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.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54780
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Postby ramana » 30 Sep 2020 03:06

Kakarat wrote:https://twitter.com/livefist/status/1310534556311724033
JUST IN: Indian MoD clears deal for 72,000 more @SigSauerInc SIG 716 assault rifles





So that would mean 72+72=144K rifles.
I hope one more tranche of 72K rifles for the SFF and ITBP also to be equipped.
Then procure the OFB 7.62x51mm rifle for rest of the troops.
Can have the AK 203 for the RR and CAPF.
This way standardize on 7.62 in x39 and x51mm for the rifles
Then there is the carbine with 5.56x45mm

ks_sachin
BRFite
Posts: 1530
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Postby ks_sachin » 30 Sep 2020 03:15

ramana wrote:
Kakarat wrote:https://twitter.com/livefist/status/1310534556311724033





So that would mean 72+72=144K rifles.
I hope one more tranche of 72K rifles for the SFF and ITBP also to be equipped.
Then procure the OFB 7.62x51mm rifle for rest of the troops.
Can have the AK 203 for the RR and CAPF.
This way standardize on 7.62 in x39 and x51mm for the rifles
Then there is the carbine with 5.56x45mm


Deejay had a post on where sigs are going.

144k rifles against a req of approx 280 odd inf bns (excl para and mech) X 400 (rifle coys).

VinodTK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2388
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Postby VinodTK » 30 Sep 2020 04:07

ramana wrote:
Kakarat wrote:https://twitter.com/livefist/status/1310534556311724033





So that would mean 72+72=144K rifles.


I hope they order another batch of 142K rifles; All the frontline soldiers from Arunachal to Akhnoor can be equiped with Sigs.

ks_sachin
BRFite
Posts: 1530
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Postby ks_sachin » 30 Sep 2020 04:12

VinodTK wrote:
ramana wrote:
So that would mean 72+72=144K rifles.


I hope they order another batch of 142K rifles; All the frontline soldiers from Arunachal to Akhnoor can be equiped with Sigs.

144k covers pretty much all of infantry.

How many do you think we need to equip the inf bns?

Please do read up on inf bns ToE

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54780
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Postby ramana » 30 Sep 2020 06:32

Where to find that TOE?

ks_sachin
BRFite
Posts: 1530
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Postby ks_sachin » 30 Sep 2020 07:00

I will try and find it sir.

VinodTK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2388
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Postby VinodTK » 30 Sep 2020 07:17

ks_sachin wrote:
VinodTK wrote:
I hope they order another batch of 142K rifles; All the frontline soldiers from Arunachal to Akhnoor can be equiped with Sigs.

144k covers pretty much all of infantry.

How many do you think we need to equip the inf bns?

Please do read up on inf bns ToE



It is hard to belive that that there are only 150K IA infentry men stretched across 3000+ KK of China and J&K border with Pakistan border.

ks_sachin
BRFite
Posts: 1530
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Postby ks_sachin » 30 Sep 2020 07:50

VinodTK wrote:
ks_sachin wrote:144k covers pretty much all of infantry.

How many do you think we need to equip the inf bns?

Please do read up on inf bns ToE



It is hard to belive that that there are only 150K IA infentry men stretched across 3000+ KK of China and J&K border with Pakistan border.[/q

Sorry my bad. There are 417 Inf Bn including Mech and Para. So you are right we probably need another 72 K.

Rs_singh
BRFite
Posts: 201
Joined: 21 Jun 2020 23:16

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussiony

Postby Rs_singh » 02 Oct 2020 00:35

ramana wrote:
Kakarat wrote:https://twitter.com/livefist/status/1310534556311724033






Then there is the carbine with 5.56x45mm



What is the barrel length on your 716s? If you’ve decided to standardize on 7.62, why do you need a carbine in 5.56? If I was making that decision, I would buy another tranche of 716s with say a 9-10” barrel length. It does come with full auto, though why you would ever fire full auto not from an area weapon escapes me. I never did. Nor do I know many that have.

Separate note unrelated to the above.
On the question of grouping? What do you mean exactly? What distance, what barrel length, single fire, auto, optics? Stress? No stress? I guess my question is what is the objective of the test. Accuracy? Precision? Distance engagement? Help me understand what you’re trying to get at.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54780
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Postby ramana » 02 Oct 2020 02:14

RS_Singh, The carbine though it looks like a rifle is really a personnel protection weapon like an automatic pistol.
If you see that in a sense it equips all those who need a longer range automatic pistol.
Tank crews, ASC, officers so on.

