Small Arms Thread

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 03 Jul 2015 01:33

I also read about a longer round from DRDO for INSAS maybe was dropped. Idea was DRDO ammo cant be used by others.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 03 Jul 2015 01:58

vaibhav.n wrote:Thakur,

They don't need to, despite other opinions on the forum. The IA still remains the only service which shares its long-term perspective plans and Capital Acquisition Plan with the DRDO, less the armoured corps chaps that is...

We both know the entire story with the LMG and carbine, the rifle is not the actual primary problem area. ARDE virtually abandoned the carbine. LMG after a 5000 odd production run due to persistent issues.

Right now when a quick proven solution is what is required for all the three.

Vaibhav, it does not work that way. For the DRDO to work on any weapon for the IA it needs IA GSQRs and also IA trial teams. Without the two, the program, even if launched ends up being dropped or foreclosed.Similar stuff in the past- the Bofors one was a perfect example. Way back, HMT and some other firms had proposed to make a local Bofors. IA had that plan shot down because imports were around the corner. So, not that ARDE is perfect, its that they need IA orders to go ahead with a firm development proposal which then gets funded by the central HQ.
Also, if OFB has to make imported rifles, get set for more issues in QA/QC. They can't even make an INSAS without issues.

koti · Post by **koti** » 03 Jul 2015 03:11

The newer rifle looks pretty good. (From Kalashnikov)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oA3Zl1VMjpg

Avinash R · Post by **Avinash R** » 03 Jul 2015 09:39

vaibhav.n wrote:
Truth be told, there isn't really that urgent an operational requirement for the fanciest new rifles now is there? Because if that indeed be the case, why is IA still at the comparative trial stage for a process it officially began in 2011 with no real end in sight? Given the problems with foreign procurement that is neither cheap nor timely it is time to seriously look at indigenous options again.
Apologist article, The IA and PMF's have been waiting for ARDE to pump out the golden goose for decades now. Every COAS from VK Singh onwards has listed new Assault Rifles as a crucial requirement.

The Army doesn't seem to be in a tearing hurry to procure small arms.

http://www.claws.in/1244/why-india-does ... sethi.html

Procurement of CQB carbine. Post issue of General Staff Qualitative Requirement in 2005, the RFP for procurement of CQB carbine along with ToT was first issued in April 2007, and subsequently withdrawn in Dec 2007. A fresh RFP was later issued in April 2008, with specific mention of “Less the TOT for passive night sight”, which was also withdrawn in June 2009 on account of inadequate competition and since it did not meet user’s requirement.

vaibhav.n wrote:How long should people continue to die for ineptness??

Yes ofcourse why is the army is so inept that it cant put together a proper GSQR & RFI and stick to it? Why the constant shifting of goalposts?

vaibhav.n wrote:
And let the best option win on a proper cost-benefit evaluation based on sustainability, economy and quality with national interest foregrounded.
....Very dandy to throw in words like economy, sustainability and national interest.

Most good assault rifles are in the 2000$ range MRP. Even at INR 120,000 per rifle, for 500,000 rifles the entire programme would not cost more than 6000 crores.

Pittance, when a single submarine costs the same nowadays.........

Ofcourse 6000 crores is loose change for some people who dont have to work their asses off to earn it.

Afterall the dining and wining by foreign maal peddlers has blinded some people to the reality that India cant afford to waste away its precious resources to fill the pockets of dishonest arms dealers.

vaibhav.n wrote:
The former Defence Minister, A.K. Antony, was forced into admitting in Parliament in late 2012 that the INSAS rifles had been overtaken by “technological development” — a euphemism for a poorly designed weapon system.

You should have had the courage to atleast link to the article or post the name of the presstitute who thinks “technological development is a euphemism for a poorly designed weapon system".

Well let me help you. The presstitute is Rahul Bedi, employed by the Briturd publication Jane's Defence Weekly and a peddler of foreign maal. No wonder he tries to run down Insas and wants India to buy some foreign crap so he can get his cut from the deal. http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp ... 175343.ece

srin · Post by **srin** » 03 Jul 2015 10:12

vaibhav.n wrote:The Infanrty Dte after IPKF asked for standardised 5.56 NATO platform for the rifle, carbine and LMG to enable troops to carry more rounds into battle, provide burst fire and a common cartridge capability for the rifle and full auto for the carbine to replace the 9mm Sterling.

OFB had problems manufacturing the NATO round and later DRDO introduced a longer 5.56 round to overcome those.

