THE SILENCING COMETH: USMC Unit Deploys to Norway with Suppressors, Doesn’t Want to Go Back

US Marine Lance Cpl. Raymond Jastrzebski Jr. kneels with his M4 Carbine during exercises in Værnes, Norway. His M4 is equipped not only with an M203 grenade launcher, but a KAC NT4 suppressor. Image credit: U.S. Marine Corps/Lance Cpl. Sarah N. Petrock, public domain

Gentlemen, it has begun: The Silencing is upon us.

Following a series of trials testing the feasibility of an infantry battalion equipped entirely with suppressors, the United States Marine Corps has moved quickly to field the first all-suppressed unit to the Værnes Air Station garrison in Stjørdal, Norway. This deployment, and more importantly its overwhelmingly positive reception, appear to signal the beginning of the end for unsuppressed infantry weapons in the West. From Military.com:

VAERNES GARRISON, Norway — When Bravo Company, 1st Battalion, 2nd Marines, arrived here in January, they weren’t just beginning a brand-new rotational deployment. They were also the first Marine Corps infantry unit to deploy with suppressors on every individual service weapon.

And three months into using suppressed weapons in every exercise and live-fire training event, Marines who spoke with Military.com say they never want to go back.

In November, Military.com broke the news that the Corps was embarking on a proof-of-concept effort to silence every weapon in an infantry battalion, from M4 service rifles to .50 caliber machine guns.

In an interview at the time, 2nd Marine Division commanding officer Maj. Gen. John Love said the suppressors, also called silencers, were already changing the way Marines operated in early testing and evaluation.

“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,” he said. “Now they can actually just communicate, and be able to command and control, and effectively direct those fires.”

Troops with Marine Corps Rotational Force-Europe agree.

They’ve used suppressed M4s and M27 infantry automatic rifles in Arctic cold-weather training environments and most recently at a joint live-fire attack event in Romania. During that event, three platoons from Bravo Company operated alongside one from the battalion’s Weapons Company that didn’t have suppressed rifles. The difference was marked, said Capt. Mark Edgar, commanding officer of Bravo Company.

“It took us back to remembering what it was like not to be suppressed, when you see people trying to communicate,” Edgar said. “For guys in charge of other Marines, being able to talk is a big way that we fight. The suppressed weapons have helped that a lot.”

For Staff Sgt. Troy Hauck, a platoon sergeant with Bravo Company’s Weapons Platoon, not having to worry about ear protection when firing his rifle is a nice bonus. But a potentially bigger boon is the element of surprise that comes with a suppressed weapon.

“Just doing some of the training attacks that we’ve done on this deployment has been good,” he said. “I’m on one side of the hill and [part of the company is] on the other side of the hill, and I can’t hear them firing their weapons. It’s pretty nice, real stealthy.”

I highly recommend clicking through and reading the full article over at Military.com.

I don’t often throw out predictions, because the simple fact is that I know I can’t do so with confidence most of the time. However, in this instance I think I can make an exception: This is the beginning of the end for unsuppressed issue infantry weapons in the Western world. I expect in 10-15 years for it to be a requirement taken entirely for granted that infantry weapons must be capable of operating suppressed all the time.

Existing suppressors (such as the KAC NT4s used in the test) do still face some hurdles before the cans of war can be loosed upon the world, however. In the article, Staff Sgt. Nelson Acevedo identified four problems that suppressors introduce: They get very hot, they have to be cleaned properly, they add weight, and they can occasionally come loose from the muzzle. All of these issues will delay the issuance of suppressors as standard military kit, but none are likely to prevent it altogether. The communication and stealth improvements offered by suppressors have now been proven to make a qualitative difference in small unit operations, and it is unlikely that these advantages will be simply left on the table moving forward.



Nathaniel F

Nathaniel is a history enthusiast and firearms hobbyist whose primary interest lies in military small arms technological developments beginning with the smokeless powder era. In addition to contributing to The Firearm Blog, he runs 196,800 Revolutions Per Minute, a blog devoted to modern small arms design and theory. He is also the author of the original web serial Heartblood, which is being updated and edited regularly. He can be reached via email at nathaniel.f@staff.thefirearmblog.com.


Advertisement

  • DW

    They don’t want to come back? Comrade Iks what did yuo do to them?

    • iksnilol

      MWHAHAHAHAHA! Finally the Amerikanski have learned politeness and the appeal of lutefisk.

      • Major Tom

        Appeal? The stuff eats silverware literally, there’s nothing appealing about that.

        • iksnilol

          Shhhh…. don’t let them know that 😉

      • Klaus Von Schmitto

        Rotten fish soaked for weeks in a deadly, caustic poison. Sounds just right for Marines.

        • Jay

          Can’t be worse than Chicken A La King MREs.

          • valorius

            Or the dehydrated Puke (Pork) Patty.

          • Klaus Von Schmitto

            I’m older than you. Try ham and mothers and get back to me. You’d take Chicken Al La King twice a day and be thankful.

          • Brett

            Veggie Omelet…Nuff Said

          • John Mood

            Or SPAM based SOS.

        • iksnilol

          Just add some crayons and they’ll be all over it.

          • Brett

            That is an international thing, not even mad.

        • John Mood

          Sounds like the recipe for Gifilite fish.

          That and some Yagermeister, and you have a violation of the Geneva convention against gas warfare.

        • gusto

          it is some strange Nordic obsession with disgusting ways to make fish

          The Icelandic people piss on a shark and bury it for months

          Swedes lets herring rot and ferment to the point that the cans bulge into balls (check out surströmming on youtube)

          The Danes have no such thing but they think they are continetals anyway the twats

          The Finns can’t afford fish

      • B-Sabre
        • Tassiebush

          That stuff is like drinking perfume!

          • Bill

            FINALLY,,, a hangover that smells wonderful.

          • Tassiebush

            It could be a way to make close proximity with alcoholics more pleasant.
            I honestly think it’s point is to experience the aftertaste because surely nobody could relish it’s initial taste. I recall once remembering it’s flavour with a slight yearning and when I next visited my parents requested another taste (my father actually likes it). I was mystified as to why I had yearned for it. I enjoy whiskey, bourbon, gin, rum etc neat but aquavit is something different.

          • Tassiebush

            And perhaps even the AGB that smells wonderful

        • John Mood

          Lutefisk and Aquavit, wait until it gets to the other end. I can only imagine it wold require the use of an M50 Gas Mask for the flatulence. Ugh!

      • Eric H

        “Fish” that I’ve seen refused by cats and dogs who typically eat any meat/food thrown in front of them.

        • iksnilol

          Well, it originally was a biochemical WMD… so what did you honestly expect?

          • Major Tom

            For it to be safe for human and animal consumption?

          • John Mood

            Barely safe!

      • John Mood

        I’ve had lutefisk, good stuff. Try some Gifilite fish. You gotta have a half ton of horseradish to stomach that stuff.

        • iksnilol

          John “noncomplaning eater of lutefisk” Mood? Thou art real? JUST LIKE THE PROPHECY FORETOLD!

          I am in awe.

          • John Mood

            Truth be told, I liked lutefisk much more than gifiltifish, WAY Better.

            Have you tried tempering your lutefisk with horseradish sauce? I like that stuff so hot it makes you cry when you grind it up (Make it fresh!)

          • iksnilol

            Are… are thou even human?

          • John Mood

            Well, that fact HAS been in question for a long time, but no I don’t have two hearts so I’m not Gallifreyan or related to Doctor Who. I have no weird physiology or appendages that don’t belong, and have a birth certificate (that’s actually REAL), so yes I’m human.

            I started people wondering back in 1982 when I dumped my police motorcycle at 50 MPH, due to an impending crash to NOT get into the mix if the bike hit the car. I landed on top on an “N” framed model 28 S&W (Caili. Highway Patrol Special) and the gun broke (BENT the frame), but I didn’t. I slid 97′ on top of that and my ballistic vest, and sustained amazingly little damage other than road rash – really painful, there were asphalted rocks embedded in my arm and I looked like hell, so the nurses were afraid to approach me to treat me. Left me alone in a room for an hour and thirty seven minutes. I walked to the phone and called my insurance and WALKED to the next hospital over, and got immediate treatment. That hospital lost the city contract… I could have thrown a blood clot and they wouldn’t have known for over an hour and a half. They took vitals and left…

            I was in and out in 30 minutes at the second hospital.

            I had a bruise the shape of a 4″ .357 magnum on my left hip for months, it turned all kinds of colors… Technicolor tushie. I am a leftie shooter, so some think I’m weird for that, but I write either way.

          • iksnilol

            “Technicolor tushie” cracked me up, glad you managed to come through relative unscathed.

            But yeah, you should definitely get your body examined by science. I mean, people that like lutefisk aren’t supposed to exist, they’re theoretical…. QUICK! Have someone poke you with something, check if you’re real.

          • John Mood

            My wife was glad to oblige and yes a sharp poke in the eye hurts.

          • John Mood

            I had a joke with my orthopedist, who treated me for a torn left ACL (he was the same surgeon who did Franco Harris’ (American Football player) knees) and total of 10 broken bones not counting toes), but that deal expired when he did. Poor old chap passed away 15 years ago. These newer young Orthos are NOT the same breed as the old school docs. My old surgeon never charged me a co-pay, ever. That was my bulk rate.

          • iksnilol

            I posted a response but it got held up. Latin name for the human species is for some reason scary.

    • B-Sabre
      • iksnilol

        What’s wrong with her?

        Looks perfectly normal.

        • B-Sabre

          Which is my point.

        • valorius

          He was complimenting her.

          • iksnilol

            I just don’t see what’s unusual, neither positively or negatively.

          • valorius

            She is rather lovely, he was complimenting the women of your country.

          • E Wolfe

            How about considering this; she’s probably looking for a house, and after a while, she won’t care if you’re still in it or not. Just stay single, and every five years find a woman you hate and buy her a house. You’ll save a ton on alimony and child support.

            Segue, back to the topic du jour: I’d hope they use QDs, which should preclude the can walking off the thread. Would have to be a monster strong can, standing up to that kind of duty cycle.

          • iksnilol

            How cheap are houses in your part of the world that oyu just buy them all willy nilly? I don’t worry about alimony, considering that a kick in the genitalia is probably more appealing than me to most women. I’ve accepted being a lonely miser, saves a lot on alimony as you say.