And Thakur spelled for me the muzzle energy.of 5.56 x45 >> 9×19mm

Am good with this.

Rs_singh
BRFite
Posts: 201
Joined: 21 Jun 2020 23:16

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Postby Rs_singh » 02 Oct 2020 02:43

ramana wrote:RS_Singh, The carbine though it looks like a rifle is really a personnel protection weapon like an automatic pistol.
If you see that in a sense it equips all those who need a longer range automatic pistol.
Tank crews, ASC, officers so on.

And Thakur spelled for me the muzzle energy.of 5.56 x45 >> 9×19mm

Am good with this.


I get the difference between a rifle and a carbine, having used both. I’m trying to drive a larger point. Why do you need a separate caliber weapon? A 716 with a 9” barrel will do just fine. As will any other SBR. Why do you want to equip your officers different than your men? You’ll qualify on your rifle, your sidearm and you carbine? That doesn’t make much sense to me.

ks_sachin
BRFite
Posts: 1530
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Postby ks_sachin » 02 Oct 2020 04:08

Rs_singh wrote:
ramana wrote:RS_Singh, The carbine though it looks like a rifle is really a personnel protection weapon like an automatic pistol.
If you see that in a sense it equips all those who need a longer range automatic pistol.
Tank crews, ASC, officers so on.

And Thakur spelled for me the muzzle energy.of 5.56 x45 >> 9×19mm

Am good with this.


I get the difference between a rifle and a carbine, having used both. I’m trying to drive a larger point. Why do you need a separate caliber weapon? A 716 with a 9” barrel will do just fine. As will any other SBR. Why do you want to equip your officers different than your men? You’ll qualify on your rifle, your sidearm and you carbine? That doesn’t make much sense to me.

A Sig 716 with 9" barrel will be comfortable with 7.62x51?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54780
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Postby ramana » 02 Oct 2020 05:01

Rs_singh

Only thing would be noise and 9" barrel would drop muzzle velocity quite a bit and that would be a big flash and noise.

ks_sachin
BRFite
Posts: 1530
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Postby ks_sachin » 02 Oct 2020 06:06

ramana wrote:Rs_singh

Only thing would be noise and 9" barrel would drop muzzle velocity quite a bit and that would be a big flash and noise.


Sirji,
The other issue is that 7.62x51 for the Para's and the Mech Inf could be a bit of a problem.

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 1727
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Postby Thakur_B » 02 Oct 2020 07:24

ramana wrote:Now compare the PLA 5.45mm range and muzzle energy.


PLA uses 5.8x42 cartridge. Roughly in the same ballpark as 5.56x45 and 5.45x39 with slightly better performance.

They have also standardised on 5.8x21 shortened cartridge for pistol/smg just like 5.56x30 developed for JVPC and 5.7x28 cartridge for Fn P90 and Fn5-7 pistol.

Oddly enough, PLA till very recently did not issue body armour to its troops despite being the largest producers of body armour in the world. Some news reports suggest that they will equip entire PLA with body armour in coming 2-3 years.

QBZ-95 is also set for replacement with a conventional layout QBZ-191 which traces it's lineage to the excellent but underrated Type-81 (7.62×39). The type-81, just like vz-58 traced it's lineage to SKS rather than the AKM.

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 1727
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Postby Thakur_B » 02 Oct 2020 07:30

ks_sachin wrote:[
A Sig 716 with 9" barrel will be comfortable with 7.62x51?


If by comfortable one refers to permanent hearing loss, blinding flash, slapping your buddy with concussive muzzle blast and kicking off a ball of dust if firing prone. Imagine a medium sized Diwali firecracker going off two feet away from your face.

Rs_singh
BRFite
Posts: 201
Joined: 21 Jun 2020 23:16

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Postby Rs_singh » 02 Oct 2020 07:53

Thakur_B wrote:
ks_sachin wrote:[
A Sig 716 with 9" barrel will be comfortable with 7.62x51?


If by comfortable one refers to permanent hearing loss, blinding flash, slapping your buddy with concussive muzzle blast and kicking off a ball of dust if firing prone. Imagine a medium sized Diwali firecracker going off two feet away from your face.


1. Have you been in combat?
2. Why would your #2 be 2ft from your face?
3. Why would you fire a carbine prone?
4. What in the rest of your post can not be covered by TTPs?
5. The round would be 39 not 51.
6. Muzzle flash can be taken care of by a can. I’ve yet to see an IA unit be equipped with one when it’s sop for sof here.
7. Velocity - yes you are right, with any SBR you will have reduced range but you don’t want a SBR for range, you want an SBR for effect at close quarters.

