“May I suggest that Mr. Bond be armed with a revolver?” (1956)(lettersofnote.com)
lettersofnote.com
“May I suggest that Mr. Bond be armed with a revolver?” (1956)
https://lettersofnote.com/2011/06/01/may-i-suggest-that-mr-bond-be-armed-with-a-revolver/
90 comments
Suppressors don't make any weapon quiet enough to be useful for hiding the sound of firing up close, as movies portray spies doing.
It's more about protecting your own hearing.
It's more about protecting your own hearing.
There are exceptions to every generalization, and this exception is pretty cool. The Welrod MkIIA is a semiautomatic pistol, designed for covert operations and assassinations, that is genuinely movie-quiet.
Ian McCollum (Forgotten Weapons) has an excellent video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d12AjvEsaHg
"When it's properly set up, this is as close as you get to an actual `silent gun`. You can, by all accounts, be within about 15 feet of this thing and not recognize that a firearm has discharged."
Ian McCollum (Forgotten Weapons) has an excellent video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d12AjvEsaHg
"When it's properly set up, this is as close as you get to an actual `silent gun`. You can, by all accounts, be within about 15 feet of this thing and not recognize that a firearm has discharged."
Note that it's still 122dB. That's quiet for a firearm, which is normally 140dB or more, but still louder than a car horn.
I think the proper way to read the quote is that you'll definitely hear the sound, but it won't necessarily be obvious that it has come from a firearm.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welrod https://www.chem.purdue.edu/chemsafety/Training/PPETrain/dbl...
I think the proper way to read the quote is that you'll definitely hear the sound, but it won't necessarily be obvious that it has come from a firearm.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welrod https://www.chem.purdue.edu/chemsafety/Training/PPETrain/dbl...
Wikipedia says 122db, but I don't think that's correct. Other sources say 73db, and describe the sound as less loud than that of the bullet impacting the woid of the target, at least with fresh baffles. (Too lazy to include links, first page google results)
Ah, Wikipedia also says that volume elsewhere in the article.
The linked Forgotten Weapons goes in to detail about the rubber seals, which the projectile pierces through when the weapon is fired.
The rubber partially reseals, but after a dozen shots or so the weapon degrades to the performance of a normal silenced pistol.
This probably explains the discrepancy. It is indeed very quiet, and my interpretation of the quote is wrong.
The linked Forgotten Weapons goes in to detail about the rubber seals, which the projectile pierces through when the weapon is fired.
The rubber partially reseals, but after a dozen shots or so the weapon degrades to the performance of a normal silenced pistol.
This probably explains the discrepancy. It is indeed very quiet, and my interpretation of the quote is wrong.
A modern equivalent based on an M&P 9mm:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aljJ2jPTa1c&feature=youtu.be...
It is Hollywood quiet.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aljJ2jPTa1c&feature=youtu.be...
It is Hollywood quiet.
You can't really tell volume from a youtube video for obvious reasons.
That's obviously the point of the progression from unsuppressed to maximum suppression; to convey the relative amplitude.
You can’t tell the SPL from a YouTube video but you can clearly tell the silencer reduces the attack and sustain of the gunshot noise by a substantial degree. It also doesn’t echo as much.
That was insanely quiet. I’ve never heard a suppressor that quiet before!
>The Welrod MkIIA is a semiautomatic pistol
It's not. It's a manually operated pistol.
It's not. It's a manually operated pistol.
In the game Rainbow Six, there was the description of the MP5SD a mp with integrated silencer and it was said, that it is only as loud as a click from a pen. I always believed that, because the game had a focus on realism, but 120+ DB is more close to reality and a bit louder.
An old colleague had a silenced .22 with sub-sonic rounds and it still sounded loud as fuck without hearing protection (we were dumb young people), but more like a car horn next to your face than an explosion, so my hearing is probably OK.
I also remember that game and the "pen click" description and I thought when he fired it the .22 would just click like that!
I also remember that game and the "pen click" description and I thought when he fired it the .22 would just click like that!
