Seal Weapons

[Silent Fart]

I was wondering if seals can carry any pistol of there choice? If so what are the most popular choices?

[Fred]

misterchief, please refrain from inaccurate postings. If you are just venturing a guess at things you don't know much about, make that clear (as is clearly the case here).

[DCH]

Certain amount of 'accountability'applies if you insist on using a name like yours on this board, Please use discretion and don't discredit the rank nor the branch.

Thanks

[Tuck's]

I've seen SEALs armed with anything from a .45 to a .357 Magnum revolver,as far as i know SEALs are at liberty to choose their own sidearm.
but please correct me if i'm wrong, i'm no expert

Mark

[Sosah]

As far as I know wouldn't the most common sidearm be a SIGP226? The HK Mk 23 SOCOM (OHWS) doesn't seem to be very popular (correct me if I'm wrong tho). I've had the good fortune of handling one awhile back. Large gun, very robust. Trigger pull as I recall was fairly heavy but I guess that's to be expected with a DA pistol that was intended for very rough conditions/handling.

[Sosah]

Sorry man I'm not trying to be an asshole or anything but what are you talking about? You can fit a SIG or any 9mm pistol with suppressor just as easily as you can fit any other gun with a suppressor. And subsonic ammo is just as available in 9mm as it is in .45. And where did you hear about the US going back to the .45? The US already has a contract with 'BERETTA' for the M92FS (M9). Why would they take a step back and go back the 1911? Or can I assume you're talking about the HK Mk23? Highly unlikely considering the Mk. 23 carries a price tag of over $2000 bucks per pistol as compared to the relatively affordable price of the Beretta. Not very feasible IMO. The only thing I've heard about are SOCOM units supposedly adopting the Mk 23 OHWS hence it's moniker: "HK Mk 23 SOCOM".
The .22 BS that you're spouting I can only guess can be traced to watching one to many A&E specials. Stopping power is an overused term by the uninformed. While the .45 may have a harder hitting round 9mm has it's benifits. Namely a flatter shooting trajectory at greater ranges and a higher mag capacity. Needless to say both are quite lethal.

[Mac679]

the only recent .45ACP addition that I'm aware of besides the MK23 Mod 0 is the USP Tactical which has replaced the MK23 for the US Army due to the MK23's inherent design flaws. If I remember correctly, someone told me the Navy is the only service still using the MK23.
on the subject of subsonic 9mm, it's widely available-think of the amounts that were put through MP5SD variants when it was a wide use SOCOM weapon.
I do believe standard .45ACP ammunition is subsonic
the M9 has not been replaced. the M9 is a standard issue weapon, you'll find it on Infantry officers to MPs
.22's are easy to supress and have been used ( ie the High Standard surpressed .22 used by SOG as well as the British Welrod also used by SOG ), but they were used more for prisoner snatches than sentry removal ( if I remember correctly )
Mac

[Sosah]

USP tactical huh? Never heard that before but it definitely is a better idea over the Mk. 23.

[shurefire]

Masterchief- You are starting to sound like a broken record. No offense intended but all of your opinions and viewpoints seam to me come from just reading books, I probably have read a few of the same ones. Just because you read a few books and some SOF's don't go around spouting stuff that has no backing. IMHO you don't know what the hell you are talking about and your posts on here is just static to me. You act like you're an expert or something. There are quite a few TRUE experts on here that will probably agree with me that you have no idea what you are talking about. To me all the stuff you are saying sounds like plagiarized drivle straight from Marcinko books and SOF's. I don't want to start a Flame War here, I don't mean to insult you personally. The purpose of this board is for the BTDT's to inform/assist/support the men and women interested in Special Operations. It is not intended for the purpose of misinformation given by people who believe their expertise is certified by means of reading some novels or watching the Discovery Channel. I say take heed like me and listen to the Been There Done That's like I have come to do and retain that knowledge. I used to be just like you and believed that I knew everything about firearms and special warfare, but I was sorely mistaken, you will be too. I encourage you to ask questions instead of answering questions with no validation at all. That's just my dos centavos.

[recce_o]

Mac679:
The porting on the MP5SSD starts almost at the muzzle, to reduce gas pressure and hence velocity to subsonic levels. My understanding is that it is intended to be used with standard velocity 9mm rounds, not subsonic rounds. The standard velocity rounds are reduced to subsonic by the porting in the barrel. If you use subsonic rounds, the velocity will be reduced too much, resulting in decreased lethality. If I'm wrong please let me know.