Two things happened ; ARDE could not overcome propellant issues on the carbine and gave up and recurring issue with the LMG.

I don't understand this fetish to reward failure with more contracts. When an arm is made to wait 20 years for a carbine all for how did the author put it...yyess....national interest.

Fine example indeed....

Everything aside (see earlier post - I couldn't corroborate the facts you've presented) the highlighted text shows why we suck at R&D. Your reaction for failure is "off with the heads", as if failure is a disaster.

Depressing really. We should give this up and be like the Saudis - splurge money on imports. That's all we're capable of.

We also don't have a doctrine. We require 5.56 rounds to be fired, but want to import 7.62 guns. We pride ourselves on "ek goli, ek dushman" (in all the tv shows), and yet we want fully automatic guns. We think manufacturing is substandard, and so blame DRDO. We think buying new rifles is a critical need, yet we keep issuing RFPs and cancelling them. Maybe this makes sense to someone, but not to me.

I take back what I said before - we are worse than Saudis - we don't even know what to import.

Avinash R · Post by **Avinash R** » 03 Jul 2015 11:08

SaiK wrote:
Putting the Indian Army's desire to import assault rifles in perspective
http://m.ibnlive.com/blogs/india/saurav ... 48529.html

This article is a keeper.

The ARX-160 also seems to sit well with IA's RFP

So the plan was to foist the Italian made Beretta ARX-160 on the Army in the name of modernization at the exorbitant cost of a billion dollars.

It's good that the deal rigged in favor of one foreign arm supplier was cancelled by the modi govt.

sonia and her Italian masters seem to be having a bad time these days

vaibhav.n · Post by **vaibhav.n** » 03 Jul 2015 11:16

You should have read the discussion from a couple of pages back. The primary issue is should we develop small arms on our own. Yes most definitely.

The question no one seems to be able to answer is this...

How long in your notion a service needs to left high and dry if the presumed development doesn't pan out as planned. Safe to say the ARDE would have beaten your wildest dreams by a margin. That is as small arms designing is the low hanging fruit everyone claims it to be.

The problem is also small arms is only one of the things ARDE is involved in one where probably they have had the least success in. They can never keep up with companies which only do this one thing.

The later tactical half of your question deserves a longer post which I will reply in detail later.

Different weapons are employed for different purposes. A rifle is designed to provide a competely different capability to an LMG which acts as a base of fire to support the rest of the section through the asaault. A carbine provides its officers and senior enlisted men to support the assault in its final stages.

Where it turns on its head is in CI Ops which are more distributed in nature an soldiers ability on the volume of fire trumps everything else.

Sure the IA bungles up with lousy GSQR and the process is flawed at multiple places and is largely top driven.

The thing is some folks see a conspiracy in that the IA had no interest in inducting domestic small arms which is patently false. The have not inducted any weapon to their own detriment. We all know the time imports take in this country we can take our pick from multiple examples and a minstry where complete apathy exists in the civilian leadership.

member_22539 · Post by **member_22539** » 03 Jul 2015 12:12

vaibhav.n wrote:How long in your notion a service needs to left high and dry if the presumed development doesn't pan out as planned.

As long as it would reasonably require for ARDE to develop a product that satisfies IA's needs (not wild desires), with the full support of IA and all funding required.

This was bungled up by the some people in the IA with their un-supportive and downright hostile attitude towards indigenous products and wanton desire to import gold plated foreign goodies (along with enjoying the fringe benefits). So, IA should take responsibility for the situation and ARDE must not be made a convenient scapegoat.

vaibhav.n wrote:Arms designing is the low hanging fruit everyone claims it to be.

According to whom? Does any tom, dick and harry design and actualize good small arms? In that case, where are the porki designed ARs?

vaibhav.n wrote:Different weapons are employed for different purposes..............

Thanks for stating the obvious, something that anyone with any interest in the subject knows about.

vaibhav.n wrote:Sure the IA bungles up with lousy GSQR and the process is flawed at multiple places and is largely top driven.

In that case, those responsible for it in the IA must PAY for it. The Navy seems to be doing exponentially better in the same environment. So, the the "system" cannot take all the blame or even most of it.

vaibhav.n wrote:The thing is some folks see a conspiracy in that the IA had no interest in inducting domestic small arms which is patently false.

It is not false and anyone with a little objectivity can surmise as much. The reasons for such disinterest is quite obvious as well.

vaibhav.n wrote:The have not inducted any weapon to their own detriment.

