The designs are good. But the production is terrible. OFB's quality control is absolutely horrendous and they have no interest in fixing it because they skim money from the top.
That's why Modi has started privatising ammo production.
Indian team goes abroad to scout for assault rifles, carbines for armed forces
- Thread starter Ashwin
- Start date
The designs are good. But the production is terrible. OFB's quality control is absolutely horrendous and they have no interest in fixing it because they skim money from the top.
That's why Modi has started privatising ammo production.
I'm not buying the weapon, i was saying that in context of what multiple sources were claiming that army has refused JVPC. MP5 is a great weapon for NSG sadly they can't buy more of them now.
Sir, from what i have read ,it appears that Insas 1b1 is a fine rifle with all its glitches sorted out , whats your views on it?
Also, please tell me what's wrong in using AKM as base platform for Insas..??
India has developed a new rifle as per specs of IA but now IA is making a fool of the nation. This new rifle is based on the most formidable 7.62 SLR. I will anyday go for that rifle.
I thought infantries prefer 5.56 to the 7.62 -- lower cost, low weight, low recoil, low projectile drop, faster follow up shots. Why then has IA gone with 7.62 based SLRs?
Last edited:
Till date, I have not come across one infantrymen who does not love the good old 7.62 SLR. I am a retd Naval Aviator so I am not the best of the authority on hand held guns. But in NDA and subsequently in Navy, I fired these weapons and also won Gold medal in Indian Naval Musketry championship in Coimbatore in 1990 in 100m SLR firing and 300m LMG firing.
Insas was an acceptable solution for the time. It used the best of three platforms, (AK, AR and FAL) to deliver on three specific requirements; logistics , reliability and operating cost.
>the 5.56 nato caliber is a cost effective, logistic easy, shooting friendly caliber. It's easier to shoot, has a sweet recoil impulse, weighs less and thus more rounds can be carried on person and shoots almost flat up to a good 300 yards and with iron sights its not that difficult to hit upto 500 yards.
> Insas derived heavily from the AK, (and not that I have anything against AK, I love AK's), but to keep the costs down the insas utilized same chrome lined barrel, same AK trunnion, same gas block, similar piston, similar notched hammer, similar trigger block, similar recoil spring, and similar stamped lower receiver. Internally the gun is 95% Saiga 5.56 auto rifle.
>IA at the time was convinced that it needs a gas block regulator as in fal and liked the left handed charging rod, and thats where insas got its gas block regulator and the charging handle location.
coming to your question on th using AKM as base pattern sure, there is nothing wrong with it, provided the system is developed like the Galil but OFB did not do that. Ak's have some inherent issues with full auto accuracy which is fine with 7.62x39 200 yard platform with iron sights, but when your engagements are at the 5.56's 400 to 500 yard ranges, you need a more accurate action, which does not have an offset reciprocating mass, in addition AK's trigger is not great for accuracy and Insas's is espepcially bad, with no discernible trigger reset and a very squishy pull .Insas also suffers for not having Good rails on the system (not on sheet metal stamped dust cover), poorly designed butstock comb, just look at regular soldiers and law enforcement, you will notice how poor the cheekrest for shooting position is.
I was excited with the MCIWS, which seemed like ARDE's attempt at making an Short Stroke gas piston on AR type rifle, so a Turkish MPT styled rifle derived from the HK416, and with 5.56 lower you would be able to swap uppers like 300 blackout, 6.5 gren, 6.8spc, 50 beowulf etc, but they bungled that up too. Indian Forces, not just the army, but all three services and paramilitary needs good, reliable and new generation of good quality firearrms which include small arms like assault rifles, long range sniper rifles, semi auto pistols, PDW's, full auto Carbines, urban sniper systems, DMR's, LMG' HMG's 30 mm multi purpose systems. I don't see OFB showing any intent on designing home grown world class alternatives to foreign systems, and what is even more painful that OFB is one of the oldest standing manufacturing organisations of India.
Edit: Long back when when Czechoslovakia was still one and a warsaw pact nation, kremlin shoved the AKM down thier throat. The pride in thier own small arms industry was such that they designed the VZ58, externally it looked like the AKM, but was nothing alike, an amazing rifle system which is quite hard to find in the civilian markets as they get gobbled up as soon as they show up. The czechs turned the AK design over it's head, with not one single part being interchangeable with the AK turning the VZ into a very short stroke piston, open bolt rifle.
Last edited:
hi,
It is not based on the SLR, it is actually based on a 7.62x51 nato version of Iszmash Saiga, it still uses a long stroke derived from the AK, recoil spring is housed above the receiver. The only reason to mistake it for the SLR is the charging handle location, it is the same rod catch handle like in insas.
I feel a modernized FN FAL 7.62x51 would have crushed the trials even now.
Last edited:
Most likely because it was too expensive to adopt a modern caliber like 6.5 gren or the 6.8spc.
I expected some improvement, since the Navy produces its own ships, ISRO launches its own rockets into space. But Babus wll be babus. What stops them from producing the AK series or its variants? as far as i know AK is still a versatile system and our armymen swear its rugged effectiveness. It looks like our Army is spoiled for choices and they want exotic weaponry when run of the mill ,tested weapon systems will work in the conditions described by army Requirements.
