Small Arms Thread

Rudranathh
BRFite
Posts: 227
Joined: 17 Nov 2007 20:06

Postby Rudranathh » 19 Feb 2008 21:42

Rampy wrote:So how will the Minsas and Kalantak be used... meaning operations side. Or is it that one will go and other one will take its place?

MINSAS and Kalantak dont fall in the same category, former is an carbine and the latter is an assault rifle. so there is no question of one replacing the other.

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Postby JCage » 19 Feb 2008 21:56

Anything is better than the Sterling, at even moderate range its not good enough. Its purely a CQB weapon. One guy I spoke to described his "experience" with a Sterling, in combat. He got so frustrated with its inability to even punch through moderate earthenwork before the target, that he said "I wanted to go upto the guy and slap him to death, that would have worked better". Then the rest of his troop joined him and opened up with INSAS - bye bye Paki.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54776
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby ramana » 19 Feb 2008 22:25

JCage wrote:Anything is better than the Sterling, at even moderate range its not good enough. Its purely a CQB weapon. One guy I spoke to described his "experience" with a Sterling, in combat. He got so frustrated with its inability to even punch through moderate earthenwork before the target, that he said "I wanted to go upto the guy and slap him to death, that would have worked better". Then the rest of his troop joined him and opened up with INSAS - bye bye Paki.


That makes sense. The Sterling is an improvement of the Sten gun. The Sten was invented to make use of the extremely large qty of pistol ammo captured from the Nazi Germans pre-Dunkirk. It uses the 9mm Parabellum cartridge which is good for extremely soft targets like water melons. However gave good rate of fire and was better than any thing in British inventory. British had crappy stuff like Lanchester, and Tommy guns of Al Capone fame. Its a shame that IA still stuck to obsolete stuff in name of economy and tradition.

ParGha
BRFite
Posts: 938
Joined: 20 Jul 2006 06:01

Postby ParGha » 19 Feb 2008 22:33

All open-bolt SMGs are inherently unstable designs. A properly manufactured Sterling is no way better or worse than an equivalent Uzi. Sterlings are LOT better than most other weapons of their class when it comes to reliability. You can only hope that the MSMC uses a different and more reliable action.

Pistol-caliber SMGs are not meant for primary combat troops; they are issued to officers, radio operators, drivers, artillery crews etc... as such they not designed for assaulting fixed positions, so no surprise if they fail spectacularly. Officers in COIN ops are best off carrying the same compact AK derivatives their men carry - just as useful but also diminishes their visibility as prime targets. Company and lower-Field grade officers in conventional roles too should carry the regular issue long-arm: It is heavy and cumbersome, but not nearly as much as before... plus with tracers it should help in C&C.

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Postby Sanku » 19 Feb 2008 23:16

OK after wading through pages of nomenclature which were more confusing that Inorganic chemisty -- I have these (I think) valid questions

MSCM and MINSAS are both carbines; they both take the same ammo. 5.56x30; but they are different guns fore sure or are they?

And if they are -- what are the roles for each.

Also what special about the bull-pup Insas? As compared to the TFTA Zittara? The kinds of ammon it can handle? If so whats special about the bull-pup compared to the big long INSAS? When will one be used as opposed to other?

And is Kalantak a upgrade to Excalibur? Was Excalibur ever produced in large numbers and operationalized?

Question questions...

sunilUpa
BRFite
Posts: 1795
Joined: 25 Sep 2006 04:16

Postby sunilUpa » 19 Feb 2008 23:29

Sanku wrote:And is Kalantak a upgrade to Excalibur? Was Excalibur ever produced in large numbers and operationalized?

Question questions...


Don't know whether Kalantak is an upgrade of excalibur, but I heard that Excalibur is dead as far as IA is concerned.

I have my doubts about Kalantak too. Till we get more info about it's advantages, can't say anything.

ParGha
BRFite
Posts: 938
Joined: 20 Jul 2006 06:01

Postby ParGha » 19 Feb 2008 23:39

Sanku wrote:If so whats special about the bull-pup compared to the big long INSAS? When will one be used as opposed to other?


A bullpup design is almost always shorter and more compact than comparable regular-configuration. The supporters say it should be used always, the detractors say it should never be used. :wink:

The reasonable explanation, I guess, is that bullpups should be used in:
* confined areas (APCs, urban environs),
* where there is likelyhood of getting tangled with other gear (paratroopers), and
* when a long-barrel (more range and accuracy) has to be fit into as little space as possible (snipers).

