Small Arms Thread

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 1614
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Thakur_B » 09 Jul 2015 18:25

vaibhav.n wrote: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.


Let's not jump to conclusions here. The tests were carried out at ARDE's establishment and might not reflect standard field conditions. The abnormally large number indicates it might be under ideal conditions.

Avinash R wrote:^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.


A gun which uses another type of ammunition ? No thanks. It's not hard to make a 14 inch barrel gun that fires regular 5.56x45 ammunition.

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

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Avinash R » 09 Jul 2015 18:54

Thakur_B wrote:
vaibhav.n wrote: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.


Let's not jump to conclusions here. The tests were carried out at ARDE's establishment and might not reflect standard field conditions. The abnormally large number indicates it might be under ideal conditions.


we all know how army tests indian made war materials http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-sa ... ne-1177317

I hope ARDE videographs the entire process of 'testing' by the army and keeps a copy handy to provide CAG with verifiable evidence.

Thakur_B wrote:
Avinash R wrote:^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.


A gun which uses another type of ammunition ? No thanks. It's not hard to make a 14 inch barrel gun that fires regular 5.56x45 ammunition.


oh yes, lets waste another few years in GSQR and RFI tamasha.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19453
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Karan M » 09 Jul 2015 19:01

Sagar G wrote:
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.


Just speak to any INSAS user. The problem still exists because soldiers are human. Rifles get dropped, magazines get clumsily handled, operational conditions mean that the rifles get slammed against obstructions, terrain and people get censured for it in the IA if the mags are damaged (depending on unit/commander). The polycarbonate mags are not really well liked by many people as they are (obviously) not as rugged as the metal ones in terms of rough handling.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19453
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Karan M » 09 Jul 2015 19:06

Picklu wrote: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.


All ok except for the fact that you have probably not seen the rejection rates for OFB produced equipment or asked about the quality of OFB produced rifles or grenades or ammo from folks using them in recent years. It was a standard practise for the unit armourer to take all OFB issued rifles (INSAS) and rework them for use. Their ammo rejection rates are horrendous & audit reports bring out that OFB managers produced entire batches without basic testing (to meet production quota and meet their yearly claims). These audit reports unlike in the case of Tejas wagehra auditors doing "extrapolations" or thinking widgets are easy to develop etc. These are fairly standard production targets, items produced, QA/QC rates and then why the QA/QC process was short circuited (answer - OFB issues, faulty equipment, faulty raw materials wrongly procured by OFB, process wrongly implemented by OFB and in many cases factory managers despite knowing issues existed, still went ahead with production to meet quota targets. Sheer "what goes of my father").

We are talking of thousands of crores of rejected items piled up, segregated and in each case, OFB manages to use political pull to avoid any detailed corrective work.

And then there is the complete lack of pride of OFB wallahs in their work. See the fit and finish.
Arjun made by OFB? Paint all over the interiors sometimes splashed on the fittings which shouldn;t have a drop of paint on them. Give the same to a TATA and Mahindra and see how they put together the same unit.

INSAS? Many fittings look as badly made as by a local kattha maker (they'd do a better job).
In contrast, other DPSUs - eg BEL, ECIL all do a much better job in manufacturing. Their workers clearly work with greater pride than the OFB which has been merrily churning out junk and you and I pay for it.

SLR - who knows what messes occurred there, because in those good old days, we didn;t have any CAG wagehra putting up their reports publicly.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54275
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby ramana » 09 Jul 2015 20:35

Hey guys can wee ease off on personal attacks? Its not like we all are holy!

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19453
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Karan M » 09 Jul 2015 20:38

^^ We should just be happy if the Excalibur may get selected and that it meets reliability criteria and hopefully more data will be available. Excalibur is a perfect case for involving pvt sector in defence and having Mahindra or L&T make the rifle.

Is the MOD listening?!

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

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby vaibhav.n » 09 Jul 2015 21:44

Karan,

Its not even as if they are treated shabbily....in addition to 45 hour weeks, night shift, extra time allowance they get govt accommodation and health benefits......

Now consider this nugget....

