet velocity mostly comes from the fact that suppressors are best used with subsonic ammunition to get the most reduction in sound

[QUOTE=StrykerE;51419832]One problem that might come up with this is that suppressed guns tend to get dirtier quicker. [URL]http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/06/09/suppressed-rifles-get-very-dirty/[/URL] There is a new suppressor from Operators Suppressor Systems that uses a completely different design than a traditional baffle suppressor and directs most of the gases forward instead of back through the barrel and out the ejection port [video=youtube;c0uYVFj_M8Y]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0uYVFj_M8Y[/video][/QUOTE] Do the same test but actually fire the rifle from the right shoulder.

This sounds like a very marine sort of innovation. "Sir, what if we put silencers on all our guns?" "Son, what are you going on about? We ain't none of those namby pamby special operators." Later "Holy shit I can actually hear what's going on!"

This is all well and good until a Boot loses the damn thing.

[QUOTE=Dubeard;51420023]This is all well and good until a Boot loses the damn thing.[/QUOTE] integrated silencers may be a thing in the near future.

[QUOTE=Dubeard;51420023]This is all well and good until a Boot loses the damn thing.[/QUOTE] I guess they could go with integrated suppressors [t]https://danieldefense.com/media/catalog/product/cache/1/image/0dc2d03fe217f8c83829496872af24a0/i/s/isr_msp_l_02-103-15139-047.jpg[/t]

[QUOTE=StrykerE;51419901]Suppressors don't actually slow down the bullet. In fact, with 5.56 NATO there is a very small increase in velocity according to some tests [t]http://truthaboutguns-zippykid.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/556box.png[/t] The perception that using a suppressor decreases bullet velocity mostly comes from the fact that suppressors are best used with subsonic ammunition to get the most reduction in sound[/QUOTE] also old silencers used wipes instead of baffles which did actually slow the bullet down by physically impacting it as the bullet passed by but are still probably the most effective means to silence a weapon even if they arent ideal for extended use

[QUOTE=StrykerE;51419742] Here's what a suppressed M249 sounds like [video=youtube;XbbGphWI4x8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbbGphWI4x8[/video][/QUOTE] And none-suppressed [video=youtube;UHYd5FpR_yM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHYd5FpR_yM[/video]

I know jack shit about military forces and how they operate, but I would think this is a very good idea. A sound suppressor will also act as a muzzle flash hider, not only allowing you to deliver the first shot unexpectedly, but also further deny your enemy the ability to locate you as quickly. Plus the previously mentioned perks of being able to actually communicate while firing upon the enemy. Sure, it will raise costs. But like gman003-main said, surely we could sacrifice one missile in order to grant our soldiers a massive advantage in combat.

They have silencers for 50 cal MG?!

I think this is great. Hearing damage on the battlefield is no joke.

[QUOTE=Ignhelper;51420179]They have silencers for 50 cal MG?![/QUOTE] [video=youtube;1iK502zQ8rs]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1iK502zQ8rs[/video] Yes

[QUOTE=DETrooper;51419744]I'd imagine it also means that their hearing won't get so bad, so that's good.[/QUOTE] That would be good, I need to sleep with a fan because of the constant ringing. There's a lot of down sides to that though. You get increased wear and tear on the gun due to increased back pressure, increased fouling for the same reason, a fairly large increase in heat buildup (though this isn't as bad with piston designs, unlike the M16/M4), and suppressors only work well when they're clean. Once a suppressor gets dirty it might as well just be a tube full of carbon that just retains heat and increases back pressure.

Regular cleaning is easy so it getting dirty easier isnt that big a problem.