Indian Army News & Discussions - 11 June 2014

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 18 Jun 2014 03:56

One bad thing though is that what a lot of us were saying (and secretly hoping that we were wrong) is that several have been political chiefs, have played more politics and let the services needs go unfulfilled. Others were plain unimpressive. Deepak Kapoor, JJ Singh, Bikram Singh - each has been singularly adept at playing the political games and the IA's needs have remained unfulfilled. Bears remarking that the IAF & IN got far more of what they aimed for. VP Malik before them, his initial handling of Kargil was lack luster. Less said the better about JJ and DK and the IA's condition correlated to their leadership.
Bikram Singh, claims are that he was tough in public posturing, but privately, went along with the GOIs, dont push the Pakis too hard policy. Given that the new chief is from the same so called Line of Succession stuff, that put paid to VKS (arguably he had a vision even if his acrimonious battle with the MOD overshadowed his work), one hopes he is different. Otherwise, not a good time for IA which seems to be suffering from an excess of political leadership.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 18 Jun 2014 04:28

Karan M wrote:RV, he did much the same in the Siachen episode too. First played along with MMS and gang for a sell out. Then did a volte face and said, IA does not approve. LOL, more political than the politicos themselves.

As Supreem Court advised Gen VK Singh to bend with the wind, this general knew whcih way it was blowing better than the politicos.

chaanakya · Post by **chaanakya** » 18 Jun 2014 08:43

ramana wrote:After dismantling TSD the Army chief has been part of problem and needs to resign for having failed to discharge his duty to the service and country.

TSD was dismantled on the excuse that there was no express sanction for raising the Unit under COAS from the Govt. A statement of intent post 26/11 did not amount to sanction for creation of the Unit. This can be easily remedied by the Present Govt by issuing orders to COAS with specific mandate. However , question remains ho much the present day Govt can repose full faith in current Brass given the murkiness in his appointment. Once Gen Suhag assumes charge he will retire only in Nov 2016 till then Govt will have time to search for an Officer in whom it can have full faith. However if Suhag fails to act on Paki violations without escalating the situation then he can be asked to go earlier as well aka Joshi. Not a good scenario but nevertheless probable. Key is to see how COAS becomes part of solution rather than problem. I feel Gen Suhag with his variety of experience could be most suited to ensure that TSD is revived and made effective as Covert op unit. He can not have the luxury of following the congis line once he is in the saddle.

Gen BS , as suspected, proved to be BS.

Yagnasri · Post by **Yagnasri** » 18 Jun 2014 13:47

Proposed COAS said to be a solider repute as a no nonsense guy. So he may or may not be a mafia mole. But utter failure of BS selected by MQ and the manner in which the proposed COAS sought to pushed through gives scope for serious suspicion, which is not a healthy position to be in. 3 times failed to get into staff college? Once again raises questions. Either staff college is useless or the COAS. Both can not be great.

So called seniority rule should go and a robust selection process for top level defense positions is the need of the hour.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 18 Jun 2014 14:22

The prestige, honour of the Army must not be trifled with - BG Verghese

VK Singh should have been censured and dismissed for stepping far beyond his limits, politicising the armed forces and speaking with a forked tongue. How can he remain a minister for the Northeast after proclaiming General Suhag a defender of murderers in the very area over which both will have oversight? The man should go. He gave his solemn word of honour thrice to earn his next promotion and broke his word every time as the Supreme Court noted. And then he had the temerity to defy and sue the previous government while in uniform on a bogus age controversy, something he is attempting to do again as a minister, in clear contravention of his oath of office and collective Cabinet responsibility.

On the entrance to the Chetwode Hall at the Indian Military Academy, Dehra Dun, is emblazoned the armed forces’ hallowed credo: “The safety, welfare and honour of your country comes first, always and every time. The honour, welfare and safety of the men you command come next. Your own comfort and safety come last, always and every time”. VK Singh forgot this and put his own petty “comfort” first and always, every time. Is this to be the mettle of India’s ministers?

This is a serious a matter. The incident underlines the importance of appointing a full-time Defence Minister immediately. The Finance Minister is burdened, and is a stranger to Defence. Less government cannot mean no government. Mr Modi will be making a disastrous start if he does not act swiftly. VK Singh is expendable. The honour and prestige of the Army are not.

rakall · Post by **rakall** » 18 Jun 2014 15:04

ShauryaT wrote:The prestige, honour of the Army must not be trifled with - BG Verghese

VK Singh should have been censured and dismissed for stepping far beyond his limits, politicising the armed forces and speaking with a forked tongue. How can he remain a minister for the Northeast after proclaiming General Suhag a defender of murderers in the very area over which both will have oversight? The man should go. He gave his solemn word of honour thrice to earn his next promotion and broke his word every time as the Supreme Court noted. And then he had the temerity to defy and sue the previous government while in uniform on a bogus age controversy, something he is attempting to do again as a minister, in clear contravention of his oath of office and collective Cabinet responsibility.