To whose detriment actually? Is it to the detriment of those framing those comically nonsensical GSQRs? Those officers sitting in air-conditioned offices and sipping whiskey at the end of the day in the club with their arms dealer friends?

member_23694 · Post by **member_23694** » 03 Jul 2015 16:05

http://www.dailyo.in/politics/sandeep-u ... /4739.html

"Why Indian Army has only itself to blame for assault rifle fiasco"

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 03 Jul 2015 16:14

dhiraj wrote:http://www.dailyo.in/politics/sandeep-u ... /4739.html

"Why Indian Army has only itself to blame for assault rifle fiasco"

Un-frickin-believable!

The Army's tender, however, does not appear to have had any of this in mind. It drew up absurd qualitative requirements for this tender in 2011. It asked for a multi-calibre assault rifle (MCAR) - a cutting-edge weapon bought in small quantities even by specialist units like Delta Force and the Navy SEALS - to equip the entire Indian army. A super-expensive weapon capable of firing both INSAS and AK-47 ammunition by swapping barrels. But which cost six times the older guns. Not to talk of the logistical nightmare of carrying different barrels and different ammunition. All this for a soldier whose only requirement has been a simple, reliable and effective assault rifle fitted with day/night weapon sights. The tender amused weapon manufacturers. Two of the biggest, Germany's Heckler and Koch and Belgium's FN Herstal did not even respond. Possibly because they held their sides laughing. The five foreign firms that did participate - two of them rushed prototypes for the contest - must rue the day they did. Delhi's arms dealer circuit was abuzz with talk of the contract sparking off a battle between two arms agents, one of whom had allegedly got the rifle requirements tailor-made to help a gun he was hawking.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 03 Jul 2015 16:16

This time they didnt get the bakra of DRDO, DPSUs delay etc to foist the blame on.

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 03 Jul 2015 16:49

DRDO should stop trying to make fancy loong abbreviation carbine/rifles and stick to the basics: Modern but cheap and reliable.

uddu · Post by **uddu** » 03 Jul 2015 17:04

Production of Modern Sub Machine Carbine and Multi Caliber Individual Weapon System may start soon.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 03 Jul 2015 17:26

The gsqr called for 1km accurate range on the rifle.

Does any existing even do 600m? Ak47 is 300m.

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 03 Jul 2015 17:37

"We have sent a proposal to the government that all Insas rifles with the force be replaced by AK rifles. The Insas has a problem of jamming. Compared to AK and X-95 guns, Insas fails far more frequently. While the error percentage in AK guns is 0.02%, in Insas it is 3%," CRPF DG Dilip Trivedi

Was that scientifically measured or was it pulled straight out of his a$$? A 'error percentage' of 3% would mean a jam/malfunction every 33 rounds(roughly a magazine and a half worth).

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 03 Jul 2015 18:32

abhik wrote:DRDO should stop trying to make fancy loong abbreviation carbine/rifles and stick to the basics: Modern but cheap and reliable.

They do what the IA asks them to do. IA wanted MCIWS level stuff.

vaibhav.n · Post by **vaibhav.n** » 03 Jul 2015 22:43

Arun Menon wrote:As long as it would reasonably require for ARDE to develop a product that satisfies IA's needs (not wild desires), with the full support of IA and all funding required.

Reasonable being the operative word here. How many years??..umm or decades..

Last time around the remit was clear all three sub-categories on a common cartridge, which wild desires do you speak of here.

Arun Menon wrote:This was bungled up by the some people in the IA with their un-supportive and downright hostile attitude towards indigenous products and wanton desire to import gold plated foreign goodies (along with enjoying the fringe benefits). So, IA should take responsibility for the situation and ARDE must not be made a convenient scapegoat.

Scapegoat!!....ARDE failed to make a carbine in the first place and then dumped it on OFB.

Much like the goat as described in the old testament was used for.

member_22539 · Post by **member_22539** » 04 Jul 2015 07:29

vaibhav.n wrote:Reasonable being the operative word here. How many years??..umm or decades.

It can be pre-decided by all stakeholders, do this within this much time or we import. But all support and funding must be given and regardless of the success or failure of the particular project, we must not cast away any knowledge we gained in the process and must continue research until we finally arrive at a usable product.

Also, your contempt for indigenous research is shining through every word you write. I hope you can be a bit more objective.

vaibhav.n wrote:which wild desires do you speak of here

Do you really not know? Are you pretending to be ignorant or are you mouthing off without bothering to keep up with the subject?