            I’d prefer left hand rifling over QD. Heard of enough QD mounts flying.

          • gusto

            iksnilol we in the nordic countries doesn’t even have alimony like in the states

            if the founder of IKEA just married a blonde golddigger and she divorced him after a year she would get nothing. childsupport yes but women are supposed to work and care for themselves like they should

            We don’t even really have Male rights activists here, 50/50 custody split is the norm here in a divorce (with a probably slight leaning towards the women due to so many dudes being fvckups)

          • iksnilol

            I know… I just tried to humor him.

            I mean, alimony is a super stupid/sexist concept. Like women can’t support themselves.

          • gusto

            it sure would be nice thou, my lady makes way more than me and she is only 4 years into her career. if she ever dumps me i’d like some monies 😛

          • iksnilol

            Meh, I gave up on the money chase before even getting into it.

            I just want my house and a reliable car. That’s it.

          • E Wolfe

            “I know… I just tried to humor him.”

            You need to brush up on the term ‘irony.’

          • E Wolfe

            That’s why they make AKs–14X1L, for folks like you, who prefer left handed threads, which is what I’m sure you meant when stating left handed rifling. Unless you want to turn the shooting world on their heads, with left handed rifling.

            IMO; Unless you need to remove that QD from your barrel, there are several bonding agents which will make losing the QD much less likely. Owners should be checking it anyway. A spanner wrench or strap doesn’t take up that much room.

          • iksnilol

            No, I meant left handed rifling itself. Reason why things threaded with a left hand thread stay on, is because barrels are right hand rifled. Which means the torque from firing tightens the muzzle device (also the reason why right hand threaded things can loosen).

            Now if you used left handed threads, you’d suddenly make all the previous muzzle accessories incompatible. Thus, to maintain compatibility just get left handed RIFLING.

            See, requiring a spanner or something and to check every so often whether it stays on is a stupid idea when it isn’t necessary.

        • yup

          She’s hot, dude.

          • John Mood

            SMOKIN’ HOT!

        • John Mood

          I’d want to go back for a second look. She’s way out of my league, but I have 20-10 vision, so I love looking… She’s worth a second (or third & fourth) look!

          • iksnilol

            I guess I’ve just been inoculated against attractive women.

            Eh, could be worse I guess. *shrug*

          • M40

            And she’s CLOTHED. The internet has seemingly inoculated me against the wiles of clothed women.

          • iksnilol

            I bet she’s nude under all those clothes, though.

          • M40

            So… what you’re saying is that ALL the women I see in everyday life look just like the porn women… and all I gotta do is unwrap them? Wow… now that’s a real game changer.

          • iksnilol

            With consent of course… Otherwise you are commiting a felony.

          • Ebby123

          • r h

            here is a tip. dont play league sports. be a free agent 😉
            no one is out of your league until you ask and get turned down bro..and then you follow her and then her real boyfriend beats you up then the courthouse and the restraining order.. THEN shes out of your league 😀

      • valorius

        There are chicks every bit as hot in America, and probably 50x as many, seeing how it’s a much. much bigger country. Just sayin’.

        • John Mood

          You are telling us the truth, but they don’t have that lovely accent like they do in Norway… What’s the cheapest flights to Norway? B-)

          • valorius

            What does a Norwegian accent sound like? Only one im familiar with from scandanavia is the goofy swedish accent.

          • John Mood

            As long as it doesn’t sound like hillbilly spam sucking trailer trash, I’m good with all the Euro accents. SOME Southerners from the US sound like IDIOTS and make the rest of us seem stupid by association. I avoid any kind of southern accent because of the huge number of hillbilly (“Hick”) accents in the south, and i grew up here.

            If you’ve ever watched the “Beverly Hillbillies” in English (not dubbed into your language), you’ll get what I’m saying.

          • valorius

            I just got back from kentucky, they sound charming. But some of the deep south ones…yikes. Of course compared to the northern ratchet accent, they sound smart.

          • r h

            i like the areas that seem to think moving your lower jaw to speak is too much work. i ran across that in the Carolinas when i was down there.
            im from CT originally and the part i grew up in had no accent. we say the words as they are printed in the dictionary. my first trip to the deep south i got off the highway to get a drink and pee and when i asked the simple question ” which way is the highway?”
            this was my answer… “hoooooweeee!! yaallll shower doo tawk funny..”
            i nearly pissed myself laughing at the irony as i left the gas station..

          • gusto

            we don’t have an accent.
            that was a stupid muppets joke ffs.

            Swedish music shaped modern popmusic with ABBA and most of the top-pop is written by Swedes today (look up Max Martin and others)

            Swedish actors are getting HUUGE roles in Hollywood, always have

            your american women are creaming their pants over Alexander Skarsgård, he left Sweden because the competition was too stiff 😛

          • valorius

            Most American music originates from black slave roots- jazz, blues and rock (which was originally called “race music.” Then country music from the ‘redneck south’.

            I honestly really know very little about the origins of pop music. A lot of people blame ABBA for disco. LOL.

          • Nimloth

            Search for “Petter Solberg English” on youtube. That’s your answer. 🙂

        • r h

          you are correct sir but there are also a shitload of women 50 times fatter then her too . just sayin
          <- not a body positive image supporter

      • Stephen Brown

        An old American saying applies here: “The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence”.

      • Mark Are Reynolds Ⓥ

        How do you know she isn’t sitting in a wheel chair?

      • CavScout

        It’s telling that her eyebrows are perfectly plucked and she’s wearing makeup. Really what the military needs for personnel… then add she can’t carry her own gear very far.

      • lowell houser

        Yeah, you’re right B-Sabre, we won’t be getting them back…..

      • r h

        yea she probably showed em her hairy armpits and leg hair…

    • James Young

      I thought the headline was saying the Marines never wanted to go back to Norway. I then thought, “Well of course, Marines go from Camp Pendleton in SoCal to the frozen tundra of Norway.” Then I saw the article was about suppressors…

      • Smedley54

        Probably rotated them through 29 Stumps first. That’ll make you appreciate tundra.

      • snakebit

        I read it the same way. Poorly written headline.

    • jq1

      They must be the 1st Marine Anti-Trumper Battalion, if they don’t want to come back.

  • Juggernaut

    Why not just cheap, disposable suppressors that can be disposed of after XXXX# of rounds? Maybe a 3D printed?

    • JD

      Because you may run out of suppressors before you run out of ammo and it’s just another box of disposable things you have to lug around. Reusable will be lighter and easier on infantry.

      • Will

        I don’t think he’s describing changing the can when you change a mag. Changing out at a depot level probably wouldn’t be a bad idea, say when you change a bolt.

    • Cheap and US military don’t go together.

      • Well the military’s idea of cheap, is what the rest of the world considers expensive.

        I remember someone suggested using drones like the Predator to replace police helicopters because he heard that they were “cheap”. I had to inform him that they were cheap compared to a F-16, not compared to civil aircraft.

    • BattleshipGrey

      Given the attempts at 3D printing guns, even with metal lined barrels, the plastics don’t hold up to the recoil well, and that’s typically with handguns. The pressures of 5.56 might destroy the 3D stuff after one round. Even if they went with cheaper metal materials I think it wouldn’t hold up well.

      • Consumer 3D printing and commercial 3D printings are two completely separate levels of ability.

        To put it into perspective the fuel nozzles in the GE9X engine for the Boeing 777X are 3D printed.

        Frankly it is amazing how far the technology has come from the early low resolution rapid prototyping machines.

        • BattleshipGrey

          Did not know that. Thanks

      • iksnilol

        3d printing metals is a thing. Brevis does it, Tronrud Engineering does it as well (both of those make titanium 3d printed cans).

    • noamsaying

      Better still, an oil filter with a hole in it.

    • rjackparis

      tell that to “disposable” AR mags.

      • GUNxSPECTRE

        It was a mistake to get rid of clips.

        Clips for days.

        • iksnilol

          They should make an AR upper that can be fed with clips like an SKS.

          • cwp

            There’s the Mean Arms MA-Loader. Thanks, California!

          • iksnilol

            No it isn’t.

            I’m thinking of an AR upper with a cut in it so that you can use regular 5.56 stripper clips. Not their stupid plastic mag/clip monstrosity.

  • BattleshipGrey

    I wonder how frequent baffle strikes will happen.

    With the capability of the interwebs we see posts on baffle strikes from time to time. If one could quantify how often it happens in the silent civilian population, could one assume it would be about the same percentage in the military, or worse since they’re doing more rough and tumble with them?

    • A larger bore might be a way to prevent that. Yeah it is louder but, based on previous purchases the military isn’t as picky about overall suppression level when buying silencers. All they seem to care about is that it get below hearing safe (140db IIRC). It is the other factors that they seem to care about.

    • valorius

      I expect it would be worse due to the rough handling of privates.

      • snakebit

        I prefer my privates to be handled gently, but to each their own!

        • valorius

          Hehe.

  • rjackparis

    if that flow through suppressor concept works, i feel that would be a good application for this.

    that is if they worked, and weren’t ultra expensive.

  • El Duderino

    Can’t wait to shoot a suppressed Ma Deuce!

    Yes…I know the article says individual weapons. I just want to see the can for a M2A1.

    • PK

      It’s not huge, but it’s well built. At least, the example I saw for an M2HB was mostly 17-4 PH steel and 718 Inconel. Beefy, about two feet long, about 2.5″ diameter. Apparently the production model was going to be made from 304 stainless, but I haven’t seen anything about it so far.

    • jono102

      The UK have done development with suppressing both M2’s and L7/M240’s and continuing with it.
      Not an auto but I’ve shot 14.5mm rifles in the past with and without a suppressor fitted. Definitely preferred suppressed. Also preferred the fact I didn’t have to carry it or the rifle any distance. The can was about 700mm long and a diameter of 150mm and had a fair bit of weight to it.

  • The_Champ

    10-15 years is a bold guess. How long did it take the US military to simply replace a pistol?

    I think you are correct that there are a lot of benefits to be had, but don’t expect any quick change in the military.

    • Aerindel Prime

      But there was no pressing reason to replace the pistol. It can be argued that there still isn’t, but suppressors offer an immediate benefit.

      • valorius

        No they don’t. In a military infantry context, they offer exactly zero benefit except at the range.