On the entrance to the Chetwode Hall at the Indian Military Academy, Dehra Dun, is emblazoned the armed forces’ hallowed credo: “The safety, welfare and honour of your country comes first, always and every time. The honour, welfare and safety of the men you command come next. Your own comfort and safety come last, always and every time”. VK Singh forgot this and put his own petty “comfort” first and always, every time. Is this to be the mettle of India’s ministers?

This is a serious a matter. The incident underlines the importance of appointing a full-time Defence Minister immediately. The Finance Minister is burdened, and is a stranger to Defence. Less government cannot mean no government. Mr Modi will be making a disastrous start if he does not act swiftly. VK Singh is expendable. The honour and prestige of the Army are not.

Utter piece of bull shit & total crap..

So the author considers "VK singh is expendable" - that shows the honour & prestige the author holds for the Army.. the same honour & prestige that the author is talking about protecting..

Why is "VK singh is expendable" ? - to protect what? In the name of honor & prestige, should the public completely turn a blind eye to "anything" happening in the army.. Is VKS wrong in highlighting that mistakes have been made by the forces, so acknowledge & accept.. Lay down the law, root out corruption within the forces to make them accepted with unyielding faith by the public..

too often that faith has been punctured by various transgressions, scams such as Sukna scam, Adarsh scam, allegations related to Tatra scam etc.

To be fair in his tweets VKS did not attack GenSuhag. He raised the issue of severe transgressions "by the unit".. was there a proper & thorough investigation into the incident to apportion responsibility.. Does the public know all details about the incident to pass a judgement? Is the "truth of the incident as we know it" as true as GenVKS leading a coup? Does GenVKS know details that we don't know? Without knowing the truth of the incident, for any person to attach motives to GenVKS and/or call him expendable is pure shit flowing out of the wrong end of the body.

I do not support the fact that Gen.VKS tweeted about it. He should have gone to his leader (Prime Minister) first, before expressing anything in public. But, his fault does not mean we can completely sweep the rest under the carpet.

Consider this:
1. The fact that the affidavit with language used go through amounts to "dereliction of duty" by the incumbent defence minister
2. If indeed the unit indulged in some kind of dacoity or any such acts, is it not the right step to hold the guilty responsible before the law? Why r officers being protected despite such acts?
3. Isn't the honor & prestige of army better served by accountability?
a. acknowledging the stuff like Jorhat incident or procurement scams.... and, taking measures to avoid a repeat of such incidents ?
b.By punitive precedents that act as deterrents rather than ignoring such stuff which might encourage repetitions in future!!
4. Ofcourse, (3) should also apply to civilian leadership & public servants as well as it applies to army.. but, have they even shown take care about "prestige & honor"?

sum · Post by **sum** » 18 Jun 2014 15:24

^^ Saar, just need to know the previous writings of this writer to know his stance on anything related remotely to BJP/its members

srai · Post by **srai** » 20 Jun 2014 04:56

If the IA is not ready for war due to lack of ammunition and firepower, it needs to look at indigenous options instead of foreign maal. You don't hear about GoI/MoD stopping/delaying orders for indigenous products. The avenues for corruptions are far less (and buying swadeshi is an easy sell politically).

negi · Post by **negi** » 20 Jun 2014 11:21

When it comes to IA's lack of preparedness let us not confuse the issue by making it a case of IA versus the GOI , IA is part of the GOI and when it comes to procurement and logistics believe me IA has as much redtape and layers of record keeping as any gobmint aphice. Remember it's housekeeping activities to this day have changed a little from British days , same with courts or any Gobmint aphice.

For procurement to be made corruption free the infinite chain of approvers needs to be done away with, the redundancy in terms of responsibilities between the IA top brass and MOD need to be removed for these two keep stepping on each other's toes, for instance MOD should have no say in evaluation or trials of a defense platform , MOD should strictly keep itself to passing relevant legislature to reform the existing rules or administration nothing more nothing less. Similarly the MOF too needs to be in loop and not come back in the end stating the selected platform is 'expensive' (the idiots should have realized and de-listed the platform a lot earlier and saved everyone's precious time , remember the IAF tanker saga ?) .

merlin · Post by **merlin** » 20 Jun 2014 23:32

What an utter chootiya this b g verghese is! A hack thoo on him.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 21 Jun 2014 11:04

Indian Army kicks off final carbine trials

http://www.janes.com/article/39829/indi ... ine-trials

The Indian Army began the final round of confirmatory trials in support of its requirement for 44,618 close quarter battle (CQB) 5.56 mm carbines and 33.6 million rounds of ammunition on 9 June, defence industry officials told IHS Jane's .

The Beretta ARX-160, Colt M4, and Israel Weapon Industries (IWI) Galil Ace carbines will undergo a series of tests at army establishments and weapon-testing facilities until the end of July. These include weapon sights, furniture, and ammunition trials.