Look I’m not trying to be facetious, I’m just pointing out some things that you learn over the years. My assumption here is you don’t want a 5.56 carbine when you’ve decided to standardize a 7.62 rd.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3222
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Postby tsarkar » 02 Oct 2020 21:23

Rs_singh wrote:I get the difference between a rifle and a carbine,

Rs_singh wrote:having used both.

Where did you use? When did you use?

Rs_singh wrote:Have you been in combat?

Have you?

Rs_singh wrote:Why do you need a separate caliber weapon? A 716 with a 9” barrel will do just fine.

Since you're an experienced user, is there any carbine or sub-machine gun in the history of firearms in the world that uses 7.62 x 51mm?

I'm putting the 51mm in bold so that you don't give 33mm or 39mm examples.

Rs_singh wrote:5. The round would be 39 not 51.

Rs_singh wrote:My assumption here is you don’t want a 5.56 carbine when you’ve decided to standardize a 7.62 rd.

Arent you contradicting your own statements? If carbine round is 39 and rifle round is 51, then even if the caliber is 7.62, how do different cartridge lengths lead to standardization?

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 1727
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Postby Thakur_B » 02 Oct 2020 22:11

TSarkar ji, there are plenty of 9 inch shirt barrel rifles made by several manufacturers including those chambered in 7.62x51. They are nothing more than novelty designs with limited practicality.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7994
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Postby nachiket » 02 Oct 2020 22:50

If you look at SIG's website, the 716 is only available with the standard 16" barrel. They have several 5.56mm rifles with shorter barrels. I am sure it is because a short barrel rifle chambered for 7.62x51mm is simply not practical for all the reasons stated above.

If you are talking about 7.62x39mm, then that is a different round altogether. No different than getting a 5.56mm carbine to go with your SIG 716. Result is the same. No ammo commonality and having to qualify on two very different rifles.

I am not certain what exactly these carbines are for. If they are just meant for officers in Armored or Artillery units as a personal sidearm, then we would probably need fewer of them than what we were looking for. If they are meant for Infantry officers, it makes very little sense to a layman like me. Why would a Capt/Major leading his Pt/Coy not use the 716 itself? In Kargil they used the INSAS. In J&K COIN ops everyone uses standard AK's. If the 716 is not practical for some reason, give him an AK-203. I mean we are clearly not concerned with different ammo here.

Or how about saving money on buying yet another rifle and spending on some decent red-dot/reflex sights for our boys. Pretty soon we're going to have our frontline troops armed with a shiny new rifle firing a full power cartridge but still using flip up iron sights on it.

Vips
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2988
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Postby Vips » 02 Oct 2020 23:19

nachiket wrote:
I am not certain what exactly these carbines are for. If they are just meant for officers in Armored or Artillery units as a personal sidearm, then we would probably need fewer of them than what we were looking for. If they are meant for Infantry officers, it makes very little sense to a layman like me.


The total requirement for Carbines is not small. It is 3.5 Lakh units.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3222
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Postby tsarkar » 02 Oct 2020 23:51

Thakur_B wrote:TSarkar ji, there are plenty of 9 inch shirt barrel rifles made by several manufacturers including those chambered in 7.62x51. They are nothing more than novelty designs with limited practicality.

Thanks, I stand corrected. I never knew or saw any. The shortest I know is 14.5 inches and that too is short.

In light of this revelation, I would rephrase my question as "how many armies in the world use a 9 inch barrel carbine chambered for 7.62x51mm as standard equipment?"

Another datapoint to help answer this question.

Why did Americans derive a 7.62 x 33 mm cartridge for M1 carbine from their 7.62 x 63 rifle cartridge for M1 Garand?
Why did Russians derive a 7.62 x 39 cartridge for SKS & AK from their 7.62 x 54 rifle cartridge?
Why did Germans derive a 7.92 x 33 cartridge for Stg44 from their 7.92 x 57 rifle cartridge?

And all this in the middle of WW2.

Rs_singh
BRFite
Posts: 201
Joined: 21 Jun 2020 23:16

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Postby Rs_singh » 03 Oct 2020 00:02

Guys I think we misunderstood each other. I should have stated I was operating under the assumption of the 7.62X39 rd and not the 51. Having the 51 in a carbine makes no sense to me nor was I advocating for that. I was merely assuming the ak type round IA is adopting and was proposing standardization around that. The sig is chambered in both 39 and 51 rd variants, so I assumed the former. I stand corrected. If I was to do this whole process, I would pick the 7.62X39 rd. Give out sigs chambered in that rd as standard issue. Provide AKM type as carbine and call it a day.

