The C7 Assault Rifle, M16, & AR15 family (C7A1, C7A2, C7 replacment, and C7 vs M16)

[KevinB]

There are two general method of mounting current military suppressors, one or two point mounts.

Knight Armaments Company (KAC) is the primary suppressor used by USSOCOM on the M4A1 and Mk18 Carbines - it is a standard one point muzzle mount
(see pic)


OPSINC has a two point mount using a screw on flash hide/brake and a barrel collar that the suppressor is tensioned against.  OPSINC 12th Model is the suppressor on the Mk12 (SPR) rifle in USSOC, and their suppressors are in use in other SOF's.
(see pic)


Both of those suppressors have endure a 30 thousand round endurance test in repeated 5k weapon trial layout.


*my camera battery died -- so I am charrging it and will take pics later.


The OPS INC 12th Model is an example as well of a BOTB suppressor as it comes back and some of its lenght is absorbed over the barrel so as to decrease weapon OAL yet still ensure proper suppression of both noise and flash.



WHY Suppress?
  Supression reduces weapon signature in both light and noise -- effectively making the shooter near impossible to detect visually or via crack/thump since the thump from the expanding muzzle gasses are contained, and the tgt only hears the crack of the suppersonic bullet (provided the bullet is still supersonic) after the bullet has arrive (or missed) and will not have the thump to determine direction or distance.
Effective military suppressors provide aprox 25-50fps of freeboar boost to the "clean" barrel velocity (which in turn can raise or otherwise alter the POI versus un suppressed, but is often offset by the weight of the suppressor).

More to follow.

 

[a_majoor]

The De Lisle carbine is an example of a weapon with an integral silencer, but the cost of creating such an effective silencer was not only monetary (porting the barrel and building the silencer body over and beyond the barrel), but also in perfomance. The De Lisle has a reported effective range of 185m, the integral silencer makes the barrel over 2" in diameter and the thing is rather heavy and bulkey. (Some details can be found at Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Lisle_carbine)

Rather than add more bits to the rifle or replace the upper receiver with a new one mounting an exotic barrel, maybe we can achieve the same effect by fiddling with the ammunition. So called "captive piston" rounds exist for Russian pistols, where the energy from the propellent drives a piston in the casing which, in turn drives the bullet. The piston, and thus the gasses, remain at the throat of the casing after fireing, so the actual mechanism of the weapon does not change in the case of a recoil operated pistol. Mor on the technical stuff here: http://world.guns.ru/ammo/sp-e.htm

Since the C-7 and most other modern rifles are gas operated, the piston does not have to be gas tight (maybe a small venting hole in the middle), and of course, such a round will have less energy than a conventional round, but the main idea is you want to be "up close and personal", so rounds like this in Urban ops or in complex terrain woudl make sense, and the shooter can switch to magazines of regular rounds when targets are at long ranges or behind light cover. No solution is 100%, but there you go.

 

[KevinB]

5.56mm relies on velocity as part of its mechanism of wounding -- especially in close.  I would fight any attempt to lower the velocity.

Suppressed 5.56mm sounds like .22LR (kinda) -- we dont need subsonic ammuntion or capabilties -- and I would suggest rather than look for a specific niche for that sort of requirement (at it can exist outside convention requirements) that then a specific platform be utilised to do so --Subsonic rifle rounds tend to be in pistol calibre effectiveness - it can be better then just to use a subsonic pistol (.45 230JHP for instance) for that role or even a crossbow with a poison filled bolt perhaps?

Back to the suppressor and mounts

The KAC mount has a index pin cut on the flash hider and is slightly longer than the M16A2/C7 standard flashhider

But still can use the bayonet and BFA


The OPSINC 12th model (and most of the others)

On the brake itself a thread protector is removed and the suppressor is threaded onto the brake -- it buts up against the barrel collar (the silverish thing in front of the gas block).


The only negatives to supressing the M16FOW is the increased backpressure (higher port pressure - which results in a higher rate of fire, increased fouling, and a decrease in bolt round lifespan).