The competing guns will also undergo a "mud test" to gauge their ability to operate in poor conditions, an evaluation all three failed during trials in 2012 in the Rajasthan desert and high-altitude regions.

uddu · Post by **uddu** » 21 Jun 2014 14:21

What about Modern Sub Machine Carbine? Again import?

kancha · Post by **kancha** » 21 Jun 2014 18:45

Are carbines even needed by the regular army in this age of assault rifles?
Who will be using them, considering that only about 40,000 are being sought?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 21 Jun 2014 22:23

44618 to be exact. Could be needed or else they wouldn't have placed the trials.
Colt M4 is the US model of AR-15.

..
The Beretta ARX-160, Colt M4, and Israel Weapon Industries (IWI) Galil Ace carbines will undergo a series of tests at army establishments and weapon-testing facilities until the end of July. These include weapon sights, furniture, and ammunition trials.

The competing guns will also undergo a "mud test" to gauge their ability to operate in poor conditions, an evaluation all three failed during trials in 2012 in the Rajasthan desert and high-altitude regions.

So how does the DRDO's MSMC stack up in the mud test?
Or is it vaporware?

Sanjay · Post by **Sanjay** » 22 Jun 2014 01:37

May I suggest something ? MSMC is a PDW that is really intended for self-defence and vehicle crews and short-range CQB. The carbines on offer are rifle calibre weapons which will serve a different purpose and are in effect shortened assault rifles.

vsunder · Post by **vsunder** » 22 Jun 2014 09:20

Sanjay: Your answer begs the question though, and it is asked out of ignorance, I am lead to understand that carbines are the weapon of choice of Special Forces, Paras etc. while assault rifles are the weapon for most infantry. So why this large order of carbines? Will they be to lace some members of the infantry in a unit with carbines, and the rest will be armed with assault rifles in a later order?
Rgds.
s.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 22 Jun 2014 18:06

Ready to take on any security challenge, even al-Qaida: Army

Sanjay · Post by **Sanjay** » 22 Jun 2014 19:28

vsunder wrote:Sanjay: Your answer begs the question though, and it is asked out of ignorance, I am lead to understand that carbines are the weapon of choice of Special Forces, Paras etc. while assault rifles are the weapon for most infantry. So why this large order of carbines? Will they be to lace some members of the infantry in a unit with carbines, and the rest will be armed with assault rifles in a later order?
Rgds.
s.

Very good question and the answer is more basic than anything - nomenclature.

The 9mm "carbine" is a submachine gun (we are using an old english term for the SMG - sub-machine carbine). Of course India just abbreviates it to "carbine".

But a carbine is really a short rifle (originally intended for cavalry). The weapons mentioned are really short rifles.

I rather suspect these carbines will be for SF units but also the Ghatak platoons and a portion may go to RR.

VKumar · Post by **VKumar** » 22 Jun 2014 22:20

India needs a dual policy - buy the best affordable foreign material whilst developing your own equipment.
If possible, buy through a JV that manufactures locally but start the imports immediately, as factories take time to be set up and get going. Do not wait to develop your own but give the forces good equipment immediately, increasing their confidence and performance. But plan to switch over to own developed product in few years and give adequate support and orders for own product even if it meets 90% of the criteria.

vaibhav.n · Post by **vaibhav.n** » 23 Jun 2014 12:45

Sanjay wrote:
vsunder wrote:Sanjay: Your answer begs the question though, and it is asked out of ignorance, I am lead to understand that carbines are the weapon of choice of Special Forces, Paras etc. while assault rifles are the weapon for most infantry. So why this large order of carbines? Will they be to lace some members of the infantry in a unit with carbines, and the rest will be armed with assault rifles in a later order?
Rgds.
s.
Very good question and the answer is more basic than anything - nomenclature.

The 9mm "carbine" is a submachine gun (we are using an old english term for the SMG - sub-machine carbine). Of course India just abbreviates it to "carbine".

But a carbine is really a short rifle (originally intended for cavalry). The weapons mentioned are really short rifles.

I rather suspect these carbines will be for SF units but also the Ghatak platoons and a portion may go to RR.

Within an Infantry unit, carbines are issued to Officers, JCO and NCO's at all Levels and also in the Battalion HQ. They will also be carried by some Specialist Platoons like the Pioneers and Anti Tank.

Example: In a 10 man strong Section the Section Commander and the Assistant Section Commander both are authorized to carry carbines with 128 rounds each.

Sanjay · Post by **Sanjay** » 23 Jun 2014 13:42

vaibhav - the carbine you speak of is the 9mm SMC. This is a very different beast to the new carbines and I don't think they might be issued on the same scale.

vaibhav.n · Post by **vaibhav.n** » 23 Jun 2014 14:29

Sanjay wrote:vaibhav - the carbine you speak of is the 9mm SMC. This is a very different beast to the new carbines and I don't think they might be issued on the same scale.