I am talking about stuff like this:

The Army's tender, however, does not appear to have had any of this in mind. It drew up absurd qualitative requirements for this tender in 2011. It asked for a multi-calibre assault rifle (MCAR) - a cutting-edge weapon bought in small quantities even by specialist units like Delta Force and the Navy SEALS - to equip the entire Indian army. A super-expensive weapon capable of firing both INSAS and AK-47 ammunition by swapping barrels. But which cost six times the older guns. Not to talk of the logistical nightmare of carrying different barrels and different ammunition. All this for a soldier whose only requirement has been a simple, reliable and effective assault rifle fitted with day/night weapon sights. The tender amused weapon manufacturers. Two of the biggest, Germany's Heckler and Koch and Belgium's FN Herstal did not even respond. Possibly because they held their sides laughing. The five foreign firms that did participate - two of them rushed prototypes for the contest - must rue the day they did. Delhi's arms dealer circuit was abuzz with talk of the contract sparking off a battle between two arms agents, one of whom had allegedly got the rifle requirements tailor-made to help a gun he was hawking.

vaibhav.n wrote:Scapegoat!!....ARDE failed to make a carbine in the first place and then dumped it on OFB.

The carbine was a failed effort, no doubt about it. But they did learn something from it and the MSMC is the result. It has been kept in limbo for ever, with never ending trials. Probably, so that they can cite emergent needs to import another gold plated product.

Also, no one makes OFB a scapegoat. Even the IA can't go over them with their imports. Regardless of what gets procured, OFB will have its share of the pie.

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 04 Jul 2015 08:57

..gsqr called for 1km accurate range on the rifle..

Is that correct ?

1 Km range is dedicated sniper rifle territory.

Even the common Sniper Support rifles or Designated Marksman rifles have accuracy optimized for around 500 meters engagement (maximum effective ranges are higher)

srin · Post by **srin** » 04 Jul 2015 08:59

vaibhav.n wrote:
Arun Menon wrote:As long as it would reasonably require for ARDE to develop a product that satisfies IA's needs (not wild desires), with the full support of IA and all funding required.

Reasonable being the operative word here. How many years??..umm or decades..

So why don't you detail us what the army needs are ? Looking at these cancelled tenders, it looks like it doesn't know what it wants

Kakkaji · Post by **Kakkaji** » 04 Jul 2015 09:03

IIRC, the replacement of INSAS with imported multi-calibre rifles was the pet project of ex-COAS Bikram Singh. He pushed hard for it, but couldn't get it through. eyebrows were raised even then about the feasibility of equipping the infantry soldiers with a rifle costing Rs. 200,000.

Picklu · Post by **Picklu** » 04 Jul 2015 09:06

Ah the decade old failures like m4, Sa80, ak47 etc are fine but insas is not?

All of them got bad reviews from their operators at the ground level for the last few DECADEs but their higher ups have always stick to their gun (pun intended).

It is the same old theme - the grass is always greener on the other side.

Gyan · Post by **Gyan** » 04 Jul 2015 09:11

Which carbine in the world can fire Indian 5.56x45 round? Whether carbine failed or the requirments laid down for ammo was not compatible with short barrel of carbine?

Yagnasri · Post by **Yagnasri** » 04 Jul 2015 09:14

I have seen AK made in US version in news. I am surprised that no private company ever tried to do that in India. Considering huge need to for Para/police etc needs in states and national level this should have need a logical thing to do.

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 04 Jul 2015 09:31

Here is the RFI for the Assault rifles - REQUEST FOR INFORMATION : ASSAULT RIFLE FOR INFANTRY

Does anyone have the link which specifies the preferred / minimum requirements ?

vaibhav.n · Post by **vaibhav.n** » 04 Jul 2015 10:32

Manish_P wrote:
..gsqr called for 1km accurate range on the rifle..

Is that correct ?

1 Km range is dedicated sniper rifle territory.

Even the common Sniper Support rifles or Designated Marksman rifles have accuracy optimized for around 500 meters engagement (maximum effective ranges are higher)

1000 yards is the requirement for the 7.62mm Light Machine Gun.

