Ballistics on silenced weapons

[Incubus 0]

I just spent a quick break playing some GR because my brain is fried from debugging C++ code for the past 7 hours, and I noticed something I didn't like...

I was playing with some silenced weapons and noticed that the power was seriously lacking. I used a silenced M4, and a sniper rifled called AW COVERT; anyway, from about 10 yards I shot a 'tango' in the throat with the M4 only to watch him turn around and kill me with a quick burst from his AK. The silenced sniper rifle didn't do too much better.

My question then, is how much does a silencer slow down the bullet velocity? I looked at the .gun files and saw that the SOCOM M4 was set about 200 lower than the normal M4. Is this correct?

[ReconSnake 0]

the effects of suppressed weapons in GR are very unrealistic - my guess is it was Ubi's attempt to balance weapons.

[mob 0]

Yep, the supressed weapons' power really sucks. A screw-on suppresor, like on the M4 Sopmod, SR-25SD and MP5SD in GR, doesn't reduce the bullet velocity at all. The only disadvantages of suppressors is increased maintenance requirements and a tendency to overheat on full auto, and of course increased length and weight. To make a suppressed weapon really quiet however you need subsonic ammo, so the really quiet weapons like the M9sd and MP5sd should be less powerful, but the M4 Sopmod uses standard 5.56 Nato so it shouldn't be any less powerful than the regular M4. The SR-25sd should be slightly louder than the M4 Sopmod, but still as powerful as the standard SR-25.

BTW, the real-life AW Covert uses a barrel with exhaust ports drilled along its length and a suppressor around the barrel (integral suppressor) and is designed for subsonic ammo, so it is appropriate that it should be much less powerful than standard snipers .

Edited July 31, 2003 by mob

[Incubus 0]

Thanks for the help guys. Looks like I'll be playing with the .gun files tonight to make things a little more realistic.

[Tollen 0]

Off topic.

I´ve bought RvS a long time ago and in that game, the silenced 5.56mm weapons there have the power of a sleepy .22 and according to the The Platoon´s forum thats realistic.

How come that it might be such a different opinions between Hobby-Rangers and Hobby-CT´s?

[Thumper1518 62]

Having endured the Beltway Sniper last year, I can tell you that a 5.56 does more damage than a "sleepy .22" and though the cretins did not use a suppressor, one would have hardly changed the terminal ballistics of the round. Only sub-sonic rounds would have diminished performance. I agree that the SD versions of the M4 and SR-25 were lakeluster in their terminal performance, as thoug they were chambered for a different round, not just suppressed. The interesting thing about super-sonic performance is A: the sound follows the bullet, too late for warning and B: those who the bullet does not hit will only here the 'crack' from the trajectory path point closest to their ear. The fun starts when that point is the same as the bullet inpact point.

[Tollen 0]

That´s what I´ve claimed all along...

To bad that the Desktop-CT´s are so damned sure about what a supressed bullet should or should not do...

[Parabellum 12]

Off topic.

I´ve bought RvS a long time ago and in that game, the silenced 5.56mm weapons there have the power of a sleepy .22 and according to the The Platoon´s forum thats realistic.

How come that it might be such a different opinions between Hobby-Rangers and Hobby-CT´s?

It would be realistic if you were using sub-sonic ammunition. A 63-grain bullet moving at ~ 1100 FPS (approximate weight/speed of a sub-sonic 5.56mm round) would have about 160 ft/lbs at the muzzle. That's not too far off from some .22 rounds. But if you're not using sub-sonic ammunition, you may actually see an increase in velocity, depending on the weapon/ammo/suppressor employed.

[Incubus 0]

One of my best friends is working on a master's degree in aerospace engineering at MIT, he knows physics like the back of his hand. I'm going to ask him about it, so as to get the math to determine the actual loss in power (if any) from using a silencer.

[ReconSnake 0]

Though the velocity might be close, the energy would not, as weight is part of the equation for energy. Energy is a key factor in the several aspects of terminal ballistics.

Back onto GR, I have put 4-5 headshots into a guy with the SOCOM without him going down.

[Guest SI-Prozac]

What Types of Silencers are there? The Dust ones water and somthing other... i dunno the names

[ReconSnake 0]

The two ones I have experience with are wet & dry. Both use baffles, the wet ones use a small amount of fluid (i have seen water and oil/grease). I can't really speak to any of the others, though there may be some.

[supasniper 0]

Back onto GR, I have put 4-5 headshots into a guy with the SOCOM without him going down.

I hate it when that happens

[Guest SI-Prozac]

The Dry ones deliver the thud/pop sound ? and Wet ones more of a swoosh or somthing?

[ReconSnake 0]

IIRC, the dry ones have more of a low note while the wet ones are bit higher pitched and lower volume. Either one works pretty good, I'd rather use a dry generally speaking.

[Rebar 0]

The issue here is, in GR a weapon is either silent, or it's not. There is no reduced hearing range for a quieter non-silent weapon.

The only realistic way to make a silenced weapon is to make it sub-sonic, with the significant loss of velocity/killing power in most cases. An exception is the old .45 caliber pistol round, which is subsonic even in most full power loads.

[ReconSnake 0]

The reduction of a subsonic round is insignificant for a 5.56 or larger when you talk killing power from a headshot/ unarmored torso. It is a limitation of the GR code that does not allow for the distinction between supersonic & subsonic, there is no reason not to text code them as supersonic rounds.

[Incubus 0]

Okay, heres the info I got from the physics expert friend...

Basically, a silencer should have a negligible effect on bullet velocity. Basically, all the silencer does is redirect the sound waves so that they cancel each other out, thus eliminating most of the sound. The porting doesn't really effect the round in any way. Because of pressure changes along the barrel (or silencer) there may be a slight loss in power, but not usually enough to make a difference.

[Parabellum 12]

Okay, heres the info I got from the physics expert friend...

Basically, a silencer should have a negligible effect on bullet velocity. Basically, all the silencer does is redirect the sound waves so that they cancel each other out, thus eliminating most of the sound. The porting doesn't really effect the round in any way. Because of pressure changes along the barrel (or silencer) there may be a slight loss in power, but not usually enough to make a difference.

Unless, like the internal Wolf suppressor on the MP5SD, some of the gas which propels the projectile is vented through ports, lowering the velocity. AFAIK, many new suppressors don't operate like that though. A couple that I've considered purchasing didn't.

[Rebar 0]

No silencer that I'm aware of can deal with the mini-sonic boom, or actually "crack", of a supersonic round. True silenced weapons cannot use supersonic rounds, for that very reason.

[ReconSnake 0]

No firearm that I am aware of is truly silenced - they are all suppressed to varying degrees.

[Rebar 0]

Of course, I meant silenced as far as GR is concerned.