 

[KevinB]

;D -- dude I dont have Attention whore written on me for nothing 

I am trying to see if MG34 will allow to do up some of his Team Canada stuff into patches for the uniform and helmet  ;D

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I-6 thanks for the education 101 on suppressors, I am guessing that the idea is to reduce significantly the muzzle flash and sound, but not eliminate it entirely, making it easier to achieve, correct?

 

[KevinB]

Colin -- yeah -- bullet flight noise will make it impossible to get movie quiet anyway...

 

[a_majoor]

Thinking about the ammunition equation, much of the blast and flash is due to the excess gas expanding out the barrel. Has anyone studied the effectiveness of "short loading" an otherwise conventional round to reduce the amount of gas being expelled? The other question might be has anyone studied exotic powder chemistry to deal with these effects.

In a way this is a reprise of my earlier post, except dispensing with the mechanical means of eliminating flash and blast effects. (reduced terminal ballistics are noted).

 

[TCBF]

If the barrel was long enough, muzzle blast and flash would be negligable.  But, that's too long a barrel.  If you load the cartridge case with a propellant that is entirely consumed in a 20" tube and still gives you the same MV and ME, your time pressure curve is going to resemble a verticle line and convert your chamber into the world's most inconvenient fragmentation grenade.

 

[T44D]

I was goin to say, slap a scope on that thing it it would probably make a good sniper rifle  

The 5.56mm is an effective weapon calibre up to 300 metres....after that it loses alot of punching power........I was hitting targets with scope out to 7-800 metres, upon inspection of the target(Full Size Body-Rubber density) the projectiles had only penetrated the surface.

The Armies of NATO's decision to switch to the 5.56 in the Eighties was that a Soldier could carry more ammo. He could also lay down more fire because of the larger ammo load. But the biggest reason, was that if you wound an enemy, it takes at least 2 other soldiers to remove him from the battle field. The enemy are more apt to tend to wounded and also, if you kill their buddy it would only enrage them. Battles today are won through attrition not demolition of enemies numbers

 

[1feral1]

The 5.56mm is an effective weapon calibre up to 300 metres....after that it loses alot of punching power........I was hitting targets with scope out to 7-800 metres, upon inspection of the target(Full Size Body-Rubber density) the projectiles had only penetrated the surface.

The Armies of NATO's decision to switch to the 5.56 in the Eighties was that a Soldier could carry more ammo. He could also lay down more fire because of the larger ammo load. But the biggest reason, was that if you wound an enemy, it takes at least 2 other soldiers to remove him from the battle field. The enemy are more apt to tend to wounded and also, if you kill their buddy it would only enrage them. Battles today are won through attrition not demolition of enemies numbers

My fellow EME brother,

Firstly, welcome to the site.

What type of ammo were you using? What twist of bbl, 1/7in, 1/9in, or 1/12in?  M193, SS109 or variant? Military or Milspec? Factory commercial? Reloads? Ball, SP? This does not sound like a military venture either.

Please back up you claims with more detail.

Standard 5.56 X 45mm FN SS109 penetrates US M1 steel helmets and flak jackets at 800m. M193 does not. The SS109 out performs it's lighter 55gr M193 predecessor by far. Thats from a stk std 508mm bbl, 1/7in twist.

The wound produced by the standard FN SS109 causes much more trauma to the human body than 7.62mm NATO and 7.62mm M43 ball ammo.

Canada, USA, UK, and Australia (and others) produce this variant of ammo, and its the stock standard in my 10 mags I have right now. I am fully confident that it will drop any threat without difficulty. In Iraq and Afghanistan our Australian Forces have had no problem sending the enemy to allah using this. Like all small arms ammo, it does have its limitations, with the US introducing a heavier 5.56mm bullet again recently. Search on here for it, and here is some info (Mk 262 Mod 0)

Personally, I'd rather be killing my enemies than wounding them. Enraging then EN if you killed their buddies?  Bring 'em on! Thats a new one, and I hope you're kidding us. After going on 31 yrs in two armies, I must confess, whoever told you that, or wherever you read that, well, they were talking out their arse. Sorry, but thats plain foolishness, in my opinion.