P.S. I think the Welrod was in either 32 ACP or 9mm, but not 22.


CORRECTION: I meant to say that the porting starts almost at the CHAMBER.

[This message has been edited by recce_o (edited 04-23-2000).]

[Mac679]

recce,
wouldn't know, I've never used one http://www.specialoperations.com/ubboard/wink.gif
on the Welrod, you might be right, I'll look it up and get back to you

Mac

[Sosah]

Aside from the MP5's baffled suppressor the gun also makes use of integral suppression within the gun itself. I can't go into detail as to how the system works because I honestly just don't know. I've spoken to someone once who explained the whole suppression system to me but that was quite awhile back. I think recce_0 is correct however I've heard of the MP5 SD's being able to fire standard rounds as opposed to sub-sonic.

[Duster]

hey Sosah, what do you mean "a step back with the 1911"? The 1911 is a fine gun.its a little more durable then the m9. the first batches of the m9 developed fissures on the receiver. and as far as stopping power, i'd rather have a 230 grain round any day of the week over the 9mm. But i do think the Mk 23 needs alot more work to be a reliable sidearm. the USP tactical would be a good choice from what i heard (i never fired one). Sigs are good. i like glocks (except that stupid Safety Action trigger crap) over sigs. But if i had to pick one it would have to be the 1911.

[This message has been edited by Duster (edited 04-21-2000).]

[Sosah]

Yeah true, step back may be a little harsh. The M92 was not the best gun and you're correct the 1911 is still a fine weapon especially some of the beautiful Para-ordnance pistols currently available. I was merely stating that since they already went to the trouble of going with the M9 why would they bother going to the trouble of going back to the 1911. I personally like the DA\SA guns a little better than SA only or DA only pistols but that's my opinion. 9mm, although not packing quite the punch of say a .40, or .45 you have to admit is more convenient when you consider that it is NATO standard. SIG's are awesome guns. Glocks are pretty cool too. But as you said the trigger safety is a little annoying. The USP is great. Very ergonomically designed. I haven't had the chance to examine the Tactical up close tho.

[Duster]

I didn't mean to come off as pissed. Its just im a firm believer in the 1911. as far as the USP Tactical, it looks to me like a USP with a threaded barrel like the one on the MK 23.

[This message has been edited by Duster (edited 04-22-2000).]

[Mac679]

Duster,
Esentially it is. It's also a lot smaller ( the MK23 has been nicknamed the "Anchor" by some ). There's a difference in the threaded barrel as well. On the MK23 the threading is a right twist, so is the barrels twist. It's possible to loosen the surpressor this way. The USP Tactical uses a left hand twist on it's barrel threading so the surpressor will get snugged up a bit rather than coming loose. Also the USP Tactical has a slightly smaller size due to the fact that it doesn't have a seperate decocking lever like the MK23 does. Another feature that the USP Tactical has ( besides the threaded barrel ) is adjustable sights. Anyone wanting more info on it I'd suggest asking JY over on WEPNet
Mac

[Silent Fart]

The standard seal sidearm is the sig 226. I would take that pistol over any other made! Watch the show the silent option, during the cqb training the operator is loading a 226.

[REEL STEEL]

As far as weapons go you should ask K_miller or someone else who has probably or might have actually fired round from all of the guns in question I'm not sure though. I did hear of the military, although I can't honestly say what branch, switching to a .45. It didn't say it was a USP H&K, that I'm sure of...I will see if I can find any other info on that subject because I don't know for sure.


[This message has been edited by REEL STEEL (edited 04-22-2000).]

[Rouge Spear]

The Hk P7 was popular for a time as were the SIG 9mm then the SOCOM version of the USP .45 came out--I personally think that the SEALs should look at the glock series of pistols, those work wonderful for water-to-land operations

Colt 1911 .45's are really only used now by the USMC Force Recon, however SEALs that are part of the MSPF uses .45s along with the marines

[Sosah]

Duster, no worries. Your post didn't come off as being offensive. As for the USP tactical I remember it having as stated adjustable almost bo-mar like sights in addition to the threaded barrel. In comparison to the HK Mk. 23 it is indeed much smaller. The Mk 23 is VERY big.

[Duster]

yeah i saw the sights. wouldnt mind checking it out. cant imagine anyone liking the P7 for anything more than a back-up gun. atleast thats my opinion.