Small Arms Thread

RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5180
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby RoyG » 06 Jul 2015 00:19

Good question. Remember that NSG and other SF groups serve mainly in CT roles, and they train heavily in urban environments. The 5.56 is very controllable which is very much needed in a HR scenario. Moreover, there are a lot more firearms which have been developed around the world which are chambered in 5.56. Our firearms industry hasn't matured and so we need to source most of our equipment, including firearms from abroad for specialized roles.

The 7.62 is used by paramilitary forces in the jungles and areas like Kashmir where you face a very hostile populace coupled with terror threat. You need to be able to put these jihadis down with 1 or 2 rounds while minimizing casualties on CT side. They don't normally take hostages except if they're hindu/buddhist so normally its just a straight fight between the jihadis and security guys.

Coming to the issue of the 5.45 round that the Russian's use - its controllable and have friends which have told me that it performs a bit better than the 5.56 in some respects. I think we need to begin r&d on indian specific rounds and develop new class of weapons around them. The Chinese have really pursued this in a big way and are even exporting.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19442
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Karan M » 06 Jul 2015 01:21

What a difference a new Govt makes, with a simple "make in India" program eh? Things start falling in place. I do wonder how many snide articles would have come out about INSAS while imported boondoggles would have been the order of the day in the past dispensations regime.

Would be interesting to see the changes made for this: The Excalibur had only two stoppages (where the bullet gets stuck in the breech) after 24,000 rounds were fired, close to the Army’s specifications of only one stoppage

http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/assa ... 49238.html

Made in India rifle to replace INSAS: Modified Excalibur currently undergoing trials to meet Army requirements

The Indian Army has decided to go for an indigenous assault rifle to replace the problematic INSAS rifles.

The decision that could save thousands of crores in foreign exchange and boost local manufacture was taken recently by Army Chief General Dalbir Singh.

The Army then cancelled a problematic Rs 4,848 crore order for importing Multi Caliber Assault Rifles on June 15 — first reported by Mail Today on July 1.

“We are going in for a designed and Made in India rifle in keeping with the government’s indigenisation thrusts,” senior Army sources told Mail Today.

The performance of the DRDO-designed ‘Excalibur’ assault rifle in trials last month at the Armament Research and Development Establishment (ARDE) in Pune has further enthused the Army.

The Excalibur had only two stoppages (where the bullet gets stuck in the breech) after 24,000 rounds were fired, close to the Army’s specifications of only one stoppage.


New features

The Excalibur is an improved version of the INSAS rifle and fires 5.56x45 mm ammunition. It has full-automatic capability over the INSAS which can only fire a three-round burst.

The Excalibur barrel is shorter by 4 mm, has a side folding butt stock and features a Picatinny rail, a universal mount that allows a range of weapon sights and sensors to be fitted on the rifle.

DRDO officials say it will take the OFB’s Rifle Factory Ishapore at least eight months to incorporate design changes suggested by the ARDE and field the first prototypes of what they are calling the ‘Modified INSAS Rifle’ (MIR).

Changes suggested after trials include a smaller handguard and improved polycarbonate magazine.

If the Excalibur/MIR clears trials, it could be in the hands of infantry soldiers within two years, DRDO officials say.

The DRDO is designing a second version of the Excalibur, the AR-2 that fires 7.62x39 mm rounds used by AK-47. The AR-2 will be offered as an alternative to the Russian-origin assault rifle.

The Army’s 2011 tender was for a Multi Caliber Assault Rifle or for a weapon that could fire INSAS and AK-47 ammunition with a barrel change.

Five international firms— Beretta of Italy, Israeli Weapons Industries (IWI), Colt Defense of the U.S., Ceska Zbplojovka of Czech Republic and SiG Sauer of Switzerland—were shortlisted for the trials.

However, Army officials now admit the specifications were poorly drafted and unrealistic.


Great news, except for the part that OFB is going to make this gun. Why the heck couldn't Mahindra or any private vendor have been roped in as well?