7.62 mm Light Machine Gun (LMG)

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 04 Jul 2015 11:17

on paper the beretta mx160 is the new mahdi. meets all of the RFI needs and has got good reviews in the press.
but thats not equal to prolonged rough service in the field.

a lot of false gods like SA80, G36, FN-SCAR, Sig 550 came up and fell by the wayside.

cost will also be a big factor for us. we cannot afford iphone guns for all, most will have to manage to moto-g2

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 04 Jul 2015 11:19

surprising thing is why GOI did not push ahead with a next gen INSAS having better plastics , UGBL, a long rail on top, cheaper desi made day/night sights, better alloys, folding stock, large box mag and heavier barrel for squad automatic weapon role etc.

they should have been busy the last 10 yrs on all that.

vaibhav.n · Post by **vaibhav.n** » 04 Jul 2015 11:37

The SIG was the template to follow, much like the INSAS it has similar lineage from AK designs but has carved out a niche for itself in all these years from various improvements. Easily one of the most accurate 5.56mm rifles on the planet today, super expensive as well though. The NSG boys swear by it!!

Yagnasri · Post by **Yagnasri** » 04 Jul 2015 15:17

Super expensive is the problem for all the things IAF and IA wants and they want them yesterday. May be taking a serious look into ak74 and developing some version of it is not a bad idea.

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 04 Jul 2015 15:47

Gyan wrote:Which carbine in the world can fire Indian 5.56x45 round? Whether carbine failed or the requirments laid down for ammo was not compatible with short barrel of carbine?

Exactly, another genius GSQR from IA onlee !!!!

ArmenT · Post by **ArmenT** » 04 Jul 2015 23:44

Sagar G wrote:
Gyan wrote:Which carbine in the world can fire Indian 5.56x45 round? Whether carbine failed or the requirments laid down for ammo was not compatible with short barrel of carbine?
Exactly, another genius GSQR from IA onlee !!!!

Gyan: If I recall correctly, the Indian 5.56x45 mm. has a little bit less propulsive force than NATO spec. Therefore, most carbines that fire 5.56x45 mm. should be able to handle it (assuming that the force generated is adequate enough to operate the recoil springs and cycle it -- this shouldn't be a problem for a well designed firearm, which should be able to handle slightly out-of-spec ammo). If you want a specific example, if the reports about coalition forces in Afghanistan and Iraq using Indian-made 5.56x45 are true (ref: the last couple of pages on this thread), then one carbine that has been using it is the M4, which is used by US military. Another one that would use it is the Galil.

That should give you an idea of where the failure is.

SagarG: Why don't you think a carbine should be capable of firing NATO standard 5.56x45 mm. ammunition?

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 05 Jul 2015 09:12

✈Anantha Krishnan M✈ ‏@writetake 2h2 hours ago

Made in India #Excalibur rifle to replace INSAS, reports @SandeepUnnithan @MailOnline #IndianArmy #DRDO

DRDO officials say it will take the OFB's Rifle Factory Ishapore at least eight months to incorporate design changes suggested by the ARDE and field the first prototypes of what they are calling the 'Modified INSAS Rifle' (MIR). Changes suggested after trials include a smaller handguard and improved polycarbonate magazine.

If the Excalibur/MIR clears trials, it could be in the hands of infantry soldiers within two years, DRDO officials say. The DRDO is designing a second version of the Excalibur, the AR-2 that fires 7.62x39 mm rounds used by AK-47. The AR-2 will be offered as an alternative to the Russianorigin assault rifle.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 05 Jul 2015 09:37

makes perfect sense. MIR and AR-2 are needed in millions given our huge needs. stop making the italians rich, they have looted enough already.

we also need a good automatic pistol for officers equivalent to the glock, light and sure footed.

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 05 Jul 2015 12:02

ArmenT wrote:SagarG: Why don't you think a carbine should be capable of firing NATO standard 5.56x45 mm. ammunition?

The issue with short barrel length and 5.56x45 round was muzzle flash and that's why the new round for MSMC. We had discussed the same issue before if you remember.

koti · Post by **koti** » 05 Jul 2015 18:46

pankajs wrote:
✈Anantha Krishnan M✈ ‏@writetake 2h2 hours ago

Made in India #Excalibur rifle to replace INSAS, reports @SandeepUnnithan @MailOnline #IndianArmy #DRDO

That should be good news. Looks like the IA is backing an indigenous product.

Anyone knows what internal differences this has over Insas? And how it is made more reliable?

What improvements does BRF suggest on the Excaliber?
-The hand guard: I think they can come up with a more modern one on the lines of Keymod.
-MICWS already has a quad rail designed, maybe they can include that here as well.
-The stock looks like an improvement over the ones on 1B1, but this too probably can be modified to that of MCIWS or of the Ak-12 types.
-The fire selector on 1B1 was well placed, but has a lot of travel. This can be minimized too.
-Since Excalibur supports full auto, a 30 round magazine should be standardized instead of the current 20 round one.
-The sling is a bit outdated according some gun bloggers, that could be modified too.

And all this with no significant weight gain.

There is no harm in developing a high capacity drum magazine too. which could be used on the Insas LMG as well.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 05 Jul 2015 20:44

Let me make a trolling comment: How can an infantry weapon work without Orange furniture?

Picklu · Post by **Picklu** » 05 Jul 2015 20:47

On the cancellation of AR RFP ...
[CT alert]
I believe the new DM has applied a blanket ban on the new RFPs and checking every such req on a case by case basis to weed out the ridiculous ones.
The existing money making ones are also being cancelled left right and center and in case of dire emergency govt to govt deals for a bare minimum number to just tide over the current situation (ala rafale). Being an engineer he is eminently capable of doing so.
He might have also intimated the service head quarters that the same banning policy will continue to apply for the reminder of the current period and also the next one if this same govt comes back. He has the full backing of the PM on this who are also of the similar mindset.
Hence the sudden improvement on the services part to start working on desi artillery, insas/akash/pinaka/tejas/arjun follow ups etc.
Some are doing genuinely, some like armoured corp are still not fully onboard and hoping for armata as FMBT while time pass charade of supporting arjun. They would need a few more blanket bans to realign.
[/CT alert]

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 05 Jul 2015 22:21

Made in India rifle to replace INSAS: Modified Excalibur currently undergoing trials to meet Army requirements

The Indian Army has decided to go for an indigenous assault rifle to replace the problematic INSAS rifles.

The decision that could save thousands of crores in foreign exchange and boost local manufacture was taken recently by Army Chief General Dalbir Singh.

The Army then cancelled a problematic Rs 4,848 crore order for importing Multi Caliber Assault Rifles on June 15 — first reported by Mail Today on July 1.

“We are going in for a designed and Made in India rifle in keeping with the government’s indigenisation thrusts,” senior Army sources told Mail Today.

The performance of the DRDO-designed ‘Excalibur’ assault rifle in trials last month at the Armament Research and Development Establishment (ARDE) in Pune has further enthused the Army.

The Excalibur had only two stoppages (where the bullet gets stuck in the breech) after 24,000 rounds were fired, close to the Army’s specifications of only one stoppage.

New features

The Excalibur is an improved version of the INSAS rifle and fires 5.56x45 mm ammunition. It has full-automatic capability over the INSAS which can only fire a three-round burst.

The Excalibur barrel is shorter by 4 mm, has a side folding butt stock and features a Picatinny rail, a universal mount that allows a range of weapon sights and sensors to be fitted on the rifle.

DRDO officials say it will take the OFB’s Rifle Factory Ishapore at least eight months to incorporate design changes suggested by the ARDE and field the first prototypes of what they are calling the ‘Modified INSAS Rifle’ (MIR).

Changes suggested after trials include a smaller handguard and improved polycarbonate magazine.

If the Excalibur/MIR clears trials, it could be in the hands of infantry soldiers within two years, DRDO officials say.

The DRDO is designing a second version of the Excalibur, the AR-2 that fires 7.62x39 mm rounds used by AK-47. The AR-2 will be offered as an alternative to the Russian-origin assault rifle.

The Army’s 2011 tender was for a Multi Caliber Assault Rifle or for a weapon that could fire INSAS and AK-47 ammunition with a barrel change.

Five international firms— Beretta of Italy, Israeli Weapons Industries (IWI), Colt Defense of the U.S., Ceska Zbplojovka of Czech Republic and SiG Sauer of Switzerland—were shortlisted for the trials.

However, Army officials now admit the specifications were poorly drafted and unrealistic.

What's behind this overwhelming love for the 7.62x39 mm round? Why is it that the NSG & Special Forces have consciously opted for a 5.56mm weapon but the rest of the army simply must have something in the AK calibre? This when even the Russians have settled on the smaller 5.45x39 mm round.

koti · Post by **koti** » 06 Jul 2015 00:05

Viv S wrote: What's behind this overwhelming love for the 7.62x39 mm round? Why is it that the NSG & Special Forces have consciously opted for a 5.56mm weapon but the rest of the army simply must have something in the AK calibre? This when even the Russians have settled on the smaller 5.45x39 mm round.

I think it is well thought out saab.

RR, CRPF and other units have realized how 7.62 is better for CI compared to 5.56. And this realization is after they were using the Insas for almost a decade.

It is similar to why western forces use .45 in Kriss and UMP against 9mm in HRT. We can extend this to IA preferring 7.62 against 5.56 in CI.