        • Iggy

          Did you read that article? Which featured military infantry talking about how they had a benefit?

          • valorius

            Which featured paid pentagon employees not sabotaging their career?

          • Iggy

            But which company equipped with suppressors did you observe in action to come to the conclusion it doesn’t work?

          • valorius

            I was in the infantry. And i’ve used suppressors in the field in civilian life.

            That is my qualification to opine on this issue.

          • iksnilol

            But marines using suppressors in joint excercises are obviously paid shills ?

          • valorius

            They are government employees bound by the UCMJ and the chain of command. I am not.

  • 22winmag

    Some peace and quiet… in exchange for white hot heat signatures on the battlefield.

    • Rusty S.

      That and mirage through an optic are what quality silencers wraps can easily ameliorate.

      • Havok

        No currently available silencer wrap is going to eliminate mirage on a full auto service weapon. Bolt actions, yes.

        • iksnilol

          Then don’t fire full auto, which has been standard doctrine for decades now.

      • 22winmag

        Why not wrap the barrels and gas tubes as well? Because the heat has to go somewhere.

        If heat is not allowed to radiate from the barrel or suppressor, suppressor and barrel temps will really explode and it will migrate back to the chamber and receiver.

  • st381183

    The three biggest hurdles with center fire rifle cans — heat, heat, and heat! Consider that headsets with electronic hearing protection to magnify sounds and comms seem like a more affordable option and won’t need all the inventory controls a suppressor may require.

    *** Although, this could lead to more support for the deregulation of silencers.

    • CommonSense23

      Have you seen the price of electronic headsets that are capable of comms. Not cheap at all, and nowhere to life of a suppressor.
      And as someone who was issued both a suppressor and peltors most of my career. Electronic ear pro isn’t doing anything to for reducing your signature when firing.

      • st381183

        All is true but burn injuries will go up. Especially after a prolonged fire fight. But you’re right, everything worth having is expensive.

        • CommonSense23

          Suppressor covers are a thing. I always used one. And other than after the initial switch over from kac cans to surefire ones. I never saw anyone burning themselves with a suppressor. Either rifle or beltfed.

        • iksnilol

          If that was true then we should have gotten rid of LMGs a long time ago. I mean, good heavens, somebody might burn themselves on the barrel.

          • valorius

            I burnt the fk out of myself with an M60 one time, firing it from the back of a moving M113A3.

          • iksnilol

            Did that affect your opinion on the usability of LMGs?

          • valorius

            Yes, barrel heating definitely affects the usability of some machine guns more than others. In fact some would argue it is a rather huge design characteristic of machine guns.

            The M60 is a GPMG, btw.

          • iksnilol

            Yeah, but you didn’t go “oh noes, I burnt my hand( or arms), we should definitely stop with this kind of weapon in the future” is what I originally meant.

            It’s a characteristic, but it isn’t something to dismiss it by.

          • valorius

            I didn’t have time to “Oh noes”, we were getting chased by an unbuttoned BLUFOR M60A3TTS main battle tank that pulled out of the woods right behind us, and i was doing my best to kill the exposed TC and driver (MILES gear) before they, you know, turned us into a simulated fine red mist. 😀

            I did burn the crap out of my hand though. The exposed barrel and terrible barrel change design of the M60 were among it’s greatest weaknesses.

          • Joe

            Peacetime Army Vet.
            Check.
            Open carrys.
            Check.
            Talks big.
            Check.
            Criticizes the USMC.
            Check.
            Tells MILES “War stories”.
            Check.
            Has never been issued a suppressor.
            Check.

          • valorius

            Has actually been in the infantry. Check.
            We actually had several wars back then. Check.
            Relates actual in the field experiences. Check.
            Open carries because he lives out the sticks and no one cares at all. Check.
            Has owned a suppressor. Check.

            And it’s not my fault Marines are world renowned for being stupid. (I hope you understand that as a former US Army infantryman, it is my obligation to question the intelligence of Marines).

            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/68673fb83b874ae375bbdf834576f2ce63e34b83c22a5dcf7e7755066090b971.jpg

        • Dr. Longfellow Buchenrad

          Hearing injuries will go down. Burns heal.

          • valorius

            I can’t recall ever seeing a “hearing casualty” from rifle fire.

          • Dr. Longfellow Buchenrad

            Nobody dies from burns or loud noises.

            However plenty of people come home from service with permanent hearing damage from all the gunfire and explosions they deal with.

      • Shaun Connery Oliver II

        Me not shooting suppressed:😭😭😭😭😭
        Me shooting suppressed:🤘😆😆😆😆😆🤘

        Any questions?

  • 8166PC1

    What about actually using them under combat conditions? Subsonic 5.56×45 travels much slower about 1000 FPS which would no doubt effect the lethality of the round.

    • CommonSense23

      Where are you getting the idea that they are shooting subsonic 5.56 from?

      • 8166PC1

        I’m not a supressor expert but wouldn’t you use sub sonic ammo if you want the full benefits of a supressor?

        • CommonSense23

          No. Unless you are using the MP5SD, MK23/24, or 300BLK almost every military suppressor is for shooting supersonic rounds. The benefits are as stated in the article. Better command and control, making it harder for the enemy to locate and engage you, especially at night, and better control when firing. With quality suppressors you can sometimes see slight improvement to muzzle velocity and accuracy.

        • KiwiGuy

          Not necessarily. I have suppressors on all my guns, including AR, as it helps cut down on the over-all noise. Wouldn’t shoot one without now.

        • Tassiebush

          It’s a good question. I used to think the same thing.
          My understanding is the benefits are still quite significant. The idea of this isn’t to fully suppress all the sound because that requires too much of a compromise in performance. It’s just to reduce the muzzle blast which still has significant benefits in it’s own right. Yes there’s still a sonic crack but it isn’t as directional and muzzle flash is reduced so it’s harder to spot where it’s coming from even if the enemy or animal is aware of shooting. It also aids communication and reduces hearing loss. These two are important factors in their own right.

          • valorius

            The zinging of rounds passing by is completely directional.

          • Tassiebush

            Thanks for correcting me. I’ve never been on the receiving end of incoming rounds. So would it make any difference to how easily the source of fire can be identified?

          • valorius

            It works like this, you hear it ‘zinging’ at you, then ‘zinging’ by you (anyone who’s done basic and crawled under wire at night as M60s fired over your head is familiar with this phenomenon). If anything, reducing the sound of all the muzzle blasts might make the sound more pronounced. Then again, your own guys are firing, and the Marine squad/platoon with the suppressed M4s will still be shooting at you with their own machine guns and grenade launchers, and heavy weapons, etc.

            I think it’s just a typical DoD program to see how much money can be p1ssed away before it’s cancelled. In an infantry context i see no real advantage, and several disadvantages. Like…the carbine is now as long and heavy as a real rifle, and where does the bayonet go?

            The whole program is gonna go away soon enough.

  • TheUnspoken

    I will be interested to see what brands and models would be used as surpressors​ become more common in standard warfare. There have been a lot of KAC, surefire, b&t, AAC, gemtech, and oss cans in use by military and LE, but would we ever see a unit sporting a Q can?

    I haven’t heard a confirmation what can might go with the Sig MHS (320), Sig has a pistol can but I don’t know that is the one that would be issued.

  • NukeItFromOrbit

    They don’t want to come back from Norway? Damn Norwegian witchcraft.

    I don’t doubt they have their uses for counterinsurgency warfare and the type of fighting we see a lot of today, but in a full scale conflict? Not going to be worth the trouble when artillery is landing all around and everybody has thermal sights.

    Maybe if somebody designs an internal suppressor with better heat dissipation? I don’t know.

    • Aerindel Prime

      Happiest country in the world, can you blame them?

      • iksnilol

        What, haven’t you listened to the news? We’re a socialist dictatorship and it is horrible here.

        /sarcasm by the way.

        • Notabitterswede

          Easy to be socialist with all that oil

          • iksnilol

            Are you sure you just aren’t a bitter Swede?

            I mean, Norway did offer a heck of lot of oil for just a port of Volvo.

          • randomswede

            No; that’s me, I’m bitter.

          • iksnilol

            Noo no no, you’re just a random Swede. You aren’t bitter at all.

          • Tassiebush

            Eeew phrasing!

          • randomswede

            I think we’ll need a mop to get the sarcasm off the forum floor.

          • Warren Ellis

            Tell that to Venezuela. 😛

          • valorius

            And with the US military protecting you.

          • iksnilol

            Tell that to Venezuela

          • Tassiebush

            Hahahaha

        • valorius

          You are. And it is. Before you argue, take a stroll down town with your open carried pistol and let me know how it goes for you.

          US for the win.

          • iksnilol

            Yeah, I know several places in the US where you’d get arrested/shot if you did that.

            Also, why carry openly?

          • valorius

            I don’t live in one of those places. Which is one of the many, many reasons why i find parts of the US to be the greatest place on earth. 🙂

            If i’m gonna live somewhere that i can’t carry a gun, that place is going to be Hawaii (leaving for there for six months next week). 3rd longest life expectancy in the world, and 330 days a year between 65-85 degrees F. 😀

            And why open carry? Because i can. 😀

          • iksnilol

            But it is tactically stupid to open carry. If you want to cause mayhem you always shoot the guy with the gun first.

            Also, I don’t know where you get your numbers from, but Hawaii is far from 3rd longest life expectancy. Norway has higher life expectancy than Hawaii in any scenario + a happier population.

          • valorius

            I’ll explain to our police forces that it is tactically stupid to open carry, maybe they’ll stop. 🙂

            While i used to live in a very high crime area (Killadelphia), I now live up in god’s country in the mountains. There is very little crime, and open carry is a pretty common sight. While there is a chance you could encounter a bear or coywolf, i suppose, people really just do it because they can.

          • iksnilol

            How many cops get shot versus regular folks tells me all I need to know 😉

            Where did you find your numbers in regards to life expectancy? The numbers I found had Hawaii at 80 years while Norway is at 82.

          • valorius

            You know if i post links the post is going to go into moderation.

            I got the figure from Hawaii news now, which states, “For residents older than 65, the report found that the average life expectancy was 21.3 years” So simple math tells me: 65+21.3 equals 86.3

            Another site i found called “Hawaii life expectancy” states Hawaii avg life expectancy at 81.3 yrs.