To answer your other questions, yes. OIF, 07-09.

And no sir. I wouldn’t call my experienced by any stretch of the imagination. Like I said, I wasnt trying to be facetious.
Last edited by Rs_singh on 03 Oct 2020 00:09, edited 2 times in total.

Rs_singh
BRFite
Posts: 201
Joined: 21 Jun 2020 23:16

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Postby Rs_singh » 03 Oct 2020 00:05

As for the barrel length, I’m sure sig can work around a reduced barrel length if the requirement came up. Plenty of M4s with varying barrel lengths given out to need. Standardization around 5.56 with gunners specializing in 7.62X51.

SCAR H not recommended by NSW. HK416 seems to be the favored toy.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7994
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Postby nachiket » 03 Oct 2020 00:11

Rs_singh wrote:The sig is chambered in both 39 and 51 rd variants, so I assumed the former. I stand corrected. If I was to do this whole process, I would pick the 7.62X39 rd. Give out sigs chambered in that rd as standard issue. Provide AKM type as carbine and call it a day.

To answer your other questions, yes. OIF, 07-09.

And no sir. I wouldn’t call my experienced by any stretch of the imagination. Like I said, I wasnt trying to be facetious.

Which SIG rifle is chambered in 7.62x39? And we have already bought the 716 chambered in 7.62x51 NATO now. And we are buying more. So no point in talking about a 7.62x39mm SIG rifle, if one exists. Might as well just get AK-203's for that right?

Rs_singh
BRFite
Posts: 201
Joined: 21 Jun 2020 23:16

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Postby Rs_singh » 03 Oct 2020 00:16

Pretty sure the air 516/716 family can be chambered in all 3 variants you mentioned. This is why I said I stand corrected. I assumed IA would have chambered it in 7.62X39 - I would have done that. But they didn’t, they chose the 51 which makes standardization harder. And ya, I’m with you in the whole might as well go for the ak203 all the way.

On the other hand, I guess retrospectively, I can see why IA would want the 51. My guess is for longer engagement you need an optic with a shortened rd. I don’t wanna be anywhere near a 5.56 with a eotech anywhere near 800yds. However, without optics, you can’t do much at that range and so pick a larger round with iron sights.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3222
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Postby tsarkar » 03 Oct 2020 00:39

Vips wrote:
nachiket wrote:I am not certain what exactly these carbines are for. If they are just meant for officers in Armored or Artillery units as a personal sidearm, then we would probably need fewer of them than what we were looking for. If they are meant for Infantry officers, it makes very little sense to a layman like me.
The total requirement for Carbines is not small. It is 3.5 Lakh units.


I hate making predictions but sometimes the future is shining ahead while we're blinded by the habits of the past.

I made a comment on Bharat Rakshak that the tank and ICV/APC is obsolete and replaced by the Attack Helicopter and the 5.5 ton Utility Helicopter. Reasons being -

1. The tank & ICV needs roads and tunnels in Ladakh while the Attack and Utility Helicopter can just fly over
2. The tank & ICV can be deployed in limited areas like Depsang Plains and Spanggur Gap while the Attack and Utility Helicopter can just fly to every ridge - whether Bana Post in West or Galwan Valley in East within a short span of time.
3. Unlike the days taken by a truck or ICV to move 10 troops, a ALH can move 10 chaps to Sonam/Amar or to DBO in hours.

Similarly my next prediction is that the rifle is obsolete. Both 7.62 x 51 and 5.56 x 45.

Here is the reason why I believe so

For both 7.62 and 5.56, the dispersion is too high and groupings not close in burst mode and full auto mode. The recoil disturbs the aim. For semi auto and bolt action, accuracy is possible.

Unless groupings are close, outcomes are not possible to achieve. A near miss bullet just whizzes past and causes no harm at all.

To improve outcomes, instead of a magazine of 20 7.62 x 51 mm bullets with not-so-close groupings, take a 40 mm or 84 mm shell with a blast radius sufficient to make close groupings irrelevant.

Also, a shell is cheaper than a 20 rounds of bullets and expensive brass cartridges. We collect brass in pouches to recycle during training.

So practically we see in the field IA sections use Carl Gustaf RCL for long range action as well as the Multi Grenade Launchers.