Where a bull-pup is less than ideal, is:
* when reach (bayonet or butt) is an issue,
* when mass is a positive aspect (accuracy or power),
* when balance and muscle-memory is an issue.

IMHO neither offers a real, all-out advantage over the other... so it is not something to get worked up over.

Kartman
BRFite
Posts: 107
Joined: 15 May 2007 20:53

Postby Kartman » 20 Feb 2008 02:51

Plus, bullpups can be fired off only one (i.e. left) shoulder...

Kartman
BRFite
Posts: 107
Joined: 15 May 2007 20:53

Postby Kartman » 20 Feb 2008 03:22

Some random thoughts/guesses/speculashuns/objervashuns...

Sanku wrote:MSCM and MINSAS are both carbines; they both take the same ammo. 5.56x30; but they are different guns fore sure or are they?

To me it appears that both the MSMC and MINSAS use the same basic (possibly, blowback-, not gas-operated) block/receiver with different trigger mechanisms and other minor mods.
So essentially (with due apologies to the GRE Verbal Tests), MINSAS:MSMC = INSAS:B-INSAS*
in the sense that both pairs use the same receiver/mechanism, but with modified layouts.

(* BINSAS = Bullpup INSAS :P)

And if they are -- what are the roles for each.

MINSAS could be a CQB replacement for AKs, something like a desi MP38/40 "Schmeisser"... something small and light enough for CQB, but that puts out a powerful (though shorter ranged) round at a high rate of fire. Plus for tank crews, sentry duty, etc.

MSMC could be a PDW for officers, MPs, Arty/Engrs and other second-line troops. Plus it's more compact and, hence, concealable... ergo, good for undercover ops, say, in COIN.

Also what special about the bull-pup Insas? As compared to the TFTA Zittara? The kinds of ammon it can handle?

I suppose the Zittara cannot handle the special desi INSAS 5.56 round, only the SS109 (NATO) 5.56 round.

And is Kalantak a upgrade to Excalibur? Was Excalibur ever produced in large numbers and operationalized?

It was never ever really clear to me what was special about the Excalibur... is Excalibur just a shorter length INSAS, with a folding stock and black, polymer furniture ?

As far as Kalantak goes, Kalantak:INSAS = M4:M16 ... essentially, a shortened version of the service rifle.

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Postby Sanku » 20 Feb 2008 09:40

Thanks All!! Some sense in the zoo now.

Kartman; Zittara can indeed take the INSAS & Nato rounds from OFB page


5.56x45 mm INSAS & NATO 5.56x30 mm 9x19 mm

So Zittara is the superset (in terms of Ammo) as compared to INSAS bullpup (I think)

CalvinH
BRFite
Posts: 667
Joined: 15 Jul 2007 04:14

Postby CalvinH » 20 Feb 2008 10:29

JCage wrote:Anything is better than the Sterling, at even moderate range its not good enough. Its purely a CQB weapon. One guy I spoke to described his "experience" with a Sterling, in combat. He got so frustrated with its inability to even punch through moderate earthenwork before the target, that he said "I wanted to go upto the guy and slap him to death, that would have worked better". Then the rest of his troop joined him and opened up with INSAS - bye bye Paki.


Heard similar thing from my relative serving in kashmir in early 90s. He said they use the gun to scatter stray dogs that gather around the garbage dump near the camp. He once hit one dog in the leg and the dog got up and ran back on three legs :eek: :shock:

Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4850
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby Neshant » 20 Feb 2008 10:41

has the insas been dumped?

India to manufacture Kalashnikovs

http://www.dawn.com/2008/02/20/int3.htm

ArmenT
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 4239
Joined: 10 Sep 2007 05:57
Location: Loud, Proud, Ugly American

Postby ArmenT » 20 Feb 2008 13:38

Kartman wrote:Plus, bullpups can be fired off only one (i.e. left) shoulder...

Not true. The FAMAS is designed for ambidextrous use. So are Tavor and Steyr AUG that I know of.

Igorr
BRFite
Posts: 615
Joined: 01 Feb 2005 18:13
Contact:

Postby Igorr » 20 Feb 2008 13:42

Neshant wrote:India to manufacture Kalashnikovs
http://www.dawn.com/2008/02/20/int3.htm

Hmm... Interesting moving.
ImageImage

ArmenT
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 4239
Joined: 10 Sep 2007 05:57
Location: Loud, Proud, Ugly American

Postby ArmenT » 20 Feb 2008 13:57

Sanku wrote:Kartman; Zittara can indeed take the INSAS & Nato rounds from OFB page


5.56x45 mm INSAS & NATO 5.56x30 mm 9x19 mm

So Zittara is the superset (in terms of Ammo) as compared to INSAS bullpup (I think)

Not at the same time :eek: You can't shove a 9 mm diameter round through a 5.56 mm barrel, not without something giving. Same with 5.56x45 vs. 5.56x30 rounds. You'd have to change the barrel, bolt mechanism and magazine before you can fire a different round. OFB page indicates that the zittara comes with interchangable barrels and magazines, but the end user will dictate which one they want to use.

Igorr
BRFite
Posts: 615
Joined: 01 Feb 2005 18:13
Contact:

Postby Igorr » 20 Feb 2008 14:23

Rudranathh wrote:Why AK-103 which uses 7.62x39mm caliber?

Why not the AK-101 and AK-102 which use the 5.56x45mm bullets?

Any idea?
5.56x45 isnt good enough for shorten barrels. So, in urban combat the shorten barrel M4 is too weak for even unclosed targets. Against havy vested combatants it's totaly uneffective. 5.56 isnt penetrates even light wooden walls. 7.62x39 - is ideal in such circumstances. The americans promote their 7.62x51 for their newest replacement for M4 - shorten barrel SCAR, but 7.62x51 is too powerfull for this i.e. has too high recoil. Even they want to use the Russian 7.62x39 round for chambering SCAR's variant.

Rudranathh
BRFite
Posts: 227
Joined: 17 Nov 2007 20:06

Postby Rudranathh » 20 Feb 2008 14:55

^ Thanks Igorr.
At present what does russian forces use? 5.56 or 7.62x39mm?
Currently which is the widely used russian assault rifle in the russian arsenal?

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Postby Sanku » 20 Feb 2008 15:25

ArmenT wrote:
Sanku wrote:Kartman; Zittara can indeed take the INSAS & Nato rounds from OFB page


5.56x45 mm INSAS & NATO 5.56x30 mm 9x19 mm

So Zittara is the superset (in terms of Ammo) as compared to INSAS bullpup (I think)

Not at the same time :eek:


Umm very did I or Kartman say that it will be at the same time? :shock: :eek: :-?

Further; looking at the specs on the board; it seems probable that only thing that will need to be changed for 45 and 30 mm (for the 5.56 caliber) ammo will be the magazine. Since all listed parameters are the same. Further in its feature it lists

Interchangeability of barrel and magazine for both calibers

What should we make of this? Interchangeability in the factory? Surely not a feature right? So the person should be able to change the above in the field

Raj Malhotra
BRFite
Posts: 997
Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31

Postby Raj Malhotra » 20 Feb 2008 15:27

I think I agree with Kartman observations

INSAS and BINSAS are full barrel rifles

Excaliber and Kalantak are shortened barrel rifles


MINSAS and MSMC are carbines firing a smaller round. MSMC is smaller and more concealable and will be good for SF and VIP Protection

Kartman
BRFite
Posts: 107
Joined: 15 May 2007 20:53

Postby Kartman » 20 Feb 2008 15:39

ArmenT wrote:
Kartman wrote:Plus, bullpups can be fired off only one (i.e. left) shoulder...

Not true. The FAMAS is designed for ambidextrous use. So are Tavor and Steyr AUG that I know of.


Do you mean one can change the cartridge ejection on-the-fly :eek:

I'd be pretty danged impressed if someone actually made something like that :shock: ... I thought FAMAS/Tavor/SteyrAUG could do the ambidextrous thingie after stripping, and then making the (in-field) mod.

Some of the newer bullpups eject the cartridge down or up... but that makes a pretty awkward/unconventional/difficult-to-get-used-to layout !

Igorr
BRFite
Posts: 615
Joined: 01 Feb 2005 18:13
Contact:

Postby Igorr » 20 Feb 2008 19:04

Rudranathh wrote:^ Thanks Igorr.
At present what does russian forces use? 5.56 or 7.62x39mm?
Currently which is the widely used russian assault rifle in the russian arsenal?

The Army official round for both assault rifles and hand-handed machine-guns remains 5.45x39 mm. They speak now about changing the weapon but not round. It's very effective round with low weight, flat trajectory, good armor penetration and low recoil. But it has the most of 5.56x41NATO shortages: esp the deficiency of stopping power. And if you are standing against very motivated enemy, it's not enough to bring him to the bleeding he will die in 2 hours. It's important to decapacitate him instantenousely.

The Chechen War showed sometimes the need for shorter barrel light 'carbine' purpose, and 5.45mm is a bad choice for this, like was said above. For such instance they de-facto came back to use AK's for 7.62x39 intermidiate round in addition to 7.62x54R (squad machingun and SVD). The production of 7.62x39 mm AK-103\AK-104 and AK-203 (light machingun) was reanimated.
ImageImageImageImage

Rudranathh
BRFite
Posts: 227
Joined: 17 Nov 2007 20:06

Postby Rudranathh » 20 Feb 2008 19:35

Igorr wrote:The Chechen War showed sometimes the need for shorter barrel light 'carbine' purpose, and 5.45mm is a bad choice for this, like was said above. For such instance they de-facto came back to use AK's for 7.62x39 intermidiate round in addition to 7.62x54R (squad machingun and SVD). The production of 7.62x39 mm AK-103\AK-104 and AK-203 (light machingun) was reanimated.


Now this makes sense why the Indian Army wants the Ak-103 which fires the 7.62x39mm round and not the other AK variants which fires the 5.56x45 round.


some questions Igorr.
What is the future of AN-94 since it too uses the 5.45x39 mm round?
Will it ever replace the AK series in russian inventory?
Is it legal for russian citizens to own an assault rifle? And how much does it cost for a AK-103 rifle along with 100 rounds.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Postby Singha » 20 Feb 2008 19:45

The Sten was invented to make use of the extremely large qty of pistol ammo captured from the Nazi Germans pre-Dunkirk.

when did this happen ? I thought the month prior to dunkirk the wehrmacht
crossed the maginot line and pretty much overran the french, belgian, dutch
and BEF at a rapid pace..when did they lose this huge quantity of ammo ?

Igorr
BRFite
Posts: 615
Joined: 01 Feb 2005 18:13
Contact:

Postby Igorr » 20 Feb 2008 20:54

Rudranathh wrote:some questions Igorr.
What is the future of AN-94 since it too uses the 5.45x39 mm round?
Will it ever replace the AK series in russian inventory?
Is it legal for russian citizens to own an assault rifle? And how much does it cost for a AK-103 rifle along with 100 rounds.

The destiny of AN-94 isnt clear yet. The low rate serial production is following for the Russian units and they say even about foreign customers. However, the AN-94 induction in the service is 'side by side with AK-74M' derivates. I know some squad level commanders that are free to choose between them for their units. Now the most units choose AK-74M. Number of 'high preparedness' divisions have both AKs and ANs in their storage. I have some videos, on a part of these the soldiers make exersise with AK-74M and other videos - with AN-94. Some say AN-94 - is very good, another - it's too complex for drafted soldiers. I think, the tendency in Russia is toward more professional units will go with AN-94 or AEK-971, but the remained drafted units who serve only 1 year now - will be enough AK-74M for them. However, those modernised AK's will be with collimator site, Piccatini rails, grips, bipods etc as you saw on the pictures above.
ImageImage

And yes, like in US the citisens can not buy full automatic variants, but Saiga etc hunting semi-automatic AK derivates.
Last edited by Igorr on 20 Feb 2008 20:58, edited 1 time in total.

Rudranathh
BRFite
Posts: 227
Joined: 17 Nov 2007 20:06

Postby Rudranathh » 20 Feb 2008 20:57

Thanks for the info Igorr but you did not answer the other question.

Is it legal for russian citizens to own an assault rifle? And how much does it cost for a AK-103 rifle along with 100 rounds.

HariC
BRFite
Posts: 358
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby HariC » 20 Feb 2008 20:59

Singha wrote:The Sten was invented to make use of the extremely large qty of pistol ammo captured from the Nazi Germans pre-Dunkirk.

when did this happen ? I thought the month prior to dunkirk the wehrmacht
crossed the maginot line and pretty much overran the french, belgian, dutch
and BEF at a rapid pace..when did they lose this huge quantity of ammo ?


The sten was a post dunkirk development. it was aimed primarily for the french resistance so that they could use ammunition from that machine pistol the germans could carry. The sten was also easily broken down into pieces and hidden .

Igorr
BRFite
Posts: 615
Joined: 01 Feb 2005 18:13
Contact:

Postby Igorr » 20 Feb 2008 21:39

Rudranathh wrote:Is it legal for russian citizens to own an assault rifle? And how much does it cost for a AK-103 rifle along with 100 rounds.

