Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

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.
Post Reply
SRajesh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2061
Joined: 04 Aug 2019 22:03

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by SRajesh »

Hai Yella
So we will stop SIG
Buy Imergency Caracal
But set up AK factory in Amethi
By the time production really starts : either their is full import ban on Russ Maal or the IA will find that AK has a tendency shoot 'oneself in the Foot'
We will abandon the Amethi factory(who knows maybe BJP has lost and the Congi/Mithaiwala's are back)
Come rain or shine the 'Malai Express' will run from Dilli to Switzerland
ks_sachin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2906
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by ks_sachin »

This is depressing no. I think we should close this thread itself.

IF we can do a ATAGS why don't we invest some intellectual capital into getting this right!!!
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12186
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by Pratyush »

The author of the article is Rahul Bedi.

Most of the issues highlighted are known issues faced by the AR 10/AR 15 family of weapons. Regarding the required cleaning of the system for smooth functioning of the weapon. So don't really understand what the fuss is all about.
sanjayc
BRFite
Posts: 1090
Joined: 22 Aug 2016 21:40

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by sanjayc »

This rifle purchase thing is sounding like a racket. Enough capability exists in India to make a state-of-the-art howitzer and a battle tank, but we somehow struggle to make three-feet-long barrel for a rifle, and are running around the whole world looking for a rifle. It is a deliberately created circus. Can't the same design and production model be followed as was done for ATAGS? Why can't rifle for army be declared a national project and a consortium of private and public entities be formed to design and produce it? Give the project to Tatas or Bharat Forge, and they will produce a world-class rifle in six months by hiring consultants from all over the world.
Srutayus
BRFite
Posts: 178
Joined: 29 Aug 2016 05:53

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by Srutayus »

Well maybe we can export the 7.62 NATO to the US and then import it back from there, with 'Imported' etched on it.. :)

After all we do ship 5.56 to America - Under fire to improve, OFB ships 11 million bullets to US market
That was for the civilian market and was during the great ammo shortage in the US when people were scrambling to find ammo. And the US market has a ton of crappy ammo available, much from Eastern Europe. Add OFB to the list.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by ramana »

Manish_P wrote:I know it's the Print (so standard disclaimers apply).

The article says the problem was due to jamming caused by defective locally produced ammunition causing barrel bulges. (Imported ammunition having been expended by our troops - without any issues? )

Deja vu anyone ?

Then it goes on to say that a major issue was the absence of optics as these were not ordered along with the rifles.

How would that be a problem with the rifle itself?
The basic problem is the Direct Impingement model of the rifle. The reports say it will cause fouling from unburnt cartridge gases. I understood this fine point only in February and asked Thakur if maybe Ishapore AR 2.0 is the better choice. I should have been clearer.

viewtopic.php?p=2536473#p2536473

Also, IA was well aware that sights have to be bought later, and thus increasing the number of rifles was the decision.
So bringing it up now is just sour grapes by the procurement cats who missed their gravy.
No wonder they don't want to be named as it was an IA command decison.
The OFB round is a standard M 80 round. To blame it is wrong. It functions fine in LMG and MMG.

Those who chose the SIG didn't understand the finer points or tested it on the imported clean-burning rounds. Most likely they did not insist on OFB rounds testing before buying.

If IA persists in SIG they would have to import ammo and become hostage to sanctions. The idea is not to become hostage to imports during a war.

Now IA infantry has egg on its face and has to give up big talk of battlefield rifles etc.
Or improve the IR 2.0 and move on.


One thing I don't understand is the firing stance of Lt Gen Joshi while test firing the IR 2.0. Shouldn't be shoulder-held and not at the hip? It is not a sub-machine gun.
SRajesh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2061
Joined: 04 Aug 2019 22:03

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by SRajesh »

Ramanaji
A question??
will this be raised by CAG report to come later
If so how will the accountability fixed!
Meaning will there be an internal enquiry or external!!
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by ramana »

I dont know.
BTW Hindu raised this issue of canceling the second tranche of Sig Sauer on the 18 March report.
https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/ ... 221831.ece
In another small arms deal, the repeat order for 72,400 SIG-716 assault rifles from Sig Sauer is delayed and more than two officials, on condition of anonymity, said it is likely to be dropped....
Under a ₹700-crore deal in February 2019 with Sig Sauer of the U.S., the Defence Ministry procured 72,400 SIG-716 assault rifles through Fast Track Procurement (FTP), most of which were for the Army and have been provided to frontline troops involved in counter-insurgency operations.

The deal is in the Request For Proposal (RFP) stage and went for approval from the Competent Financial Authority (CFA) on February 22, one of the sources cited above said.