While suppressors do not make the weapon quiet, the firearm could be outfitted with subsonic ammunition which by itself is very nearly silent[1] even with larger rifle calibers[2]. Though to be fair the ballistics on subsonic ammunition doesn't even compare to supersonic ammunition which is why they see little practical use. But for a 007 type character who normally engages in very close range that should make complete sense.
[1] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0fb8CLXll9I
[2] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tTdMr8tdL4I
[1] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0fb8CLXll9I
[2] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tTdMr8tdL4I
[deleted]
Spies should carry crossbows more. They're pretty quiet.
But still reasonably loud.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ciIy3rqVh8
So a traditional hunting bow instead. Or a blowpipe with poison darts.
How fast does the poison act? I bet I could make a lot of noise if I felt a dart hit my neck
Silent But Deadly: Welrod Mk IIA
https://youtu.be/d12AjvEsaHg
MR73 Sniper Revolver in .357 Magnum
https://youtu.be/P1zEUGck8NE
Forgotten Weapons is great YT channel...
https://youtu.be/d12AjvEsaHg
MR73 Sniper Revolver in .357 Magnum
https://youtu.be/P1zEUGck8NE
Forgotten Weapons is great YT channel...
I've shot a Manurhin MR73 (not the 8" model featured, but a 4" one) and it's a really nice revolver. The action is smoother than a S&W but not as good as a Python. However the Manurhin will likely last longer than either.
So far as suppressing a revolver, the cylinder gap lets gases escape so it's not as quiet as it could be. An exception is the Nagant M1895 which another poster mentioned. It's ammunition will seal the gap to prevent the escape of gases. However it's truly horrendous trigger pull (12 lbs/5.5 kg for single action, 20 lbs/9.1 kg for double action) means that even James Bond would have difficulty in using it.
To give you an idea of how bad that is, find a 12 lb object in your house, suspend it from a string, then attempt to lift it by just curling your index finger.
So far as suppressing a revolver, the cylinder gap lets gases escape so it's not as quiet as it could be. An exception is the Nagant M1895 which another poster mentioned. It's ammunition will seal the gap to prevent the escape of gases. However it's truly horrendous trigger pull (12 lbs/5.5 kg for single action, 20 lbs/9.1 kg for double action) means that even James Bond would have difficulty in using it.
To give you an idea of how bad that is, find a 12 lb object in your house, suspend it from a string, then attempt to lift it by just curling your index finger.
> To give you an idea of how bad that is, find a 12 lb object in your house, suspend it from a string, then attempt to lift it by just curling your index finger.
Was curious so gave this a try with 20 lb, and it was tough, but not egregiously so.
Of course, I'm a climber during normal times, and my current routine has devolved to just hangboard training and gymnastic ring work.
And for reference, a 24-pack of 355 ml beer cans is 20 lb, if you're looking for appropriate household objects.
Was curious so gave this a try with 20 lb, and it was tough, but not egregiously so.
Of course, I'm a climber during normal times, and my current routine has devolved to just hangboard training and gymnastic ring work.
And for reference, a 24-pack of 355 ml beer cans is 20 lb, if you're looking for appropriate household objects.
It's made worse when you're trying to do that while also trying to keep a steady aim, as well.
> are there suppressors for revolvers?
There is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OTs-38_Stechkin_silent_revolve...
There is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OTs-38_Stechkin_silent_revolve...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nagant_M1895
It pushes the cylinder forward against the barrel and the casing is longer than the bullet, entering the barrel to form a seal.
It pushes the cylinder forward against the barrel and the casing is longer than the bullet, entering the barrel to form a seal.
The “hush puppy” pistol had a lock to stop the slide moving at all.
This is wonderful.
Details matter in fiction. It's a delicate balance to weave it in without obsessing over it to the detriment of other elements, but you need that texture to anchor the consumer's perspective in a place that seems real.
Lots of modern media fail miserably at this, e.g. many of the recent films by J.J. Abrams. I guess it's harder when the product is designed by a committee of people who don't really care in the same kind of way that Mr. Fleming clearly did.