            I found Norways life expectancy listed as 81.8 on “world life expectancy dot com” It lists Norways life expectancy as 15th in the World.

            I’ve seen other sites that list Hawaii as 3rd. Obviously there is a good deal of conflicting info, but regardless of that…..Arctic to Sub Arctic and extremely heavily taxed socialism vs Tropical beach paradise and far less heavily taxed socialism light. Pretty easy choice.

          • iksnilol

            Oh, Hawaii will disappoint you.

            Trust me on that one.

          • valorius

            Why do you think I’ve never been there before? It is as close to heaven on earth as i’ve ever seen.

          • iksnilol

            Because I’ve seen it. Too much poor/homeless people, too high costs of living. Tourist industry skewed that place.

            Sure, probably great for retirees. Then again, that’s another issue, old people everywhere.

          • valorius

            My job pays for housing and my rental car. And it’s a higher salary than i’d get here in my home state. Win. 😀

            Sadly everywhere there’s a lot of sunshine, there are a lot of bums.

          • James Young

            Cost of living sucks in HI which is why they pay more than your state, but I guess if your company pays for everything you don’t have to worry. If my company wanted to move me to Hawaii I would quit.

          • valorius

            If they wanted to move you there and pay for your housing and car, would you quit?

          • James Young

            Yes. My company offered me something similar to move me to New Jersey, but I told them no. I would have let them let me go. I ended up working a deal with them to move to another office to a place I wanted to be.

          • valorius

            “What do you know about surfing Major, you’re from god damn new jersey.”

            Did you honestly just compare NJ to Hawaii? (I’m from Pennsylvania, so i’m confounded by the comparison)

          • James Young

            Weather alone is not enough to win me over. Housing costs, taxes, business regulation, and gun laws together are more important. I think beyond the few years my company pays my way because they aren’t going to do that forever. Can I raise a decent sized family there and still afford to live? Or am I always trying to keep up with rising housing costs and taxes? Am I able to protect myself or is the government doing it’s best to regulate away modern handguns? Can I someday start my own business and make it a success or is the government of that state putting every barrier in my way to fail?

          • valorius

            The only negative for me when it comes to hawaii are the gun laws. They suck. I’ve been carrying a firearm for almost 20 years now, so i’ll feel naked there for sure. But on the flip side, where we’re at there is almost zero violent crime and there are no dangerous predators at all.

            But yeah…the gun laws suck.

          • James Young

            Not to argue with you, but I just want to mention two things. 1. That’s interesting, HI has quite a bit of violent crime, drug use, prostitution and so on, so you must have found a good spot. 2. Even in the safest of places you can lose your life. The obvious examples are places like that community college in Oregon or that crazy dude in Norway. In my own life I lived in a super safe suberb, but one day, not a hundred yards from the room I was renting (I could literally see it from my window) there was a double homicide in the street. Can happen anywhere

          • valorius

            In the city where i used to live i had 5 people die violently within 100 feet of my house.

          • James Young

            I’ll second iksnilol on this statement about Hawaii

          • Tassiebush

            Yeah all the people I know who’ve been to Hawaii recently were shocked at all the homeless people and other tourists who were apparently quite rude.

          • valorius

            FWIW, the travel channel ranks the 10 happiest places to live, and they’re all in South and Central America. Costa Rica is no.1

            “An-army free country has to be doing something right. The happiest country on
            Earth can’t have many enemies (maybe that’s why they have a high life
            expectancy of 79.3, too). With abundance of natural beauty — from
            beaches to volcanoes to rainforests — Costa Ricans appreciate their
            bounty. The local saying, “Pura vida,” loosely translates as “Life is
            good.” And here in Costa Rica, life is pure happiness, too.

            Happiest Planet Index: #1″

          • iksnilol

            The travel channel is a reliable source now?

            Now that’s a crock of manure.

          • valorius

            Well it’s only called “The Travel channel.”

            What should we go by instead, Norwegian state owned TV?

          • iksnilol

            No, rather go with American owned channel promoting American travel destinations.

            *sigh*

          • valorius

            I think The Travel Channel is an international type of a thing. Wutevs, Hawaii is awesome. 😀

          • iksnilol

            American owned, operated and promotes American destinations over other places?

            C’mon, you are better than this, you oughta know bias.

          • valorius

            If it’s American owned why are all 10 of the places they list not in America? Central America is not considered to be “part of America” by actual US Americans.

          • iksnilol

            If Central AMERICA isn’t part of AMERICA then why does it have AMERICA in its name?

            Are you gonna tell me now that Southern Norway isn’t a part of Norway`?

          • valorius

            People from the United States call the United States “America.” So from any US Americans perspective, Central Americans (nor Canada) are not American. In fact i suspect the Average Mexican or Canadian would get rather offended if you called them an American.

            Hawaii is however part of the United States, so to a US American, Hawaii is “America.”

          • valorius

            For the record, i would very much enjoy visiting Norway…but i’d never want to live there, or anywhere in Europe.

          • James Young

            FYI. Life expectancy is based more on you and your decisions than where you live. Family history, diet, proper exercise, regular medical checkups, etc. If life expectancy isn’t in the 60s you should be good

          • valorius

            Hey man, i’m not the one that keeps posting all these charts. 🙂

          • Tassiebush

            but you just might go to prison for failing to maintain your lawn or register your canoe or some other bit of personal freedom that wasn’t on anyone’s radar. Certainly not implying that your gun rights aren’t very awesome because I’m very jealous of those but I think a huge range of freedoms matter.

          • valorius

            Go to prison in the US for failing to register a canoe or lawnmower? Has that actually happened? (Serious question). I’m from Pa, that sort of thing doesn’t go on here, but each state can be very different.

          • Tassiebush

            I know canoe registration is a thing in some states. I’ve read about people having to comply with that in articles about making them. Think it was on somewhere like the Mississippi. Not sure of the penalty but it’s the principle of it. As for the lawn thing that was for failing to maintain a lawn in line with some stupid resident’s association guideline. I think it was in Arizona or Nevada or somewhere arid. Saw that on Penn and Teller Bull$hit episode on lawns. Basically I think there is sometimes so much effort on stopping govt interference and a blind spot to corporate interference. Both are bad though of course and some areas are much more free than others. It’s also about enforcement too. My grandfather carried a revolver for roadside rabbits back in the 50s or 60s after that had become illegal locally (handguns being regulated by then but all other types were not). He once had a young policeman try to make an issue of it but an older one pulled the young one into line and they left him alone. That’s unthinkable now of course.

          • valorius

            Usually they’ll fine you for that sort of thing. HOA’s do definitely suck. I guess if you rack up enough fines and dont pay them, at some point, you could get arrested over it. It is very, very uncommon though.

          • Tassiebush

            I think in that poor guy’s case it was a pretty unreasonable bunch of lawn specifications ill matched for the local climate and soil. he lost his job so the throw money at it with instant lawn (which he’d attempted already) option wasn’t there.

      • valorius

        Dont they have one of the highest suicide rates in the world in the part that is above the arctic circle?

        • iksnilol

          It’s just greenpeace covering up murders commited by polar bears.

          Japan is top on the suicide charts.

          • Sgt. Stedenko

            Highest price for a pint of beer according to the internet 😉

    • MissileMech

      “They don’t want to come back from Norway? Damn Norwegian witchcraft.”

      Maybe Norwegian Girls? They are stunning and have Viking blood!

      • James Young

        They are also half a foot taller than you…

        • iksnilol

          What, no, they’re normal height. About 1.7-1.8 meters.

          • James Young

            Let’s see…Google…1.7-1.8 meters is ah, 5.6′-5.9′

            Well that’s not bad

          • iksnilol

            How short are you lot?

          • James Young

            6′ 0″

            What’s “lot”?

          • iksnilol

            A bunch.

            though in the context I used it in it means “you people”, as in “how short are you people”.

          • James Young

            Average height in the US is impacted more by different ethnicities than a country like Norway. According to Wikipedia women in US average 5′ 4″. My perception is that women are a bit shorter than that where I have lived.

          • iksnilol

            Your necks must hurt all the time over there.

          • James Young

            yes, and our backs

          • iksnilol

            Why your backs? Lift with your legs, not your back.

            Neck pain can’t be avoided without looking aloof to the short people.

        • MissileMech

          Yes. She was.

  • RetroG

    If you think DI ARs need cleaning now, wait until you have a silencer on the end of the barrel. Even the mags need to be cleaned more often.

    • iksnilol

      Really, a non issue.

      If it really is an issue, get something like an OSS or even better, make some sort of bore evacuator in the gas block.

    • CommonSense23

      I’m guessing you don’t have much experience with running a DI AR with a suppressor. I would rarely clean my suppressed MK18. Around every 4 to 6000 rounds. And only reason I did that was either salt water exposure or a pre deployment inspection.

      • Treyh007

        4 to 6000 rounds……. cmon man you know that’s BS with a Suppressed DI system. I too have a mk18 Suppressed (also adj gas block) and it gets filthy just from a day at the range. I appreciate your service sir but I do believe you exatuate that statement.

        • The Dude (Noveske Fan)

          Filthy doesn’t stop a di gun, just keep it wet. My mk18 with rc2 runs fine dirty. Though I haven’t gone 4 to 6 between cleanings.

          • Treyh007

            Did not say it didn’t run while filthy just making a point that 4 to 6 is asking a lot from a DI system.

          • Joshua

            Not really.

          • CommonSense23

            No its not.

        • CommonSense23

          Thats not exaggerated at all. I kept accurate round counts of my gun. Did that easy.

      • USMC_grunt2009-2013

        A guy named CommonSense and he only cleans his weapons every 4-6,000 rounds.

        Got ourselves a real winner here.

        • CommonSense23

          Why should I bother cleaning a weapon stateside when its not required. By doing so I actually get to see how my weapon performs.

          • USMC_grunt2009-2013

            You must be in one garbage ass outfit then.

          • CommonSense23

            What cause we didn’t waste time doing task that aren’t needed, and actually were allowed to see how far we could take a weapon.

          • USMC_grunt2009-2013

            Cleaning weapons is a requirement, even if your rifle wasn’t malfunctioning. Performing regular maintenance and putting the weapons away clean extends the service life of said weapon and it’s components, which eases logistical issues. Not to mention is easier on the wallet of the American taxpayer. Like I said, garbage unit=garbage discipline.