A legal variants like 'Saiga' for 7.62x39 mm costs like $180 url1 , for .308 - a bit more $300 url2

ArmenT
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 4239
Joined: 10 Sep 2007 05:57
Location: Loud, Proud, Ugly American

Postby ArmenT » 21 Feb 2008 11:46

Sanku wrote:
ArmenT wrote:
Sanku wrote:Kartman; Zittara can indeed take the INSAS & Nato rounds from OFB page


5.56x45 mm INSAS & NATO 5.56x30 mm 9x19 mm

So Zittara is the superset (in terms of Ammo) as compared to INSAS bullpup (I think)

Not at the same time :eek:


Umm very did I or Kartman say that it will be at the same time? :shock: :eek: :-?

Point well taken, sorry about the confusion :).

By the way, I remember reading somewhere that the original INSAS carbine was having some technical problems having to do with the shorter barrel not being long enough for the ammo it was using at that time (IIRC, it was the same ammo as the INSAS rifle and LMG) and that this made it hard to control in automatic mode. Have they solved the issue since then or is that why MINSAS is using a smaller round now?

Kartman
BRFite
Posts: 107
Joined: 15 May 2007 20:53

Postby Kartman » 21 Feb 2008 13:59

ArmenT wrote:Point well taken, sorry about the confusion :).

No prob :) ... just that I'm not that up-to-date on the field for the last few years, so was more than a bit surprised that someone had actually managed to fix this problem :shock:

By the way, I remember reading somewhere that the original INSAS carbine was having some technical problems having to do with the shorter barrel not being long enough for the ammo it was using at that time (IIRC, it was the same ammo as the INSAS rifle and LMG) and that this made it hard to control in automatic mode. Have they solved the issue since then or is that why MINSAS is using a smaller round now?

That was my understanding, too... too much flash, recoil, etc because of trying to slow down the std. INSAS 5.56X45 ammo with a very short barrel. Would be quite a job even with a NATO std. round, I'd think.

rkhanna
BRFite
Posts: 1162
Joined: 02 Jul 2006 02:35

Postby rkhanna » 21 Feb 2008 17:05

http://img180.imageshack.us/img180/4408/16022008009qn1.jpg


If the one on the top right is the Klantak (Sp?) and the one on the bottom is the Excalibre.


What is the designation of THIS rifle?

http://img132.imageshack.us/img132/8462/16022008012di8.jpg

Kartman
BRFite
Posts: 107
Joined: 15 May 2007 20:53

Postby Kartman » 21 Feb 2008 17:11

MINSAS

sombhat
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 89
Joined: 20 Feb 2008 21:59
Location: Kolkata

Postby sombhat » 21 Feb 2008 17:40

I remember someone once told me how the fire mode selector was better positioned in the M16 than in the AKs. He showed how the M16 selector can be operated by the firing hand's thumb, making switching between Safe, Single Shot and Auto much easier and quicker.
Whereas in the AK, one would require to use the other arm to access this switch. Can the gurus please advise as to how the INSAS compares in this regard?

Sorry if this has been discussed before.

Vick
BRFite
Posts: 753
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

Postby Vick » 25 Feb 2008 07:11

From DN
[quote]
Feb 25, 2008
India Boosts Spending on Infantry Equipment

By VIVEK RAGHUVANSHI

NEW DELHI — While the Indian military has long focused on acquisition of major weapons, the challenges of low-intensity warfare increasingly have occupied strategists, and more funds now are being funneled into small arms manufacturing.

The driving force behind this move is the $2 billion Futuristic Soldier System program, designed to equip Indian infantry soldiers with most modern weaponry and equipment, including an advanced lightweight rifle, GPS receiver, helmet-mounted night-vision devices and handheld computers.

“There is hardly any research or attention in the military on small arms, though this should be one of the key areas of focus given the type of engagements that the Indian forces have been undertaking in the past two decades,â€

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Postby Singha » 25 Feb 2008 08:04

the person at Tavor stall showed how the default tavor optical sight is
affixed a bit further up the barrel. for nightsight, there is a clip behind this
wherein it is just slid into the bracket. when not needed it is slid out. so
the daysight can always remain in place.

all the modems of Tavor looked quite well made.

ArmenT
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 4239
Joined: 10 Sep 2007 05:57
Location: Loud, Proud, Ugly American

Postby ArmenT » 25 Feb 2008 11:43

sombhat wrote:I remember someone once told me how the fire mode selector was better positioned in the M16 than in the AKs. He showed how the M16 selector can be operated by the firing hand's thumb, making switching between Safe, Single Shot and Auto much easier and quicker.
Whereas in the AK, one would require to use the other arm to access this switch. Can the gurus please advise as to how the INSAS compares in this regard?