Details matter in fiction. It's a delicate balance to weave it in without obsessing over it to the detriment of other elements, but you need that texture to anchor the consumer's perspective in a place that seems real.
Lots of modern media fail miserably at this, e.g. many of the recent films by J.J. Abrams. I guess it's harder when the product is designed by a committee of people who don't really care in the same kind of way that Mr. Fleming clearly did.
If you haven't read the original novels, they are an absolute treat. Very refreshing. There is great detail, but, almost never more than you absolutely need. It is used to set the pace, so, in the slower moments there will be some fluff details. Ultimately it makes for short novels, really novellas by today's standard. And frankly I love them all the more for that. It's easy to finish one in a single sitting.
How do you feel about the ones written post-Fleming? I have a couple compilations from Raymond Benson but have not found time to finish them yet. Was curious how the Bond others wrote compared, as I haven't read the originals yet.
John Gardner is actually pretty good. But by the time it gets to Raymond Benson novel Bond has become to much like movie bond and it just comes across as a caricature.
That sounds like exactly the type of escapism that I need right now. Are the novels meant to be read in order? If not, do you have one or two that would be good to start with?
They are in order, and Bond evolves based on his experiences in previous books. I would start with the first, Casino Royale and go from there. Bond of the novels is a more complex and less hero-worshipable character than his movie equivalent. My personal favourite is On His Majesty's Secret Service - I also loved the short story A Quantum of Solace (which has nothing to do with the movie of the same name).
And while I personally enjoy the novels, I will say that some of them have not stood up to the test of time as well as others, and now read as very dated. Not discouraging you from reading them, just be forewarned!
And while I personally enjoy the novels, I will say that some of them have not stood up to the test of time as well as others, and now read as very dated. Not discouraging you from reading them, just be forewarned!
OHMSS is also my favorite. Out of curiosity which would you say have not aged well? Dr. No has some issues racially as I recall but not that I can think of as outright offensive. I ask because I want to know what I have missed (sometimes the blinders are up and you don’t see what you should).
The published order of the books is not chronological order, but, I believe unless an author explicitly says so, one should always read their books in published order.
The way to look at them is they are glimpses into Bond's past. A few of them are several stories, in fact.
That being said, the first published is also Bond's first mission so no harm in starting with Casino Royale either way.
The way to look at them is they are glimpses into Bond's past. A few of them are several stories, in fact.
That being said, the first published is also Bond's first mission so no harm in starting with Casino Royale either way.
I never have, but now I'm putting them on my list. Thanks for the recommendation.
I don't know if it's only because it's a committee or because the person at the top J.J. Abrams doesn't care at all about it (it's also why he has kept overusing lensflare in a lot of his "movies")
Abrams cares about realism and continuity to the extent that in his universes you can see events happening on one planet from another with the naked eye
Exactly, when you're working at his level the resources and knowledge pool to hire people to obsess over the details. It's either a matter of ego, or he just doesn't value that sort of detail.
Interesting read.
The Walther PP series was a good future focused “fashionista” choice for Bond in film.
But I do think for the Bond character from the book, as well as the reality of the 50’s-60’s period, a small revolver would haves suited for both close range discrete carry self-defence, as well as offensive assassination.
From a more gritty/realistic viewpoint, targeted killings in a number of places around the world in the period often relied on revolvers due to their simplicity and reliability.
Ammunition failure was more common then, revolvers allowed the user the ability to sequence thru a stoppage/misfire.
Close combat stoppage drills then for semi-automatic pistols were not nearly as refined as today.
The Walther PP series was a good future focused “fashionista” choice for Bond in film.
But I do think for the Bond character from the book, as well as the reality of the 50’s-60’s period, a small revolver would haves suited for both close range discrete carry self-defence, as well as offensive assassination.
From a more gritty/realistic viewpoint, targeted killings in a number of places around the world in the period often relied on revolvers due to their simplicity and reliability.