          • USMC_grunt2009-2013

            “What cause we didn’t waste time doing TASKS that WEREN’T needed,…”

            Fixed it for ya, use proper grammar next time, you’ll sound less retarded. 😉

      • RetroG

        I’ve been running DI ARs with silencers for about 5 years now, from two different manufacturers, center fire pistols about as long and rimfire for over a decade. They ALL blow more crap back into the action and into the magazines as well.

        And I’m the poster child for not cleaning your guns until they start to malfunction.

    • Joshua

      If you think pistons don’t need cleaning now, wait until you have a silencer on the end of the barrel. Even the mags need to be cleaned more often.

  • iksnilol

    Suppressors coming loose can be solved very easily: Either use left hand threads on the barrel (not gonna happen probably) or just rifle the barrels in the opposite direction (left hand instead of right hand twist). Then the torque from firing won’t loosen the barrel.

    Weight and cleaning is a non issue with titanium and centerfire ammo. Finns proved this a long time ago (their reflex suppressors were meant to be mounted and forgotten about, and those were steel). + I think titanium is more heat resistant than steel is.

    • BrandonAKsALot

      I would have to venture you’re correct on titanium’s thermal properties. It’s allotted with aluminum which has far better conductivity than steel. Steel will pretty much always be superior when it comes to wear though.

      • iksnilol

        Don’t have to use entirely titanium. Though with 3d printing you do get one seamless single piece. Which is kinda neat.

        Though you could add a couple of inconel baffles. If you really wanted to.

  • Aono

    As I said before, suppression is the “killer app” of piston operating systems over direct impingement. There will come a point when we really begin to seriously weight the score of decibel value at the shooters ear as a performance metric. This will be DIs undoing, finally, after many, many, many, way, way too many, abortive attempts to erroneously pin assorted reliability issues on DI instead.

    But – it makes zero sense to run a piston in an AR15 because the whole buffer tube layout exists purely to accommodate DI. The future will belong to clean sheet designs, hopefully based around constant recoil, ideally leveraging caseless.

    All of the noises around 6.5 in SOCOM, as well as the analytical basis for LSAT, point in this direction.

    It is known.

    • Monty01

      Excellent post.

    • Um, alright. Well, I disagree, anyway.

      • iksnilol

        Why is he wearing ear pro if it is such a good suppressor?

        • Warren Ellis

          Why wouldn’t he wear an ear pro while firing a gun, suppressed or not? Doesn’t every little bit help in protecting ears from getting hearing damage?

        • The Dude (Noveske Fan)

          Because the round is still going supersonic and it’s likely still around 135db.

        • valorius

          Because a suppressed 14.5″ AR is still louder than a police siren at 10 feet distance.

        • Russ Kell

          Heh. I still wear ear-pro when shooting any of my suppressed subs at the range. The guy in the next bay over always seems to be shooting his UltraDeath Megakiller 3000 the day I’m shooting suppressed subs.

          A 10′ tall, 10 wide earthen berm between bays just doesn’t stop the madness 🙂

      • Aono

        I don’t get it, what’s the relevance? Just that it works? I didn’t speak to that.

        • Are you serious?

          • Aono

            Yeah, you show a video where a DI gun runs and runs with a can on it. But my whole point was that DI guns run great but aren’t as quiet at the ear as suppressed piston guns, because of the additional ejection port pop in DI. Joshua says I’m wrong but at least understood the point I was making. So what point were you making?

          • Logic

            … you realize that people have ear protection? And want to reduce overall sound level against an opponent, which DI does best…

          • Aono

            … you realize people want to communicate and maintain situational awareness to coordinate against said opponent? You realize that’s why ear protection isn’t used in the first place? Read my conversation with Joshua.

          • Logic

            You realize electronic earprotection does exist and is used by the military, that doesnt let trough extrem sound levels but the sound of voices………..

          • Logic

            *btw, have fun without any ear protection against explosives / or shooting certain weapons that cant be supressed / or beeing close to vehicle guns

      • FarmerB

        So, a face full of gas, a stupidly high RoF and uncovered super-hot metal at 1000F waiting to burn flesh off your comrades – yeah, there’s still some work to do here.

    • valorius

      The future belongs to laser rifles if you ask me. Give it 50 years, we’ll see them.

      • B-Sabre

        Laser rifles…with frikkin’ sharks on them.

        • valorius

          Damn right they’ll have sharks on them.

          • John

            Navy SHARKs.

          • valorius

            That could be a bit unwieldy…

    • Joshua

      You realize SOCOM as a whole suppresses their rifles and USASOC who has tested all variants of rifles is specifically requiring DI uppers for the BLOCK III with suppressed usage in mind?

      Also DI is quieter suppressed. Pistons expel supersonic gases from the gas block when suppressed that increase db.

      • Aono

        So I may have written that drunk last night, but hungover Aono still agrees with drunk Aono. Pistons increase db at the gas block, DI increases db at the gas key. Both are “porty” but one is porty pointed at the ear, even assuming that both are tuned optimally. I’m predicting that we will start to see a lot more data on this as 12″ from the ear replaces 1m from the muzzle as a db standard, and also that we will begin to take actually reducing hearing damage more seriously as a weighted factor across the board.

        I don’t know that Block III is DI *because* of suppressors, do you? There are a million very good reasons for Block III to be DI, not least to cut the 416 good idea fairy off at the knees, but is suppression actually one of those reasons? Is SURG specifically requiring DI? Are Sic MXG 300BLK uppers louder than their DI counterparts – at the ear?

        • Joshua

          I take it you don’t have the slightest clue how the M4 cycles do you?

          The gas key on the M4 is nothing more than a hollow tube directing gas from the gas tube into the expansion chamber inside the carrier.

          The extra time the M4 requires for the gas to be channeled down the gas tube, into the gas key, redirected into the carrier, gas expanding to cycle the rifle, and then finally being vented out of the 3 exhaust ports on the side of the carrier through the ejection port allow for the gas to cool enough that it has no effect on DB.

          Piston guns like the 416, however don’t have that luxury. They are noticeably louder suppressed due to venting the gas very early in the cycle.

          Block III is being requested as DI.
          The SURG is being requested as DI.
          The Sig MCX in use with JSOC is using mostly subsonic munitions to replace the MP5, even then 300BLK isn’t compatible to 5.56 during suppression due to powder charge being incredibly lower.

          • Aono

            The gas vents out of the exhaust ports AND gas vents out of the gas key. DI lugs get dirtier than piston lugs because gas vents there. DI provides a nice puff of air that clears debris out of the receivers, that puff comes from somewhere. The gas rings clear the exhaust ports AND the gas key clears the tube. It’s not like all the pressure moves out of the tube and through the key and wholly into the carrier and only THEN all venting begins AFTER pressure has dropped to ambient in the gas tube. But the point is: you really think that all that venting has “no” effect on db? No, you don’t think that.

            You don’t think adding a can’s backpressure to that cycle doesn’t exacerbate that venting and the resulting db? No you don’t.

            I do hear what you are saying about early venting in pistons. But again, I’m saying that at the shooter’s ear, not a meter to the right of the muzzle, this early venting matters less to the ear than the ejection port pop in DI does to the ear. But because the new at-ear standard is so young, there’s just not a whole lot of data out there about this yet. My prediction is that as the data on this becomes more and more fleshed out, that there will naturally be a more serious effort to weight the resulting lessons in order to achieve true hearing safety for the shooter.

            I didn’t ask whether the 300MCX was comparable to 5.56 but whether it an MCX was louder to the shooter’s ear than a DI upper. I assumed you would understand that I meant a DI upper that was also in 300, as hopefully neither of us are pants on head retarded enough to try and make that apples to oranges comparison.

          • Joshua

            People in these comments try apples to oranges all the time.

            That said the q honey badger being tested by a certain unit is proving to be much quieter than the Sig MCX that was adopted by a different certain unit.

            The mcx has a very notable pop from the gas block venting gas that isn’t there on the Q.

          • Aono

            But has that been quantified in decibels at the shooters ear? I believe you that the overall signature is lower, but the signature can be lower overall while still being louder at the ear. That is what I’m getting at. If we’re starting to look at cans not just as glorified flash hiders to reduce our signature, but as tools that help us to communicate in the fight, that’s a pretty significant change in the motivation to suppress the gun with all of the weight heat dirt blowback penalties that that entails. If we’re using cans to communicate, then hearing safety ultimately trumps signature reduction. That’s my whole point here, and it’s illustrated by many many silencer reviews out there that show how suppressed DI AR15s are invariably louder at the ejection port than they are at the muzzle.

          • Joshua

            Yes, piston guns popping at the gas block is still louder than the gases coming out of the ejection port.

          • Aono

            So, you’re saying I should stop drunk commenting? JE REFUSE

          • Joshua

            You may carry on drunk commenting….can be fun at times.

          • Aono

            Tonight: Aono takes the stand to litigate on behalf of an AK-47 in 6.8SPC in the DMR role

            SUREFIRE FLESHLIGHT FOR BARREL TARDHOMNICS

            GRIPPOD ON THE ULTIMERX

            KNOCKING STOPDOWN POWER

          • John Mood

            Good point, sir.

  • Gusto

    NO need for hearing protection one of them says…

    It is still loud, especially If a squad is firing…

    • valorius

      Especially once the machine guns, grenade launchers and rocket launchers open up.

      • gusto

        and don’t you have your coms linked to your hearing protections anyway?

        we have it like that and we are mere hunters

        If I am hunting alone I don’t wear mine (in ear molded ones) but when I hunt with others I wear them and have the suppresor on

        when I am at the range I wear big headphones even thou I have a suppresor

        already have tinnitus but don’t want to make it worse, didn’t get it from shooting thou, rather being a metalhead ):

  • Monty01

    There can be no doubt that universal suppression is the future. However, we do need suppressor technology to improve so that system life is maximised. The 3D printing of metals is particularly interesting as it offers a much better means of fabrication than welding. Start making OSS-type suppressors with 3D printing and improved fluid dynamics and we should start to see big gains.

  • Yogi Bear

    Naive but honest question: What about suppression? Is the effect downrange still as frightening as with unsuppressed weapons? I heard it stated several times that the appeal of the Ma Deuce stems from it’s unmistakeable firing sound – won’t you loose that if you suppress it?