Sources say on an average a worker draws up to Rs 40,000 a month but a major part includes the piecework component. Experienced workers draw as much as Rs 80,000 on the basis of piecework. If the factories continue to pay higher wages without productivity, it can lead to an audit objection. This is what prompted the board to approach the army for fresh orders, so that at least the level of wages can be maintained, the source said.


As a worker if you are earning 40,000 in India on an average, the quality and attention to detail better be along Teutonic lines...

Low demand for Insas rifles triggers concern in ordnance factories

For those interested in more MoD goof ups; one of the best reports on the authorised scales and ammo holdings some of which were zero or negative...

CAG Report --Ammunition Management in Army

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

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby vaibhav.n » 09 Jul 2015 22:14

Thakur_B wrote:
vaibhav.n wrote:You dont get it do you...with 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.


Let's not jump to conclusions here. The tests were carried out at ARDE's establishment and might not reflect standard field conditions. The abnormally large number indicates it might be under ideal conditions.


Hmm actually you could be right or the DDM added another zero...What is intriguing is that even modern chrome lined barrels have a life of 12-15k rounds so obviously they haven't fired it using only one rifle....

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19453
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Karan M » 10 Jul 2015 01:30

LOL

http://www.defenseworld.net/news/13378/ ... lace_INSAS

Indian Army To Issue RFI For Assault Rifles To Replace INSAS
Source : Our Bureau ~ Dated : Tuesday, July 7, 2015 @ 11:34 AM
Views : 339 A- A A+
[INSAS standard foldable and fixed butt rifles]

INSAS standard foldable and fixed butt rifles

The Indian Army is likely to issue a new RFI (Request for Information) for a new single caliber assault rifle to replace its INSAS rifle after it scrapped a four-year-old tender for purchasing 1.8 lakh multi-caliber weapons.

“A RFI will soon be issued for a single caliber guns as part of the ‘Make in India’ initiative. The RFI will be open to all,” PTI quoted an unnamed defense source as saying Tuesday.

“The army has so far not shortlisted any particular gun to replace INSAS that entered service in the late 1990s,” the source said.

The army had initially tendered for a a rifle with interchangeable barrels firing different calibres — the 5.56-mm INSAS round and the 7.62-mm AK-47 round as the troops use them in counter-insurgency operations while the INSAS rifles are issued for peace stations.

However, none of the firms which had pitched for the contract could satisfy the army with sources saying that the General Staff Qualitative Requirements “could well have been too ambitious”.

“There was no point on working on something that cannot be worked out,” the sources added.

Army had on June 15 informed the four short-listed international firms that it was retracting the multi-crore contract.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7558
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby nachiket » 10 Jul 2015 01:56

^^Wait, so the previous news that they were buying the Excalibur was false?

If they are going with the RFI-RFP route again, I just hope that after they finally choose a rifle, they invite proposals from Indian private companies to manufacture those rifles. If the ARDE is supposed to compete against others for the order, the OFB should have to do the same for manufacturing them.

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

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Hobbes » 10 Jul 2015 07:25

Karan M wrote:
Picklu wrote: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.


All ok except for the fact that you have probably not seen the rejection rates for OFB produced equipment or asked about the quality of OFB produced rifles or grenades or ammo from folks using them in recent years. It was a standard practise for the unit armourer to take all OFB issued rifles (INSAS) and rework them for use. Their ammo rejection rates are horrendous & audit reports bring out that OFB managers produced entire batches without basic testing (to meet production quota and meet their yearly claims). These audit reports unlike in the case of Tejas wagehra auditors doing "extrapolations" or thinking widgets are easy to develop etc. These are fairly standard production targets, items produced, QA/QC rates and then why the QA/QC process was short circuited (answer - OFB issues, faulty equipment, faulty raw materials wrongly procured by OFB, process wrongly implemented by OFB and in many cases factory managers despite knowing issues existed, still went ahead with production to meet quota targets. Sheer "what goes of my father").

We are talking of thousands of crores of rejected items piled up, segregated and in each case, OFB manages to use political pull to avoid any detailed corrective work.