Ammunition failure was more common then, revolvers allowed the user the ability to sequence thru a stoppage/misfire.
Close combat stoppage drills then for semi-automatic pistols were not nearly as refined as today.
In Doctor No (the novel,) Bond does end up with a revolver, albeit not meant to be his small gun.
“There’s only one gun for that, sir,’ said Major Boothroyd stolidly. ‘Smith & Wesson Centennial Airweight. Revolver. .38 calibre. Hammerless, so it won’t catch in clothing. Overall length of six and a half inches and it only weighs thirteen ounces. To keep down the weight, the cylinder holds only five cartridges. But by the time they’re gone,’ Major Boothroyd allowed himself a wintry smile, ‘somebody’s been killed. Fires the .38 S & W Special. Very accurate cartridge indeed. With standard loading it has a muzzle velocity of eight hundred and sixty feet per second and muzzle energy of two hundred and sixty foot-pounds. There are various barrel lengths, three and a half inch, five inch…”
Excerpt From: Fleming, Ian. “Doctor No.” Penguin Books Ltd (UK), 2009-07-19T11:22:25.
“There’s only one gun for that, sir,’ said Major Boothroyd stolidly. ‘Smith & Wesson Centennial Airweight. Revolver. .38 calibre. Hammerless, so it won’t catch in clothing. Overall length of six and a half inches and it only weighs thirteen ounces. To keep down the weight, the cylinder holds only five cartridges. But by the time they’re gone,’ Major Boothroyd allowed himself a wintry smile, ‘somebody’s been killed. Fires the .38 S & W Special. Very accurate cartridge indeed. With standard loading it has a muzzle velocity of eight hundred and sixty feet per second and muzzle energy of two hundred and sixty foot-pounds. There are various barrel lengths, three and a half inch, five inch…”
Excerpt From: Fleming, Ian. “Doctor No.” Penguin Books Ltd (UK), 2009-07-19T11:22:25.
> The Walther PP series was a good future focused “fashionista” choice for Bond in film.
Interesting opinion given that the PP dates from 1929! And of course the simplified PPK was a favourite of the Gestapo.
Interesting opinion given that the PP dates from 1929! And of course the simplified PPK was a favourite of the Gestapo.
Yes, the PP series were police guns, and the Gestapo were police.
It was also one of the first double-action semi-automatic pistol, making it popular with police forces the world over in the years after WWII, including (at least according to one source) the CIA
MAJ BOOTHROYD Walther PPK. 7.65mm with a delivery like a brick through a plate-glass window. Takes a Brausch silencer, with little reduction in muzzle velocity. The American CIA swear by them.
It was also one of the first double-action semi-automatic pistol, making it popular with police forces the world over in the years after WWII, including (at least according to one source) the CIA
MAJ BOOTHROYD Walther PPK. 7.65mm with a delivery like a brick through a plate-glass window. Takes a Brausch silencer, with little reduction in muzzle velocity. The American CIA swear by them.
Revolvers may look simple, but they have lots of small internal parts. More than a typical semi-auto.
And they are not reliable in practice. Especially considering that most semi-auto malfunctions can be cleared in a second with tap-rack, but revolver malfunction tend to lock it up for good.
And they are not reliable in practice. Especially considering that most semi-auto malfunctions can be cleared in a second with tap-rack, but revolver malfunction tend to lock it up for good.
[deleted]
> And they are not reliable in practice.
I'm curious what you mean by this. I agree that when a revolver experiences a mechanical malfunction it's usually serious and the gun is probably done until a gunsmith takes it apart. But that type of malfunction is extremely rare.
I'm curious what you mean by this. I agree that when a revolver experiences a mechanical malfunction it's usually serious and the gun is probably done until a gunsmith takes it apart. But that type of malfunction is extremely rare.
Not rare. I shoot USPSA and Steel Challenge and have seen all kinds of revolver malfunctions in matches. Cylinder binding because bullets walked out under recoil, broken firing pin, cylinder falling out on the ground, timing issues (chamber not aligned with bore axis), broken springs, etc.