    And in a full on firefight, could it have an effect on morale if the enemys weapons went BANG BANG BANG and your own went (bang) (bang) (bang)?

    • iksnilol

      Not really, suppression is more caused by the rounds landing near you than the guns going BANG.

      • valorius

        You’re basing this on what? Your extensive combat experience?

        • iksnilol

          Because animals still run like a scolded child if you light them up with a suppressed firearm.

          • Dr. Longfellow Buchenrad

            I do have to say that I would be a lot more scared out of my pants if I saw rounds impacting near me but heard nothing than if I heard gunfire but saw no impacts.

            Though neither sounds like a pleasant experience.

          • ostiariusalpha

            You would at least have a good guess which direction to take cover from if you can hear the report, but a suppressed weapon takes away even that small comfort.

        • BillC

          He’s right, dumb-dumb.

          • valorius

            You put forth a compelling argument, sir. I will retort by simply stating, “Ninga ninga naa naaaa!”

          • BillC

            Indeed.

          • iksnilol

            Grok, garosh? Nanu platu!

          • valorius

            And that too!

        • USMC_grunt2009-2013

          What he said is true.

          • valorius

            I disagree, as does literally every other branch of every other military on earth- or they’d have all been using suppressors for 100 years.

      • Klaus Von Schmitto

        And bullets hitting things near you, especially metal things, is actually pretty load. That will make you hunker down unless you just have a death wish.

    • jono102

      The BANG, BANG BANG of an enemies rifle is one thing, but its the Crack, Crack Crack of the rounds that let you know some one doesn’t like you in particular.
      Having rounds cracking over you but no idea of the direction they came from has a pretty big effect on moral.
      Hearing the weapon report can help you identify the weapon, give direction and approx range (crack and thump) all kind of useful things a suppressor can stop or minimise.

      • valorius

        Again, a suppressed 14.5″ AR is as loud as a police siren at a distance of 10 feet. As i’ve posted numerous times. A suppressed AR is completely audible to anyone you are shooting at within 100 or so meters, which is where almost all infantry combat takes place.

        • jono102

          Well there goes my plain of using a police siren as cover…
          Yes, no Sh*t they are still loud/Audible, but from personal experience an un suppressed rifle will give you a general direction of the firer where as a suppressed rifle will give at best a general direction in a 180 degree arc. That’s even before you add in ground clutter, taking cover or police cars with their sirens on.

          Quote: “within 100 or so meters, which is where almost all infantry combat takes place……”
          Well the last 17 odd years suggest differently with a pretty solid mix of engagement across the 0-500m+ distance.

          • valorius

            Again, in a firefight the machine guns and support weapons in your squad are going to create more noise than any rifle ever does. Also, the bullets zinging by you give away the direction of the person shooting at you. much like a motorcycle zooming down the road does. Doppler effect works with supersonic bullets just like it does with trains or motorcycles.

            I fully see the point and support the use of suppressors for specops and on patrols and the like, but not as general infantry weapons.

          • jono102

            Was suppressor design and construction at a point anywhere in the last 90 years where it was feasible to go to even consider general issue? They are now robust enough and cheap enough to issue on a wide scale. Any limitations are greatly surpassed by what they can provide a soldier be they SF or Infantry.

            “Having been in the Infantry” yeah you drop that a lot, Your not the only one, difference being some here just happen to be still currently serving with contemporary experience and teachings that extend past “Owning a rifle and doing stuff”

          • valorius

            I would say the original maxim designs were very robust and highly effective, yeah.

            I only mention i was in the infantry because, you know, i was. Most people on forums, even if they had a military background, weren’t. Most people like to hear input from people who were in the exact field that is being discussed.

            If we are discussing SOCOM stuff i certainly prefer to hear first hand info from people who were in that role. If we were discussing naval cruise missiles, i’d want to hear from a naval weapons officer.

            Certainly everyone is entitled to an opinion, but i put more weight on people with direct real world experience on any given topic. Since this is a site that discusses a lot of infantry weapons, my experience is often directly relevant. So i share it. Now, was i a high speed low drag 82nd airborne master parachutist E7 with 20 years in? Nope. But i do have 4 years real world experience with all things infantry.

            I would think people would appreciate that fact.

          • jono102

            There is a large difference between offering ones opinion and forcing ones opinion. The weight of someones opinion is measured against the amount of personal experience it is drawn from.

          • valorius

            Were you in the infantry? The only one who posts regularly that ive seen share any kind of detailed background is Commonsense23, who stated a specops background. Even specops is very different than the infantry, and infantry needs- and vice versa.

            All i’m doing is giving my opinion. It’s easy enough to skip my posts if it offends you.

          • jono102

            Currently serving Infantry (NZDF) for 20+ yrs. incl positions throughout an Inf Bn incl Rifle and Support Coy, Bn HQ and Inf Training establishments. Worked with and around enough Five eyes and NATO forces to have pretty good exposure to different ways of skinning the cat incl US Army and USMC Light Inf/ISR elements.

            Nothing you posts offends me especially as they are opinions drawn from personal experience serving. In my opinion it just tends to be a little narrow minded at times.

            The Fan Boi’s….they offend me

          • valorius

            So in your opinion, how does having suppressed rifle squads serve any purpose when all the support weapons (which, let’s face it, are far louder) are unsuppressed? The squad leader is still going to be screaming over the sound of the M249 or M240, let alone 40mm grenades, conventional grenades, rockets, sidearms, outgoing 60mm mortar fire (which is often very close to the front line troops, and contrary to the movies is quite loud) and incoming fire.

            And more importantly, if the purpose of issuing M4s over M16s was to have a small, light, handy carbine- how does making them M16 sized (but without the benefit of the increased range and wounding potential of a 20″ barrel) make any sense at all?

            And then there’s the cost. If we figure a unit cost of $200 each, that’s an extra $1800 per USMC squad, x4 squads is $7200 per platoon, or $112,000 per bn.

            Finally if this is a good idea, why has it never been done in over 100 years of widespread suppressor availability?

            Thanks for yer service.

          • Logic

            Really good points, you still have LMG’s, 40mm, Mortars. -That nullifies the supressor effect of your troop beeing harder to locate.

            And that for insane cost, weight at the worst position possible, really long unhandy “Carbines”.

          • jono102

            Firstly Its still serves a very good purpose. Yes combat is loud, nothing will change that, But you have now taken at least a 70% of the integral weapons at section and platoon level and reduced the signature/noise at both target and firers end markedly. For the most part an Infantry section or platoon maintain a degree of spacing for security so not every one is snugged up with a support weapon like a line on a range. The noise suppression is only a part of the solution, the likes of active noise reduction/comms capable hearing pro is the other part.

            Secondly to think of the noise reduction alone is thinking to narrowly. The signature from target end has a lot more effect than you seem to think. Some western military’s (at the infantry level) expose commanders and soldiers to advanced firing safety, i.e. being in proximity to targets while Snipers engage them from various ranges both suppressed and un-suppressed whilst trying to locate them visually or acoustically. Then you realize the vast difference between the 2 at target end. Also fighting by night, your muzzle flash is not only a massive indicator to you enemy, but also can have an effect on your night vision (eye/optic) and your team around you.

            Thirdly, the barrel length argument is largely non existent in practical terms. It doesn’t effect accuracy to any measurable degree but you start to get loose energy at the longer ranges. This is the reason some military’s go to 16 vs 14.5inch barrel as the 16inch still maintains enough energy at 600m to do what it is intended to do. As you referred to there are a lot of other noisy “bigger” weapons in a Section and Platoon and these are the ones we generally rely on to do the damage 500m+. These are what Section and Platoon commanders will use to do the killing with rifles offering some overlap. If a commander is relying on his riflemen to do the damage at those ranges, he’s doing something wrong. Under the 500-600m mark the difference in wounding potential is largely non existent in a military/infantry context. The same projectile out of both barrels hitting the same point will have largely the same effect on a threat.

            Fourth, 100 years of wide spread suppressor availability? Just because something has been around a long time it doesn’t mean its viableHow long have they

          • valorius

            Before delving into anything else, do NZ infantry forces use suppressors?

          • jono102

            Yes. The are a standard issue accessory for the likes of the section DWW(LMT MWS) and the AW sniper rifles. Not standard on the out going Steyr’s but the incoming MARS-L rifles are all fitted with WARCOMP breaks and Units will have suppressors to issue as/when required. Much the same as wet weather gear or warm kit, generally soldiers probably wouldn’t use them all the time (maybe different to how the Marines are doing it) but placing them on when they offer an advantage. Then its just a case of them knowing the different POI if there is a noticeable one.

          • valorius

            So you’re saying that NZ infantrymen currently all get issued a suppressor, for use as needed?

          • jono102

            No, Exactly as above. The new service rifles currently being introduced now are also coming with a quantity of suppressors. Suppressors will be provided to units to issue as and where required by role or task. They won’t be on a one per man basis primarily on a cost basis to begin with. A key note to come out of small arms replacement and upgrades here is the future intent would be to suppress all small arms at section/platoon level as possible incl LMG’s etc. The only limit now is technology or the market is playing catch up to the need or requirement.

            You have to ask yourself, If its just a “Nothing” or dead idea, why are the UK, US, Canadian, Australian and NZ forces all putting a lot of work into developing it at the Inf Bn level incl suppressing support weapons 5.56-12.7mm.

          • valorius

            One bn of USMC infantry is “A lot of work?”

          • valorius

            I googled NZ, Canadian and UK infantry forces being equipped with suppressors and got zero hits.

          • valorius

            Obviously i disagree that they are of any practical value for regular line infantry forces.

          • valorius

            I can’t fathhom how on the one hand people hold up suppressors as being a panacea for long range rifle combat while at the same time trumpeting the use of 14.5″ carbines for the same combat.

            Give me an M16 with a bipod and an ACOG for that sort of fighting.

          • jono102

            Didn’t you just mention:
            “within 100 or so meters, which is where almost all infantry combat takes place”
            So what point would a 20inch barrel and bipod be? Fathom away

          • valorius

            500 meter combat was specifically brought up. I responded that for said style of combat, i would want a 20″ M16 with an ACOG and a bipod. When i was in, back in the dinosaur days, and was an SDM, we used 20″ M16A1’s and later A2’s with a compact carry handle 4x scope and fixed bipods for that role.

