Every so often I see (in movies and TV) submachine guns like the Uzi, Mac-10 or MP5 equipped with silencers. Other than making the gun look cooler, what possible point is there? You’re going to spray out 30 rounds, but you want to do so quietly?
Erm, yes. In real life, you wouldn’t spray out 30 rounds, though. Not that I know, though. :o
Perhaps to protect the ears of the shooters.
Haj
As I understand it, the idea of a silencer is to make it difficult for the target(s) to immediately notice where the sound is coming from. Also, in real life, anyone with any skill will be firing in short bursts, or semi-automatic mode.
People using submachineguns in the real world don’t “spray out 30 rounds,” that’s just Hollywood. My experience with them is IPSC style competition with a borrowed MP5K-PDW and I’ve learned that he who shoots the fewest bullets wins. He who “sprays and prays” dies.
Also, all the modern machine guns you list have selective fire seitches so they can be used semi-auto and in the case of the MP-5 customised with 2 or 3 shot burst selections. They can be used as extremely effective and accurate carbines. With a good sound suppressor and subsonic ammunition they can be very stealthy. The Mag subguns and Uzi as not as effectively suppressed as the MP5 becuause they fire from an open bolt but still good. A friend is getting a Mossad suppressor for his Uzi sometime soon so we’ll do some seat of the pants tests with it.
Well, yeah. Why would you want to alarm the whole neighborhood?
Also, gunfire in an enclosed space is really freakin’ loud (something movies rarely mentioin, BTW). It can, at least temporarily, deafen anyone without good enough hearing protection. With suppressors, you can talk normally.
G’day
The SAS (and Australian SAS and Commandos) are known to favour the H&K MP5SD “Hockler” (and possibly more recent models), a submachinegun with an effective integral sound suppressor. This weapon allows them to engage enemy combatants while they are infiltrating an enemy position without alerting the entire enemy force to their presence. It isn’t silent, exactly, but it will be heard in the next room rather than throughout the building or all over the base.
Regards,
Agback
Not to mention that the silencer, well made, often works as a fine flash suppressor, which might make all the difference.
Gairloch
I’m going to tactically expand on Padeye on this one. The more bullets you spray in one burst, the more you are liable to detection, but then again the more you are liable to missing your damn target.
I would say in theory (and in practice): more volume of fire on target, the worse you are.
Tripler’s Converse: The more volume you spray on a target, the worse accuracy you will get per round fired. You have more control round for round than you do putting a burst on target, but as your muzzle climbs or drifts, yer gonna miss. A silencer may help you conceal a burst, but you are much better off with a one-shot-one-kill policy.
Tripler
It’s pretty damned hard to track one loud shot. Ask any professional sniper.
The other thing is that a thingamibob on the end of a gun is not neccesarily a silencer. It could also be a muzzle brake, which actually makes the dang thing louder, at least to the shooter, but reduces both recoil and the tendency for the muzzle to climb when shooting in full-auto mode, thus helping to counteract Tripler’s Converse
Disclaimer: I have never shot a full-auto, or a gun with a silencer or muzzle brake, or any other thigamibob on it, so the above could be completely false.
Something else that surprised me.
The other day, on Conquest, the team was working with SWAT teams to learn the basics. This included shooting, and at one poitn doing target shooting with a silenced MP5.
The damn thing made no noise. A very sliight clicking sound as the new round entered the chamber, and then the ping as the round hit the target. I had always figured they would make that thwip sound that they do in the movies. Silly of me, but still.
Very cool.
And is the OP certain he’s talking about a silencer and not a flash suppressor?
Or possibly even a compensator?
The one-shot-one-kill policy is fine and dandy when you’re using powerful weapons like sniper rifles, assault rifles, and the like. It’s less than certain when you’re using a pistol-ammo weapon like a submachinegun – and especially if it’s sound supressed.
Also, head shots might look fine and dandy in computer games or whatever, but when you’re running around in a real tactical situation with a supressed SMG (and assuming you have limited time and several targets) you’re looking at torso shots – which is why bulletproof vests are really rather more effective than some people tend to think. Also, you’re looking at several of those torso shots at any given target, because of the previously mentioned low power of the weapon and the general redundancy of organs in the torso. Probably you’ll want to use armour piercing ammunition.
Note: This information is derived from several years of reading non-fiction and fiction by people who know what they’re talking about, not personal experience, even though I have been in the military and fired full-auto weapons in bursts or full auto. And yeah, full auto is basically useless for anything else than suppressive fire, and then you’ll want to have a big, loud, semi-fixed position weapon like a machine gun – or possibly a good assault rifle fired from a good position.
What others have said is correct although I feel that I should chime in because my family had both an Uzi and a Mach 10 with a silencer when I was growing up (my father is a FFD). I shot both of them dozens of times. With the silencer, both were pretty quiet and pretty easy to shoot except that the Mach 10 felt like you were holding on to a rocket.
Without the silencer, they were LOUD, especially the Mach 10. Not only could it be heard from a long distance, it was also harder to shoot effectively because of the excessive noise. If you had first-hand experience shooting them, you would certainly see the value of the silencer.
The silencers on both were really effective. The only sound that the guns made with them on were the sound of the actions slamming shut rapidly. IIRC, the Uzi shot nine 9mm bullets a second and the Mach 10 shot nineteen 45 cal bullets a second. The sound that they made were like a really quiet jackhammer.
Shagnasty
As someone who has fired an Uzi on many occasions, could you then advise on that other movie idea - shooting an Uzi on full auto, while holding it with one hand. Can you do this with any accuracy ?
I remember firing a Stirling SMG while I was a cadet (giving SMG’s to 16 year olds - go figure) and that was VERY quiet. I dont think they are particularly powerful, which may explain it.
ChalkPit The Uzi has a slow rate of fire, about 650rpm, which makes it easy to control though the muzzle still tends to rise. My friend’s gun is pretty much factory stock but with the wood buttstock instead of the folding metal one. The best technique has been to put the buttstock in the center of my chest and pull down with my left hand on the foreend. Some other shooters have a vertical foregrip which makes for better control. His H&K is over 1000rpm I think but the two shot burst position makes this moot. Easy to get two shots on an IPSC cardboard at 20 yards but the third will usually be high and wasted. His is also the K model with a vertical foregrip for better control. MACs are known as bullet hoses but there is a cottage industry devoted to accessorizing them and making modifications to slow down the cyclic rate to make them suitable for competition.
I think some Sterlings had an intergral suppressor and that might have been the case with the ones you fired. Even subsonic 9mm ammunition from an unsuppressed weapon is too loud to shoot without hearing protection.
…I should have read more carefully. One handed subgun shooting is pure Hollywood myth. The full size Uzi I was talking about is really too big to easily shoot one handed anyway. The mini Uzi often used by the secret service and micro Uzi pistol have very high cyclic rates. You can shoot one handed but you will find it nearly impossible to hit what you intended.
Hollywood scenes are shot with blanks. They use special restricted barrels so there is enough pressure to eject the cases but since there is no bullet mass there dynamics are completely different than when shooting bullets.
Well, we were certainly wearing ear defenders, they probably wouldnt have let us fire without them, but I certainly remember being surprised how quiet it was, compared to the many other guns I fired while wearing ear defenders.
I was under the impression that hollwood used splintering (teeny tiny fragments) wood bullets to get proper ejction and blowback. At least that’s what I had read. Maybe a combo of both.
Or am I way out whacked.