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby shiv » 06 Jul 2015 06:47

Karan M wrote:Great news, except for the part that OFB is going to make this gun. Why the heck couldn't Mahindra or any private vendor have been roped in as well?

In fact Mahindra may not be required. There are literally dozens of arms manufacturing units in India - many of which have been restricted by law to manufacture air guns alone. A few are allowed to manufacture shotguns and there is a very strict "quota" of how many they can manufacture.

OFB have a complete monopoly on firearms. By law. I suspect the law itself will have to be changed. I will check and post.

Hobbes
BRFite
Posts: 219
Joined: 14 Mar 2011 02:59

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Hobbes » 06 Jul 2015 07:04

Karan M wrote:
Great news, except for the part that OFB is going to make this gun. Why the heck couldn't Mahindra or any private vendor have been roped in as well?

The OFB screwed up big time making the original INSAS. Most of the problems reported with it in the field were manufacturing defects, not design issues. What guarantees do we have that the OFB will not adhere to their habit of screwing this one up too? The only guarantee of success in the MIR project is if a reputable private vendor such as Mahindra or Bharat Forge does the manufacturing, rather than a Government entity with zero accountability and terrible quality control.

vaibhav.n
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 575
Joined: 23 Mar 2010 21:47

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby vaibhav.n » 06 Jul 2015 07:12

Looks like they made changes to the op system. Would love to know the details on the endurance test, what would be important would be the cyclic rate of fire.

Now troop trials at Mhow and production prototype testing should be only left.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby shiv » 06 Jul 2015 08:17

In medicine, if I say "AIDS is becoming more common" I will have to back up my claim with statistics from proper studies.

About INSAS I have seen many complaints but no statistics like failure per X rounds under Y conditions

The problem is that there is no assault rifle in the world that can compare with the Kalashnikov. I would like to see a comparison (with statistics) of INSAS with non-Kalashnikov standard issue weapons of other armies.

member_20453
BRFite
Posts: 613
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby member_20453 » 06 Jul 2015 12:48

http://ajaishukla.blogspot.be/2013/04/m ... e-for.html

Normally quality shouldn't be an issue any more once this upgraded Excalibur Rifle goes into production, 15K crores are being pumped into all 41 OFB factories to drastically improve quality, plan is to turn these into 21st century hi tech manufacturing units. More so, many forget that it was the old version of the heavily mass produced INSAS which had manufacturing related quality issues, INSAS 1B1 as far as I know from field usage is quite a reliable weapon. Many in the infantry love the rifle. Many in CT Ops love the AK for its stopping power.

Can't wait to see some nice shots of the new Excalibur.

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

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby ArmenT » 06 Jul 2015 13:35

Hobbes wrote:
Karan M wrote:
Great news, except for the part that OFB is going to make this gun. Why the heck couldn't Mahindra or any private vendor have been roped in as well?

The OFB screwed up big time making the original INSAS. Most of the problems reported with it in the field were manufacturing defects, not design issues. What guarantees do we have that the OFB will not adhere to their habit of screwing this one up too? The only guarantee of success in the MIR project is if a reputable private vendor such as Mahindra or Bharat Forge does the manufacturing, rather than a Government entity with zero accountability and terrible quality control.

Ideally, it shouldn't be a single vendor, but multiple vendors. That way, if one vendor decides to screw with quality and price because they are the sole supplier, they will get smaller orders the next year.

For example, here in the US, Colt tried to screw around with the US government and overcharge for M4 and next thing you know, Remington and later, FN got more orders to manufacture them the next year.

rkhanna
BRFite
Posts: 1160
Joined: 02 Jul 2006 02:35

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby rkhanna » 06 Jul 2015 14:04

INSAS Concept Graphic? How to make things TFTA :roll:

Image

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19442
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Karan M » 07 Jul 2015 01:26

shiv wrote:
Karan M wrote:Great news, except for the part that OFB is going to make this gun. Why the heck couldn't Mahindra or any private vendor have been roped in as well?

In fact Mahindra may not be required. There are literally dozens of arms manufacturing units in India - many of which have been restricted by law to manufacture air guns alone. A few are allowed to manufacture shotguns and there is a very strict "quota" of how many they can manufacture.