    • Logic

      The supersonic projectile at its nose forms a pressure wave = a supersonic crack. That is supression.

      With the opponent having a supressor and supersonic rounds, you hear a ton of supersonic cracks, but no or barely the muzzle, therefore its much harder to locate them.

      Its not the supression, the problem is >weight and size<, you will run around with really long unhandy Rifles/ Or at medium size, an extremly short barrel with less cover penetration, much less steel penetration, worse trajectory, worse wind drift, less supersonic range, less fragmentation range, slightly reduced lethality.
      Also having this weight at the front is the worst possible spot.

    • Ken

      The bullets are still supersonic, so there will be quite a loud crack as the bullets pass nearby.

    • BillC

      Bad guys don’t get “frightened” from loud noises.

    • BillC

      Do you know how dumb you sound? We don’t frighten our enemies to death with loud noises. God, you are dumb. We kill our enemies with bullets and bombs.

      • RocketScientist

        And we can kill them a lot better when they’re cowering in a hole or behind a rock (instead of shooting back at us) because of the psychological effect of hearing deadly bullets whiz/crack past them and slam into the ground/cover surrounding them. It’s called suppressive fire, and has been a part of standard military tactics since at least WWI.

        “In military science, suppressive fire (commonly called covering fire) is “fire that degrades the performance of an enemy force below the level needed to fulfill its mission”. “Suppression is usually only effective for the duration of the fire”.[1] It is one of three types of fire support, which is defined by NATO as “the application of fire, coordinated with the maneuver of forces, to destroy, neutralize or suppress the enemy. … Suppressive fire usually achieves its effect by threatening casualties to individuals who expose themselves to it. Willingness to expose themselves varies depending on the morale, motivation and leadership of the target troops. Suppressive fire is often used as covering fire, defined by NATO as ‘Fire used to protect troops when they are within range of enemy small arms.’ ”

        Do you know how dumb YOU sound?

    • USMC_grunt2009-2013

      Close misses make a snapping noise like someone breaking a dry stick next to your ear (sort of). That is what causes one to take cover when under fire.

  • Sam P

    If (when) suppressed rifles are issued widely or universally, do they remain a separate part that gets attached or do integrally suppressed rifles become the new standard? What are the disadvantages and advantages of integrally suppressed rifles vs. a separate can?

    • RSG

      I’d like to see it. I’d also like to see silencer manufacturers team up with barrel manufacturers to produce them for civilian consumption. Not as complete rifles, but just the integrated barrel. The downside is barrel life, which is much shorter than the life of a suppressor. Especially if the can is serviceable. In the military, a few sustained firefights can burn thenthroat out of a barrel quickly.

    • iksnilol

      I think a separate can is advantageous. when you wear out the barrel you simply transfer the old suppressor to the new barrel.

  • Goody

    I’m hoping for semi-disposable integrally suppressed barrels. Fairly popular in New Zealand.

  • Bill

    Re: your caption. American warfighters don’t “kneel,” they “take a knee.”

  • valorius

    As i’ve said before…stupid.

  • valorius

    This is a goofy what if/fad and is not going to go anywhere. Sorry fan bois.

    • Joe

      Suppressors are a fad?
      So were…
      Lasers/PEQ’s,
      NVG’s,
      Optics,
      Auto loading rifles,
      Aircraft,
      Machine Guns,
      Auto loading handguns,
      &
      Automobiles

      • valorius

        Well bud, Suppressors have been around since the 1910s, and no military ever felt a need to suppress their rifles even though they were universally available and cheap. And even though there have been literally hundreds of wars on a global scale for someone to say, “Hey, let’s put suppressors on infantry rifles.”

        All the other things you listed were cutting edge tech. Suppressors are a hundred years old bud. There is nothing cutting edge about them at all.

        Oh.

  • valorius

    With the price of rifle, optic, rail accessories and suppressor, and their desire to replace all M4s with M27s, the USMC has now potentially driven the cost of a single infantry carbine up around $5000….for a branch that is completely broke.

    This confirms yet again- Marines are stupid.

    • Logic

      Especially because a much better Rifle, could be made for much much less money.

    • FWIW: The KAC RAS have been part of the base price of M4, M4A1, and M16A4 acquired by the DOD for several years now.

      • valorius

        All the crap hung off of it isn’t.

        M27 ($3000) , ACOG ($1000?) or Aimpoint M68 ($500) , PEQ-15 ($1000?), Suppressor ($200?)

        So you’re talking about roughly $5200 for an M27 with an ACOQ, or $4700 for an M27 with an M68.

        Plus however much the military is spending on lights and fore-grips, etc. It is a LOT of money for a service that is flat out broke and trying to fund $130 million a copy Stealth fighters and $100 million a copy V-22 tilt rotors.

        • The various accessories have been in inventory a long time too, and are simply not going away.

          • valorius

            They’re buying PEQ-15s and M68s as we speak man. And yes, in infantry service, these things break. They also get replaced with newer models. $$$$

        • iksnilol

          You do know that the military pays less for those things than we civilians do ?

          • valorius

            Those are the military prices, best as i was able to find. The civilian prices are substantially higher on all those items.

    • Joe

      So when the U.S. Marine Corps recognizes a force multiplying asset that is already in the system and decides to issue suppressors to Infantry Battalions its indicitive of their stupidity.
      But when the U.S. Army Rangers, Scouts, Snipers, ODA’s, Delta does the exact same thing it isn’t?

      Valororius you are a fool.

      • valorius

        A suppressor is not a force multiplying asset. if you were ever in the infantry you’d realize that machine guns, grenade launchers and rockets are rather loud…and the USMC is not suppressing them.

        And you spelled my name wrong.

  • Vet for Trump

    Two ways to keep them from coming loose (if not a QD suppressor) is go to a left-hand thread instead of right-hand on the barrel, or go to left-hand rifling in the barrel.

    • RSG

      Or just issue integrally suppressed barrels with external takedown cleaning capabilities.

  • RSG

    How many in a battalion?

  • Joshua

    The biggest hurdle will be training Joe to understand that attaching and removing a suppressor messes with the zero of the rifle.

    I foresee a huge issue with Joe’s not hitting anything because they’ve thrown their zero off by messing with the suppressor.

    These are the same Joe’s who flick the Matech sights up and down out of boredom and wear down the retention nub.

    • CommonSense23

      Eh. Never had a major issue with either our KAC cans or surefires with POI shift. Only ones that caused that was the MK20s.

      • valorius

        you said youre specops right? A highly disciplined NCO with tremendous amounts of training is analagous to an average 19yo E1 grunt in what way exactly?

        • CommonSense23

          I’m saying the KAC cans and Surefire cans currently being used did not significantly effect our guns POI. Zero skill was involved. I didn’t change my POA at 200 yards with either my suppressor on or off.

          • valorius

            We both know a typical infantry private is going to find a way to break something if it can be broken…which was the point the other guy was making.

  • B-Sabre

    I want to see them suppress that M203!
    *bloop!*

    • Sianmink

      Russians have had suppressed grenade launchers for years, using the same sort of captive piston system they use for the PSS.

  • Michael Gallagher

    Ok, now I want to see those suppressors for the M203s,

    (Well not after a Marine has had a long weekend stuck on base.)

    .

  • Steven

    Two questions from a guy that carried a suppressed M-16 back in 68-69. Have they found a way to keep the suppressor from kicking tons of carbon back into the action? In any serious firefight the suppressed rifles started going down from this.
    Second question is how much weight do they add? On our teams most guys wanted to leave them behind because they added too much weight with very little sound reduction using full power ammo.

    • iksnilol

      Little craaaazy thought here: Suppressors have changed somewhat in the past almost 50 years.

      • Steven

        And how? Have you used one in a real firefight? You might give me a little more detail on how they have changed.

        • iksnilol

          Well, they’re way better than whatever you used back in Vietnam. That’s how they’ve changed.

          • valorius

            Based on what? Better how?

          • ostiariusalpha

            I think a modern suppressor engineer might grimace a bit at the less than optimal baffle designs they were using back then, for one thing. Which is a little ironic because the original Maxim Silencers used pretty sophisticated baffle geometries. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/f8f7f05d6845b66d23812facc3f038c17781b5066d5543d1b4a501e84bd8cbeb.jpg

          • valorius

            No one used original maxim designs as general issue items either. You know when you have 100 years of evidence from every military on earth that something is not useful for a certain role, and then one branch of one nation equips one battalion with an item that is only slightly improved over what’s always been available, it’s hard to see any rationale as to how this is something worth doing. Especially when there are so many obvious drawbacks (cost, bulk, weight, no affect to crew served weapons, etc).

            Again, don’t get me wrong- silencers are COOL and have some military applications, but as a general issue infantry item? I just don’t see it. Neither does the entire rest of the world.

    • Joshua Graham

      They have not, but it isn’t as much of an issue given that the M16s now have chrome-lined barrels and chambers, as well as the use of decent lubrication suited for the task. Bolt carriers are also internally chrome-lined and issue ammunition is somewhat cleaner than back then.

      As far as weight is concerned it will make the rifle a little more nose heavy but it shouldn’t be an issue for young guys who have to stay fit. I don’t have any experience with the old suppressors but now they are made using various materials and some are pretty light.

      • Steven

        I might take offense if you are implying our Ranger teams were out of shape back then. 🙂

        • Joshua Graham

          Hahaha. Definitely not. My SilencerCo Omega 300 is made out of titantium, stellite and steel and weighs in just under one pound and it’s rated for both full auto fire and calibers up to .300 Win Mag.

          I imagine suppressors purpose-built for 5.56 rifles could be even lighter.

          • valorius

            How much did your titanium suppressor cost?

      • valorius

        How about the girls in the infantry? Adding extra weight sounds like a splendid idea.

  • Joshua Graham

    This comments section is a mess of people who do not know what they’re talking about.

    Main objection seems to be that suppressed M16s are still not that quiet. No s***, but they’re more quiet than unsuppressed M16s. Other concern is Private Joe Bob might burn himself with the suppressor. Teach his ass not to touch barrels or suppressors after firing and he’ll be fine or get burned. Every kid touches the stove at least once.