Sanjay,

I was only putting the point across that significant space still exists for Carbines in Infantry Battalions even if we standardize on a Assault Rifle at a Section/Platoon Level. You are right, there has been a decline of the slower pistol round from military carbines around the world. Plus the difference in terms of weight for both types of Firearms is minimal now.

Traditionally, carbines were issued to provide automatic fire capability to troops should they need to engage the enemy but otherwise kept out of the initial long distance firefight. These were generally in the form of Officers, senior NCO's or were used as porters to carry Man-Pack Ammunition.

Personally, the current weapons trials shed a lot of light on the future role of our Infantry units. The Army is moving with the times and has finally shed its thinking on full auto assault rifles. This was a long time demand from a younger generation officers to provide a full auto capability to an individual rifleman being important in the current scenario.

vaibhav.n · Post by **vaibhav.n** » 29 Jun 2014 02:02

Rohit,

I think you right all along with regards to 23 Div which does seem to form a part of 1 Corps. Any idea on the Indep Armoured Brigades with 1 and 10 Corps?

Its 6 Indep Armoured Brigade with 10 Corps I guess, I have not in all honesty seen that Formation Sign (Prancing Horse) before. Which one is that? 23 Armd Bde?

Link

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 29 Jun 2014 22:22

vaibhav.n wrote:Rohit,

I think you right all along with regards to 23 Div which does seem to form a part of 1 Corps. Any idea on the Indep Armoured Brigades with 1 and 10 Corps?

Its 6 Indep Armoured Brigade with 10 Corps I guess, I have not in all honesty seen that Formation Sign (Prancing Horse) before. Which one is that? 23 Armd Bde?

Link

My dear friend, I think you just managed capture a great piece of information here.

And here is why - that (I) armored bde placed in the I Corps column of flags is 14(I) Armored Bde flag which till recently has been part of 2 Corps! (and the other one is 6(I) Armored Bde; 23 (I) is with 11 Corps)

Check this 2006 news report about 2 Corps testing concepts of CSD in Jalandhar area with constituents from 1 Armored, 14 RAPID and 14 (I) Armored Bde taking part in the exercise. http://archive.indianexpress.com/news/c ... -may/2473/

This development can only mean one thing as per my limited knowledge - either a new independent armored brigade is being raised for 2 Corps or it will pick up one from 9 Corps. Most probably 16(I) Armored Bde.

vaibhav.n · Post by **vaibhav.n** » 30 Jun 2014 02:31

rohitvats wrote:
vaibhav.n wrote:Rohit,

I think you right all along with regards to 23 Div which does seem to form a part of 1 Corps. Any idea on the Indep Armoured Brigades with 1 and 10 Corps?

Its 6 Indep Armoured Brigade with 10 Corps I guess, I have not in all honesty seen that Formation Sign (Prancing Horse) before. Which one is that? 23 Armd Bde?

Link
My dear friend, I think you just managed capture a great piece of information here.

And here is why - that (I) armored bde placed in the I Corps column of flags is 14(I) Armored Bde flag which till recently has been part of 2 Corps! (and the other one is 6(I) Armored Bde; 23 (I) is with 11 Corps)

Check this 2006 news report about 2 Corps testing concepts of CSD in Jalandhar area with constituents from 1 Armored, 14 RAPID and 14 (I) Armored Bde taking part in the exercise. http://archive.indianexpress.com/news/c ... -may/2473/

This development can only mean one thing as per my limited knowledge - either a new independent armored brigade is being raised for 2 Corps or it will pick up one from 9 Corps. Most probably 16(I) Armored Bde.

Thanks!!
It could very well be the later. That leaves 2 Indep at Mamum and 3 Indep at Ratnuchak for 9 Corps. IIRC, 16 Indep used to be expressly tasked to make moves on the Supwal-Zafarwal-Dhamtal axis in case of a break-out by the Divs. I guess the rate of urbanisation has finally caught and could be a hindrance to any major Armoured movement.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 30 Jun 2014 09:01

^^^From what I know, 16(I) was earlier tasked with 1 Corps - this is a case of Corps swapping their (I) Armored Bdes. What remains to be seen is whether 14 (I) will move from Ambala to a new location under SW Command.

ArmenT · Post by **ArmenT** » 30 Jun 2014 10:17

ramana wrote:44618 to be exact. Could be needed or else they wouldn't have placed the trials.
Colt M4 is the US model of AR-15.

..
The Beretta ARX-160, Colt M4, and Israel Weapon Industries (IWI) Galil Ace carbines will undergo a series of tests at army establishments and weapon-testing facilities until the end of July. These include weapon sights, furniture, and ammunition trials.

The competing guns will also undergo a "mud test" to gauge their ability to operate in poor conditions, an evaluation all three failed during trials in 2012 in the Rajasthan desert and high-altitude regions.
So how does the DRDO's MSMC stack up in the mud test?
Or is it vaporware?