Most are catastrophic, meaning that competitors cannot fix them on the clock, and if they don't have a spare gun they cannot finish the match either.
Most are catastrophic, meaning that competitors cannot fix them on the clock, and if they don't have a spare gun they cannot finish the match either.
People rarely use stock, unmodified revolvers for steel challenge or USPSA, and they rarely shoot factory ammunition. Almost all of the modifications are about intentionally trading reliability for speed.
I don’t dispute what you’ve seen but I don’t think it’s representative of what would be used for self defense or combat.
I don’t dispute what you’ve seen but I don’t think it’s representative of what would be used for self defense or combat.
The article has an update pointing at a BBC article with a video interview: "Time Out - The Guns of James Bond" https://www.bbc.co.uk/archive/time-out--the-guns-of-james-bo...
The video above can't be played in my country (BBC restrictions), I found a copy of it on Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJuEs3aMvOk
The video above can't be played in my country (BBC restrictions), I found a copy of it on Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJuEs3aMvOk
IIRC, in the later (non-Fleming) books, MI6 forces Bond to trade his PPK for an HK VP70 after a critical misfire.
Also, in the same book, it is revealed that Bond keeps a Smith & Wesson Model 29 .44 Magnum revolver(!) in the glove box of his modified Saab 900(!!)
Also, in the same book, it is revealed that Bond keeps a Smith & Wesson Model 29 .44 Magnum revolver(!) in the glove box of his modified Saab 900(!!)
I had a Saab 900 turbo, I loved it! Now I can say I drove a Bond Car
The 900 turbo was a genuine cool car back then. Among famous owners you find tennis legend and fashion icon Bjorn Borg (left in this picture):
https://images.svd.se/v2/images/272d7d06-9b1e-4825-a13e-1f26...
https://images.svd.se/v2/images/272d7d06-9b1e-4825-a13e-1f26...
As well as Ingemar Stenmark...
Speaking of Saab 900 Turbo. I saw one the other day when re-watching the movie Heat (1995), visible during the infamous street battle. Well worth a watch, if not just for the Saab.
What surprised me most is that he presented himself as the biographer of James Bond, as if he were real. I wasn't aware of that history.
It's a writer's technique somewhat similar to method actors who take on the character's persona as their own for the duration of a play or filming. It's almost like attempting to evoke in yourself a synthetic form of dissociative identity disorder to allow a "real" personality to live and grown independently of you while you interact with and guide it towards the outcome you're hoping for.
Pretty much as far from "kill your darlings" as one can get, tbh.
Pretty much as far from "kill your darlings" as one can get, tbh.
> Pretty much as far from "kill your darlings" as one can get, tbh.
Forking your own thinking process to have a secondary personality execute in parallel sounds as close to "killing your darlings" as possible, given that personality would presumably have their own favorite expressions and tropes.
Forking your own thinking process to have a secondary personality execute in parallel sounds as close to "killing your darlings" as possible, given that personality would presumably have their own favorite expressions and tropes.
At first read, I really thought Ian Fleming was being sarcastic in his letter!
It would have been nice if they'd included the original letter and not just the first paragraph of it.
The article starts with a scan of the entire letter. You need to enable javascript for the image to load.
[deleted]
No, the article starts with a scan of the reply.
It's adorable that Ian Fleming responds as if James Bond is a real person
I’ve found this to be a common trait amongst most authors I reach out to when commenting on the specifics of their work.
Really? Often they say things like "he prefers...", etc. in some sense speaking for their character not hypothetically but as if they were close to a real person that "does" things rather than "would do".
However pretending to be personally acquainted with the character is a step higher, I feel. How common is that?
However pretending to be personally acquainted with the character is a step higher, I feel. How common is that?
And then you have Alan Moore, who takes it a step further and actually sees his characters.
The ppk is an amazingly reliable firearm. Because it's a blowback design, it's very immune to limp wrist failures, in contrast to most semi-automatic pistols that delay ejection until chamber pressures go down. This limits you to .38ACP but the trade-off is increased reliability while maintaining a small package. These firearms can also be miniaturized, for instance, my Bersa Thunder cc fits into my front pocket and is quite a nice EDC (we have constitutional concealed carry in Kansas).
>This limits you to .38ACP
FWIW, I don't think PPKs have ever been chambered for .38ACP; most PPKs these days are chambered in .380 Auto, though there are older variants chambered for .32ACP, a modern variant chambered for .22LR, and a few other oddball variants that use other cartridges.
FWIW, I don't think PPKs have ever been chambered for .38ACP; most PPKs these days are chambered in .380 Auto, though there are older variants chambered for .32ACP, a modern variant chambered for .22LR, and a few other oddball variants that use other cartridges.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't .380 Auto and .380 ACP the exact same round?
It looks like you are correct. But not to be confused with the .38 Auto![1]
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.380_ACP
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.380_ACP
[deleted]
There was something I read--probably via HN--some years ago that suggested that the PPK wasn't that satisfactory an arm.
I can hit bullseyes at 25m with mine fairly reliably. The first trigger pull is a bit hard (if it isn't cocked), but after that it is smooth. Reliable way to safely lower the trigger is also a bonus. Quality and finish are as good as any of my pythons. Field stripping is super easy, the trigger guard is a lever which lets you just pull the slide right off.
What's not to love?
What's not to love?
When Princess Anne was nearly kidnapped her bodyguards Walther PPK jammed at an unfortunate moment.
After that it was withdrawn from service, in the bond novels that followed they pulled it an replaced it with something else (FN1903 iirc).
After that it was withdrawn from service, in the bond novels that followed they pulled it an replaced it with something else (FN1903 iirc).
Perhaps Bond could spend a day or two with Dirty Harry. Calahan could show him a thing or two about revolvers.
If a spy needs to be armed, they already failed.
In the new series, at the beginning of Casino Royale Bond literally 'earns' his 00 by killing 2 people.
He's not a spy, he's a thug, and the movies aren't really confused about that.
He's not a spy, he's a thug, and the movies aren't really confused about that.
Neither are the books. James Bond is a killer who found a respectable job.
CIA, KGB, Mossad, etc. have long and colorful histories of doing much more than writing reports.
The contemporary CIA has its own drone assassination program in-house. They’re not all flown by the Air Force.
I think it’s fair to call a member of an intelligence agency’s foreign service a “spy” even if their job is more covert action than intelligence gathering.
The contemporary CIA has its own drone assassination program in-house. They’re not all flown by the Air Force.
I think it’s fair to call a member of an intelligence agency’s foreign service a “spy” even if their job is more covert action than intelligence gathering.
This could depend on the motivations of their contact. If they need to impress e.g. warlords in order to manipulate, there is a good chance they will arrive armed. This is after all their ticket to the access they need, and they may only have one chance. Access operations are tailored to fit the target.
Would that mean that any assassination done with a weapon is a failure?
No, it would mean that spies don't do assassinations.
The primary job of a spy is to gather classified information, ideally without anyone noticing. Dead bodies tend to be noticed.
The primary job of a spy is to gather classified information, ideally without anyone noticing. Dead bodies tend to be noticed.
Actually, in all the Bond movies, I don't recall him ever having a mission to spy per your definition. Spies are typically used in situations between countries and many of Bonds foes clearly weren't countries, e.g., Goldfinger, Dr. No, Drax. They were just super criminals without allegiance to any country. The closest classic spy movie I recall was From Russia With Love but even that involved SPECTRE more than Russian.
I mean, fundamentally the spy thriller spy does anything a given country needs done in another country that would otherwise be considered illegal or an act of war, if the provenance of the order was known.
Bond was more of an assassin AND spy. A spassassin.
I did a quick search, and the first result was very interesting!
https://www.guns.com/news/2019/08/08/gun-question-can-you-pu...
Edit: more interesting pictures https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2016/06/15/why-cant-revo...