OFB have a complete monopoly on firearms. By law. I suspect the law itself will have to be changed. I will check and post.


Please do! PS I saw one "shuddapoly" (wottaname :rotfl: :rotfl: classic saar ) gentlemans videos - very interesting. Are there any airgun repair shops you'd recommend?

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19442
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Karan M » 07 Jul 2015 01:29

ArmenT wrote:Ideally, it shouldn't be a single vendor, but multiple vendors. That way, if one vendor decides to screw with quality and price because they are the sole supplier, they will get smaller orders the next year.

For example, here in the US, Colt tried to screw around with the US government and overcharge for M4 and next thing you know, Remington and later, FN got more orders to manufacture them the next year.


That's exactly why I want Mahindra, Punj LLoyd, Bharat Forge etc all in the small arms business. They'll offer an alternative to OFB which has got fat and happy making lousy quality items.
We are talking of thousands of crores of rejected items which are lying segregated because OFB rushed production without basic QA/QC checks.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19442
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Karan M » 07 Jul 2015 01:30

Hobbes wrote:
Karan M wrote:
Great news, except for the part that OFB is going to make this gun. Why the heck couldn't Mahindra or any private vendor have been roped in as well?

The OFB screwed up big time making the original INSAS. Most of the problems reported with it in the field were manufacturing defects, not design issues. What guarantees do we have that the OFB will not adhere to their habit of screwing this one up too? The only guarantee of success in the MIR project is if a reputable private vendor such as Mahindra or Bharat Forge does the manufacturing, rather than a Government entity with zero accountability and terrible quality control.


My concerns exactly. On the plus side, DRDO has now had some experience dealing with all these hassles and will take more care in transferring production and hopefully QA/QC processes as well.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19442
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Karan M » 07 Jul 2015 01:31

vaibhav.n wrote:Looks like they made changes to the op system. Would love to know the details on the endurance test, what would be important would be the cyclic rate of fire.

Now troop trials at Mhow and production prototype testing should be only left.


Eggjactly. The op system and materials seem to have been rejigged for greater reliability.

On a whining note:

DRDO officials say it will take the OFB's Rifle Factory Ishapore at least eight months to incorporate design changes suggested by the ARDE and field the first prototypes of what they are calling the 'Modified INSAS Rifle' (MIR). Changes suggested after trials include a smaller handguard and improved polycarbonate magazine.

why can't we just drop the darn polycarbonate magazine and come up with some other way to indicate remaining rounds? that magazine has been nothing but trouble from day one with deployments in siachen to the thar and people dropping the rifle and breaking the magazines.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54261
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby ramana » 07 Jul 2015 01:37

All those improvements suggested by ARDE( which is part of DRDO) have Army troops assent? IOW after OFB makes those changes, hope Army doesn't come back in disagreement.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19442
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Karan M » 07 Jul 2015 01:55

R saar, the item can go into production only after IA places orders which can happen only after a bunch of trials. Now your million $ question is basically whether OFB can make these with relevant quality. I hope so, they have had a huge time to at least learn the basics of rifle making.
Modified INSAS meeting reliability standards is a jingo dream.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19442
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Karan M » 07 Jul 2015 02:00


Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19442
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Karan M » 07 Jul 2015 02:07

Saurav Jha, take a bow. Whatta a prediction.

http://www.ibnlive.com/blogs/india/saur ... 48529.html

There is no denying that the INSAS rifle family needs development but then that also falls within the lookout of IA itself, which is a key stakeholder in the entire process. As Major General (retd.) Bhupendra Yadav, who has long years of experience with the Department of Defence Production (DDP) in the Ministry of Defence and has a PhD in Operations Management to boot, says 'At the time of introduction in the 1990s it was universally felt that we had a good design on our hands.'