Note that Beretta ARX-160, Colt M4 and Galil Ace all use the 5.56x45 mm. cartridge, same as the INSAS. DRDO's MSMC uses a different cartridge size (5.56x30 mm.) and is a different class of weapon (more of a personal defence weapon or a SMG class rather than a true carbine, which the other three are)

vaibhav.n · Post by **vaibhav.n** » 30 Jun 2014 10:26

rohitvats wrote:^^^From what I know, 16(I) was earlier tasked with 1 Corps - this is a case of Corps swapping their (I) Armored Bdes. What remains to be seen is whether 14 (I) will move from Ambala to a new location under SW Command.

God, I really struggle when you put your head to stuff like this after a hiatus!!

Couple of clarifications i need help with.

1. Aren't 2/3/16 9 Corp's Armored Brigades, or that is old news?

2. If indeed, 16 is with 1 Corps then its is more puzzling with swapping operational control but not relocating them; cause i mean you would know they like to keep their Armoured Brigades with both Strike and Holding Corps closer to the starting line you know objective wise. Or have i got it wrong. 16 still is where they have been traditionally.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 30 Jun 2014 11:41

vaibhav.n wrote:
rohitvats wrote:^^^From what I know, 16(I) was earlier tasked with 1 Corps - this is a case of Corps swapping their (I) Armored Bdes. What remains to be seen is whether 14 (I) will move from Ambala to a new location under SW Command.
God, I really struggle when you put your head to stuff like this after a hiatus!!

Couple of clarifications i need help with.

1. Aren't 2/3/16 9 Corp's Armored Brigades, or that is old news?

There is some confusion here - in a pic similar to one you posted, 2, 3 and 16 were shown as part of 9 Corps. But it has been generally considered that 16 would go with 1 Corps. Here is a link to a more recent pic (a bit grainy, though) of 9 Corps with flags of formations under it. http://www.tribuneindia.com/2008/20080222/him2.jpg. You can make out the flags of 2 and 3 IAB. Flag of 16 is either missing or not visible.

2. If indeed, 16 is with 1 Corps then its is more puzzling with swapping operational control but not relocating them; cause i mean you would know they like to keep their Armoured Brigades with both Strike and Holding Corps closer to the starting line you know objective wise. Or have i got it wrong. 16 still is where they have been traditionally.
16 IAB with 1 Corps could be because of earlier AOR of 1 Corps in Gurdaspur-Pathankot-Sambha corridor. 1 Corps has traditionally fought in this sector and placing 16 IAB in Pathankot would've made sense. But to be honest, this all maya onlee. We can keep on second guessing IA while it does things which seemingly don't make sense!

Ankit Desai · Post by **Ankit Desai** » 01 Jul 2014 22:56

Sikh Regiment gets its 23rd battalion !!!!!!!!

It was a glorious day for the Sikh Regiment - one of the Indian Army's most decorated regiment - with the commencement of the raising of the 23rd battalion of the regiment at the Sikh Regimental Centre, Ramgarh Cantonment. Officers and jawans of the 23rd battalion the Sikh Regiment celebrated the memorable day with customary Gurudwara Sahib function , praying to the Almighty to shower His benevolent blessings on the battalion to achieve the pinnacle of regimental heritage.

To commemorate the historical event, a special sainik sammelan was held, which was presided by Lieutenant General GS Shergill, VSM, who is also the Colonel of the Sikh Regiment. He congratulated all ranks of the traditionally valiant 'Khalsas' on the new raising and exhorted them to be a motivated and cohesive fraternity and live up to the glorious legacy of the Indian Army and the Sikh Regiment.

Part of MSC ?

-Ankit

VinodTK · Post by **VinodTK** » 02 Jul 2014 06:53

Govt plans military training for people on China border

NEW DELHI: In keeping with PM Narendra Modi's principle of keeping friendly relations with neighbours but as equals and not inferiors, the government is planning to impart "military training" to people living in areas close to the China-Indian border. The idea is to integrate the border population with overall vigilance and security apparatus in the northeast and Jammu & Kashmir.

Sources within home ministry said the government plans to train border populations at the level of a paramilitary force and even give them arms training so that in times of emergency they can be utilized. The development comes days after fresh aggression from China in Pangong lake in Ladakh.

"Even otherwise border population makes the eyes and ears of a government on the border. They are the biggest bulwark against any aggression by the enemy as they live there and watch every movement. World over governments encourage people to settle on the border. Only in India this is discouraged in the name of 'sensitivity'," said a senior home ministry official.

Minister of state for home Kiren Rijiju had earlier said the policy of keeping borders off the reach of people had to be shunned and that more and more people should be encouraged to visit and settle in border areas.

The move is part of the government's large plan to help more and more people settle in border areas of Arunachal Pradesh and Ladakh by creating requisite infrastructure. These people would then be given training in vigilance and combat not just to defend themselves but also the borders.

This experiment has already been successfully conducted by Seema Sashastra Bal (SSB) that now guards the India-Nepal border. SSB was set up in early 1963 in the wake of the India-China conflict to inculcate feelings of national belonging in the border population and develop their capabilities for resistance through a continuous process of motivation, training, development, welfare programmes and activities in north Assam, north Bengal, hills of Uttar Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh, and Ladakh.

The scheme was later extended to Nagaland, Manipur, Tripura, Jammu & Kashmir, Meghalaya, Sikkim and border areas of Rajasthan and Gujarat (1989), Manipur, Mizoram and some more areas of Rajasthan and Gujarat. However, in 2001 SSB was put on India-Nepal border and the tradition lost sheen with time.

In vast swathes of the border in Arunachal Pradesh there are no settlements of people. ITBP, which guards the border, walks for 21 days with ration and other paraphernalia to conduct one long range patrolling as roads are absent and there are no villages near the border. The idea is if people stay near the border such difficulties would be easy to surmount and help forces secure the border.

"But for that we first need to create infrastructure. Who in 21st century will live without road, electricity and communication," said the official.

Hari Seldon · Post by **Hari Seldon** » 02 Jul 2014 18:37

Dunno if this is the right thread, but found an old photo online.

Maj Kuldip Singh Chandpuri is 3rd from left. With his troops, after the epic battle of Longewala.

Bob V · Post by **Bob V** » 03 Jul 2014 14:30

Kerala's Only 'Maha Vir Chakra' without Recognition

srai · Post by **srai** » 04 Jul 2014 08:43

The big deal about the Army’s small arms

The big deal about the Army’s small arms
Updated: Jul 4, 2014 12:28 AM , By Rahul Bedi | 0 comments

Even deciding on a multi-purpose tool, akin to a Swiss knife, for example, has been delayed despite trials in 2011 featuring European and American vendors.
Shortly after taking over as the Chief of Army Staff in May 2012, General Bikram Singh had emphatically declared that upgrading the small arms profile of his force was his foremost priority.

Two years later, as Gen. Singh prepares to retire in end July, neither the 5.56mm close quarter battle (CQB) carbines nor the multi-calibre assault rifles he promised are anywhere in sight for the Army’s 359 infantry units and over 100 Special Forces and counter-insurgency battalions, including the Rashtriya Rifles and Assam Rifles.

The Army’s prevailing operational reality is that it does not own a carbine as the Ordnance Factory Board (OFB) ceased manufacture of all variants of the WWII 9mm carbines, including ammunition, around 2010.

And, two years later, the Ministry of Defence (MoD) finally endorsed the Army’s persistent complaints regarding the inefficiency of the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO)-designed INdian Small Arms System (INSAS) 5.56x39mm assault rifles. It agreed that they needed replacing.

The former Defence Minister, A.K. Antony, was forced into admitting in Parliament in late 2012 that the INSAS rifles had been overtaken by “technological development” — a euphemism for a poorly designed weapon system which the Army grudgingly began employing in the late 1990s and, unceasingly, had complained about ever since.

Among largest arms programmes
The Army’s immediate requirement is for around 1,60,080 CQB carbines and over 2,20,000 assault rifles that it aims on meeting through a combination of imports and licensed-manufacture by the OFB. Ultimately, the paramilitaries and special commando units of respective State police forces too will employ either or both weapon systems in what will possibly be one of the world’s largest small arms programmes worth $7-$8 billion.

Gen. Singh’s guarantees, however, remain delusional and, expectedly unaccountable. And, in time-honoured Indian Army tradition, they will now be transferred to his successor, the Army Chief-designate, Lieutenant Gen. Dalbir Singh Suhag, to vindicate.

An optimistic time frame in inking the import of 44,618 carbines, which have been undergoing an unending series of trials since August 2012, is another 12-18 months away if not beyond. The deadline to acquire assault rifles, trials for which are scheduled to begin in August, is even longer — certainly not before 2016-17, if not later.

Till then, the Army faces a fait accompli of making do without carbines, a basic infantry weapon. It will also have to make do with inefficient INSAS assault rifles, another indispensable small arm for the force’s largest fighting arm.

Currently, three overseas vendors are undergoing “confirmatory” trials at defence establishments and weapon testing facilities in Dehradun, Kanpur, Mhow and Pune with their CQB carbines. The November 2011 tender for CQB carbines also includes the import of 33.6 million rounds of ammunition.

Competing rivals include Italy’s Baretta, fielding its ARX-160 model, Israel Weapon Industries (IWI) with its Galil ACE carbine and the U.S. Colt featuring the M4. The U.S. subsidiary of Swiss gunmaker Sig Sauer, which was originally part of the tender with its 516 Patrol Rifle, has failed to turn up at the ongoing carbine trials.

Sig is under investigation by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) on charges of alleged corruption in potentially supplying its wares to the Indian paramilitaries. Alleged arms dealer, Abhishek Verma and his Romanian wife, Anca Neacsu — both are in Tihar jail — once represented Sig’s operations in India.

Inefficiencies
The carbine trials, expected to conclude by mid-July, will be followed by a final report by the Army, grading the vendors on the performance of their systems. Thereafter, the MoD will open their respective commercial bids, submitted over two years earlier and begin price negotiations with the lowest qualified bidder — or L1 — before inking the deal.

According to insiders associated with the project, this intricate process is almost certain to be protracted, despite the inordinately high expectations of efficiency from the Narendra Modi government. They believe the carbine contract is unlikely to be sealed within the current financial year. However, once signed, weapon and ammunition deliveries are to be concluded within 18 months alongside the transfer of technology to the OFB to licence build the designated carbine.

In short, no Army unit will be equipped with a carbine till well into 2016.

The saga of the assault rifles is even starker.

A multi-service internal review in 2012 of the INSAS assault rifles revealed that they were made from four different kinds of metal, an amalgam almost guaranteed to impair their functioning in the extreme climates of Siachen and Rajasthan.

Surprisingly, the Indian Air Force was the most vociferous in castigating the DRDO over as many as 53 operational inefficiencies in the rifle that the country’s prime weapons development agency took nearly two decades to develop and at great cost.

Inexplicably, the DRDO insisted on the OFB developing the SS-109 round, an extended variant of the SS-109 NATO-standard cartridge for 5.56x39mm rifles aimed at achieving marginally longer range, a capability unnecessary for such a weapon system. This operational superfluity delayed the INSAS programme as it required the import of specialised and expensive German machinery and necessitated the “stop gap” import of millions of ammunition rounds from Israel.

The DRDO-designed and OFB-built rifle also cost several times more than AK-47 assault rifles of which around 100,000 were imported from Bulgaria in the early 1990s for less than $100 each as an “interim” measure at a time when the Kashmiri insurgency was its most virulent and Islamist militants better armed than Army troopers.

The MoD issued the tender for 66,000 5.56mm multi-calibre assault rifles in November 2011 to 43 overseas vendors, five of who responded early the following year.

The competing rifles, required to weigh no more than 3.6kg and to convert readily from 5.56x45mm to 7.62x39mm merely by switching the barrel and magazine for employment in counter-insurgency or conventional roles, include the Czech Republic’s CZ 805 BREN model, IWI’s ACE 1, Baretta’s ARX 160, Colt’s Combat Rifle and Sig Sauer’s SG551. The latter’s participation, however, remains uncertain. A transfer of technology to the OFB to locally build the selected rifle is part of the tender.

Meanwhile, field trials for the rifles are scheduled for early August, nearly 30 months after bids were submitted, as that is the extended time period it surprisingly takes the Army to conduct a paper evaluation of five systems.

But these too have already run into easily avoidable problems.

On security grounds, the rifle vendors are objecting to the Army’s choice of its firing range at Kleeth in the Akhnoor sector hugging the Line of Control (LoC) as the venue for the initial round of trials. A final decision on this is awaited. Thereafter, other trials will follow in diverse weather conditions in Leh, Rajasthan and high humidity areas, all regions where the assault rifles will eventually be employed.

Transforming the soldier
Acquiring these modular, multi-calibre suite of small arms is just part of the Army’s long-delayed Future-Infantry Soldier As a System (F-INSAS) programme envisaged in 2005, but interminably delayed.

The F-INSAS aims at deploying a fully networked infantry in varied terrain and in all-weather conditions with enhanced firepower and mobility for the digitised battlefield. It seeks to transform the infantry soldier into a self-contained fighting machine to enable him to operate across the entire spectrum of war, including nuclear and low intensity conflict, in a network-centric environment.

But senior military officers concede this programme stands delayed by six to seven years almost exclusively because of the Army’s inability in formulating qualitative requirements (QR) to acquire many of these ambitious capabilities.

Even deciding on a multi-purpose tool, akin to a Swiss knife, for example, has been delayed despite trials in 2011 featuring European and American vendors. Officers associated with F-INSAS said this, like other equipment acquisitions, was due to the Army’s rigid procedures, inefficiencies and inability to take timely decisions.

The Army continually blames the MoD for creating bureaucratic hurdles in its modernisation efforts, but fails in acknowledging its own shortcomings in drawing up realistic QRs, conducting timely trials and, above all, realistically determining its operational needs and working towards them economically.

Senior officers privately concede that the “uniforms” are largely responsible for the lack of modernisation, but manage to successfully deflect their own limitations sideways onto the MoD.

Gen. Singh’s tenure, like several other chiefs before him, exemplifies this. It is highlighted by their collective inability to even incrementally upgrade the Army’s war waging capacity be it night fighting capability for its armour fleet, modern artillery, light utility and attack helicopters or infantry combat vehicles, among others.

(Rahul Bedi is a New Delhi-based defence analyst.)

rkhanna · Post by **rkhanna** » 04 Jul 2014 09:39

From Above article. On INSAS ...

A multi-service internal review in 2012 of the INSAS assault rifles revealed that they were made from four different kinds of metal, an amalgam almost guaranteed to impair their functioning in the extreme climates of Siachen and Rajasthan.

Surprisingly, the Indian Air Force was the most vociferous in castigating the DRDO over as many as 53 operational inefficiencies in the rifle that the country’s prime weapons development agency took nearly two decades to develop and at great cost.

Inexplicably, the DRDO insisted on the OFB developing the SS-109 round, an extended variant of the SS-109 NATO-standard cartridge for 5.56x39mm rifles aimed at achieving marginally longer range, a capability unnecessary for such a weapon system. This operational superfluity delayed the INSAS programme as it required the import of specialised and expensive German machinery and necessitated the “stop gap” import of millions of ammunition rounds from Israel.

The DRDO-designed and OFB-built rifle also cost several times more than AK-47 assault rifles of which around 100,000 were imported from Bulgaria in the early 1990s for less than $100 each as an “interim” measure at a time when the Kashmiri insurgency was its most virulent and Islamist militants better armed than Army troopers.

TII -- This is India

we are our own worst enemy.

merlin · Post by **merlin** » 04 Jul 2014 09:41

Has the IA ever said what exactly is wrong with the INSAS rifles? Wrong as in wrong in 2014, not wrong in 1998.

ASPuar · Post by **ASPuar** » 04 Jul 2014 10:27

Dunno about the Indian Army, but chaps I know in the field say that the weapons, particularly the INSAS LMG are totally unreliable, occasionally leading to disaster in life and death situations. If I were a soldier, and was in say, CI ops in Kashmir, and didn't know if my rifle will work or not, I would not be a happy camper. Apparently repeated requests for modifications have been stuck in bureaucratic lethargy and organisational lack of urgency in both DRDO and OFB. Don't think its fair to ask a soldier to stand a post with an unreliable weapon. In fact it's downright criminal. But no one seems to care.

rkhanna · Post by **rkhanna** » 04 Jul 2014 11:04

Dunno about the Indian Army, but chaps I know in the field say that the weapons, particularly the INSAS LMG are totally unreliable, occasionally leading to disaster in life and death situations. If I were a soldier, and was in say, CI ops in Kashmir, and didn't know if my rifle will work or not, I would not be a happy camper. Apparently repeated requests for modifications have been stuck in bureaucratic lethargy and organisational lack of urgency in both DRDO and OFB. Don't think its fair to ask a soldier to stand a post with an unreliable weapon. In fact it's downright criminal. But no one seems to care.

I think the issue is not just of design but also production quality. How good is the Quality standards of OFB making plastic/metal for the Guns. Is there consistency in procurement and manufacturing process across batches.

IMO there is little premium in reinventing the wheel here. The boat has sailed with regards our Small Arms capability and now we have been lapped in terms of manufacturing capability and R&D. We as it is import western machinery in our manufacturing process.. Why not just replicate the FN-FAL model again for an entire Small Arms Family. LMG/AR/Sniper Rilfe/ Carbine/SMG/Side Arm and make them under ToT.

Turkey has managed to build a credible Mil-Ind complex doing just this and then innovating on the product with skills learned.

Reddy · Post by **Reddy** » 04 Jul 2014 12:21

ASPuar wrote:Dunno about the Indian Army, but chaps I know in the field say that the weapons, particularly the INSAS LMG are totally unreliable, occasionally leading to disaster in life and death situations. If I were a soldier, and was in say, CI ops in Kashmir, and didn't know if my rifle will work or not, I would not be a happy camper. Apparently repeated requests for modifications have been stuck in bureaucratic lethargy and organisational lack of urgency in both DRDO and OFB. Don't think its fair to ask a soldier to stand a post with an unreliable weapon. In fact it's downright criminal. But no one seems to care.

Years ago i used to collect Russian cameras. One example is Kiev 88 medium format camera, a rip off of Hasselblad 500. As a rule i always order two cameras because they seldom work out of box. One need to rip them apart polish gears, repack anti-reflective felt and paint, wash crappy lubrication and change with something that does no dry in warm weather etc. However, once it is rebuilt it lasts a life time. Do similar with East Germany lens and you end up with top notch medium format set-up for 1/3 the price.
Coming back to INSAS, only opportunity i had talking to a user of INSAS said exactly same thing about these weapons. Out off box they are crap but once it is tweaked they are as good as any. In other words, inconsistent machining and horrible QC. Perhaps we picked up this wonderful production values from our socialist brothers.

SanjayC · Post by **SanjayC** » 04 Jul 2014 12:26

^^^ Rather then phasing out INSAS rifles on which so much effort has been spent, it is better to hand over their blueprints to private companies like Bharat Forge, who can improve them further, rectify all faults and manufacture them with world-class standards, with license to export. Being private firms, they won't take much time to collect gun designers from around the world to act as advisers.