I tend to agree with you, maybe it is time OFB changed to a perform or perish type system. The Govt. Jobs stability should be removed, these people feel they are untouchable because of being in a Govt. Job and they will do a dharna and force the govt. to reconcile.
Invite private players make it 49% and 51% and also put up a clause if the Govt. job workers dont perform or deliver in a time stipulated manner, they will be removed from the job. Period!
As i said before there will be always rejections of home production. due to kickbacks involved. Navy produces its own thing, Only Airforce and IA are into rejecting the Home grown production and want Fancy foreign items.
In the end IN and ISRO also have to deal with the same babus that IA/IAF deal with.
IA is at present equipped with indigenous rifle - and has been for decades. And chances are, the future standard-issue rifles will also be indigenous (at least majority of them). Now, are those rifles 100% local designs? No. Neither are the technologies ISRO or IN uses 100% Indian.
In my view, that is irrelevant - as long as the required capability is delivered and local industrial capability is built up, I don't care if the rifle is designed in India or on Mars.
Although I see the merit in having a rifle calibre somewhere between 6 and 7mm...I personally feel the whole Multi-Calibre requirement was too much of a stretch and too complicated for us to adopt. But that's history now.
There is nothing exotic or overtly outlandish about the currently defined IA requirement. There's nothing fancy about a modern 7.62 or 5.56 rifle. There's nothing fancy about SCAR or ARX-200 or ACE 52 or Tavor 7AR. Yes, some of them are indeed more expensive than others but we cannot ask for a Mercedes at the price of a Maruti.
The service rifle of IA during the 1971 war (SLR) was technologically on par with the service rifles of most first-world countries during that time. Most of NATO/Western Bloc countries used same FN FAL designs as we did.
But what is the state of IA today? Our service rifles are technologically ~20 years behind those same countries with which we were on par in the 70s. Therefore I reiterate: there is nothing fancy about current IA requirement.
Even if we fulfill entire IA requirement for rifles (8 lac plus) with foreign-designed, locally-made guns, I have no problem. If first-world users like French Army and US Marine Corps have no problem buying guns from foreign companies (German in their case), I don't see why we should.
The govt will just privatise OFB, but it will take time. The private players have to get settled in first.
Tanks, IFV production etc is going to the private industry anyway.
It is more of a doctrinal change. 5.56 mm as we all know was adopted more to injure and not to kill. Thus to put more logistical strain on the enemy's forces. but with advent of current day warfare, or rather the lack of it, it is becoming clear that whatever destabilizing forces we encounter are not the conventional warfare types. So it was decided with to go for the 7.62 mm for having more .. ehm.. stopping power per shot. other reasons and benefits are there but those just helped made the decision making process more easy.
Last edited:
Doesn't make a whole lot of a difference. 5.56 has an effective range of around 600 m while 7.62 probably 800m. At that extra 200 m, your accuracy in thick forest undercover and mountainous terrain is nil. You end up carrying half the ammo and extra weight. Most militant ambushes would be within the 500 m range, the 5.56 can easily score within that range.
Modern calibres would be expensive but a generic 5.56 x 45 would be easy to manufacture in India as tooling and other machines would be available. They probably make those by the millions.
Most current tangos are low value expendables for the adversary, ours are not... ours are trained soldiers and policemen. Tangos are mostly armed with 7.62 mm rounds. Now it is not about scoring a hit, it is about what happens when you score a hit. The 5.56 has high velocity and being smaller what happens is when the bullets hits a tango, it passes through them like hot knife through butter, he is usually injured and continues firing even after being hit multiple times, at times even 5 bullet holes are unable to put em down (if you know anyone who has done ops in the valley or elsewhere, will confirm).
When a higher caliber bullet hits any part of the body it usually take out a chunk of body mass out of the exit wound, or it gets lodged in the terrorist's body resulting in high trauma, or a greater kill probability... thereby a quick kill/immobilization. So it is better to get a kill on first hit shot than risking our men, when the primary aim is to neutralize the tangos ASAP.
The IA and the PA come from the same pedigree of of battle, "Keep fighting till you can", Usually this mean the average PA and IA soldiers keep on fighting with even crippling injuries on the battle field, making them injured doesn't take them out of battle, medic facilities are provided only after the battle is over one way or the other. Also, use of 5.56mm counts when you are fighting a civilized enemy, which takes injured soldiers out of the battle, Neither the PA not the PLA are "civilized" to care for their own soldiers let alone the enemy.
The lower Logistics and and costs get nullified when you have to carry twice the number bullets to achieve the same objective.
in kargil...the pak machine gunners lodged up above the tops sometimes used to use anti material bullets against the indian charge.
it makes a whole lot of difference if we can kill the low value tango in one shot to the body, not just injure him. if i were in charge, i would approve softening the hideout with .50 calibre guns before sending the boys with full 7x62 rounds with hollow points. it makes total sense physically and psychologically.