'The issues with the INSAS are known to be on the production side of things,'he continues.'Even there the defects have been identified and should simply have beenrectified with the Army taking the necessary initiative to make the other stakeholders work on this path. After all what exactly are the Master General of Ordnance(MGO) and Director General of Quality Assurance (DGQA) there for anyway? The Army can't suddenly take a standoffish attitude on this and just look abroad.'
General Yadav adds emphatically.For those who came late, on OFB's special/extended board are included the MGO and DGQA who are senior serving officers appointed by IA specifically'to represent the users and their interest on quality aspects.' These two gentlemen are supposed get the job done on quality control aspects related to production by OFB.


As per General Yadav, the time already spent in the process of 'downselecting' imported types since 2011, was more than adequate to develop the next iteration of the INSAS and fix issues with it provided there was sufficient will. '3-4 years gives you enough time to upgrade the INSAS to satisfactory levels,' General Yadav remarks.[/b]Although hypothetical, a re-look can be taken at something like the Excalibur, a modernized development based on the INSAS which IA has been rather lukewarm too[/b]


We should also carry this forward for our SF or other niche uses.

Especially at a time when DRDO's home-grown MCIWS is 'out of the stovepipe and into the light' undergoing technical trials. The MCIWS revealed for the first time right here on 'Geek at Large' earlier this year (http://ibnlive.in.com/blogs/sauravjha/2 ... -drdo.html) is an indigenous attempt at a contemporary modular AR exhibiting all the features possessed by the rifles currently in contention for IA's next gen requirement.

Interestingly an indigenous 6.8 mm round has also been developed for use with the MCIWS. The MCIWS' grenade launcher can also fire programmable air burst rounds making it a tie-in for the F-INSAS program. Instead of handing out massive royalties to foreign weapon makers the IA could well decide by putting its weight behind the iterative development of the MCIWS.


Moreover, let DRDO select a production agency(could be from the private sector) for itselfas far as the MCIWSis concerned and give it the option of exporting the weapon irrespective of whether it finds favour with the Indian military or not. If downright imports are 'moral' then downright 'exports' are moral too. Indeed liberalization in this arena should be a two-way street with various classes of FDI allowed and various categories of outright exports allowed too.

And let's not forget OFB either, which warts and all has serious potential and has delivered in the past when there has been 'clarity amongst stakeholders' like in the case of the 105mm Indian Field Gun that continues to be procured by IA even today. Let them upgrade their game in the face of competition. And let the best option win on a proper cost-benefit evaluation based on sustainability, economy and quality with national interest foregrounded.

Picklu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2091
Joined: 25 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Picklu » 07 Jul 2015 09:01

The same OFB produced SLR and I have not found much criticism about its quality. So pillorying OFB alone on quality concern is probably not right when the same factory has produced similar item with better quality.

My take on this is that the process failure is mostly on product design refinement and support planning

From my limited experience in IT Vitty, I have seen that when something new is designed, the design process focus fully on features and at the most product performance but completely neglects the production(in numbers, on time with required quality) and maintenance part. The first generation is typically horrible on this regard. Good orgs take that in stride and continues to work on the same to come up with the mk2 to take care of these issues. Separate budget is allocated for these improvements outside the budget of regalar production and maintenance of mk1.

It is exactly the same thing we are noticing here. Only, IA being in the line of fire has a different urgency than the rest of the orgs due to several factors.

Everytime there is some issue with an indigenous weapon system, the public discourse veers to find a scapegoat. Before induction, it is IAF vs DRDO, after induction its IAF vs DRDO vs OFB.

Need to have a mindset that everyone in these orgs are Indian and nobody personally is at fault. The issue lies mostly in the process and that needs to be fixed. For every lazy person in one org, there is a counterpart on the other side and vice versa.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7722
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby rohitvats » 07 Jul 2015 10:56

Picklu wrote:<SNIP> Everytime there is some issue with an indigenous weapon system, the public discourse veers to find a scapegoat. Before induction, it is IAF vs DRDO, after induction its IAF vs DRDO vs OFB.

Need to have a mindset that everyone in these orgs are Indian and nobody personally is at fault. The issue lies mostly in the process and that needs to be fixed. For every lazy person in one org, there is a counterpart on the other side and vice versa.


