interesting silencer on AK seen in Ukraine
- Thread starter roscoe
- Start date
- Status
dogtown tom
Member
Sound reduction isn't the only benefit.
Reducing muzzle flash and disguising the source are often given priority over reduction in decibels.
I doubt they issue subsonic.
entropy
Member
They use the VSS 9x39 rifle when they need subsonic. As dogtown tom says, true 'silenced' weapons are rarely needed on the battlefield. The sound displacement benefit is the main advantage. Confusing your target long enough so he can't triangulate where you are before you drop him is a force multiplier.
N555
Member
I concur.
jmorris
Member
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2005
- Messages
- 24,148
The sonic “crack of a bullet alone without muzzle blast, of a bullet going past buildings and other objects, creates sounds that makes it difficult to discern direction of travel. Lots of echoes.
sarduy
Member
More of a muzzle signature reduction than anything else.
jonnyc
Member
The Soviets/Russians do issue a subsonic 7.62x39 round, with a black/green tip.
Varminterror
Member
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2016
- Messages
- 14,891
Looks like a bunch of folks need to experience shooting suppressed. Subsonic or not, it’s a completely different experience, and highly advantaged in many ways.
gotboostvr
Member
I will as soon as I get my tax stamp approved!
The wait for the eForm4 is bad enough, I don't know how you guys managed it with the old style ones.
CapnMac
Member
The Marines fitted out an entire Regiment with suppressors--but not subsonic ammo--and reported significant success in Field Exercises equipped that way.
This was for all but the crew-served and heavy weapons (which you typically employ beyond rifle range anyway).
It was not a priority for use in asymmetrical warfare, so all the Flags nodded and went back to Business As Usual.
This was for all but the crew-served and heavy weapons (which you typically employ beyond rifle range anyway).
It was not a priority for use in asymmetrical warfare, so all the Flags nodded and went back to Business As Usual.
kBob
Member
I have seen a fair number of suppressors in mews articles on AK74. Also A couple of AK 74 with PSO series scopes.
Since week Two I have not seen privately owned weapons that were identifiable as such.
As their gun control laws pre war were not as onerous as some EU nations one wonders if suppressors were even controlled and if some we are seeing were private or group purchases.
About 1 in 100 Ukrainians owned a long gun (pistols were harder to get and near impossible) While most gun owners owned shot guns, rifles were allowed including semi automatic though with a ten round magazine limit.
-kBob
Since week Two I have not seen privately owned weapons that were identifiable as such.
As their gun control laws pre war were not as onerous as some EU nations one wonders if suppressors were even controlled and if some we are seeing were private or group purchases.
About 1 in 100 Ukrainians owned a long gun (pistols were harder to get and near impossible) While most gun owners owned shot guns, rifles were allowed including semi automatic though with a ten round magazine limit.
-kBob
d2wing
Member
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2008
- Messages
- 6,415
I don't know if that is a silencer or a flash hider. A good friend of mine, a sniper, in the book "Black Horse Rider" tells of picking off several NVA in a bunker during an ambush. It didn't take long for them to realize that he was a sniper and find him and concentrate fire on his position. He thought he was dead but the log he hid behind took all the hits. It is the same battle in the AHC channel movie "Rescue at Dogshead" but that movie leaves out the story of the trapped infantry. There might be a feature film coming based on that battle. Anyway a flash hider is pretty important in some circumstances.
gotboostvr
Member
That's awful large to be a flash hider.
trackskippy
Member
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2010
- Messages
- 3,487
In that case, I doubt its a flash hider too.
If anything, the Europeans have a much easier time buying actual suppressors, as in many places there, they arent restricted and can be bought over the counter without restriction. Unlike here in the "Land of the Free".
Here in the states, there have been quite a few different "fake" suppressors around for a long time. Mostly used as either barrel extensions for things like the MAC, UZI, type "pistols", or to make shorter than legal length rifle barrels look like the real thing and are "legal" by permanently attaching them.
Something like this is one Ive seen on a couple of AR pistol "retro builds. This one actually offers some flash suppression. Most of the others are just tubes with no baffles and no flash suppression.
If anything, the Europeans have a much easier time buying actual suppressors, as in many places there, they arent restricted and can be bought over the counter without restriction. Unlike here in the "Land of the Free".
Here in the states, there have been quite a few different "fake" suppressors around for a long time. Mostly used as either barrel extensions for things like the MAC, UZI, type "pistols", or to make shorter than legal length rifle barrels look like the real thing and are "legal" by permanently attaching them.
Something like this is one Ive seen on a couple of AR pistol "retro builds. This one actually offers some flash suppression. Most of the others are just tubes with no baffles and no flash suppression.
Varminterror
Member
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2016
- Messages
- 14,891
The muzzle end is enclosed, and there are no ports. That muzzle closure constitutes a suppressor, not a flash hider.
kBob
Member
The original “suppressor” on the XM 177 series (aka CAR-15) was a suppressor though not a very good one. It had baffles but interestingly still had an M-16a1 style bird cage suppressor at the muzzle.
Some have suggested it was to keep the pressure up in the gas system…. but given the number of far shorter “pistol barrels we see today that seems unlikely
Colt had already had experience making a 10.5 inch barreled aircrew Survival gun and given my own experience with “Shorties” I suspect it actually was intended as a noise suppression device as well as flash suppression.
A good suppressor on a 10.5 inch like several US Gov units use has almost no flash at the muzzle and from the right side the flash at the ejection port is much more noticeable. Of course this can also be seen with full length rifles that are not suppressed but it was neat that the “direct impingement” system that some say has little effect at the breech was so noticeable without the distraction if normal muzzle flash
-kBob
Some have suggested it was to keep the pressure up in the gas system…. but given the number of far shorter “pistol barrels we see today that seems unlikely
Colt had already had experience making a 10.5 inch barreled aircrew Survival gun and given my own experience with “Shorties” I suspect it actually was intended as a noise suppression device as well as flash suppression.
A good suppressor on a 10.5 inch like several US Gov units use has almost no flash at the muzzle and from the right side the flash at the ejection port is much more noticeable. Of course this can also be seen with full length rifles that are not suppressed but it was neat that the “direct impingement” system that some say has little effect at the breech was so noticeable without the distraction if normal muzzle flash
-kBob
- Status