Personally engaging targets up to 300m is not easy. On the move, running, body armour, overheating, adrenaline pumping, the noise of battle, smoke, exhaustion, general confusion, rds coming in, etc. The list goes on.

Even firing at moving targets, yes well on the move at say, 70kph from a hatch ontop of a LAV, in heat excessive of 45C, with CVC helmet on, body armour, EPS 21 ballistic goggles, again adrenaline pumping, etc, well its tough to get a strike even at 40-50m (or less even) with short 3-5 rd controlled bursts, while under fire too. The real world is by far different than relaxing back at some range firing from a bench, or some range prac at a class rge in Wx on a sunny Alberta spring day.

I can understand not filling in your Unit, (as I have done too due to operartional necessity), but why can't you say what rank you are, we already know your Corps and MOC/ECN, thats much more of a give away than simple rank.

Arte et Marte,


Wes

 

[KevinB]

Thanks Wes

 

[Big Red]

Managed to procure any mk 262 in the IZ yet Wes or just going to stick with ss109?  If you're riding in the family hatch might you might want to trade for a belt of 5.56AP to turn cars off...

+1 on all the debunking of the BS that was posted ref 5.56

 

[1feral1]

No, I have not, seen the green tipped M885, that all, but in our F88C Austeyr carbines, only Aussie ammo is authorised, and  have plenty of that to go around. Howeverever the Marines are coming in thick inot the FOB, so I am sure I'll be examining some of this new ammo sooner or later, but not shooting it.

Regards,

Wes

PS - Good to hear from ya Hales!

 

[shark]

I'm a little confused. I have been taught that the weight of the C7 is 3.9 kg and 4.4 kg with the 30 round mag. But than another instructor said it was 3.3 and 3.9. Which is it?

I know the Canadian DND webpage shows the C7A1 assault rifle at 3.3kg unloaded, 3.9kg loaded.  However a loaded 30 round mag is exactly 1.0 lb (0.45kg) (an unloaded mag is exactly 0.25 lb (0.11kg))  So a 0.6kg increase doesn't make sense. 

Colt Canada specs show the mass of unloaded C7A1 is 3.31 kg
Add 0.45 kg for the loaded 30 round mag, makes it 3.76 kg total.

Question:  Does anyone know if I am OK referencing Colt Canada? (are they the main supplier?)

 

[old medic]

Question:  Does anyone know if I am OK referencing Colt Canada? (are they the main supplier?)

Diemaco was recently bought out by Colt, so yes.

 

[AmmoTech90]

Loaded weight may include the ELCAN sight...

Edit
Actually no, because 3.3+.45=3.75 vice 3.9 and the ELCAN weighs more than 150 grams, so it probably comes down to an item manager reading some scales at an angle 10 years ago...

 

[redleafjumper]

Does the "unloaded" weight include the weight of the empty magazine?

 

[DirtyDog]

I'm quite unfamiliar with the C7 rifles and hoped to get a lot of info and opinions in this thread.  It wasn't until I had read some posts that I realised they were over 6 years old and that there were 50 pages to this thread!  Is there a more concise source of info regarding some of the subjects in this thread (possible replamenct, vs. m16/m4, variants, et.c).

Thanks and sorry if this post messes up this thread or if I am missing something.  It's just a bit jumbled, a lot to wade through and I don't have a lot of time on my shitty 28.8k connection.  Feel free to delete this after, was just hoping for a little direction.

 

[Freddy Chef]

40 year old training film/video.

http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=1333359893

Interesting to see what has and hasn't changed.

 

[Samsquanch]

Good video... Thanks. Reminds me of high school but with usefull information. Is the bushmaster AR-15 very similar to the c7? Looks similar in photos. I know it is .223. saw a deal at a local gun shop wondering if it is worth buying.
Cheers