Bharat Rakshak Forum Announcement

Hello Everyone,

A warm welcome back to the Bharat Rakshak Forum.

Important Notice: Due to a corruption in the BR forum database we regret to announce that data records relating to some of our registered users have been lost. We estimate approx. 500 user details are deleted.

To ease the process of recreating the user IDs we request members that have previously posted on the BR forums to recognise and identify their posts, once the posts are identified please contact the BRF moderator team by emailing BRF Mod Team with your post details.

The mod team will be able to update your username, email etc. so that the user history can be maintained.

Unfortunately for members that have never posted or have had all their posts deleted i.e. users that have 0 posts, we will be unable to recreate your account hence we request that you re-register again.

We apologise for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your understanding.

Regards,
Seetal

Small Arms Thread

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9285
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Aditya_V » 03 Oct 2017 15:26

Also, I presume, loading a drum magazine with bullets would be a lot more complicated to soldiers on the field. Being an armchair internet person with zero real experience I am assuming it to be the case.

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 981
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Manish_P » 03 Oct 2017 15:43

^ The older top-loading design drums were.

A few of the newer designs from US and Romania have taken a lot of that pain away.

Check out the romanian rear-plate opening 75 drum round mag by Century Arms.
(the chinese, as expected, have made cheaper low-quality copies)

Still not as reliable, ergonomic or cheap as regular stick magazines though...

Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3781
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Karthik S » 03 Oct 2017 15:44

Thanks guys.

srin
BRFite
Posts: 1400
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby srin » 03 Oct 2017 17:43

One data point if anyone has: how many SLR rounds did a soldier carry before Insas ? And how many INSAS rounds does he carry now ?

darshhan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2206
Joined: 12 Dec 2008 11:52

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby darshhan » 03 Oct 2017 20:24

:evil: :evil:
Bart S wrote:
niran wrote:yes sir, the original logic was 5.56 will wound, and wounded soldiers will engage more soldiers to tend him = less foe firing :rotfl: :rotfl: surely an imagination by a desk bound babu.



IIRC this came out of studies by the US military and their experience with actual conflicts. And it still holds true for regular warfare where you are generally fighting a war of attrition against a trained enemy. Where it comes up short is in counter insurgency especially against drug fueled suicide attackers of the Talibunny variety.


There is no lack of pencil pushers in US military plus the special interest groups working to promote M-16/M-4 family of small arms.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34006
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby shiv » 03 Oct 2017 20:30

niran wrote:
ramana wrote:
However battle experience shows 5.56mm is not doing the job. It wounds rather than kill.


The original switch/the move was wrong.

yes sir, the original logic was 5.56 will wound, and wounded soldiers will engage more soldiers to tend him = less foe firing :rotfl: :rotfl: surely an imagination by a desk bound babu.

I think it is important on BRF to correct misinformation. Let me set the qibla right. 5,56 became the fashion for the US and NATO and in the 80s a serving British Army officer told me that if a man is dead his comrades will leave him, but if he is wounded - two men will be needed to pick him up. Hence the 5.56 was considered OK. But back then they has not considered fired up jihadis on soosai missions.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34006
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby shiv » 03 Oct 2017 20:36

Karthik S wrote:Gurus, most armies don't use drum magazines, but wouldn't that be better as number of reloads will be lower.

The problem is how much weight of ammunition can a soldier carry in combat where there is no certainty that he will get water or food for 24 hours?

A study of a famous battle that the US lost in Vietnam was later explained by the fact that
1. US soldiers were bigger and needed more rations
2. They were loaded with helmet, med kit armour and plenty of ammunition
3. As patrols got longer the tired soldiers would use up their water and discard the bottle (weight) then discard the helmet (weight) but retain only the gun and eventually got killed.

As always it is logistics logistics logistics

srin
BRFite
Posts: 1400
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby srin » 03 Oct 2017 22:14

Aditya_V wrote:It also depends on the the operation theater in commercial warfare, north of Zojila where there is very little vegetation or in the Rajastan desert where engagement ranges will be greater the 7.62 *51 will have an advantage, where the vegetation is higher in Punjab and much of Kashmir LOC bordering Jammu, Poonch and the Valley where due to heavy vegetation infantry engagement is probably 100-200 meters the 5.56 should have less recoil, more ammo and adequate for killing.

Against Drug induced talibani variety with engagement less than 50-100 ms the AK series 7.62 *39 is the best with lesser recoil than the 7.62*51 Nato but more stopping power than the 5.56 is best suited, it is like we need our infantry to have 3 different rifles for COIN, thick vegetation borders and sparsly vegetated areas plus various MMG variations and sub machine guns for drivers, JCO's, artillery crews etc.


Being an armchair captain that I am, I gathered some facts (ref: https://www.swggun.org/5-56-vs-7-62/):
- a soldier can carry 3 times more rounds of 5.56x45 NATO vs 7.62x51 NATO
- the 5.56 NATO is more accurate and has flatter trajectory and has higher velocity at 500 yards than 7.62x39 AK47 round
- The stopping power is higher for 5.56 NATO vs 7.62 AK47 at shorter distances and roughly comparable stopping power at higher distances

Next, I read somewhere that significant %age of firing is for covering fire, and not directly to hurt the enemy.
Also read up that each (or some ?) soldier in a company need to carry some 7.62x51 rounds anyway for the company LMG.

Carrying 7.62x51 being heavier, a soldier can carry fewer rounds. So, in mountain warfare where carrying capacity is less, it is better to use a lighter round.
In CQB, against drugged terroristanis, better to use rounds that can kill and penetrate armour. And also logistics isn't much of an issue. So, better to have the 7.62x51 NATO or even the less accurate and powerful 7.62x39 AK47 rounds.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9285
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Aditya_V » 03 Oct 2017 22:40

But the IA quota of bullets to soldiers has been the same 60 in 3magazines which used to be the case with SLR.

Another main disadvantage of 7.62 NATO is compared to 7.62*39 and 5.56 the barrel lengths were longer and unwieldy in combat when barrel length is reduced muzzle flash increases and range also comes down a bit

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

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby vaibhav.n » 03 Oct 2017 23:08

srin wrote:One data point if anyone has: how many SLR rounds did a soldier carry before Insas ? And how many INSAS rounds does he carry now ?


It has remained the same since the 70's, each rifleman in an infantry section carries 80 rounds in 4 mags, 2 fragmentation grenades and 1 LMG magazine.

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2024
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby abhik » 03 Oct 2017 23:27

In other news, the US army puts on hold its plan to replace M4 with a 7.62*51 rifle.

CalvinH
BRFite
Posts: 463
Joined: 15 Jul 2007 04:14

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby CalvinH » 04 Oct 2017 01:23

vaibhav.n wrote:
srin wrote:One data point if anyone has: how many SLR rounds did a soldier carry before Insas ? And how many INSAS rounds does he carry now ?


It has remained the same since the 70's, each rifleman in an infantry section carries 80 rounds in 4 mags, 2 fragmentation grenades and 1 LMG magazine.


Why LMG magazine?

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34006
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby shiv » 04 Oct 2017 06:34

srin wrote:Being an armchair captain that I am, I gathered some facts (ref: https://www.swggun.org/5-56-vs-7-62/):

- the 5.56 NATO is more accurate and has flatter trajectory and has higher velocity at 500 yards than 7.62x39 AK47 round
- The stopping power is higher for 5.56 NATO vs 7.62 AK47 at shorter distances and roughly comparable stopping power at higher distances

I am no less armchair captain than you, but one of the complaints I have heard about the 5.56 is that it will go through the soldier. "Going through" essentially means that the bullet retains energy even after exiting so that all the bullet energy is not used up in damaging the soldier's body tissues. A larger round that fails to penetrate deposits all its energy in the soldiers body - causing more damage and might perhaps stop him.

The US public with their penchant for guns have gone through these iterations of "stopping power" and most videos from serious gun enthusiasts speak derisively of the 0.22inch (which is 5.5 mm) while they love the 0.5 inch or nowadays the 9 mm. I read a quip that nothing has done more to popularise metric units in the US than the 9 mm round.

Ultimately the information we are getting is mixed. No one is absolutely sure as far as armed forces are concerned. A post above thise one says the US is hesitating from switching over to a bigger than 5.56. The India army too is dithering - and asking for Churkendoose guns can change barrels and fire 5.56, 6.5 and 7.62. For all the cursing that the INSAS has seen (and its design is definitely outdated now) - the rifle had its fans.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34006
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby shiv » 04 Oct 2017 06:36

CalvinH wrote:
vaibhav.n wrote:
It has remained the same since the 70's, each rifleman in an infantry section carries 80 rounds in 4 mags, 2 fragmentation grenades and 1 LMG magazine.


Why LMG magazine?

To share the load that needs to be carried by the LMG team who are part of the unit and will provide crucial offensive and defensive power

srin
BRFite
Posts: 1400
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby srin » 04 Oct 2017 07:18

shiv wrote:
srin wrote:Being an armchair captain that I am, I gathered some facts (ref: https://www.swggun.org/5-56-vs-7-62/):

- the 5.56 NATO is more accurate and has flatter trajectory and has higher velocity at 500 yards than 7.62x39 AK47 round
- The stopping power is higher for 5.56 NATO vs 7.62 AK47 at shorter distances and roughly comparable stopping power at higher distances

I am no less armchair captain than you, but one of the complaints I have heard about the 5.56 is that it will go through the soldier. "Going through" essentially means that the bullet retains energy even after exiting so that all the bullet energy is not used up in damaging the soldier's body tissues. A larger round that fails to penetrate deposits all its energy in the soldiers body - causing more damage and might perhaps stop him.

The US public with their penchant for guns have gone through these iterations of "stopping power" and most videos from serious gun enthusiasts speak derisively of the 0.22inch (which is 5.5 mm) while they love the 0.5 inch or nowadays the 9 mm. I read a quip that nothing has done more to popularise metric units in the US than the 9 mm round.

Ultimately the information we are getting is mixed. No one is absolutely sure as far as armed forces are concerned. A post above thise one says the US is hesitating from switching over to a bigger than 5.56. The India army too is dithering - and asking for Churkendoose guns can change barrels and fire 5.56, 6.5 and 7.62. For all the cursing that the INSAS has seen (and its design is definitely outdated now) - the rifle had its fans.


Btw, I mis-stated the stopping power: The stopping power is lower for 5.56 NATO vs 7.62 AK47 at shorter distances.

srin
BRFite
Posts: 1400
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby srin » 04 Oct 2017 07:20

vaibhav.n wrote:
srin wrote:One data point if anyone has: how many SLR rounds did a soldier carry before Insas ? And how many INSAS rounds does he carry now ?


It has remained the same since the 70's, each rifleman in an infantry section carries 80 rounds in 4 mags, 2 fragmentation grenades and 1 LMG magazine.


Interestingly, one of the videos I was watching yesterday mentioned that during the SLR era, soldiers could remove rounds from the LMG magazine that they carried and use it for the SLR because they both fired the same round.

srin
BRFite
Posts: 1400
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby srin » 04 Oct 2017 07:21

Aditya_V wrote:But the IA quota of bullets to soldiers has been the same 60 in 3magazines which used to be the case with SLR.

Another main disadvantage of 7.62 NATO is compared to 7.62*39 and 5.56 the barrel lengths were longer and unwieldy in combat when barrel length is reduced muzzle flash increases and range also comes down a bit


Good point. On a related note, the recoil is much more for 7.62 and it affects accuracy in full auto mode.

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 981
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Manish_P » 04 Oct 2017 08:31

Full auto is hardly ever used by trained forces. Even by belt fed LMG/MMG providing suppressing fire.

Even more so in the Indian army where accuracy (of firepower) and economy (of ammunition) are given due importance.

'Ek goli, ek dushman'

Other than that it helps increase barrel life and reduce collateral damage to life and property (important when you are fighting on your land and are not an invading army).

Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3781
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Karthik S » 04 Oct 2017 09:37

shiv wrote:
srin wrote:Being an armchair captain that I am, I gathered some facts (ref: https://www.swggun.org/5-56-vs-7-62/):

- the 5.56 NATO is more accurate and has flatter trajectory and has higher velocity at 500 yards than 7.62x39 AK47 round
- The stopping power is higher for 5.56 NATO vs 7.62 AK47 at shorter distances and roughly comparable stopping power at higher distances

I am no less armchair captain than you, but one of the complaints I have heard about the 5.56 is that it will go through the soldier. "Going through" essentially means that the bullet retains energy even after exiting so that all the bullet energy is not used up in damaging the soldier's body tissues. A larger round that fails to penetrate deposits all its energy in the soldiers body - causing more damage and might perhaps stop him.


Shiv ji, if "going through" is the complaint, can't hollow-point bullets be used for the same caliber?
PS: I am assuming that hollow-point is not used and parabellum rounds are used.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34006
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby shiv » 04 Oct 2017 09:48

Karthik S wrote:
shiv wrote:I am no less armchair captain than you, but one of the complaints I have heard about the 5.56 is that it will go through the soldier. "Going through" essentially means that the bullet retains energy even after exiting so that all the bullet energy is not used up in damaging the soldier's body tissues. A larger round that fails to penetrate deposits all its energy in the soldiers body - causing more damage and might perhaps stop him.


Shiv ji, if "going through" is the complaint, can't hollow-point bullets be used for the same caliber?
PS: I am assuming that hollow-point is not used and parabellum rounds are used.

They should use hollow points - but I don't know if there is some funny "International convention" against hollow points that we are following. Seems absurd if we are - like rapist signing convention not to do it from the back

But then again hollow points could change the ballistics profile and may be leading to loss of accuracy, range and tumbling. Need to dig further and see

PS: Kookal seems to suggest that hollow points are more accurate...

srin
BRFite
Posts: 1400
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby srin » 04 Oct 2017 09:55

^^^ wiki auntie says hollow-points are banned by Hague Convention

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34006
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby shiv » 04 Oct 2017 10:01

Then again hollow points need to be machined perfectly - or they will be inaccurate..Apparently the older poorly machined rounds were bad, but new ones are more accurate

CalvinH
BRFite
Posts: 463
Joined: 15 Jul 2007 04:14

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby CalvinH » 05 Oct 2017 01:17

shiv wrote:
CalvinH wrote:
Why LMG magazine?

To share the load that needs to be carried by the LMG team who are part of the unit and will provide crucial offensive and defensive power


Thanks. Makes sense. LMG's high rate of fire would need more bullets.

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

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby vaibhav.n » 05 Oct 2017 14:38

Calvin,

The authorised 1st line ammo scale is for an LMG team is in excess of 700 rounds. AFAIK, the Bren No1 carries the LMG and 5 mags while the Bren No2 carries another 5 mags and the spare barrel. The rest are carried by the Assault Group.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7528
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Pratyush » 05 Oct 2017 18:16

srin wrote:^^^ wiki auntie says hollow-points are banned by Hague Convention


Only in regular conflicts amongst states. They are permitted in counter terror operations.

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 981
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Manish_P » 05 Oct 2017 19:51

Hague Convention? Of year 1899 ??

Since India was ruled by Britain at the time, surely we are not signatories...

And anyway even in regular warfare soldiers are shredded by miniguns, cut up by 20mm, 30mm anti-armor rounds, incinerated by Napalm, vaporized by HEAT rounds, pulverised by 'x' kg bombs.. why give a flying #@^k about whether a bullet is hollow-point or not

Like Shiv ji mentioned a couple of posts earlier - Rapists signing a convention...

srin
BRFite
Posts: 1400
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby srin » 05 Oct 2017 20:36

Manish_P wrote:Full auto is hardly ever used by trained forces. Even by belt fed LMG/MMG providing suppressing fire.

Even more so in the Indian army where accuracy (of firepower) and economy (of ammunition) are given due importance.

'Ek goli, ek dushman'

Other than that it helps increase barrel life and reduce collateral damage to life and property (important when you are fighting on your land and are not an invading army).


Interesting that you mention the "Ek goli, ek dushman". How does it apply to automatic assault rifles that IA wants to procure ?

deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3628
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby deejay » 05 Oct 2017 21:06

^^^You are asking this seriously or in jest?

srin
BRFite
Posts: 1400
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby srin » 05 Oct 2017 21:24

Seriously. Because I'm curious and I don't really understand. To me it goes to the heart of the requirement of the automatic rifle. To me, the auto rifle is important to provide suppressive fire.

Mihir
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 842
Joined: 14 Nov 2004 21:26

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Mihir » 05 Oct 2017 22:37

srin wrote:Interesting that you mention the "Ek goli, ek dushman". How does it apply to automatic assault rifles that IA wants to procure ?

The motto isn't to be taken literally. It showcases an emphasis on individual marksmanship, but marksmanship is not seen as a substitute for sustained suppressive fire. If the IA is specifically demanding full auto 7.62mm rifles, it intends to have riflemen lay down this suppressive fire instead of LMGs if the circumstances call for it. Similar to how the USMC uses the M27 IAR.

hnair
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3314
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: Trivandrum

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby hnair » 05 Oct 2017 22:48

srin wrote:^^^ wiki auntie says hollow-points are banned by Hague Convention


Hollow-point is legal for civilian use :lol: in US and low-velocity hollow-point 9mm is very popular with home defense type of automatic pistol owners, since it is supposed to be non-ricocheting (squashing) and also due to low-velocity will not go through the average woodsiding-dry-wall/gypsum board combo into the next room. Apparently causes minimum "collateral damage" and the resultant law-suits :oops:

A certain Winchester hollow-point round was a personal favorite

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 981
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Manish_P » 06 Oct 2017 08:20

King Khan didn't sign up on this particular provision, and others, of the convention, I think.

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2024
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby abhik » 06 Oct 2017 10:21

Is this "Ek goli, ek dushman" making virtue of necessity - limited logistics and/or affordability? I don't suppose other professional armies train their infantrymen to empty a few clips into the air while shouting snack bar.

ks_sachin
BRFite
Posts: 250
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby ks_sachin » 06 Oct 2017 10:35

abhik wrote:Is this "Ek goli, ek dushman" making virtue of necessity - limited logistics and/or affordability? I don't suppose other professional armies train their infantrymen to empty a few clips into the air while shouting snack bar.


It is fire discipline. When you are out doing a cordon a search in a remote jungle how do you expect logistics to keep up with you right to the point of engagement. You manage with what you carry.

So it is a necessity and a virtue....

VinodTK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2116
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby VinodTK » 16 Oct 2017 06:46

From assault to sniper rifles, machine guns to carbines, soldiers yet to get basic infantry weapons
NEW DELHI: Indian Army's foot soldiers are still nowhere close to getting basic modern infantry weapons, ranging from assault rifles and sniper guns to light machine guns and close-quarter battle carbines, after a decade of acquisition projects from abroad being repeatedly scrapped as well as failure of indigenous options to pass muster till now.

The huge delays in the induction of "small arms" for infantry battalions figured in the Army commanders' conference last week, with Gen Bipin Rawat telling his senior Lt-Generals that "our approach to procurement process needs to be balanced with focus at the right places".

Though plans are now on track to plug major operational gaps in artillery guns, air defence missiles and helicopters, "small arms" remain a big worry. As per overall plans, the 12-lakh strong Army needs 8,18,500 new-generation assault rifles, 4,18,300 close-quarter battle (CQB) carbines, 43,700 light machine guns and 5,679 sniper rifles. All these figures also include some weapons for the much-smaller IAF and Navy, say sources.

But all these induction plans, which are supposed to include direct purchase of an initial number of weapons from a foreign vendor followed by large-scale indigenous production with technology transfer, have failed to materialize so far.

In September 2016, for instance, the Army was forced to re-launch its global hunt for new-generation 7.62 x 51mm assault rifles to replace the old glitch-prone 5.56mm INSAS (Indian small arms system) rifles after similar bids over the last decade were scrapped due to corruption scandals, unrealistic technical requirements and change in caliber of the desired guns, as was first reported by TOI.

Sources say the technical parameters or GSQRs (general staff qualitative requirements) for the new assault rifles, with an effective range of 500-metre, have now been finalized. "The case will now be moved for the defence ministry's approval under the `Buy & Make (Indian)' model before the formal tender or RFP (request for proposal) is floated," said a source.

Simultaneously, the Army is testing prototypes of a 7.62mm x 51mm rifle developed by Rifle Factory Ishapore after it held the 5.56mm Excalibur rifle did not meet its requirements of a "higher kill probability".

Similarly, the procurement case for 5.56 x 45mm CQB carbines, with an effective 200-metre range, was re-launched recently after the earlier one was scrapped last year. The defence ministry had junked the earlier case, dating back to 2006, on the ground that it had become "a resultant single vendor situation" with only the carbine from the Israel Weapon Industries (IWI) being selected after confirmatory trials.

The story of the 7.62 x 51mm caliber light machine guns is similar, with the Army back to square one after a long-winded procurement process. The defence ministry in August "retracted" the tender or RFP because only IWI was left in the fray after protracted field trials from December 2015 to February 2017.

The case for sniper rifles is relatively new and smaller. The Army is keen to induct 5,679 new 8.6mm sniper rifles, with an effective kill range of 1,200-metre, from abroad to replace its old 7.62mm Dragunov sniper rifles (800-metre range) acquired from Russia in 1990. The Dragunov rifles are not equipped with modern magnification and sight systems as well as bipod stands, while their ammunition is also quite expensive.

Amid all this, the Army is keeping its fingers crossed that the infantry, or the "queen of the battle", also gets its due in the never-ending race to induct big-ticket weapon systems ranging from tanks and howitzers to fighters and submarines.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 48147
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby ramana » 16 Oct 2017 07:14

What a precise number for sniper rifles. Not one more or less.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34006
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby shiv » 16 Oct 2017 07:36

abhik wrote:Is this "Ek goli, ek dushman" making virtue of necessity - limited logistics and/or affordability? I don't suppose other professional armies train their infantrymen to empty a few clips into the air while shouting snack bar.

Sarcasm notwithstanding - you could start with this book if you want to make a beginning

Men have to be trained not to use up bullets - and not to " empty a few clips into the air while shouting snack bar" which is what they will do because being in battle is dead scary, the enemy is rarely seen, they stay hidden and keep their heads down, and there is noise, smoke and bullets and shells flying around and unexplained sudden deaths from unseen enemies. In the frontline this creates a logistical problem even for Amreeka, whom we all know is all virtue and never necessity because no one will apply for ammo courier job in that sector. That explains how the Amricans control little fortesses in Afghanistan while the Taliban rule the countryside.

Unlike video games - soldiers need water, food and bullets - so logistics is not about bullets alone. In Vietnam all-virtue-no-necessity America lost battles because soldiers discarded protective gear and water bottles and carried empty guns till they were too tired to fight

No soldier can be guaranteed a supply of bullets over and above what he can carry so ideally he must not "empty a few clips into the air while shouting snack bar." That is the "fire discipline" that Sachin was talking about. I am sure most of us have read tales of heroism where the leader tells his men "Hold your fire until you see the whites of their eyes". That sentence sounds so much more sophisticated and polished than this crude dehati "ek goli ek dushman" of the uneducated brown man who probably does not understand logistics and has to make do with whatever he has in a ham handed apology of an army, but it is exactly the same thing - telling men no to "empty a few clips into the air while shouting snack bar."

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 48147
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby ramana » 17 Oct 2017 05:04

Shiv, Thanks for the book recommendation.

Its very illuminating.

Its available in pdf form.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4163
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Rakesh » 17 Oct 2017 16:45

https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/919815192204132352 --> Let's be clear, the INSAS MK-1C is a good contemporary 5.56 x 45 mm rifle. And the JVPC 5.56 x 30 definitely meets requirements.

Joint Venture Protective Carbine (JVPC) --> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_Su ... ne_Carbine

Bart S
BRFite
Posts: 812
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 00:03

Re: Small Arms Thread

Postby Bart S » 18 Oct 2017 23:46

Very impressive from Tonbo



Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: g.chaks, Rakesh and 38 guests