aditya g

Member
May 11, 2020
79
83
NA
FIQfcHWVUAE6xrc

Somehow I dont recall an Army officer wearing a sweater back at office, normally it is always a coat.
 

AbRaj

Senior member
Dec 6, 2017
2,490
1,826
Republic of Wadiya

Always wanted shorter INSAS1B1,SIG716I it's seems to be shorter by 4-5cms a big deal ,AK203 is almost or more than INSAS1B1,AK203 would be longer than SIG716I not a good thing,The downfall of SIG716I is 7.62NATO & It's A 'IMPORT' Without Any Home Grown Industry Backing It..
TBH INSAS always looked like crudely designed and hurriedly assembled science project of 60s, than a battle rifle made in a billion dollar company.
Even today all their designs are AK ripoffs with bits and pieces of pica-tiny rails shouldered here and there. Looks like they are still living in 60s at the cost of taxpayer's money and soldier's lives.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: SammyBoi

AbRaj

Senior member
Dec 6, 2017
2,490
1,826
Republic of Wadiya
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: TARGET

Jersey27

Member
Nov 26, 2021
8
8
New Zealand

not a bad replacement for jungle camouflage. Hope they adopt similar pixelated pattern for desert and high altitude/snow as well by changing the colour of green pixels to sandy and white respectively.
Also these stripes and badges too needs to go for westren style patches
army: Digital disruption, designed by NIFT: New combat uniforms for the Army | Delhi News - Times of India (indiatimes.com)
They should've got rid of the epaulettes. Those can be easy to grab in hand-to-hand combat. They don't serve any purpose other than displaying the rank insignia, and holding the lanyard (which itself is redundant in a combat uniform).
 

AbRaj

Senior member
Dec 6, 2017
2,490
1,826
Republic of Wadiya
They should've got rid of the epaulettes. Those can be easy to grab in hand-to-hand combat. They don't serve any purpose other than displaying the rank insignia, and holding the lanyard (which itself is redundant in a combat uniform).
IA is not very fond of using common sense.
After decades of juggling with different camouflages, they decided to go with pixilated form of existing camouflage without much needed upgrades. It looks like 20th century avatar of 19th century combat fatigue.
Just compare huge jump Russians have done with their ratnik infantry combat system. But it’s very much expected from IA, Infact anything more would have been surprising.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jersey27

AbRaj

Senior member
Dec 6, 2017
2,490
1,826
Republic of Wadiya
I may sound like ranting but not so long ago when all other armies were asking for AR with better ergonomics, battle effectiveness and modern accessories like reflex sights with integrated magnification, and higher modularity, IA was insisting on things like sandook type carrying handle, bayonets, wooden stock etc. And when they got to know about modularity by reading brochures (Brochuritis as one famous Navy Pilot calls it ) on defence expos, they want overboard with it by demanding “unobtanium” by demanding ability to change multiple types of barrels on field during active combat.
That’s why I believe this recent procurement of Sig 716 and Modernised AK 47 ( marketed as AK203) will give them exposure to 20th century small arms (TAR is only for special forces) to otherwise soldiers that are habitual to 60s era OFB Craps ie forced onto their throats by successive governments.
@Jersey27
 

KUNAL BISWAS

Active member
Jul 30, 2021
84
193
INDIA
TBH INSAS always looked like crudely designed and hurriedly assembled science project of 60s, than a battle rifle made in a billion dollar company.
Even today all their designs are AK ripoffs with bits and pieces of pica-tiny rails shouldered here and there. Looks like they are still living in 60s at the cost of taxpayer's money and soldier's lives.

1B1 > SIG716I ( fact ) .. ;)
 

Ankit Kumar

Team StratFront
Nov 30, 2017
3,613
3,475
Bangalore