Sorry if this has been discussed before.

INSAS selector is similar to the M16 selector. Here are 3 pics to show you who has what:
Image
M16 - Note that the selector switch is on the left side of the weapon and is north east of the trigger. For a right hander who has the gun on their right shoulder, it can easily be controlled from the hand holding the rear grip by simply moving the thumb.

Image
AK-74 - Note the selector is on the right side, which makes the lever face away from you if you're a right hander. For those who don't know it, the selector is the long nearly horizontal lever above the trigger. You can tell from the picture that it isn't easy to manipulate the lever. You'd have to take your hand off the trigger just to move it.

Image
INSAS - It is hard to see the selector switch in this picture, but it can be seen on the top image just above and to the right of the trigger (the oval knob with the white line). Similar to the M16, it is on the left side of the weapon, so it can be controlled easily by a right-hander. It is also close to the trigger and the rear grip, just like the M16, so it can be manipulated without taking your hand off the grip.

Igorr
BRFite
Posts: 615
Joined: 01 Feb 2005 18:13
Contact:

Postby Igorr » 28 Feb 2008 21:04

Today RosoboronExport confirmed talks with Indian counterparts about AK licensioning in India.

k prasad
BRFite
Posts: 797
Joined: 21 Oct 2007 17:38
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow
Contact:

Postby k prasad » 28 Feb 2008 23:48

I tried out the SAR-21 at the Singapore air show, and had to say, was kinda disappointed, although, to be fair, it was the second rifle I tried, after the SLR (havent fired any though, and certainly havent disassembled a rifle).

First, the foregrip is kinda flimsy, and shook a bit like a loose tooth when holding it. This is where the Insas, with the more rugged furniture probably has an edge. Still ok though. Its not too heavy either, at 4 kg, about the same as the Insas, which surprised me since I'd have expected the bullpup to be lighter.

The weight and balance of the rifle is excellent, especially the carbine version, and the 1.5X integral sight is great to use. As a result, its easy to hold and move. The grip is also well fitted ergonomically, and shouldn't be a problem to hold. However, the distance between the it would get pretty uncomfortable to hold with a magazine in place, and may cause a bad wrist pain after a while.

However, this rifle cannot be fired from either shoulder (its only fired from the right shoulder), and even lacks a brass deflector that would help deflect the rounds downwards. The trigger pull is around 4 kg, which is kinda on the heavier side, and the bolt is a bit sluggish. However, I do think the recoil will be managed extremely well.. didnt move a bit when I released the bolt. The sgt there mentioned that the recoil on this rifle was far better than on the M-16s, and it wasnt as error prone (although it too needs as much maintenance as the M-16s).

My biggest beef though is with the fire selector switch, which is in an extremely awkward position, on the butt, instead of the selector switch on the Pistol grip like on most rifles. The safety is just in front of the trigger, while the selector switch is on the butt, which means that if you want to change the firing from semi to full auto, you'll have to remove the magazine from your shoulder, remove one of your hands, and change the setting by depressing the button... not very good.

Still, have heard a lot of good things about this rifle, at least wrt firing accuracy.

There was also the sharpshooter and carbine variants. Checked out the red dot reflex sights, and man, they're really something.. all Insas's should have them, if possible.

Overall, I'd say that Insas isn't as bad as people think it is (wrt high tech and space agey-ness criteria). Its probably one of the best rifles out there.

Igorr
BRFite
Posts: 615
Joined: 01 Feb 2005 18:13
Contact:

Postby Igorr » 02 Mar 2008 19:39

An interesting video about the visit of Nikonov to US and his meeting with Stoner and the comparative trials between their M16 and AN-94. The last was 10 time more accurate than M16.
http://ru.youtube.com/watch?v=pEZuT3gi7jc

Kalantak
BRFite
Posts: 110
Joined: 24 Feb 2008 12:01

Postby Kalantak » 02 Mar 2008 20:54

Igorr any progress in Russia on any new type of bullets like the US 6.8 SPC cartridge. They have even designed their rifles around this cartridge and even the old m-16 can be made to fire this new cartridge with a few modifications.

sombhat
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 89
Joined: 20 Feb 2008 21:59
Location: Kolkata

Postby sombhat » 03 Mar 2008 15:34

Thanks for the explaination ArmenT. I hope we had better pics of the INSAS selector.


Return to “Mil-Tech Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests