View Full Version : Marine Corps to Put Silencers on a Whole Infantry Battalion
http://www.military.com/daily-news/2...battalion.html (http://www.military.com/daily-news/2016/11/22/corps-put-silencers-whole-infantry-battalion.html)
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...re-infantry-b/ (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/nov/23/marine-corps-experiment-silences-entire-infantry-b/)
The U.S. Marine Corps is attempting a unique experiment that pairs the deadly — but typically loud — fire power of an infantry battalion with silence.
Maj. Gen. John Love of 2nd Marine Division out of Camp Lejeune, North Carolina, is gathering data on the way suppressors improve battlefield communication and efficiency. Early testing at Marine Corps Air-Ground Combat Center Twentynine Palms indicates that suppressing everything from M4 rifles to .50 caliber machine guns can dramatically assist U.S. warfighters.
“What we’ve found so far is it revolutionizes the way we fight,” Gen. Love recently said at the Marine Corps Association Ground Dinner, Military.com reported (http://www.military.com/daily-news/2016/11/22/corps-put-silencers-whole-infantry-battalion.html) Tuesday. “It used to be a squad would be dispersed out over maybe 100 yards, so the squad leader couldn’t really communicate with the members at the far end because of all the noise of the weapons. Now they can actually just communicate, and be able to command and control and effectively direct those fires.”
*****************************************
Well, it's about time. Imagine if the Army had included integrated suppressors on the M1 Garand in WWII.
BushMasterBoy
11-25-2016, 15:37
Tinnitus is a VA compensable disability. Deafness is a horrible thing to bear.
It worked for Boulder PD... I could totally see this going well for the USMC! I've been told that in Europe, what little they do, hunting without a suppressor is considered inconsiderate. Let's hope and pray under R control with an R POTUS, we can get the Hearing Protection Act passed next year.
BladesNBarrels
11-25-2016, 17:21
Hunters in New Zealand can buy a suppressor at the hardware store.
[snip]
Let's hope and pray under R control with an R POTUS, we can get the Hearing Protection Act passed next year.
http://thecripplegate.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Praying.jpg
At first, I'm thinking my credit card is going to get killed. But then I realize a lot of the cost is regulations. If the manufacturing cost of a can dropped, and no stamp required, it should drop the retail price considerably.
I don't know that I'd have a can for each rifle/carbine/pistol but maybe one or two would be fun.
BladesNBarrels
11-25-2016, 17:38
The pendulum swings and times change.
Might become a requirement to conform with noise restrictions.
Then the manufacturer's would scramble to get the suppression low enough to meet standards or you can't shoot.
Hmmmm..........
I don't know that I'd have a can for each rifle/carbine/pistol but maybe one or two would be fun.
This is how it all starts, and then you decide one more can't hurt, then you buy a suppressor without a host because you have the perfect build idea for that suppressor. It is the best drug out there!
http://thecripplegate.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Praying.jpg
At first, I'm thinking my credit card is going to get killed. But then I realize a lot of the cost is regulations. If the manufacturing cost of a can dropped, and no stamp required, it should drop the retail price considerably.
I don't know that I'd have a can for each rifle/carbine/pistol but maybe one or two would be fun.
Suppressors won't drop in price. People already pay the price and they'll get a $200 discount from the government.
Suppressors won't drop in price. People already pay the price and they'll get a $200 discount from the government.
Not initially, but if they are deregulated (removed from the ATFE purview entirely), there will initially be a shortage, then every Tom, Dick, and Bartholomew will start manufacturing them. Prices will drop, and a bunch of those guys will go bankrupt. The remaining manufacturers will move all or part of their operations to countries with friendlier labor environments, except for boutique manufacturers with a "premium" product.
Suppressors won't drop in price. People already pay the price and they'll get a $200 discount from the government.
If they become as common as say a shoulder thing that goes up, I think the price would go down. The Class 2 SOT isn't much but it has had a way of limiting competition.
There would definitely a ton of new companies making builder's grade products and driving the price down, just like with AR lowers.
HoneyBadger
11-25-2016, 18:10
Any Tom, Dick, Or Bart can already make their own suppressor in their garage for less than $400, including the cost of the form 1 stamp.
Any Tom, Dick, Or Bart can already make their own suppressor in their garage for less than $400, including the cost of the form 1 stamp.
True, but many don't know that, or lack the required tools or aptitude to do so. I'm thinking that within a couple of years of deregulation, we'll see sub-$150 suppressors on the shelf at our local sporting goods store.
I can't wait to get my Cohlaugns suppressor from the Army Surplus store. Haha.
SideShow Bob
11-25-2016, 19:10
we'll see sub-$150 suppressors on the shelf at our local sporting goods store.
There is already one at that price for .22 lr. (not including stamp, transfer or wait time) advertised in one of the multitude of sale ad emails bombarding my in box.
.455_Hunter
11-25-2016, 19:19
If such a change to the law came into effect, the media would be waiting with bated breath for the first criminal misuse...
"Dindoo Nuffin was supposedly on his way to choir practice when he entered Hank's 'Merica Gun Emporium, where he was able, with NO BACKGROUND CHECK, to walk out in five minutes with a threaded "drop-in" barrel for a Glock 19 and a silencer. One hour later, Nuffin's estranged girlfriend was killed- her body not found for hours because no one heared the gunshots, even in her densely packed inner city neighborhood."
HoneyBadger
11-25-2016, 19:50
I'm not saying you're wrong, but when was the last time a gangbanger used a suppressor in a crime? If it's as rare as I suspect, is that because suppressors are currently harder to legally obtain?
The good news here is that if the HPA gets passed soon, and there is an incident, there will be several more years of Trump administration for the dust to settle.
.455_Hunter
11-25-2016, 19:57
I suspect their will be just enough misuse, just like AR-15s or dumb CCW permit holders, to keep them in the forefront of media coverage.
Oil filter suppressors for everyone. [Coffee]
http://youtu.be/7t_pcWPdSDs
To Bear Arms
11-25-2016, 21:31
If the HPA is passed more company's will be making suppressors, which will bring the price down, then company's will have to refine sound reduction, size, manufacturing process and get caught up with technology to be able to compete and stay in business. It's a win win!
Check out what they are doing overseas where you can just walk in and buy one.
https://www.oceania-defence.com/suppressors/556-20-samson.html
Check out there entire suppressor line! They are pretty impressive and still being refined!
I suspect their will be just enough misuse, just like AR-15s or dumb CCW permit holders, to keep them in the forefront of media coverage.
Because there is no legitimate reason any hunter or Fudd would need something like this.[facepalm]
Because there is no legitimate reason any hunter or Fudd would need something like this.[facepalm]
I'm positive that I'll be using a suppressed muzzleloader for elk season next year.
Because there is no legitimate reason any hunter or Fudd would need something like this.[facepalm]
I'm positive that I'll be using a suppressed muzzleloader for elk season next year.
I'm aiming for a lightweight Kimber Mountain Ascent in .30-06 with an Omega suppressor for rifle elk season next year.
https://assets.americanrifleman.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Kimber-Mountain-Ascent.jpg
spqrzilla
11-25-2016, 22:56
The tactical implications of an infantry battalion with suppressed rifles is more fascinating to me than the speculation on removing silencers from NFA of '34.
GilpinGuy
11-26-2016, 00:02
Yeah, I'm wondering what you combat vets think of this, other than it'll save your hearing.
Yeah, I'm wondering what you combat vets think of this, other than it'll save your hearing.
There are so many factors that it is really hard to say.
Since the m4/m16 is a DI system, this might make things worse in the long run for any protracted firefights they find themselves in, a la dirtier internals. I hope they do extensive testing in this regard to know how it affects things before they get into a situation.
It would be great for OP's or anywhere the quieter report would be a tactical advantage. The extra length on the barrel will need to be compensated for by entry teams in an urban environment, and I hope they run these on M4's cus a 20" barrel m16+suppressor would be cumbersome -- under the impression the Corps has gone to m4's for the grunts so that's good.
Anyone mounted who dismounts and then re-mounts into a vehicle will need to be extra careful if they get into a firefight while dismounted. They'll learn quickly that a hot can touching your leg, etc. = "Hi, Doc." They should know this due to the barrel already being a factor in this regard, but a can presents a bigger surface to potentially touch.
It would be good for them to train on both suppressed and unsuppressed, with a knowledge base on quickly rezeroing if they get a baffle strike and need to remove it and continue fighting.
This most likely takes fixed bayonets out of the equation, but I have no idea if they ever actually fix them -- unlikely.
It will be interesting to see if the tactical advantage of quieter fire for grunts has any contra indicators like less fear in the enemy due to loss of the psychological aspect of a loud firefight.
Very interested to hear from former Marine grunts on how they think this is a plus or minus based on Marine Infantry TTPs.
Since the m4/m16 is a DI system, this might make things worse in the long run for any protracted firefights they find themselves in, a la dirtier internals. I hope they do extensive testing in this regard to know how it affects things before they get into a situation.
Yeah, my first concerns were how it would affect their weapons. Not only will they likely get dirtier, but they'll also get much hotter.
...but I have to admit that I'd like to see the suppressor that would fit a .50 cal M2. [rockon]
HoneyBadger
11-26-2016, 11:39
If I were ISIS, dying in silence from hundreds of yards away without accomplishing any of my terror goals or contributing to the fight would be my worst fear. Silent killers are a serious psychological operation all on their own.
UrbanWolf
11-26-2016, 11:40
It worked for Boulder PD... I could totally see this going well for the USMC! I've been told that in Europe, what little they do, hunting without a suppressor is considered inconsiderate. Let's hope and pray under R control with an R POTUS, we can get the Hearing Protection Act passed next year.
Lets sneak SBR in there as well. John Dillinger doesn't walk around with saw off Tommy gun in his trench coat anymore, we are the only country that alloW handguns yet but lentgth requirement on rifles, lets get rid of that stupid law already.
Can a M777, 155mm howitzer be suppressed?
Sort of got me thinking of the Air Wolf stealth mode helicopter...only on TV. [Coffee]
http://thecripplegate.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Praying.jpg
At first, I'm thinking my credit card is going to get killed. But then I realize a lot of the cost is regulations. If the manufacturing cost of a can dropped, and no stamp required, it should drop the retail price considerably.
I don't know that I'd have a can for each rifle/carbine/pistol but maybe one or two would be fun.
Oh, no shit! I'd love to be able to play in the suppressed world!
HoneyBadger
11-26-2016, 14:08
Can a M777, 155mm howitzer be suppressed?
I don't see why not:
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/155mm_suppressor-tfb.jpg
That seriously looks like some type of military hardware mating behavior.
HoneyBadger
11-26-2016, 23:28
giggity.
That is the exact opposite of a silencer. Call it a loudener.
I'm curious if this is such a good thing in firefights (or even some training circumstances). Even full auto rated suppressors really aren't, when it comes down to it. If they are going so far as to suppress the squad automatics and/or M2 (I'm not sure) the duty life on those in training alone is going to be shit. Problem I see is in a real combat situation, if mounted, it's going to be nigh impossible to get a cooking suppressor off, so I guess you just keep shooting it anyway as the baffles melt out. Never done that, so I'm not sure what issues arise, I assume it would affect accuracy with some small element of risk, not sure if it would compromise safety by any significant factor or not.
https://youtu.be/3Sj8FP5nh98 (https://youtu.be/3Sj8FP5nh98)
SilencerCo Omega torture test.
There are several others like it on youtube.
Aloha_Shooter
11-28-2016, 19:58
If the HPA is passed more company's will be making suppressors, which will bring the price down, then company's will have to refine sound reduction, size, manufacturing process and get caught up with technology to be able to compete and stay in business. It's a win win!
Check out what they are doing overseas where you can just walk in and buy one.
https://www.oceania-defence.com/suppressors/556-20-samson.html
Check out there entire suppressor line! They are pretty impressive and still being refined!
It's kind of funny to see that because I just got back from NZ and was told bolt action rifles are okay (but you have to be prepared for the inspectors to check to make sure you store the bolt separately from the gun) but semi-autos and handguns are a no-no. People in NZ are good with rifles for hunting but don't seem to see the need for self-defense or citizen protection from government tyranny -- other than that, some of the best people in the world.
osok-308
11-29-2016, 09:34
This + the HPA = Cheap Mil surp suppressors someday? I can only hope.
Rucker61
11-29-2016, 09:43
It's kind of funny to see that because I just got back from NZ and was told bolt action rifles are okay (but you have to be prepared for the inspectors to check to make sure you store the bolt separately from the gun) but semi-autos and handguns are a no-no. People in NZ are good with rifles for hunting but don't seem to see the need for self-defense or citizen protection from government tyranny -- other than that, some of the best people in the world.
Semi-auto rifles and handguns are legal.
http://www.police.govt.nz/about-us/publication/arms-code/firearms-licensing
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.