Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

Dumpshock Forums _ Shadowrun _ RL difference between a silencer and a supressor?

Posted by: Moon-Hawk May 5 2006, 02:39 PM

Oh mighty gun-nuts, I beg your wisdom.
Silencers are for SA weapons, supressors are for BF/FA, at least in SR. But what's the difference? I don't understand why there would be two different devices. Are they constructed differently?
I'm sure this is a long answer to a simple question, but just for the record I'm not particularly interested in changing SR or anything, I'm just trying to learn a little about guns.
And oh yeah, HOW DO FIREARMS REALISM!?!?!?!?!?1

Posted by: HMHVV Hunter May 5 2006, 02:48 PM

From what I know of the subject (which admittedly comes from other RPG sources), there isn't one, really. Suppressors are the proper name for silencers, from what I've heard, so they're one and the same.

My guess is that SR used two terms to differentiate between Pistol silencers and SMG or higher ones.

Posted by: Moon-Hawk May 5 2006, 03:14 PM

Oh, so it's just so it's just an easy way to track the different prices/availability/etc. of the same basic device, but in a small size for pistols and a larger size for larger weapons? Hmmm, that almost makes sense. But what about machine pistols? If that's the only difference, then I'd think you'd use (in Shadowrun, now, not RL) a "silencer" for pistols/machine pistols, and a "supressor" for SMG's, MG's, AR's, etc.

Posted by: Austere Emancipator May 5 2006, 03:16 PM

QUOTE (HMHVV Hunter)

Right. Sound suppressor sounds more formal, but silencer means the same thing -- unlike magazine/clip.

If you're using quality suppressors, the technology is the same regardless of whether you're suppressing a bolt-action, semi-automatic or fully automatic weapon. There isn't necessarily any difference in size, etc. either. For example, http://guns.connect.fi/rs/MG.html are tiny, while http://guns.connect.fi/rs/50cal.html is huge. Or compare http://guns.connect.fi/rs/L1supp.html to a http://www.johnsguns.us/images/Rem700-sm.jpg -- the latter is no doubt much more effective, but it's also far bigger than the one meant for the select-fire rifle.

Increased heat retention is a problem for repeated shooting with suppressors. A machine gun with a hefty suppressors would overheat significantly faster than one without. Not that there's much point in suppressing an MG in combat in the first place.

http://matrix.dumpshock.com/raygun/basics/suppress.html at Raygun's site.

Posted by: KarmaInferno May 5 2006, 03:26 PM

http://www.panzerbaer.de/images/bw_pzh_155mm_m109_schalldaempfer_wtd_meppen-001.JPG

-karma

Posted by: Austere Emancipator May 5 2006, 03:29 PM

Ahh, good ole camo wang...

Posted by: Moon-Hawk May 5 2006, 03:34 PM

Well, Raygun's site pretty much answers any questions I could possibly have about supression.
Thanks.

Posted by: Kremlin KOA May 5 2006, 05:00 PM

QUOTE (KarmaInferno)

http://www.panzerbaer.de/images/bw_pzh_155mm_m109_schalldaempfer_wtd_meppen-001.JPG

-karma

You know

I thought I could keep my GF satisfied

But how can I compete with THAT

Posted by: Fire Hawk May 5 2006, 06:37 PM

Um...

What's the point of silencing an artillery cannon? If you're hitting your target from several kilometers away, does it *matter* if the poor bastards at G-0 wouldn't be able to hear the thing go off from that distance anyway? Besides, you've silenced the cannon, but what about the shell?

Posted by: Kagetenshi May 5 2006, 06:44 PM

So the neighbors don't complain.

~J

Posted by: Foreigner May 5 2006, 10:12 PM

Fire Hawk:

I think that the main reason for silencing an artillery piece is to prevent the concussion caused by firing the weapon from stunning *your own* troops, rather than the enemy's.

Kagetenshi:

IIRC, Hiram Maxim, who invented the silencer sometime around the dawn of the 20th Century, made silencers for everything from .22 rimfire pistols all the way up to a silencer for a 4" artillery piece.

The Maxim Silencer Company also made automotive mufflers (the technology is pretty much the same).

An acquaintance of mine owned an antique (1930s-vintage, I think) diesel generator. The beastie's muffler had an attached bronze plate stamped "MAXIM SILENCER CO." .

--Foreigner

Posted by: Austere Emancipator May 5 2006, 10:46 PM

The 155mm howitzer suppressor that was linked above was made precisely so that neighbors wouldn't complain. I have not heard of any modern attempts to sound suppress artillery for any other reason -- which doesn't mean no such attempt has been made.

Posted by: mfb May 5 2006, 10:54 PM

QUOTE (Austere Emancipator)

I have not heard of any modern attempts to sound suppress artillery...

that only makes sense, doesn't it?

Posted by: Raygun May 6 2006, 01:22 AM

QUOTE (Foreigner @ May 5 2006, 10:12 PM)

IIRC, Hiram Maxim, who invented the silencer sometime around the dawn of the 20th Century, made silencers for everything from .22 rimfire pistols all the way up to a silencer for a 4" artillery piece.

Hiram Percy Maxim did not invent the silencer (his father, Hiram Stevens Maxim, did invent the machine gun, though). He was just the first person to come up with a design that sold reasonably well. In fact, http://www.maximsilencers.com/ still exists today, though it doesn't make firearm sound suppressors anymore. There are a few European patents that outdate his first 1908 patent by a couple of decades, and there are probably older ones that I'm not aware of. People have been attempting to suppress firearms since at least the flintlock days.