And then there is the complete lack of pride of OFB wallahs in their work. See the fit and finish.
Arjun made by OFB? Paint all over the interiors sometimes splashed on the fittings which shouldn;t have a drop of paint on them. Give the same to a TATA and Mahindra and see how they put together the same unit.

INSAS? Many fittings look as badly made as by a local kattha maker (they'd do a better job).
In contrast, other DPSUs - eg BEL, ECIL all do a much better job in manufacturing. Their workers clearly work with greater pride than the OFB which has been merrily churning out junk and you and I pay for it.

SLR - who knows what messes occurred there, because in those good old days, we didn;t have any CAG wagehra putting up their reports publicly.

One thing that we're missing here is that the 1A1 aka SLR line was designed, delivered and installed by FN Herstal of Belgium, one of the world's leading small arms manufacturers, who also supplied the manuals and detailed training for every step of the manufacturing process, including quality standards and processes. All that OFB had to do was to turn on the switch and run the damn thing. On a similar note the standard Indian military/ police sidearm, the Browning Hi-Power that the OFB calls the "Pistol Auto 9mm 1A", is manufactured from dies and machinery supplied by Inglis of Canada, which is the reason for its longevity. On another note, stories I've heard say that the dies are so worn now that the weapon has a ton of issues.

Unfortunately the INSAS was an indigenous design as is the Excalibur, and the OFB never weaned its way off its dependence on foreign suppliers to build a working internal engineering and quality culture, with the results that are before us. Given the complete lack of accountability at the OFB, I do not see things improving any time soon, and so would not be particularly surprised if the Excaliburs delivered by them exhibit build and quality problems.

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

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Sagar G » 10 Jul 2015 20:20

Karan M wrote:Just speak to any INSAS user. The problem still exists because soldiers are human. Rifles get dropped, magazines get clumsily handled, operational conditions mean that the rifles get slammed against obstructions, terrain and people get censured for it in the IA if the mags are damaged (depending on unit/commander). The polycarbonate mags are not really well liked by many people as they are (obviously) not as rugged as the metal ones in terms of rough handling.


I had spoken to one recently who worked in army's repair and maintenance department. I had asked him about INSAS and he had said that though he was in a different section but the guys working on gun repair were under the same roof and from them he knew that the gun was good and wasn't much problematic. It didn't occur to me then to ask about the mag specifically but since he didn't point it out as well I can safely assume that it isn't such a big issue than how it is made out. Previous government has answered about the rifle problems as well and we can see that

Prior to 2003, Indian Army had reported a problem of oil spray in the eyes of the firer. Based on the feedback, corrective action was taken and the design was modified. Since then, no adverse feedback has been received. Besides the remedial and improvement measures suggested by the Defect Investigation Team are intimated to the manufacturer and the user. Some of the defects/shortcoming noticed are:-

(i) Improper heat treatment and material; the concerned Ordnance Factories have been advised accordingly.

(ii) Firing of segregated ammunition lot; Users have been advised.

(iii) Improper drill by the User; user has been advised and educated by short term courses.


the problems range from quality control to improper user action. Personal level of talk that anyone has have had with a few users is barely a sign of problem with the design. Full transparent mag isn't something which has been done for the first time and the same has been exported as well. How come they aren't suffering from much problem but our guys keep them cracking up as is being suggested ??? How many mags per thousand gets cracked up due to rough handling ??? Is the crack so severe that it immediately renders the full mag ineligible to be used ??? We need to know answers to these questions before we form any educated view about INSAS mag troubles.

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

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Sagar G » 10 Jul 2015 20:25

nachiket wrote:^^Wait, so the previous news that they were buying the Excalibur was false?

If they are going with the RFI-RFP route again, I just hope that after they finally choose a rifle, they invite proposals from Indian private companies to manufacture those rifles. If the ARDE is supposed to compete against others for the order, the OFB should have to do the same for manufacturing them.


It's embarrassing that people here still don't know the difference between DRDO and defence PSU's. I would like to put it in sweet and short terms that DRDO competes with no one when it comes to designing defence equipments, neither do they participate in replying to dumbass RFI/RFP from IA HQ.

