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
Thakur_B
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2404
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by Thakur_B »

The price Russians are asking for Ak203 should be the asking price for Ak15 (7.62x39), Ak19(5.56×45) and Ak308(7.62×51).
Yagnasri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10390
Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by Yagnasri »

ramana wrote: Looks like Russians don't want the deal.
That is the main reason. They want to milk maximum now and if that is not possible they are ready to let go the deal. They have done similar things even with T90s with gun tech not being given in spite of agreeing IIRC. Better for going to any local system from the private sector which will be better than anything OFB made.
sanjayc
BRFite
Posts: 1091
Joined: 22 Aug 2016 21:40

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by sanjayc »

Can't the Government declare a new rifle for the army a "project of national importance," create a consortium of Bharat Forge, OFB, Tata Power SED, and DRDO (essentially the companies already involved in ATAGs), and give it the mandate to design and produce the new rifle? This would be much better than begging these foreign countries for something as basic as a rifle when Indians are capable of launching a rocket to Mars or build the most advanced howitzer in the world -- ATAGS.

How about designing a new rifle based on an existing design like the FN FAL, to speed up the whole thing? Why not just shorten and lighten it? I doubt capability doesn't exist in India to design and build an assault rifle. It is painful to see this drama and beggary of Indian government before foreign governments when the capability exists inhouse.

"We will buy from private companies of other countries but not from private companies of India because we are socialist" -- this is next level stupidity going on since Bandit Ji's time.
Last edited by sanjayc on 20 Dec 2020 20:41, edited 1 time in total.
Vips
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4699
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by Vips »

Not to go OT but the Russians are hell bent on biting the hands that are feeding them. Not only the rifle deal but also in the Ka-226 Helo deal they are not agreeing on the level of indigenous content from India. They want this venture to be screw-drivergiri by HAL. Plus the logistics agreement (sharing of each others military bases) which was supposed to be signed in October is no where near finalization. Looks like the lap dog is firmly following its Chinese master.
m_saini
BRFite
Posts: 767
Joined: 23 May 2020 20:25

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by m_saini »

sanjayc wrote:Can't the Government declare a new rifle for the army a "project of national importance," create a consortium of Bharat Forge, OFB, Tata Power SED, and DRDO (essentially the companies already involved in ATAGs), and give it the mandate to design and produce the new rifle?
This would be common sense so I'm sure we'll never do it. instead we'll go for 400iq chanakya-niti :mrgreen:
Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7793
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by Prasad »

Why do you need a brand new from-the-scratch design? if the IA decides on a caliber, it can call for locally made guns. OFB, Punj Lloyd(or whoever owns it), SSS or anyone else can go for trials and may the best wo/man win! They all have designs ready and it could get done in 6 months!
VinodTK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2982
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by VinodTK »

My sincere hope is, army places an emergency buy order for another 350K Sig Sauer 716 rifles, that would take the IA Sig Sauer count to ~500K this ahould meet the need of the front line troops, and the rest 800K can be any thing the army/India wants other than AK203, it is about time the Russians got some kind of message.
AkshaySG
BRFite
Posts: 412
Joined: 30 Jul 2020 08:51

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by AkshaySG »

Screw em .. As far as I have heard the Sig Sauer's are cheaper , delivered much faster and are being liked by troops . So let's just get two more tranches of 75/100k rifles each and arm all front line/border area troops , Then force the Army to go local and choose either any offering from an Indian private company or a JV .
sanjayc
BRFite
Posts: 1091
Joined: 22 Aug 2016 21:40

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by sanjayc »

Better to improve on INSAS with the help of private companies like Bharat Forge, chamber it for7.62x51mm, and we are done. The INSAS problem was in production quality, not in its design mechanism. So why are we not trying to improve it and hand over production to private companies?
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by ramana »

sanjayc wrote:Can't the Government declare a new rifle for the army a "project of national importance," create a consortium of Bharat Forge, OFB, Tata Power SED, and DRDO (essentially the companies already involved in ATAGs), and give it the mandate to design and produce the new rifle? This would be much better than begging these foreign countries for something as basic as a rifle when Indians are capable of launching a rocket to Mars or build the most advanced howitzer in the world -- ATAGS.

How about designing a new rifle based on an existing design like the FN FAL, to speed up the whole thing? Why not just shorten and lighten it? I doubt capability doesn't exist in India to design and build an assault rifle. It is painful to see this drama and beggary of Indian government before foreign governments when the capability exists inhouse.

"We will buy from private companies of other countries but not from private companies of India because we are socialist" -- this is next level stupidity going on since Bandit Ji's time.

Should have done that in 2014. Now time is lost.
So just buy two more tranches of Sig Sauer Battlefield Rifle,
There are other alternatives to the assault rifle.
And select one and don't give a committee to decide.
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12200
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by Pratyush »

AkshaySG wrote:Screw em .. As far as I have heard the Sig Sauer's are cheaper , delivered much faster and are being liked by troops . So let's just get two more tranches of 75/100k rifles each and arm all front line/border area troops , Then force the Army to go local and choose either any offering from an Indian private company or a JV .

You are too optimistic. The AK will be bought at the terms the Russians ask for and India will pay.

Such is the way of the Indian MOD.

I will be shocked if it goes any other way.
Picklu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2128
Joined: 25 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by Picklu »

The money for veto is a much older scam than money for vote
Thakur_B
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2404
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by Thakur_B »

Experience of large Armies in Small Arms replacement has been less than stellar.

US Armed forces - Opted for incremental upgrades over replacement. Replacements when ordered are also backward compatible with existing system (HK416 derivatives for M4 replacement)

Russia - Opted for incremental upgrade of Ak74 with limited induction of AK12.

UK: Incremental upgrade of SA80. Upgrade has been well received.

France: Successful replacement of FAMAS with HK416.

Turkey: Successful replacement of G3 with HK417 ripoff Mpt76.

China - Successful replacement of Type 56 and Type 81 with Qbz 95. Managed to replace Ammunition as well. On to next round of replacement.

India - Unsuccessful replacement of Fn FAL with Insas. Still undecided on standard ammunition.

Pakistan: Still sticking with G3. No mass adoption of incremental upgrade. Leering towards type 56 derivatives.

Germany: Successful replacement of G3 with G36. On to next line of replacement.

Most have avoided replacement of ammunition type.
ParGha
BRFite
Posts: 1004
Joined: 20 Jul 2006 06:01

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by ParGha »

Thakur_B wrote:Experience of large Armies in Small Arms replacement has been less than stellar. ... Most have avoided replacement of ammunition type.
I would argue that there hasn't been a significant technical breakthrough in small-arms technology since the 1950s to justify a massive replacement. Countries have experimented with flechettes (Colt), case-less ammos (H&K), micro-grenades (Daewoo), etc, but nothing has paid off yet.

In recent years, there is speculation of returning to longer-ranged ammunition based on technical advances in optics; some of it may have prompted the Indian Army to opt for the SIG 716i in a throwback to 7.62x51mm. The US too is looking at a 6.8mm intermediate round.

However, there is also speculation of future wars going underground (or in covered areas like towns and jungles) to avoid increasingly ubiquitous drone-swarms (ex. the US Army is training all but 5 of its infantry brigades in underground warfare). If you are going to fight underground or in other constrained environments, then you don't need long-ranged ammunition... you need lots of short-ranged and suppressable ammunition.

BTW, the FN FAL / SLR was successfully replaced by the INSAS in all front-line units. We can endlessly re-hash whether the INSAS does everything that everyone ever wanted it to do, but it did go into mass-production, through the entire supply-chain and into the hands of millions of soldiers in the past 20+ years. That is still an achievement. It will live on in Army service for at least another decade, and with police forces for many more decades.
nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9102
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by nachiket »

Thakur_B wrote:Experience of large Armies in Small Arms replacement has been less than stellar.
UK: Incremental upgrade of SA80. Upgrade has been well received.
The case of the UK is the most similar to ours (at least to an extent). They were transitioning from the same 1A1 SLR - semi-auto FN-FAL clone - that we used. They were transitioning to 5.56mm ammo from 7.62x51 NATO just like us. And they were also transitioning to an indigenous weapon after using a much loved licensed produced foreign one. And to top it off, the SA80 was just as badly received initially (or perhaps even more) as the INSAS. Its problems lasted a long time too and it garnered a terrible reputation. Even now, if you go to YouTube videos or articles about the FN-FAL or its British clone you will find the comments section filled with ex-British Army chaps talking about how much they loved the FAL/SLR and how much they hated the SA80.

The difference between them and us is that they stuck with it and kept on improving it and adopting incrementally upgraded versions of the SA80. We gave up on the INSAS after a point. I am not sure how much of it was down to our inability to improve production quality at OFB rather than an unwillingness to incorporate design changes.
Srutayus
BRFite
Posts: 178
Joined: 29 Aug 2016 05:53

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by Srutayus »

I am not sure how much of it was down to our inability to improve production quality at OFB rather than an unwillingness to incorporate design changes.
There is little evidence of OFB taking ownership of their own products let alone one developed by ARDE
Thakur_B
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2404
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by Thakur_B »

The Army has been led to hedge all it's procurement plans os rifles on AK203 deal which TBH is a political deal. If the deal collapses, which is seeming a major probability every passing day, Army would be left without even a fig leave to spare.

There seems to be no consensus on Ammunition and training standardisation or logistics in the Mind of IA brass.

Back in the early 90s there was just one ammunition to rule them all

7.62x51 for rifles, LMG, MMG

9x19mm being second most numerous, 7.62x54 existed for specialised roles.

Then came in AKM and INSAS so 7.62x39 and 5.56x45 INSAS (different from 5.56 NATO standard) came in the mix.

Then came Tavors, M4s, Fn Minimi, so stocking large numbers of M193 and SS109 equivalent ammunition became necessary.

AKM got mainstream for CI and popular with CAPF as well so 7.62x39 stocks had to be ramped up.

As on date, in my ballpark estimation, Armed forces have in excess of 3,00,000 AKM of various makes, over 10,00,000 INSAS including those in stores and with reserves.

For CAPF the number of AKM may be as high as 3,00,000 with up to 6,00,000 INSAS and up to 1,00,000 SLR in active duty and reserves.

Realistically it will take 10 years to phase out INSAS from the date of orders for replacement along with ammunition for each type.

With three main ammunition types, it would be nightmare.
Thakur_B
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2404
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by Thakur_B »

Thakur_B wrote:
shobhits wrote:
Image
Indra rifle by Astr Defence Pvt. Ltd.

A young guy from Karnataka has come up with this design.

Image
Image
Defence Production India
@DefProdnIndia
Defence Investor Cell of Department of Defence Production helps young engineer Ankush L Koravi to build his own designed Assault Rifle at Ordnance Factory Ishapore (Kolkata)
7:19 PM · Jul 21, 2018·
https://mobile.twitter.com/DefProdnIndi ... 4219644928

Good job.
This guy using OFB facilities came up with more polished prototype than OFB.

rajkumar
BRFite
Posts: 423
Joined: 22 Sep 2000 11:31
Location: London U.K
Contact:

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by rajkumar »

https://twitter.com/Mave_Intel/status/1 ... 40128?s=20

Can someone identify the personal weapons. I see Sig716i's and the JVPC(??)
ParGha
BRFite
Posts: 1004
Joined: 20 Jul 2006 06:01

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by ParGha »

Looks like (L to R): B&T, B&T, Sig, PKM, Carl Gustav, Sig, AKM, Sig, Sig, Sig... what a logistical nightmare!
Last edited by ParGha on 29 Dec 2020 07:05, edited 1 time in total.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by ramana »

IA like IAF loves diversity of weapons.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by ramana »

Logistics is too below their level.
Thakur_B
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2404
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by Thakur_B »




New AK family variant AKV-521. Maintains 80% commonality with AK12, changes chassis from receiver dust cover combo to Monolithic upper and lower combo thus removing any chances of wobbly dust cover due to wear and tear for mounting optics. Features ambidextrous safety. More features to be added as this is just a prototype.
Thakur_B
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2404
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by Thakur_B »

Ballistic protection upgrade to Helmets. Modern patka equivalent as an add-on to standard helmets seen on CRPF QAT in the valley.

Image
Image
Image
Lisa
BRFite
Posts: 1718
Joined: 04 May 2008 11:25

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by Lisa »

Thakur_B wrote: Image
Could somebody please tell me what these men are carrying (the triangular thingy).
Thakur_B
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2404
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by Thakur_B »

Lisa wrote:
Thakur_B wrote: Image
Could somebody please tell me what these men are carrying (the triangular thingy).
Mini UGV.
nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9102
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by nachiket »

ParGha wrote:Looks like (L to R): B&T, B&T, Sig, PKM, Carl Gustav, Sig, AKM, Sig, Sig, Sig... what a logistical nightmare!
The one on the extreme left looks like an MP9. Why would a regular infantry soldier be carrying one of these on the LoC? It is a compact personal protection weapon. Doesn't seem to have a magazine loaded either.
Thakur_B
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2404
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by Thakur_B »

https://www.indiatoday.in/amp/india-tod ... 2020-12-30

Army plans to procure 5000 JVPC.
Fn-Herstal has backed out from potential deal to arm SFF with SCAR and P90.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by ramana »

Thakur_B wrote:https://www.indiatoday.in/amp/india-tod ... 2020-12-30

Army plans to procure 5000 JVPC.
Fn-Herstal has backed out from potential deal to arm SFF with SCAR and P90.

Thanks for the article. Hope a lesson is learned about the idea of imports from holier than thou arms makers in Europe.

Question will OFB have to make longer barrel.
Thakur_B
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2404
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by Thakur_B »

http://www.spsmai.com/experts-speak/?id ... s-Carbines

Lt. General P.C.Katoch weighs in on Carbine procurement. Nothing new in the article except he states that the overall requirements of Army for carbines is in excess of 6.4 Lacs. CAPF and state police forces need double the numbers.
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_B wrote:https://www.indiatoday.in/amp/india-tod ... 2020-12-30

Army plans to procure 5000 JVPC.
Fn-Herstal has backed out from potential deal to arm SFF with SCAR and P90.

Thanks for the article. Hope a lesson is learned about the idea of imports from holier than thou arms makers in Europe.

Question will OFB have to make longer barrel.
It's more about the small piecemeal requirements for special forces. For a large orders, all concerns would be set aside like they do for the Gulf states.

Fn and SiG orders can be met from their American Subsidiaries' production facilities. Steyr can supply from India (MKU) and Australia. IWI from Israel and India. H&K loses out because other than France, no one has had any substantial license production deals.
Thakur_B
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2404
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by Thakur_B »

https://theprint.in/defence/why-indian- ... ce/556190/

Navy adopts new camouflage uniform, phases out few old ones.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by ramana »

Interesting.

The Army wanted their version with 5.56x45 per above.
Does JVPC need longer barrel for ballistics?
That's my question.
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:Interesting.

The Army wanted their version with 5.56x45 per above.
Does JVPC need longer barrel for ballistics?
That's my question.
JVPC barrel is long enough for the 5.56x30 MINSAS round. Too long in my opinion. It weighs too much as well. At 3 KGs it weighs the same as M4 carbine.

This is what is being offered to Army for CQB role.
Thakur_B wrote:
Thakur_B wrote:
Image

OFB-ARDE carbine.
Image
Thakur_B
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2404
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by Thakur_B »

SFF new camouflage pattern
Image

Navy new camouflage pattern.
Image
Thakur_B
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2404
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by Thakur_B »

Image

JVPC starts seeing action with CRPF QAT.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by ramana »

Thakur, Got it. So already the carbines are ready. The procurement is clubbed together.

Good clarity.
Thakur_B
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2404
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by Thakur_B »

https://twitter.com/RKSharm15849483/sta ... 13088?s=20

PLR made X95 are now capable of firing 5.56x45 INSAS ammunition.
Thakur_B
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2404
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by Thakur_B »

https://www.timesnownews.com/india/arti ... rmy/703857

SMPP delivers 1,00,000 jackets 4 months ahead of schedule.

Overall order quantum was 1.86 lacs.

IA should carry on the momentum and issue RFP for the next tranche of procurement.
Vips
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4699
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Post by Vips »

This time there would be heavy competition for the RFP with SMPP, MKU, Midhani(Bhabha Kavach) and Sarvatra Kavach to choose from.
Post Reply