Bang on target! Best summary of core issue plaguing our MIC.

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

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Singha » 07 Jul 2015 11:38

the british SA80 has the kind of translucent plastic mag seen on INSAS.

but most others use metal or thicker plastic opaque mags , sometimes with a transparent plastic slit to see how much ammo is left. this might be more rugged from our pov.

eg the Tavor 5.56mm 30rd mag

http://www.defensereview.com/wp-content ... m_DR_1.jpg

the weight diff between a metal and plastic mag * 10 mags might not be huge considering the other combat load a trooper carries.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby shiv » 07 Jul 2015 13:33

Karan M wrote:Please do! PS I saw one "shuddapoly" (wottaname :rotfl: :rotfl: classic saar ) gentlemans videos - very interesting. Are there any airgun repair shops you'd recommend?

Depends. Minor repairs can be done by shuddhapoly type people. But typically any shop on SJP road or Kovi shop near Manipal center (more upmarket/expensive) for stuff that requires new stock or welding work.

Sorry OT

member_20453
BRFite
Posts: 613
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby member_20453 » 07 Jul 2015 14:03

Indeed as Picklu suggests the SLR made by OFB is a very reliable rifle as, actually I would love IA/OFB to come up with a modified variant of the SLR, it would be make the ideal squad sniper rifle. Actually they only need to add a piccatiny rail on top, perhaps a couple of small rails up front, perhaps a collapsible stock. Effective range of this weapon is between 600-800M ideal for a squad sniper.

http://www.indianarmy.thecompleteactor. ... o/str%20(5).jpg

https://www.defencetalk.com/pictures/da ... Sniper.jpg

member_22539
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2022
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby member_22539 » 07 Jul 2015 16:19

^+1. If the americans can use their 50s era M-14s as a squad marksman weapon, then we can do the same with the FAL.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Viv S » 07 Jul 2015 17:09

RoyG wrote:Good question. Remember that NSG and other SF groups serve mainly in CT roles, and they train heavily in urban environments. The 5.56 is very controllable which is very much needed in a HR scenario. Moreover, there are a lot more firearms which have been developed around the world which are chambered in 5.56. Our firearms industry hasn't matured and so we need to source most of our equipment, including firearms from abroad for specialized roles.

The NSG's weapon of choice for an urban environment is the MP-5 (same for the Marcos). The SF on the other hand trains for all manner of operations, and most of its actual operations have been COIN-related. For non-urban scenarios the SF & NSG both employ the 5.56 mm Tavor. Same for RR Cdo as well as the special units of the CRPF and BSF.

The 7.62 is used by paramilitary forces in the jungles and areas like Kashmir where you face a very hostile populace coupled with terror threat. You need to be able to put these jihadis down with 1 or 2 rounds while minimizing casualties on CT side. They don't normally take hostages except if they're hindu/buddhist so normally its just a straight fight between the jihadis and security guys.

Every elite unit (including foreign ones) operating in such situations seems to prefer the 5.56 round. Even the Russians operating in COIN reportedly prefer the AK-74 over the AKM.

Coming to the issue of the 5.45 round that the Russian's use - its controllable and have friends which have told me that it performs a bit better than the 5.56 in some respects. I think we need to begin r&d on indian specific rounds and develop new class of weapons around them. The Chinese have really pursued this in a big way and are even exporting.

Point is, its broadly comparable to the 5.56 and still preferred over the 7.62x39mm round.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Viv S » 07 Jul 2015 17:14

rkhanna wrote:INSAS Concept Graphic? How to make things TFTA :roll:


I think I prefer the MCIWS' furniture. Full marks for 'coolness' factor. :mrgreen:

Image

Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2594
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Sagar G » 07 Jul 2015 19:28

Karan M wrote:why can't we just drop the darn polycarbonate magazine and come up with some other way to indicate remaining rounds? that magazine has been nothing but trouble from day one with deployments in siachen to the thar and people dropping the rifle and breaking the magazines.


Why shall we drop it ??? The problem has been addressed and there has been no news of any complain about the same from any respectable source. Wiki tells me that it's already in use in an assault rifle exported all over the world so it's not something new that we have done for the first time in the world (though I wish that was the case). I feel that we are unnecessarily harsh on our designers.

member_22539
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2022
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby member_22539 » 07 Jul 2015 19:41

^Yep, the gorgeous Steyr AUG also uses it, so it is not new in any way.

Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2276
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Manish_P » 07 Jul 2015 19:58

No prizes for guessing that the number of rounds left is the mag is crucial for the soldier in a firefight (or even otherwise)

So visibility is very important

If, and this is a big IF, transparency is a factor in the 'hardening' of the polymer then the sort of compromise given by 'Windows' or 'Slits' might be a solution...

And of course the magazine designers do try to incorporate thicker 'bumper's at the edges and the bottom to minimise the chance of the window itself getting cracked when the magazine hits the ground.. but there is no accounting for Murphy's Law :)

HK UMP Mag

Image


British SA-80 rifle mag

Image

Here is a concept from HERA Arms Germany... the slit is on the back-end of the magazine

Image

Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2594
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Sagar G » 07 Jul 2015 20:14

Manish_P wrote:If, and this is a big IF, transparency is a factor in the 'hardening' of the polymer then the sort of compromise given by 'Windows' or 'Slits' might be a solution...


No transparency or translucency isn't an indicator of hardness/softness. The problem with windows/slits is that you would have to look at that particular place to get to know the remaining no. of bullets but the same isn't an issue with a fully transparent one.

One disadvantage of fully transparent mag is that if you are thinking of bluffing your enemy with an empty mag then that's not going to happen :mrgreen: You can put a jacket over the mag to overcome this but then if you have a Salman Khanish (a la Andaz Apna Apna) type of buddy, you are dead meat :lol:

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby shiv » 07 Jul 2015 20:56

Sagar G wrote:
Manish_P wrote:If, and this is a big IF, transparency is a factor in the 'hardening' of the polymer then the sort of compromise given by 'Windows' or 'Slits' might be a solution...


No transparency or translucency isn't an indicator of hardness/softness. The problem with windows/slits is that you would have to look at that particular place to get to know the remaining no. of bullets but the same isn't an issue with a fully transparent one.

One disadvantage of fully transparent mag is that if you are thinking of bluffing your enemy with an empty mag then that's not going to happen :mrgreen: You can put a jacket over the mag to overcome this but then if you have a Salman Khanish (a la Andaz Apna Apna) type of buddy, you are dead meat :lol:


Gunge and dirt in the mag will collect up more easily with a slit unless the mag is reserved for carriage only in in Forum Mall Bangalore

member_22539
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2022
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby member_22539 » 08 Jul 2015 05:46

^These small slits/windows can be covered by transparent material and they are seen as such in most of these slit/window types these days.

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

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Singha » 08 Jul 2015 09:09

imo rugged aluminium with a back or side slit of plastic is the way fwd. not having plastic at the corners to hit the ground helps...let it just be on the side or back

kmkraoind
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3908
Joined: 27 Jun 2008 00:24

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby kmkraoind » 08 Jul 2015 10:02

Even a small wired aluminum mesh sandwiched between polycarbonate will make it unbreakable on falls as well as light and transparent.

If the aluminum mesh could be little embossed on outer side, so that it will add grip and no need to proved other gripping grooves to the magazine.

It seems no such magazine exists, I should have patented those designs. :D

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

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Singha » 08 Jul 2015 10:59

my leo toys mauser pistol with its 5-rd mag was ultra reliable to its last day when the charging bolt handle broke.
mag made a solid click and no jams ever. a genius made its master mould.

Avinash R
BRFite
Posts: 1973
Joined: 24 Apr 2008 19:59

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Avinash R » 08 Jul 2015 12:48

shiv wrote:In medicine, if I say "AIDS is becoming more common" I will have to back up my claim with statistics from proper studies.

About INSAS I have seen many complaints but no statistics like failure per X rounds under Y conditions

The problem is that there is no assault rifle in the world that can compare with the Kalashnikov. I would like to see a comparison (with statistics) of INSAS with non-Kalashnikov standard issue weapons of other armies.