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

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Picklu » 11 Jul 2015 15:29

Hobbes wrote: One thing that we're missing here is that the 1A1 aka SLR line was designed, delivered and installed by FN Herstal of Belgium, one of the world's leading small arms manufacturers, who also supplied the manuals and detailed training for every step of the manufacturing process, including quality standards and processes. All that OFB had to do was to turn on the switch and run the damn thing. On a similar note the standard Indian military/ police sidearm, the Browning Hi-Power that the OFB calls the "Pistol Auto 9mm 1A", is manufactured from dies and machinery supplied by Inglis of Canada, which is the reason for its longevity. On another note, stories I've heard say that the dies are so worn now that the weapon has a ton of issues.

Unfortunately the INSAS was an indigenous design as is the Excalibur, and the OFB never weaned its way off its dependence on foreign suppliers to build a working internal engineering and quality culture, with the results that are before us. Given the complete lack of accountability at the OFB, I do not see things improving any time soon, and so would not be particularly surprised if the Excaliburs delivered by them exhibit build and quality problems.


We are talking about the same thing. Let me explain below.

This is what is involved to bring out any mass produced item for usage

A. product r&d develops the item with required feature & performance
B. production r&d develops the manufacturing process to produce the same in mass scale with proper quality control *
C. production agency produces the item following the developed manufacturing process

For the sake of simplification, I am omitting the continuous improvement via feedback loop. I am also omitting the product support part.

Now, for indigenous weapon system, DRDO takes care of part A and OFB takes care of part C but no specialized org exists for part B.

Part B is taken care partially by DRDO and partially by OFB/HAL/govt Shipyard/defense PSU and none are expert in the same as none have mandate and necessary resources.

Part B is as important as part A and requires almost equal amount of resource, time and specialized knowledge and decades of experience with access to specialized global supply chain of high end sesnors and machinary. This is not same as production agency experience and Without having expertise in this, no indigenous mass produced weapon will be successful - be in insas, dhruv, arjun or tejas.

The moment OFB or other defense PSUs acquire the part B via via TOT from foreign weapon developer, they churn out mass produced items with required quality be it SLR, Chetak or Reporter radar. However, for indigenous weapon systems (or mother russia supplied incomplete ToT) this vital part remains the weak link and production suffers both in quality as well as quantity.

Blaming OFB (or any defense PSU for that matter) for this is again missing the wood for the trees. Just like DRDO, these production orgs also will develop this expertise but will take time and dedicated support.

Already some orgs like BEL have improved a lot and others are also coming up but the degree varies.

There are various reasons for such variation among Indian production orgs. Not possible to cover everything but missing mandate with money plus govt support is the major reason and org apathy/lal jhanda is the least to blame for that matter. For better orgs, simply check their product portfolio, dev cycle timeline and frequency and the reason for success would be obvious. Also, till date, I have not found many HAL or OFB wala who are not patriot or proud of their service towards nation.

Hopefully, with NaMo govt, the problem with money for modernisaion etc will go away rapidly and once that happens, these orgs will fulfill their truly strategic purpose. Remember, it is still Bhilai, Rourkela and other SAIL plants when the NATION needs it despite having multitudes of private steel plants in desh. **

THAT IS WHY I MENTIONED THAT THE BLAME LIES WITH THE PROCESS AND NOT THE ORGS. The orgs can be blamed for kingdom comes without understanding their problem and nothing fruitful will come up. And for the nations sake, it is not an option. Privatization is not going to solve that problem on its own quickly enough simply because the need to humongous amount of upfront capex, land and man power requirements.
---------------------------

* For items to be mass produced, the production r&D must design the manufacturing process with as much automation as possible - both for production as well as QC. This increases the capex as well as opex and also needs specialized knowledge and access to global supply chain for this niche area but can not be avoided else the production agency will simply turn into sweat shops of China pushing the labour to inhuman conditions to make up for rejections. There is really no other alternative.

** Midhani plays its role there both on product as well as process r&d.

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

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Picklu » 11 Jul 2015 15:43

Anecdote is that, metal magazines are much more rugged so much so that they were used to double up as small hammer for various field tasks. Not sure how true or widespread. Plastic mags simply unsuitable for such usage.

Metal mags with slits or with side rubber cladding for protection will be equally unsuitable for such.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36409
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby SaiK » 11 Jul 2015 19:26

posting again to up the ante on such useful technology, especially to smoke the hell outta hiding pakis on the mountains

http://www.gizmodo.co.uk/2012/05/theres ... rt-bullet/
Like a mini laser-guided smartbomb, this incredible new bullet will actually bend around corners. Once fired out of a rifle, it'll track you and change direction to hit its target no matter where you run. If you're painted with a laser designator, you've just got no hope, and now it's ready for production.

Image

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

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Hobbes » 12 Jul 2015 08:10

Picklu wrote:<snip>
A. product r&d develops the item with required feature & performance
B. production r&d develops the manufacturing process to produce the same in mass scale with proper quality control *
C. production agency produces the item following the developed manufacturing process

For the sake of simplification, I am omitting the continuous improvement via feedback loop. I am also omitting the product support part.

Now, for indigenous weapon system, DRDO takes care of part A and OFB takes care of part C but no specialized org exists for part B.

Part B is taken care partially by DRDO and partially by OFB/HAL/govt Shipyard/defense PSU and none are expert in the same as none have mandate and necessary resources.

Part B is as important as part A and requires almost equal amount of resource, time and specialized knowledge and decades of experience with access to specialized global supply chain of high end sesnors and machinary. This is not same as production agency experience and Without having expertise in this, no indigenous mass produced weapon will be successful - be in insas, dhruv, arjun or tejas.

The moment OFB or other defense PSUs acquire the part B via via TOT from foreign weapon developer, they churn out mass produced items with required quality be it SLR, Chetak or Reporter radar. However, for indigenous weapon systems (or mother russia supplied incomplete ToT) this vital part remains the weak link and production suffers both in quality as well as quantity.

Blaming OFB (or any defense PSU for that matter) for this is again missing the wood for the trees. Just like DRDO, these production orgs also will develop this expertise but will take time and dedicated support.
</snip>


I think the bit you're missing here is on who has the accountability for Part B, which is the production technology. In an engineering company context, which is that of the OFB, it is the accountability of the production organization (the Part C folks) to either design the manufacturing process and the line, or bring in external expertise to do this. That is what private companies like Tata, L&T, Reliance etc. have been doing from Day One. This is a well understood thing, and has been widely documented. Public sector companies including IOC, BP, BHEL etc. have no problem following it. The standout failures are the OFB and the DPSUs, most probably because (a) they have a captive market; (b) both the buyer and producer/seller are governed by the same authorities, a guaranteed way for the authorities in question to abuse their power; (c) that market (the Services) is muzzled by the onus of official secrecy; (d) very large sums of money in the form of bribes, commissions etc. are collected by those who should be enforcing process, quality and accountability, as can be seen here; and (e) military issues, especially those pertaining to procurement and supply issues do not touch the general public, until it is too late, as was the case in 1962.

Given these circumstances, the OFBs are never going to up their game. The DPSUs, especially BEL, seem to have done a little better though (with the obvious exception of BEML and HSL).

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 1614
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Thakur_B » 12 Jul 2015 10:54

Karan M wrote:^^ We should just be happy if the Excalibur may get selected and that it meets reliability criteria and hopefully more data will be available. Excalibur is a perfect case for involving pvt sector in defence and having Mahindra or L&T make the rifle.

Is the MOD listening?!


Give Excalibur to L&T and given their track record, they will convert it into desi SiG-550 series.

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

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby shiv » 12 Jul 2015 14:37

The BSF had organized a little public exhibition as part of its 50th year. I have some photos here
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=6252&p=1868925#p1868925

On display were Dragunov, INSAS, Kalshnikov, X95, a Beretta of some description, a Grenade launcher and a Carl Gustav. I missed some stuff because of crowds.

I asked about the INSAS and there were no complaints. In general I have tended to ask soldiesr who carry the INSAS whether they face problems and no one has ever said "Yes". I asked of the polycarbonate magazine caused any problems and the reply was "Badhiya hai" (i.e it is fine). he then compared it to the Kalashnikov and said that the transparent one would let him know how many rounds are left which the metal one does not. heari8ng that from a user is interesting.

The Grenade launcher has a range of up to 1.7 km. Did not know that

sooraj
BRFite
Posts: 1396
Joined: 06 May 2011 15:45

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby sooraj » 18 Jul 2015 12:27


Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8204
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Pratyush » 18 Jul 2015 12:58

I read the report and was left shaking my head, in disbelief.

Rahul Bedi at his best.

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

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby member_22539 » 18 Jul 2015 14:37

^From the above farticle

In 2013-2014 the army had summarily rejected three prototypes of the gas-operated MCIWS, designed to fire 5.56 mm, 7.62 mm and 6.8 x 43 mm special purpose cartridge, by merely changing the barrel and magazine.


This is news to me. Is there any truth to this? Or is he just pulling it out of his a$$?

uddu
BRFite
Posts: 1861
Joined: 15 Aug 2004 17:09

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby uddu » 18 Jul 2015 15:22

Paid news. Disregard it.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16997
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Rahul M » 18 Jul 2015 15:42

read the author's name and closed the tab.

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 1614
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Thakur_B » 21 Jul 2015 16:33


Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19453
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Karan M » 22 Jul 2015 00:17

shiv wrote:The BSF had organized a little public exhibition as part of its 50th year. I have some photos here
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=6252&p=1868925#p1868925

On display were Dragunov, INSAS, Kalshnikov, X95, a Beretta of some description, a Grenade launcher and a Carl Gustav. I missed some stuff because of crowds.

I asked about the INSAS and there were no complaints. In general I have tended to ask soldiesr who carry the INSAS whether they face problems and no one has ever said "Yes". I asked of the polycarbonate magazine caused any problems and the reply was "Badhiya hai" (i.e it is fine). he then compared it to the Kalashnikov and said that the transparent one would let him know how many rounds are left which the metal one does not. heari8ng that from a user is interesting.

The Grenade launcher has a range of up to 1.7 km. Did not know that


That is good news.

shyamoo
BRFite
Posts: 483
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby shyamoo » 22 Jul 2015 03:51

It should be straight forward to design a metal magazine with a polycarbonate section across the middle which would address both the issues.

Or am I missing something here?

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

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Hobbes » 22 Jul 2015 05:55

Karan M wrote:
shiv wrote:The BSF had organized a little public exhibition as part of its 50th year. I have some photos here
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=6252&p=1868925#p1868925

On display were Dragunov, INSAS, Kalshnikov, X95, a Beretta of some description, a Grenade launcher and a Carl Gustav. I missed some stuff because of crowds.

I asked about the INSAS and there were no complaints. In general I have tended to ask soldiesr who carry the INSAS whether they face problems and no one has ever said "Yes". I asked of the polycarbonate magazine caused any problems and the reply was "Badhiya hai" (i.e it is fine). he then compared it to the Kalashnikov and said that the transparent one would let him know how many rounds are left which the metal one does not. heari8ng that from a user is interesting.

The Grenade launcher has a range of up to 1.7 km. Did not know that


That is good news.


Some weeks ago I was in Delhi, and had the opportunity to meet a very senior MHA chaiwalla in an informal setting. The talk turned to the INSAS, and the gent stated that in general the CAPF troops had no complaints with it and that the reason they liked the AK 7.62x39 was the bigger cartridge coupled with the sheer rate of fire, which created a very effective combination for dropping terrorists dead in their tracks. He confirmed that there were some manufacturing issues with the INSAS, but felt the complaints to be overblown and said that they were completely fixable on the production side.

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

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby member_22539 » 22 Jul 2015 06:49

vnmshyam wrote:It should be straight forward to design a metal magazine with a polycarbonate section across the middle which would address both the issues.

Or am I missing something here?


Weight is also an issue. Metal magazines do weigh more as compared to polycarbonate ones. That said, I am not sure how much of an issue it really is.

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

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby shiv » 22 Jul 2015 06:57

Every time I have asked a soldier with an INSAS about any issues he has never said that there were issues. The only time I asked about polycarbonate magazines I was told that they liked them because they could see how many rounds were left. No one that I know of came up complaining that magazines needed to be used as hammers and so metal was better. Or that they kept breaking.

One curious "dysjunction" that I find in some of our discussions is that all the information we get is via the media. When we dislike what the media say we are sure it is because of presstitution. When we agree with the media report (for whatever reason) the same media are no longer presstitutes who are promoting some rival product. I wonder if this is more about our own biases.

INSAS discussions are like that IMO

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 1614
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Thakur_B » 22 Jul 2015 11:38



More from DFI

Image
Early ARDE MCIWS


Image
Most Recent Design


Image
Internal Mechanism Of ARDE'S MCIWS


Image
ARDE-DRDO MCIWS Internal Mechanism


It seems that MCIWS does not have a buffer tube like AR-15/M-16, as earlier prototype shows, and might come with a folding stock option.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Austin » 22 Jul 2015 22:12


Kakkaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3276
Joined: 23 Oct 2002 11:31

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Kakkaji » 22 Jul 2015 23:31



Old news. Already reported as false

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 1614
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Thakur_B » 23 Jul 2015 06:02

Kakkaji wrote:


Old news. Already reported as false


Rajat Pandit is whinging about the alleged decision to go for Excalibur, must be some truth in Excalibur procurement. Otherwise the headline would be 'SDRE DRDO's ryfle phail$ again and ze @rmy is going for m0dern guns from 3L33t gun makers' :)

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

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby vaibhav.n » 23 Jul 2015 10:07

Exclusive: Made in India rifles to replace INSAS

As I suspected, the author has now revised the figures in the new article to 2400 rounds for the excalibur from the earlier quoted 24000 rounds.

Much more realistic and inline with known requirements globally.

The IA must be told to wean away from the 7.62 Russian also it does not make sense when something like an excalibur is being provided.

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

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby shiv » 23 Jul 2015 12:09

Kakkaji wrote:


Old news. Already reported as false

I seem to have missed this news. Do you have a link?

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Gyan » 23 Jul 2015 12:59

The small arms development strategy seems pretty robust.

1. INSAS 5.56 follow on is Excalibur (Evolutionary design).

2. Ghatak 7.62x39 follow on design seems to be Excalibur-2 (again Evolutionary design(?)).

3. MSMC is 5.56x30mm follow on to 9mm SMGs (Is there OFB 9mm SMG design also in development?).

4. MCIWS seems to be more advanced design

5. After INSAS LMG we are developing another 7.62x51 LMG

Hence we are tackling various requirements using multiple approach/s, while developing follow on to earlier products also. Though developments in Pistols, Sniper rifles and (light) Anti-material rifles is still missing.

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

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby shiv » 23 Jul 2015 17:18

Gyan wrote: Anti-material rifles is still missing.

See this
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vidhwansak
After trials, the Border Security Force ordered 100 Vidhwansaks for use in the border areas.[8] These were supplied by October 2008.[9] The rifle has also been offered to the Indian Army and the National Security Guards.[1][5] However, the Indian Army chose not to bring the Vidhwansak into use as it did not meet the weight requirements.[10]

hanumadu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4688
Joined: 11 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby hanumadu » 23 Jul 2015 21:12


Kakkaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3276
Joined: 23 Oct 2002 11:31

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Kakkaji » 23 Jul 2015 21:17

shiv wrote:I seem to have missed this news. Do you have a link?


Posted above by Karan M on July 9th:

http://www.defenseworld.net/news/13378/Indian_Army_To_Issue_RFI_For_Assault_Rifles_To_Replace_INSAS#.VbEYmPnMO00

“A RFI will soon be issued for a single caliber guns as part of the ‘Make in India’ initiative. The RFI will be open to all,” PTI quoted an unnamed defense source as saying Tuesday.

“The army has so far not shortlisted any particular gun to replace INSAS that entered service in the late 1990s,” the source said.


Return to “Mil-Tech Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests