Suppressors Marines Getting Serious About Suppressors for All!

[Potss]

...potentially of course. Story here: http://www.guns.com/2017/08/11/marines-want-information-on-buying-up-to-194000-5-56mm-suppressors/

I wonder who will land that contract. And I wonder if the requisition requirements for 139db are at the shooter's ear, or at left of muzzle position. And I wonder why those H&K piston bolt eaters will deal with this. Especially since OSS is out because of the 18oz weight limit.

Thoughts, especially industry folks?

 

[A5scott]

Surefire and KAC will probably get sizable chunks

Scott

 

[sandwarrior]

Interesting how the Army needs more longer range, harder hitting weapons, and the Marines seem to need more quiet (subsonic?) weapons. This shit of who needs what needs to be seriously looked at from the top.

 

[Potss]

Nothing remotely indicates subsonic. That would be terrible. Suppressor for all would be great though.

 

[FatBoy]

It probably would have my ears not ringing like sirens right now. If this happens it's gonna be way down the road, and weapons maintenance will need to be addressed as well. I love cans, but average Joe is going to have issues unless they address the blow back fouling and keeping them tight. Most units don't get a shit load of weapons training. At least we didn't. (Army)

I would hope Allen Engineering gets back into the game. The weight will be a problem as Ron's cans are stainless, but they are tanks that hold up to sustained fire.

 

[sandwarrior]

Nothing remotely indicates subsonic. That would be terrible. Suppressor for all would be great though.

The most effective way to suppress noise from a gun shot is to use subsonic rounds. A suppressor in and of itself indicates subsonic.

 

[A5scott]

Yes, subsonic rounds are a lot quieter compared to supers, say about 130-140db for super and 120-130 db for subs, but I don't think the military would sacrifice terminal ballistics for that amount of decibel reduction. Maybe for specific smaller scale circumstances, but how many subsonic rounds cycle a rifle action? 300BLK is about it.
I think they just want to make it a little easier to communicate in a firefight. Sound suppression is not the number one priority.

Scott

 

[SDet]

They're looking for 139dB, not sub sonic. 139 is 1000 times quieter than unsuppressed 556 at 168. It's a no brainer. Subs are reserved for the people who need to go undetected. Suppressors are for the people who need to communicate and keep their hearing to some degree.

 

[chorizo]

Look at the ammo described for usage....NOT sub-sonic

 

[sandwarrior]

Subsonic or not, IMO, this is a giant waste of money. You could do electronic hearing protection for 1/10th the cost. I shot a suppressed M16A1 when I was in and it was like there was no suppression on the rifle at all. This is just another thing that fucks up the function of the rifle.

 

[Gunfighter14e2]

Yes, subsonic rounds are a lot quieter compared to supers, say about 130-140db for super and 120-130 db for subs, but I don't think the military would sacrifice terminal ballistics for that amount of decibel reduction. Maybe for specific smaller scale circumstances, but how many subsonic rounds cycle a rifle action? 300BLK is about it.
I think they just want to make it a little easier to communicate in a firefight. Sound suppression is not the number one priority.

Scott

My full power loads exceed 160db. 120-130 for subs? My mono-cored 30 cal can is only 125 with full power loads, 22" barrel at 3' db recording (175smk 45 grs Varget) The subsonic I shoot is substantially quieter than that, to the point the brass hitting concrete or wood makes more noise, with the bullet strike on a rock at 200yds the biggest. You can hear the bullet impact the bank at 200 as well. Hunting men with subsonic ammo an a can is easily doable to 4-500yds if they are in the open an stupid, or you are a one man band in their rags. Past that, in a military A/O subs are for sentry work or materiel reconfiguration only. Any one going to fight a war with subs only, will not return.
There are cans that do not induce back pressure but they are not cheap, short, or lite.

Add-----The added advantage of cans is not being able to ID where the shot came from an way more flash reduction at night. A person that knows how to employ a properly canned weapon, hide, an pick his targets properly, has the ability to delay (or stop) an advance. That is also why tracking can be so risky to the trackers, with the ability to tag at much longer distances these days, it puts more safety zone between track'ie an track'or

 

[A5scott]

My full power loads exceed 160db. 120-130 for subs?

We were discussing suppressed fire, and that's why I mentioned 130-140 (give or take) db range, which is kind of typical for suppressed, semi auto rifle. I understand that an unsuppressed gunshot depending on the host and ammo is in the neighborhood of 160-165db. 120-130db for subsonic 300BLK or 9mm, depending on host and ammo.

Your 22" 308 is a bolt rifle? That's a different conversation. I believe the discussion was narrowed to suppressing 5.56, more than likely the hosts are all select fire, and barrels 20" and shorter. I think that eliminates subsonic ammo from the discussion.

Scott

 

[Gunfighter14e2]

We were discussing suppressed fire, and that's why I mentioned 130-140 (give or take) db range, which is kind of typical for suppressed, semi auto rifle. I understand that an unsuppressed gunshot depending on the host and ammo is in the neighborhood of 160-165db. 120-130db for subsonic 300BLK or 9mm, depending on host and ammo.

Your 22" 308 is a bolt rifle? That's a different conversation. I believe the discussion was narrowed to suppressing 5.56, more than likely the hosts are all select fire, and barrels 20" and shorter. I think that eliminates subsonic ammo from the discussion.

Scott

The 300BO's I've tinkered with, run somewhat different than your findings. Hammer drop on firing pin 85 +/- db, bolt closing on live round 100 +/- db, High speed ammo, measured 3' from an @ 0900 from muzzle, 155-162, subsonic ammo same set up 108db-114db, supposed Subsonic ammo but still breaking the Sound Barrier 118-121db, an yes the host was select fire. Yes Port sound appears to indicate a higher db to the shooters ear.

 

[Flyingbullseye]

My mono-cored 30 cal can is only 125 with full power loads, 22" barrel at 3' db recording (175smk 45 grs Varget)

125db full power 30 cal???? What mono core can is that? The ultra 9 is probably the quietest 30 cal can on the market and its just over 130db.

 

[Gunfighter14e2]

One I made years ago, I've played with internals after I did my first form 1 back in the mid 70's. Can is heavy (1.5moa droop on 22"5.5 rem taper) as I wanted it to withstand FA fire on a AR10 an M14. Dwell time is long as are the vortexes created. Blast chamber, is totally different than std thinking as well. Part of the design is spiral, part is Taper. Took me almost a week to whittle it out on a manual mill after boring the threw hole an turning to correct OD size.

 

[Qazwsx]

Dealing with the excess heat and fouling is the issue, as well as gaining suppression/fixing the enemy through fire superiority is largely based on the sound of the volume of fire. Attenuating this with a suppressor might show up down the road in the real world where a volume of fire isn't loud enough to keep an enemy down.

Talked to some Lcpls and their main issue is the length, melting shit and old gunnys who still expect the guns to be white glove clean. The gunnys were concerned about injuries caused by contact with blistering cans, thermal signature and reliability suppressed.

 

[fdkay]

Some of these things (fouling, reliability) will likely not be an issue as word was they were considering going with M27 IAR for everyone.

 

[WATERWALKER]

Some of these things (fouling, reliability) will likely not be an issue as word was they were considering going with M27 IAR for everyone.

M27 IAR for EVERYONE?

 

[fdkay]

They have kicked it around.
If not the M27, i can see them transitioning to a piston system
http://www.military.com/daily-news/2016/11/18/marine-corps-experimenting-new-service-rifle.html

 

[l1qu1dthunkz]

Subsonic or not, IMO, this is a giant waste of money. You could do electronic hearing protection for 1/10th the cost. I shot a suppressed M16A1 when I was in and it was like there was no suppression on the rifle at all. This is just another thing that fucks up the function of the rifle.

Don't know of a set of electronic earpro that I'd rely on inter-team comms in theater that's 1/10 the cost of a can. Maybe it exists, I just havent seen it. A good set of MSA muffs only shed ~20db, but they're $250+...not that thats what the fed pays for them. I'd take the can any day, personally. My unit had KAC cans on our m4a1's, and while they wouldn't have been my first choice, they worked just fine. Not much to go wrong either...screw it on. Oh yeah and cans dont take batteries...

 

[fdkay]

M27 IAR for EVERYONE?

https://www.upi.com/Defense-News/20...-M27-Infantry-Automatic-Rifles/2361502824490/

 

[anarchist]

Subsonic is out of the question for terminal performance reasons, not to mention the billions of rounds of standard velocity stuff that is in inventory. Another practical reason is possibly having to replace the rear sights to get the required amount of sight adjustment with a round that has a rainbow trajectory.

Considering what the U.S. government, by way of the VA, is paying annually for tinitus and hearing loss claims, the cost of a suppressor per soldier doesn't even register on the scale.

The suppressors should be used in conjunction with electronic ear pro with built-in comms like the Peltor ComTac line. No can is going to meter below 140 dB at the shooter's ear with standard issue ammo and this necessitates the use of ear pro. Also, in room clearing or in a firefight, you can't dictate where your muzzle is located. In most circumstances, you are reacting to an immediate threat and putting rounds downrange is the priority. The muzzle may be next to someone's head, behind someone, etc. Even if a can metered right at 140 dB at the shooter's ear, if another soldier is to either side and behind you when they fire, you just got exposed to way more than 140 dB.

I've seen pics of guys from the 82nd Airborne wearing Howard Leight ear pro on exercises. I own some of those in addition to multiple pairs of Peltor ComTacs. The HL are junk compared to the Peltors. This is to be expected since the HLs cost $30 and the Peltors cost $400+. In my current DoD job, I was issued HL. Needless to say, I use my personal Peltors when we're on the range. The government needs to get serious and issue quality (MSA or Peltor) electronic ear pro to every soldier along with a can IMHO.

 

[fiveoshooter]

I would hope Allen Engineering gets back into the game. The weight will be a problem as Ron's cans are stainless, but they are tanks that hold up to sustained fire.

Right on brother - Ron makes SOLID cans.