Marines to try silenced infantry battalion
According to the Washington Times, the Marine Corps is experimenting with putting silencers on all of the weapons in one infantry battalion;
“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 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.”
Training exercises using the new approach have already been conducted by Bravo Company, 1st Battalion, 2nd Marines. Officials ultimately plan to include weapons systems like the M249 light machine gun and M240G medium machine gun in the experiment.
My tinnitus approves of the plan.
From Military.com;
Suppressors work by slowing the escape of propellant gases when a gun is fired, which drastically reduces the sound signature.
That means more marksmanship training.
Category: Marine Corps
Shhhh. We’re hunting wabbits…..
Be vewy vewy quiet….
Dammit! How are the Marines supposed to hunt snakes if the snakes find out about this ahead of time?
Silly rabbit, Trix are for….
No wait, different rabbit.
Are you sure it isn’t duck season instead?
The Marines will not handle the quieting at all well, I’m guessing. “Quiet Zone. Use Silencers.”
If this works, imagine the effectiveness, not to mention the pure panic it would cause in an enemy that can’t see, and now can’t hear, where the fire is coming from.
Surpresors are not really that quite. They reduce the sound signature, and are very effective as sound camouflage since now the enemy cannot accurately tell from where exactly the fire is coming from, but the bullets are still supersonic, with its loud crack sound as it breaks the sound barrier, and eventually you can’t mistake an infantry squad firing and maneuvering on an enemy position.
All in all is a great advantage, and it certainly makes it way easier to communicate. Specially during day time. During night time all US infantry is equipped with IR lasers for targeting, and there is no way Joe is going to confuse his team leader’s laser painting his target.
Oh, and most movies use pre recorded sounds of pneumatic guns for suppresors. In real life they are way louder than that, but way quieter as well than an unsuppressed weapon.
True…A “silenced” Barrett still makes an impressive racket.
They gonna silence the enemy too and all the grenades and artie? That would be weird.
Hmm. Wasn’t there an episode of Rocky and Bullwinkle that dealt with the formula for “hush-a-boom”?
IDC SARC Yes, that is the ultimate objective.
No experience here with silencers but heard that a .45 is much quieter than a .22 with a silencer? Wish they would allow them for citizens, we have hundreds of cats roaming our neighbor and the city won’t pick them up anymore, they spent too much on studies and now can’t do their freaking jobs!!
They’ll just shoot at the guy shouting orders at his marines from 100 meters away. The squeaking wheel will get greased.
On a broader front, if successful it may go a long way to having suppressors removed from the NFA list.
Hope so, anyway. Like Jonn’s, my tinnitus would be grateful!
Too bad they couldn’t put silencers on those T-56 engines!
I once tried one of those noise cancelling headphones. Drove me crazy. Just ramped up the ringing. Sheesh!
I just can’t wait to see someone try silencing a .50 cal. However, this could definitely help with hearing loss.
I’ve been around the silenced .50 Barrett( I know, I already said that)…it’s still noisy. Can’t say I’ve seen a silenced M2. That just seems wrong.lol
The liberals are going to hate this, I can already see it coming it’s not fair
Liberals may hate the idea of silencers becoming legal/prevalent in civilian society (as it could also change the dynamic of mass shootings, I imagine), but I don’t see any having a problem with this for the military.
If it gives our guys an edge and isn’t cruel/inhumane, that’s a win. Nobody wants fairness in a lethal fight.
I’m okay with cruel and inhumane when it comes to some child raping, torturing, kidnapping ISIS fighter.
They deserve a little inhumanly. It may take a little of the fight out of their buddies.
Napalm is a good place to start.
VA and NC allow suppressed firearms for hunting, so the anti-gun types have already failed to suppress the gun-crowd. Used to see them out on various ranges quite often, which served to placate the locals regarding gun noise. I like the idea that “if you don’t know its there; you can’t complain about it.”
Heh. “Sounds” good to me!
Jeez! A silenced 240B? That is very (“vewwy”) quiet, surgical placement. I can’t imagine what that would sound like (or not sound like). Don’t “silencers” wear out after ‘x’ amount of rounds? You’d be changing silencers faster than changing barrels.
Yeah. I can’t see how they are going to suppress a machine gun. The can is going to wear out quickly.
The closest thing to this we have tried so far is the suppressor for the M110, which fires the same bullet, 7.62×51, but it is only semi with a 20 round mag, and the TM specifically recommends an slow rate of fire.
And then, i have no idea what happens when you shoot a tracer round with a supressor on. Never tried that one, and the M240 combat belt got 1 tracer every 4 ball rounds.
So who knows.
That is going to end up prohibitively expensive.
1) They wear out fast and will be expensive to continuously replace. Especially on heavy automatic weapons.
2) Suppressors are only really effective if you are using subsonic ammunition. That is going to reduce the range of weapons drastically while requiring a complete overhaul in logisitics and training.
Never had a problem with radios and hand signals. And while WE might be suppressed, our enemies definitely will not be, not to mention the reduced effective range of a suppressed weapon is going to favor our enemies more than it will benefit us.
The only time suppressors are a good idea is during room/building clearing.
Two 19D. Same time (10:55) reply.
NOT a coincidence.
😉
None of what you say is remotely true. Modern suppressors will easily out last multiple barrels. Even for the belt feds.
Even shooting supersonic ammo, noise is reduced significantly. Multiple AARs from Afghanistan from captured TB show the enemy hates being engaged by suppresed weapons.
Modern suppressor give multiple benefits including external ballistics.
Great! Now what the hell am I supposed to do with all of these “Sound Of Freedom” bumper stickers?
The Sound of Freedom is now “whispering death”. 🙂
Ditto that on hearing liberals screech and I love the sound of that! I remember reading in a book about Vietnam that suppressors were referred to then as “Hush Puppies” because after some pols in DC screeched about them giving our operators an “unfair advantage” over the enemy someone responded that they were intended for use on enemy watch and guard dogs.
Interesting that Maj Gen Love takes more about how it enhances command and control than advantages over the enemy.
If that’s the main concern, I wonder if MBITRs or Rifleman’s Radio with hearing defender tactical headsets would be a better (not sure about cheaper) option. SF uses them now, and I know we were looking at fielding it to conventional infantry units.
These systems are pretty cool- it gives you an intra-team communications capability, but it also taps you into the larger network. There are add ons that allow data and GPS. The headsets allow you to communicate in a normal speaking voice, but they kick in and cancel any loud noises (like gunfire). They are configured to fit with the ACH.
Can’t say I’m terribly familiar with can tech, beyond the basics of how it works, anyway. What will this mean for ballistics? Less energy? Reduced range? Or has the tech surpassed that? How about wear & tear on the cans?
Ruger is pushing hard with their suppressor.
Loooong wait time for the paperwork hassle is the biggest obstacle for me. Common sense gun law my ass.
This makes a lot of sense.
how much do ear plugs and hand signals cost?
Suppressors with super sonic ammo are still loud and will damage your hearing. The corps instead should look to electronic ear protection to offer troops better hearing protection and comm.
Certainly the end of the bayonet charge.
Sounds like the Corps is attempting to make “swift, silent, deadly” apply to more than just MRE produced farts.
While I could support a suppressed fire squad or platoon, I don’t think a battalion or division wide replacement would be effective. As already mentioned, the suppressors are expensive and can be a hassle to replace depending on what type they would go with (internal/external).
I think what the command is forgetting is the awesome psychological advantage of a company of Marines opening up on the enemy.
I fought in OIF in 2003 and one of our best weapons traveling on open convoys was the ability to unleash an ear shattering response in the form of M-2, MK-19, M-16, M-4, M-9, 240G and whatever else we could through out em. Could I whisper sweet nothings to the guys around me? Hell no, but I could pay attention to the tried and true hand signals and squad tactics we trained for.