However, there is a push for foreclosure of the case given on the emphasis for boosting domestic industry, the source added.

The first lot of 72,400 SIG-716 assault rifles have long been inducted by the Army.
It looked odd as the main report says AK-203 is delayed and buried in it is SIG second tranche will be canceled. The reason given is to have more of the AK-203!
Srutayus
BRFite
Posts: 178
Joined: 29 Aug 2016 05:53

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by Srutayus »

Those who chose the SIG didn't understand the finer points or tested it on the imported clean-burning rounds. Most likely they did not insist on OFB rounds testing before buying.
They did test it on OFB rounds. SIG actually went through the trouble of manufacturing OFB type rounds themselves to test in order to win their first order.
It could well be that the SIG made OFB rounds with much better quality control than OFB. But then all rifles were tested on OFB rounds in India.

Also, the article makes little sense in many places and is very incoherent.
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12186
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by Pratyush »

Sig has had QC issues with the new service pistols for the US army.

How do we know that Indian service rifles don't have any QC issues.

That is the only logical reason why the firearm purchase get's cancelled. Everything else is just word salad.
k prasad
BRFite
Posts: 962
Joined: 21 Oct 2007 17:38
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow
Contact:

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by k prasad »

Of the total imported SIG716’s, the army had received 66,400 rifles, the Indian Air Force (IAF) 4,000 units and the Indian Navy’s Garud Special Forces the remaining 2,000 weapon systems.
I stopped reading Bedi's article at this point. No wonder BRF doesn't respect him.

[EDIT] I kept reading, and found this gem:
like altering the grip to enable a firmer grasp by adding a ‘wooden handle’ under the 457.2 m long barrel
Looks like our Jawans are being equipped with supercarriers, not rifles, gents.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by ramana »

OFB makes 7.62x51 M80 ammo
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by ramana »

I think better to start making a 7.62x51mm Assault rifle in India.
Has to fire the OFB cartridge.
Has to be gas piston type.
Rest is ergonomics.

Thakur,
Please list the requirements with must(absolutely needed) and want(desirable)
ks_sachin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2906
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by ks_sachin »

Ramna why. There are enough private players in the country. Let us look at the SSS Defence assault rifles or take the Galil Ace and reverse engineer.
The OFB guys will keep regurgitating the Insas design and as long as we stick to that we will have problems.
Atmavik
BRFite
Posts: 1985
Joined: 24 Aug 2016 04:43

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by Atmavik »

Srutayus wrote: It could well be that the SIG made OFB rounds with much better quality control than OFB. But then all rifles were tested on OFB rounds in India.
:rotfl:
Srutayus wrote: Also, the article makes little sense in many places and is very incoherent.
very shady article making little sense. i would not raise my BP based on what the Wire says
ks_sachin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2906
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by ks_sachin »

The American soldiers in Vietnam also suffered due to the DI on the M-16 I think. Untill they got into their SOP the regular cleaning of the rifle. Perhaps our boys are so wedded to the AK that this is something that is taking time to become part of the their routine.
I wonder what the routine was in the days of the SLR.
ks_sachin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2906
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by ks_sachin »

We need to get this back on the development roadmap....

https://twitter.com/IndianDefenceRA/sta ... X3hlQLt81g

Three 7.62X51 contenders that come to mind
1 - OFB INSAS
2 - ARDE - MCIWS but chambered appropriately
2 - SSS Defence
SRajesh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2061
Joined: 04 Aug 2019 22:03

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by SRajesh »

Sirji
even if its the ATAGS model, we will still have the testing and endless testing no!
Maybe all ATAGS and the Rifles will be tested on Shukrayana 3 and Mangalayan4 before being adopted!
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12186
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by Pratyush »

Why not a new calibre entirely for the battle rifles.

The Americans have selected 6.8*51. Our use case is not that much different from their use case.

Standardise on 2 seperate weapons. 7.62*39 for COIN.

And whatever else is selected for battlefield roles.
Thakur_B
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2404
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by Thakur_B »

ramana wrote:
Thakur,
Please list the requirements with must(absolutely needed) and want(desirable)
Absolutely must

Monolithic upper
AR pattern rifle ergonomics with Ambi controls
Modular construction to change calibre and barrel lengths
Good recoil management
Under 2 MoA accuracy
Suppressor compatible
MLOK mounts instead of rails everywhere for weight savings
Weight : under 3.5 KG with loaded mag for 5.56x45, 4 KG for 7.62x51


Desirable
Folding stock
Flip up sights
Side charging handle
Bolt hold open
ks_sachin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2906
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by ks_sachin »

Rsatchi wrote:Sirji
even if its the ATAGS model, we will still have the testing and endless testing no!
Maybe all ATAGS and the Rifles will be tested on Shukrayana 3 and Mangalayan4 before being adopted!
Common man we r trying to be serious here. This is more important than arty as it impacts every soldier!!
The ATAGS model is good. If OFB cannot deliver prod quality let them partner with PVT sector.
ARDE can someone other then OFB as prod partner.
Pvt sector also level playing field.
Surely now we can do better than INSAS.
Last edited by ks_sachin on 06 May 2022 12:18, edited 1 time in total.
ks_sachin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2906
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by ks_sachin »

Thakur_B

I agree with everything except caliber change. Barrel change I understand.
ks_sachin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2906
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by ks_sachin »

Pratyush wrote:Why not a new calibre entirely for the battle rifles.

The Americans have selected 6.8*51. Our use case is not that much different from their use case.

Standardise on 2 seperate weapons. 7.62*39 for COIN.

And whatever else is selected for battlefield roles.
Pratyush ji the problem is not caliber but design capability.
Thakur_B
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2404
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by Thakur_B »

ks_sachin wrote:Thakur_B

I agree with everything except caliber change. Barrel change I understand.
Cannot have this decade long circus every other decade.

Look at AR 15 derivatives in various calibers
5.56x45
5.45x39
.300 blackout
6.5 grendel
6.8 SPC

AR10 derivatives
7.62x51
6.5 creedmoor
6.8x51 SiG Fury

Kalashnikov Derivatives
7.62x54
7.62x51
7.62x39
9x19
5.56x45
5.45x39

AR derivative rifles can swap calibers around easily by replacing upper assembly or barrel and bolt. Newer Kalashnikov designs like the AKV521 are built around this modularity.

The advantages are
- common manual of arms
- common training and marksmanship course
- reduced logistics for spares (ak 200 series has 80% parts commonality in all the variants)
- ability to shift to newer caliber when required without the entire retraining.
ks_sachin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2906
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by ks_sachin »

Thank you

Much appreciated.
Cyrano
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5461
Joined: 28 Mar 2020 01:07

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by Cyrano »

Not sure if already discussed here, there are several news reports of Sig Sauers imported recently malfunctioning due to poor quality desi ammo from OFB. causing barrel bulges, higher recoil etc.
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12186
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by Pratyush »

Cyrano wrote:Not sure if already discussed here, there are several news reports of Sig Sauers imported recently malfunctioning due to poor quality desi ammo from OFB. causing barrel bulges, higher recoil etc.
The last 2 pages are discussing that waste of an article.
Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5383
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by Manish_P »

Thakur_B wrote:...

Cannot have this decade long circus every other decade.
...
Thakur ji, must really appreciate your patience in re-iterating these points every year or so via educative and grounded posts.

On a lighter note, sometimes i feel there could be a list of BRF dictums... some along the lines of Murphy's laws :)

For eg - The types of Operations is directly proportional to the numbers of calibers being developed & inversely proportional to the numbers of calibers available.
SRajesh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2061
Joined: 04 Aug 2019 22:03

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by SRajesh »

Thakurji and Pratyushji
6.8x51 Fury per wiki was for non military use in SIG
For commonality's sake can we not just have 7.62x51 and 7.62x39 and build a infantry weapon around that and get Pvt involved in design and delivery.
Only issue is what will happen to Amethi factory, would be huge election issue and backlash
ks_sachin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2906
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by ks_sachin »

Rsatchi wrote:Thakurji and Pratyushji
6.8x51 Fury per wiki was for non military use in SIG
For commonality's sake can we not just have 7.62x51 and 7.62x39 and build a infantry weapon around that and get Pvt involved in design and delivery.
Only issue is what will happen to Amethi factory, would be huge election issue and backlash
RSatchi
The army has to decide on what caliber it wants.
For COIN 7.62x39 is fine due to engagement ranges as you can see the RR and AR bn have AKs.
Regular inf is the issue.
However that is not the problem.
Apart from ARDE there is no small arms design experience/ expertise in India.
You can see Thakur_Bs wish list but those are all design requirements.That is not rocket science if one thinks from a soldier’s perspective but OFB keeps rehashing the INSAS and ARDE MCIWS was mix of a few designs I believe and stopped when the army lost interest in a multi caliber weapon.
However the Army has decide and put its weight behind a domestic weapons platform and then support DRDO/OFBPvt sector by providing realistic req and then proper support during design and development. Brochuritis is the bane of weapons development in India.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by ramana »

Thakur, Thanks for the listing.
ks-Sachin Dont want a single entitiy and if it is compromised leads to fiaso.
So need to have atleast two.
I am not sure about the AK-203 factory also after the Ukrain War, price rises, and the following recession.
Both time and cost go up.

Why cant the Army use the Trichy developed AK-47?
Atmavik
BRFite
Posts: 1985
Joined: 24 Aug 2016 04:43

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by Atmavik »

US Army is switching to a new SIG

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7088&p=2548322#p2548322
Thakur_B
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2404
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by Thakur_B »

IA has been very slow to learn the lesson in small arms. Khan chacha tried the multical thing with their SF with the SCAR program and then decided that it was not worth it. In Khan's case, Robinson Armament excellent XCR platform lost to FN SCAR because a requirement of blank firing adaptor was added at the very last minute.

IA went full brochuritis based on SCAR trials with our own multical rifle saga. DRDO too leapt in headfirst with their very own Robinson XCR inspired MCIWS despite IA never asking them for it.

IA's requirements for JVPC too were based similarly to the ill fated NATO PDW contest. Like the two main contestants of the NATO PDW trial, FN P90 and HK MP7, JVPC will never get adopted in numbers, with most NATO militaries opting for shorty 5.56x45 carbines in PDW roles, exactly what IA is doing with its carbine procurement.

Truth is, neither of 7.62x39, 5.56x45 or 7.62x51 are perfect rounds. 7.62x39 however is the most optimum round for short and medium range engagement, but it is the worst performer against body armour and medium ranges or higher due to the fat bullet losing its velocity.

6.5 grendel and 6.8 SPC bring the power of 7.62x39 but with better ballistics for long range engagement. No major military has decided to standardise upon intermediate cartridges. Serbia is adopting 6.5 grendel with their new Zastava made AKM chambered in it.

Khan has gone the far end of the spectrum, having decided that they need to defeat Chinese Level IV body armour at long ranges with 6.8x51 with most the disadvantages of 7.62x51 amped up. Khan has also picked up SiG XM5 with barrels shorter than M4 on a round that packs 20% more energy than 7.62x51 that would be unusable without a suppressor.

Expect IA to repeat the nonsense any time now.
ks_sachin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2906
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by ks_sachin »

And we expect MoD babus to take the generals seriously!!!

Maybe we have a menu option. Anytime Jawans need to pick up their weapon they can go to the quarter guard and chose
- caliber
- DI or piston
- reciprocating or non- reciprocating
- AK or AR pattern
etc etc
Let them also organise for their own bullets while we r at it!!
But Thakur_B in your opinion what is the caliber the Armd should adopt?
Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7793
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by Prasad »

7.61x39 might be adequate for COIN and perhaps that's driving IA's requirements. Given the need to get out of COIN and fight conventional, especially with PLA, a better round might need to be found. If not the 6.8x51 maybe the 6.8x43 of ARDE might work. But again it needs studies to determine effective range etc etc and then IA has to pick the correct one for the correct role.

Question is, is the IA capable of doing such an exercise given how terrible the last two decades have been
Atmavik
BRFite
Posts: 1985
Joined: 24 Aug 2016 04:43

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by Atmavik »

https://www.youtube.com/post/Ugkx8Srw3T ... 9cztL4e9iq

Tonbo Imaging's Arjun-XII long range thermal scope, mounted on a SiG 716 of the Indian Army.

Image
mody
BRFite
Posts: 1362
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Mumbai, India

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by mody »

The circus continues.This report claims that the repeat order for Sig-716i is ON. The way the rifle is distributed amongst the different formations, is really confusing. The report says the repeat order will ease the logistics aspect. The deployment pattern at the filed level suggest anything but!

https://www.msn.com/en-in/news/other/in ... 798a082f63
VinodTK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2976
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by VinodTK »

mody wrote:The circus continues.This report claims that the repeat order for Sig-716i is ON. The way the rifle is distributed amongst the different formations, is really confusing. The report says the repeat order will ease the logistics aspect. The deployment pattern at the filed level suggest anything but!

https://www.msn.com/en-in/news/other/in ... 798a082f63

India to ink ‘repeat order’ deal for 73,000 SiG 716 rifles from the US

May be it was disinformation to scuttle the deal.
Thakur_B
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2404
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by Thakur_B »

Repeat order to SiG is common sense. How can we use common sense?

I also support the cancellation of Ak203 deal. Rest of the rifles can be PLR Systems Galil ACE 52N in 7.62x51. standardise the calibre. ACE 52N also comes with magazine commonality with SiG 716 and is made in India.
Kakarat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2223
Joined: 26 Jan 2005 13:59

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by Kakarat »

https://twitter.com/amanroutray7/status ... q7b4J2ArJA
SSS Defence assault rifles equipped with Tonbo Imaging Apollo VX sight. The Bullet Proof Helmets looks familiar too
Image
Image
Post Reply