The Weapons That Special Forces Really Use

[Protectandserve]

[YT]gJsnEJRUjVs&index=14&list=UUre2GibO9Vdb3C59VzDsFxQ[/YT]

Here this should help clear it up for all those still confused.

 

[MadSquabbles500]

[YT]gJsnEJRUjVs&index=14&list=UUre2GibO9Vdb3C59VzDsFxQ[/YT]

Here this should help clear it up for all those still confused.

never mind stupid question

 

[MadSquabbles500]

So does the shotgun not really have useful combat application besides breaking the doors down?

And would it not be better for every gun to have an integrated sound and flash suppressors? It would make life more pleasant for the users and people around them.

 

[Snakesolidsnake]

So does the shotgun not really have useful combat application besides breaking the doors down?

And would it not be better for every gun to have an integrated sound and flash suppressors? It would make life more pleasant for the users and people around them.

Shotguns lack range and magazine capacity. No real reason to use slugs when you have rifles, and buckshot is only good at short ranges. Plus ammo takes up a lot of room.

As far as suppressors, this article was written about Rangers, not Seals or Delta Force. Rangers deploy in much larger numbers, and they're not doing raids all the time like the Seals do. They're light infantry and don't really require the suppressors. I imagine a lot of it has to do with cost, and I don't know the life and durability of them, especially the way infantry tend to abuse gear.

 

[MadSquabbles500]

Shotguns lack range and magazine capacity. No real reason to use slugs when you have rifles, and buckshot is only good at short ranges. Plus ammo takes up a lot of room.

As far as suppressors, this article was written about Rangers, not Seals or Delta Force. Rangers deploy in much larger numbers, and they're not doing raids all the time like the Seals do. They're light infantry and don't really require the suppressors. I imagine a lot of it has to do with cost, and I don't know the life and durability of them, especially the way infantry tend to abuse gear.

Even if stealth is not the utmost important, the suppressor would just make life easy on your ears wouldnt it? You can probably hear your surroundings better too.

 

[Snakesolidsnake]

Even if stealth is not the utmost important, the suppressor would just make life easy on your ears wouldnt it? You can probably hear your surroundings better too.

You're right, but it probably comes down to money and necessity. They cost more money and they aren't a necessity for most.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

You're right, but it probably comes down to money and necessity. They cost more money and they aren't a necessity for most.

How much can suppressors really cost without mark-up and tax stamp?

 

[MadSquabbles500]

How much can suppressors really cost without mark-up and tax stamp?

And to add, if a manufacturer were to make such a weapon, a quieter one, and not mark the price up too much, you would think they would win a larger market share or at least have their own niche all to themselves.

 

[Roaming East]

And to add, if a manufacturer were to make such a weapon, a quieter one, and not mark the price up too much, you would think they would win a larger market share or at least have their own niche all to themselves.

Consumers in the states' are retarded though and would think that the lower priced one is 'not as good' simply because of its cost. Name appeal is so powerful a driving market device that its almost impossible for a new comer to burst into the scene unless they get a lot of name recognition from respected shooters.

HK could buy out Hi-point, slap their logo on the old Hi-point .40 and you'd see them flying off the shelves for 900 a pop with a legion of fans talking about how Delta-elite they were.

 

[Snakesolidsnake]

How much can suppressors really cost without mark-up and tax stamp?

If we're still talking about suppressors for the military, it adds up pretty quick when you talk about multiple weapons for that many people. Plus I doubt there are suppressors for the crew served and automatic weapons, so there will still be unsuppressed weapons on the battlefield. Maybe this will change in the future when they phase out the M-16/M-4 and the other weapons.

 

[RerouteToRemain]

Consumers in the states' are retarded though and would think that the lower priced one is 'not as good' simply because of its cost. Name appeal is so powerful a driving market device that its almost impossible for a new comer to burst into the scene unless they get a lot of name recognition from respected shooters.

HK could buy out Hi-point, slap their logo on the old Hi-point .40 and you'd see them flying off the shelves for 900 a pop with a legion of fans talking about how Delta-elite they were.

I don't agree with that well at least from what I've seen. High end brands have put out some turds and they get called out on it. They usually do the consumer right in the end. Either by a refund and or fixing the issue.

 

[krait]

Even if stealth is not the utmost important, the suppressor would just make life easy on your ears wouldnt it? You can probably hear your surroundings better too.

Suppressors add weight and size to the weapon. Change handling characteristics of the weapon. Also depending on what kind it will affect the ballistics of the round, change POI.

 

[MadSquabbles500]

Suppressors add weight and size to the weapon. Change handling characteristics of the weapon. Also depending on what kind it will affect the ballistics of the round, change POI.

I see

How about something like this weapon below though?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zn3KCSm3ui4

 

[MadSquabbles500]

also another question

are regular infantry or special forces ever issued those bullet proof shields I see police swat units carrying? If not, why not?

 

[golvmopp]

also another question

are regular infantry or special forces ever issued those bullet proof shields I see police swat units carrying? If not, why not?

They don't like the color.

 

[Stoic1]

Bullet proof shields for infantry soldiers?

Tough to use with a rifle - difficult to carry in a vehicle.

Oh yeah....and they are ridiculous! LOL.

 

[MadSquabbles500]

Do they at least use it for specific scenarios? I mean why do the police swat teams use it? There has to be some crossover.

 

[krait]

Why use a shield when you can pull up in an Bradley or Stryker. Purely assumption but I would think speed is a factor. Those things are very cumbersome and wouldn't do squat against a grenade or rpg. Police don't typically have to worry about those. Infantry or SF that would need that kind of protection I would assume would just use an armored vehicleto get close enough.

I am not military but have helped some cop friends in their training scenarios. Those shields are very cumbersome and once inside a building felt like more of a hindrance than aid.

 

[MadSquabbles500]

Why use a shield when you can pull up in an Bradley or Stryker. Purely assumption but I would think speed is a factor. Those things are very cumbersome and wouldn't do squat against a grenade or rpg. Police don't typically have to worry about those. Infantry or SF that would need that kind of protection I would assume would just use an armored vehicleto get close enough.

I am not military but have helped some cop friends in their training scenarios. Those shields are very cumbersome and once inside a building felt like more of a hindrance than aid.

Let say you have to enter into a room or hallway. I would think the shield would afford you some protection.

 

[MadSquabbles500]

Shotguns lack range and magazine capacity. No real reason to use slugs when you have rifles, and buckshot is only good at short ranges. Plus ammo takes up a lot of room.

Why does the Navy only teach its fresh recruits the shotgun and not the M16 then? Do they only have shotguns and no rifles onboard ships?