    Suppressed M16s sound like Ruger 10/22s unsuppressed. It’s not silent but it’s way quieter and does less hearing damage.

    As far heat signature is concerned, who cares? If you’re shooting at people in engagements that heat up the suppressor they’re going to figure out where you’re at pretty quickly without the use of IR. Even still, these days we’re not up against enemies that commonly employ IR.

    Get a grip, people.

    • valorius

      The only benefit is that it makes the rifle quieter. Doesnt do crap for the really loud weapons in the squad, but who cares, right?

      Also makes your M4 as big and cumbersome as a full length M16, but without the added range and velocity of an M16. Which makes tons of sense….

  • Moondo

    HPA Prediction, the self proclaimed Gun experts on the left (Feinstein, and Crew ) are going to say only the military need Assault weapons, and silencers. They shouldn’t be on our streets.

  • iksnilol

    It isn’t the same, it uses a proprietary bulky clipazine. I want something that uses the common stripper clips that NATO ammo is on.

  • TJbrena

    Suppressors that don’t add too much forward weight and neatly cover the barrel would be ideal IMO. The former for function, the latter for form and maybe moving some of that weight back to the rifle’s center of gravity. I mean, a can hanging off an AR barrel looks kinda crappy unless it’s a 10″ barrel, in which case it looks fine.

  • valorius

    There are dudes that pay for brides from Russia, the Philippines, or Central America. I don’t understand it, but those dudes exist.

    • John Mood

      Boys, not men, who have more money than sense.
      And I say Marines ARE NORMAL. The rest of the world is sub-par.

      OOH RAH!

    • E Wolfe

      When I was serving, the most beautiful brides were the Israeli girls that guys met while serving on embassy duty. Stone cold pretty and loyal. But I’m not hung up on beauty queens, if she’s smart, clean, considerate and faithful, she’s worth a serious look–but always, always check out her mother before you ever commit. 😉

      • valorius

        I Found my trophy wife in Cherry Hill, NJ. lol.

  • It makes perfect sense, civilian laws notwithstanding. Just as folding stocks or flash suppressors were at one point just “add-ons” that gradually became an integral part of a weapon (or just as mufflers on internal combustion cars, for god’s sake), there is absolutely no practical reason that integral suppressors couldn’t just become one of the part assemblies of a general-issue rifle. They would have to become maintenance-free, heat-shielded, foolproof and other stuff, but people did solve the problem of those nasty unreliable detachable magazines in the end, right?

  • Smedley54

    We’re referring to Marines here, not normal people.

  • nadnerbus

    Well, speaking for myself…

    I went to Saint Martin back in January, and couldn’t help but notice all the French chicks were hot. After thinking about it for a minute, I came to the realization that none of them were tatted or pierced up in weird ways, they all dressed nicely and had clean healthy hair (no blue hair dye, hippy dreads, etc) and NONE of them were fat.

    Every time I’d see a fat chick, she’d talk and it would be an American.

    When a woman tales good care of herself, and cares to dress nicely and put on makeup, even the average ones look very beautiful.

    • John Mood

      AMEN! Same thing in Nassau, Grand Bahamas.

    • Patrick ONeil

      Unlike Americans, they are also NOT mostly fat. They don’t live on fries, pizza, and ice cream.

      • nadnerbus

        Well, one downside: they all seem to smoke.

        • gusto

          keeps them thin and not hungry 😛

  • Tom Utech

    Are any of you putz’s paying attention?! The jist of the article is this unit of Marines appears to approve & is happy w/noise suppression in combat!

    There is ABSOLUTELY nothing @ all here from which anyone is to infer how hot Norwegian women are!

    I agree w/the premise that remaining unseen in battle is in direct correlation w/remaining unheard. As long as there is NO appreciable sacrifice in accuracy, muzzle velocity, or effective range (of which all 3 will likely suffer). Though one should have every expectation that noise suppression is going to save lives while greatly improving combat effectiveness.

    • AlDeLarge

      Silencers generally increase velocity and have no affect on accuracy or terminal effectiveness.

  • Jim

    Huh? What did you say? I can’t hear you, speak up! Real Marines don’t need suppressed weapons…………

  • Benjamin Goldstein

    I wonder if this had to do with their noise pollution laws?

  • Mike

    Will they be using subsonic ammo?

    • Doubtful. With the muzzle blast suitably attenuated, the sonic crack of a passing projectile can actually deceive enemies downrange as to the source of the incoming fire.

  • John Mood

    Why NOT go back to Norway? I hear it’s a VERY nice place, if you can handle the cold climate. The travel brochures sure paint a lovely picture, and the photos of the ladies (for you gents) and those Norwegian men (for the ladies) certainly are handsome.

    Or, do they not want to go back to non-suppressed? Your headline writer never explains this in his body copy. Perhaps he was in a hurry, deadlines and such. Or he maybe didn’t have his coffee that Zero-Dark-Thirty. I’m pretty sure it’s the latter, but please a little more clarity of writing…

  • Mark Are Reynolds Ⓥ

    Another case of where the special privileged get to have toys that us mere mortals have to jump through hoops to get. Just saying…Oh, and for those who can’t comprehend what they are reading…Come back to no suppressors. Not come back to Norway. Duh?

  • 2016usaofzimbabwe

    NO NUMB BRAINS….NOT GO BACK TO non SUPPRESSED GUNS….

  • Buck

    Suppressors could have been used decades ago. . More military BS that constantly get our military hurt and keeps us behind where we should be. Christ is the son of GOD.Buck 🇺🇸⚔🇺🇸 100% disabled Vietnam veteran Christian Right wing republican lifetime member of the NRA and friend to Israel

  • Spear Fish

    I have a suppressed AR in 5.56 and trying to suppress 5.56 is an exercise in futility. Using a suppressor with supersonic ammo is like taking a shower with a raincoat on, and by the time you reduce the powder charge enough to get 5.56 subsonic it has the terminal ballistics of a .22 not to mention it won’t reliably cycle the action. I thought that was the whole reason the 300BLK was developed. My suppressed 300BLK AR can reliably cycle with subsonic and the huge .30 caliber 220 grain bullet still has decent terminal ballistics. I guess they are thinking reducing the muzzle blast somewhat is still beneficial, which I agree it does help, but with the supersonic crack of the bullet it’s still pretty damn loud. Not sure about the negatives the article mentions, you never have to clean a center fire suppressor, in fact most of the suppressors I have seen can not be disassembled, only rim fire suppressors require periodic cleaning due to the lead buildup and the dirty powder most rim fires are loaded with, with the use of Titanium the weight has gotten down to pretty much nothing, and my Q.D. mounts have never come loose. The biggest plus I can see, is maybe with this more widespread use, it will hasten taking them off the NFA list. Especially when they realize suppressors are not silencers like in the movies. The only thing I’ve found that’s Hollywood quiet is an integrally suppressed .22LR bolt action rifle.

    • Form Factor

      Using subsonic ammunition is completly unacceptable for 95% of military engagements.

      – No Supression (supersonic crack of passing by projectiles), supression fire is of absolute vital importance.
      – Completly hilarious drop and wind drift, no range
      – verry low energy, extremly low penetration

      Eighter you change your buffer weight or whatever to optimize the M855A1 5.56×45 DI AR. Or use a M855A1 5.56×45 Piston Rifle (more comfortable to shoot but much louder).

      All you want is to get rid of muzzle blast while still supress with supersonic ammo, so the opponent cant really locate you and often dont know which way to take cover.

      Problematic is the lenght of supressors, we use Carbines for a reason, they become really long again with supressors. And the weight beeing at the worst spot possible – front.

  • Ced Truz

    “Wade estimated equipping an infantry battalion with suppressors would cost about $700,000, a price tag that might give decision-makers pause.”

    This seems ridiculously high but I can see this being a huge factor in this NOT becoming standard.

  • darrell_b8

    I wouldn’t want to go back either…..have you SEEN a Norwegian Uff ta girl!!! WOW!!

  • Core

    Excellent. Not at all surprising. The first time I used a suppressed MP5SD and M4 SOPMOD I fell in love.

  • gusto

    I was recently in London
    as many people as my country, twice yours,

    and yes the ratio in the nordic countries is higher

  • Joshua

    Just a fyi, I shameless took this from SSD. However I was there when the question was asked, and this falls in line with everything CRANE has seen regarding the 416.

    If the suppressor is not built exactly for the 416, it just plain won’t work well.

    Fact is the M27 performs horribly with current inventory suppressors, including the KAC NT4. I saw a whole lot of M27s go down due to suppressors being added from Marine Corp inventory.

    “On another note, Mr Woodburn was asked during a Q&A period about when we should expect the test report for last year’s suppressor evaluation. He said that it should be ready by Fall but that the Marine Corps’ suppressor priority was for its Medium Machine Guns. Scuttlebutt suggests that the Marines noted a decrease in range during the evaluation when used with the M4 and M27. Furthermore, Mr Woodburn mentioned that the Marines are interested in finding a suppressor that is compatible with the M27, which could be construed as further evidence of the Marine Corps’ intent to field more M27s. Or, it could mean that the IAR would be next in line after the suppression of the medium machinegun fleet.”

  • CavScout

    Exciting stuff. Wish I was in long enough to see it. OCP uniforms and suppressed weapons.

  • Dracon1201

    The next service weapon will have an integral suppressor if command has any sense.

  • Richard Lutz

    Sound suppressors are now so good there is no good reason not to issue them. If there is a problem in the field with them they can be readily removed.

  • vet of usa’s genocide Vietnam

    Now that is a great way to reach out and touch the moslem scum of the earth with a silent death tap.lmfao

  • r h

    i’m confused. how does being issued silencers, in someway, make Norway Inhospitable to the USMC? ( especially since hell itself doesnt fit this bill)..

    Did the Norwegians make fun of them because they were all mouse farting?

  • Fegelein

    This innovation will be ignored. No big corporate contracts in it.

  • Ben Pottinger

    I’m thinking if they are going to go full time suppressed why not use integral cans? No risk of them coming off or baffle strikes. And modern cans should easily last the life of the barrel.

    Plus I’d say the specific design would be different for a suppressor for an entire platoon to use versus a civilian or sniper specific can. I’d say they could probably get away with a much smaller/shorter/lighter/louder can then would be needed for a sniper or civilian shooter.