Image

In every Indian Army platoon or section photo, you will find Carl Gustaf RCL or 40 mm Multi Grenade Launchers. There are so many photos on this thread itself.

These weapons require lots of additional rounds, so other soldiers will need to carry them. Carrying them in addition to 7.62 x 51 or 5.56 x 45 rifle + magazines will be too heavy.

And since these weapons help achieve more and better outcomes than any rifle, its best for a section or platoon to be equipped with more of them. And instead of rifles, carry a lighter and easier to maintain AK-47 when the enemy is too close.

This is reality' on the field.
Image

So dump the rifle and get Carl Gustaf/MGL + more ammo + AK for close in work.

This works across airborne/para, mechanized, infantry, artillery, support troops, navy & coast guard, air force garuds, bsf, itbp, crpf...

Having said this, adjusting to the new reality will require dumping 300 years of history and habits.
Last edited by tsarkar on 03 Oct 2020 00:53, edited 1 time in total.

Rs_singh
BRFite
Posts: 201
Joined: 21 Jun 2020 23:16

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Postby Rs_singh » 03 Oct 2020 00:47

Not sure if you’re being serious in your post or sarcastic above. However, 40 mike mike is a shit ton of fun, I will have to say.

Why do you say groupings are not close for 556? Which ammo are you talking about? 300grain, 400,500? Green tips? Blue? They are close enough to achieve the endstate. 20 yrs of gwot seems to indicate that

Rs_singh
BRFite
Posts: 201
Joined: 21 Jun 2020 23:16

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Postby Rs_singh » 03 Oct 2020 00:51

I think the future seems to be the 6.8 rd, although it is many years out and the marines don’t seem interested at the minute.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3222
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Postby tsarkar » 03 Oct 2020 02:22

Rs_singh wrote:Why do you say groupings are not close for 556? Which ammo are you talking about? 300grain, 400,500? Green tips? Blue? They are close enough to achieve the endstate. 20 yrs of gwot seems to indicate that

There is a whole difference in accuracy achieved while firing on the range and while firing during “fire and movement”. In addition, the Jehadis we face are training by Pakistani SSG and continuously keep shifting positions and present a fleeting target.

The reason Pathankot 2016 and Mumbai 2008 incidents went long is because the terrorists were continuously changing positions. At Pathankot terrorists were discovered twice after the encounter was over

In Kashmir the standard tactic is to identify the house where the terrorists are holed up and blow it up with a RCL round. In some cases RPO or the Spanish C90 rounds are used

Photos of C90 here https://m.facebook.com/IndianDefenceFac ... 4389444327

The captions are wrong given the tendency of jingos to brand standard RR infantry as SF or MARCOS to sensationalize.

Photos of RPO here https://www.reddit.com/r/MilitaryPorn/c ... with_rpoa/

In successful encounters in Kashmir where there are no Indian casualties or injuries, we blow the terrorists where they have taken shelter at long range with RCL Carl Gustaf, C90 or RPO.

Whenever we get into a gunfight at close ranges, then irrespective of AK or Tavor or INSAS we end up incurring casualties

Even from a conventional warfare perspective, more standoff weapons like RCL Carl Gustaf, C90, RPO, MGL and more rounds + AK is better than high end rifles and less standoff weapons

Rs_singh
BRFite
Posts: 201
Joined: 21 Jun 2020 23:16

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Postby Rs_singh » 03 Oct 2020 06:16

tsarkar wrote:
Rs_singh wrote:Why do you say groupings are not close for 556? Which ammo are you talking about? 300grain, 400,500? Green tips? Blue? They are close enough to achieve the endstate. 20 yrs of gwot seems to indicate that

There is a whole difference in accuracy achieved while firing on the range and while firing during “fire and movement”.

In successful encounters in Kashmir where there are no Indian casualties or injuries, we blow the terrorists where they have taken shelter at long range with RCL Carl Gustaf, C90 or RPO.

Whenever we get into a gunfight at close ranges, then irrespective of AK or Tavor or INSAS we end up incurring casualties

Even from a conventional warfare perspective, more standoff weapons like RCL Carl Gustaf, C90, RPO, MGL and more rounds + AK is better than high end rifles and less standoff weapons


Amen to that. I never used CG but like I said 40 mike mike was fun.
You guys really blow them from a distance with CG? No room interventions? I’m surprised because we could never do that. Collateral/COBs prevented us. We did multiple room interventions, door to door spreading the love. Are your fan boys from across the fence spiked up too? Ours were always high on MDMA. One particular instance we had to engage the same guy twice despite taking his bottom half out with a frag.

Do you guys wear body armor? We got into a fair bunch of gunfights but did not take hits “every time”. Agree on, RI/HI being high marker for cas. It was either that or IEDs for us.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54780
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Postby ramana » 03 Oct 2020 07:41

tsarkar from what I hear CG 84 and Sig Sauer are making an impact. Also the RR training camp where marksmanship practice is given.

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3460
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Postby Aditya G » 04 Oct 2020 03:53

tsarkar - nitpick but houses typically are blown up by laying explosives and not by firing in a rocket.

ks_sachin
BRFite
Posts: 1530
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Postby ks_sachin » 04 Oct 2020 06:47

Aditya G wrote:tsarkar - nitpick but houses typically are blown up by laying explosives and not by firing in a rocket.

Even when there are insurgents inside firing?

No sirji in the valley CG.

Vips
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2988
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Postby Vips » 07 Oct 2020 20:45

Indian defence forces considering 'Made in India' carbine for meeting urgent requirements.

With a proposal to import carbines unlikely to fructify, Indian defence forces are considering the acquisition of 'Made in India' carbine for meeting their urgent requirement in view of the situation on China border.

The carbine is an infantry weapon used for close quarter battles for which the Indian Army has been on a lookout since many years now.

"The carbine produced by the Ordnance Factory Board at its facility in Ishapore in West Bengal has been offered to the armed forces who are now evaluating it for acquisition," government sources told ANI. Preliminary trials of the weapon were also carried out a short while ago by officials concerned dealing with the acquisition of weapon systems for the three armed forces.

The scope for consideration of buying indigenous carbine came up after it started emerging that the forces would not be acquiring the carbines from the foreign country which has exported it to only a few countries and that too in very small quantities. The issue of acquiring these carbines from abroad had been stuck for close to two years now as the matter was referred to a high-level Committee for decision by the Defence Acquisition Council under the first NDA government.

The overall requirement of the armed forces is for almost 3.5 lakh carbines but they wanted to acquire around 94,000 of these weapons through import route under fast track procedures.

If selected, the OFB carbine will undergo rigorous testing and initially be inducted in limited numbers only by the defence forces. :?: Classic Indian babudom

Efforts to acquire the CQB carbines since 2008 have not materialised. The initial lot of carbines acquired by the forces is expected to be provided to troops deployed on the China front.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi government recently cleared the second batch of the Sig Sauer assault rifles which would be provided to the troops deployed against the Chinese forces in Eastern Ladakh and other areas.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7994
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Postby nachiket » 07 Oct 2020 20:55

Vips wrote:"The carbine produced by the Ordnance Factory Board at its facility in Ishapore in West Bengal has been offered to the armed forces who are now evaluating it for acquisition," government sources told ANI. Preliminary trials of the weapon were also carried out a short while ago by officials concerned dealing with the acquisition of weapon systems for the three armed forces.

I hope they evaluate offerings by SSSDefence as well. If the govt. and MoD are serious about supporting private players in defence they need to be proactive in trying to get their products tested and evaluated by the armed forces, and inducted if found suitable.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7994
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Postby nachiket » 08 Oct 2020 01:24

A picture of the new SIG in service with a BEL Holographic sight. I hope enough of these are procured for every soldier.
https://twitter.com/jaywankhadejrw/stat ... 5654073344

Image

Details of the sight
https://twitter.com/jaywankhadejrw/stat ... 7692966913

Image

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54780
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Postby ramana » 08 Oct 2020 07:06

Vips wrote:Indian defence forces considering 'Made in India' carbine for meeting urgent requirements.

...

If selected, the OFB carbine will undergo rigorous testing and initially be inducted in limited numbers only by the defence forces. :?: Classic Indian babudom

.


Long winded article to say this line.

Srutayus
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 94
Joined: 29 Aug 2016 05:53

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Postby Srutayus » 08 Oct 2020 22:03

The "OFB carbine" was actually designed by ARDE. Concerns about the manufacturing quality by OFB and product ownership between ARDE & OFB are still very pertinent, especially due to the INSAS experience.

Cyrano
BRFite
Posts: 543
Joined: 28 Mar 2020 01:07

Re: Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Postby Cyrano » 08 Oct 2020 23:44

Made in Machilipatnam ! A town that manages to stay out of news and hidden :)


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Google Feedfetcher and 57 guests