Old news from archives
Indian Army finds INSAS rifles reliable

NEW DELHI, SEPTEMBER 6: Intensive tests on INSAS rifle, the Indian Army's mainstay, have confirmed its "robustness and reliability" even in "intense operational scenarios."

The Army's Infantry School in Mhow tested 44 INSAS rifles of the Platoon Weapons Division, simulating an "intense operational scenario". The rifles were put through alternative tests of short-burst firing and single-shot firing.

The report of the tests says the rate of fire and performance during high cyclic load was "acceptable".

A total of 12,237 rounds were fired. The total number of "stoppages" where rounds get jammed during continuous use was under one per cent, a vindication of the Army's stand, since the international norm for small arms is two per cent.

The report says out of 44 rifles, only 15 faced stoppages, and only three more than eight stoppages. Barring the three, the average stoppage was only 0.66 per cent, the report adds.

Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2594
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Sagar G » 08 Jul 2015 22:01

shiv wrote:Gunge and dirt in the mag will collect up more easily with a slit unless the mag is reserved for carriage only in in Forum Mall Bangalore


Slit/window will obviously have a transparent cover like the one's in the pics posted.

vaibhav.n
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 575
Joined: 23 Mar 2010 21:47

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby vaibhav.n » 09 Jul 2015 01:56

Avinash R wrote:A total of 12,237 rounds were fired. The total number of "stoppages" where rounds get jammed during continuous use was under one per cent, a vindication of the Army's stand, since the international norm for small arms is two per cent.


Those statistics need to be studied in totality to be understood. A total ~ 12,000 rounds fired by 44 INSAS rifles, for an average of ~ 280 odd rounds/rifle. Ideally, what should interest us is the Mean Rounds Between Stoppage (MRBS) as a figure. MRBS (FTE/FTF), the common number (0.2% rate of stoppages) also happens to be the known benchmark for an AK-47.

We are unaware of the actual cyclic rate and how many rounds did every gun shoot so are unable to calculate any meaningful figures.

However even when kept aside; Consider this,

The current M4 series was designed to meet a requirement written in 1990, which called for the M4 to fire 600 mean rounds between stoppages, PEO Soldiers officials said. Weapons officials did say that the M4A1, the special operations version of the M4, achieved 1,691 mean rounds between stoppages when it the tested using the new M855A1 ammunition.


The M249 SAW, the Army’s Squad Automatic Weapon, has a reliability requirement of 1200 MRBS.


Even in a limited firing scenario...what does not bode well is when ~30% of the rifles suffer stoppage with under 300 rounds fired.

Anyways there is hope with the Excalibur, but these lingering production issues need to be ironed out or given to private players...This versus with the MSMC where the IA is asking for 99.6% success rate and falsely claims 2% is the international standard when it is obviously much less.

Link:US Army M4 Tests

Avinash R
BRFite
Posts: 1973
Joined: 24 Apr 2008 19:59

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Avinash R » 09 Jul 2015 08:05

^yeah that statistic proves INSAS as reliable and my job is to prove it as crap, so lets shift the goalpost again and demand another set of statistic and compare INSAS rifle to the M4 carbine.

and we know what you are peddling viewtopic.php?p=1863322#p1863322

vaibhav.n
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 575
Joined: 23 Mar 2010 21:47

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby vaibhav.n » 09 Jul 2015 09:39

You dont get it do you...wih only one stoppage for 24,000 rounds they are demanding higher reliability for the excalibur than even the INSAS that for a full auto weapon.

Avinash R
BRFite
Posts: 1973
Joined: 24 Apr 2008 19:59

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Avinash R » 09 Jul 2015 17:08

^so what? its a known tactic, the army keeps demanding the moon to stall purchases of indigenous weaponry.

with the new govt in place they will soon realize those old tactics wont work.

while the coast guard is happy to buy indian amogh carbines the army is still crying about lack of carbines in its armory.


Return to “Mil-Tech Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests