Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

[Kakkaji]

4 men 3 different calibres.

A logistical nightmare.

These men are not from the Indian Army. Most likely, they are Russians

[nachiket]

4 men 3 different calibres.

A logistical nightmare.

These men are not from the Indian Army. Most likely, they are Russians

Russians wielding Israeli Negev and American SIG-716? They are Indian. The uniforms are of the new IA camo pattern. Not sure what unit though. From the kit they do not look like regular infantry for sure.

[Rakesh]

‘Colonel Kalashnikov’ first beneficiary of new army HR policy
https://www.news9live.com/india/colonel ... cy-2454965
02 March 2024

[Pratyush]

Why "Col Kalashnikov"?

The gentleman's name is,"Colonel Prasad Bansod". It's a good name for an Indian. The fact that he is called Col Kalashnikov, shows that our media has no appreciation of his accomplishments. Without bringing a foreigner into the discussion.

[Rakesh]

His accomplishment is what is of value here ---> Developed a 9mm carbine which is in limited series production and which has the potential to replace over a million Sterling carbines, in addition to export.

Equally important is the change in the Army's thinking ---> promoting officers based on domain specialization. Rather than lose him to the private sector, he will continue to contribute/innovate for the Indian Army.

Don't get caught up over a name. It is only a name. They can call him Colonel Tom Cruise, if that is what makes the media happy. His media appointed name is inconsequential. It is a sound byte. Nothing More, Nothing Less.

[Thakur_B]

From PLR plant in Kanpur. IWI ARAD in 5.56x45 manufactured in India. ARAD is also available in 7.62x51.

[nachiket]

From PLR plant in Kanpur. IWI ARAD in 5.56x45 manufactured in India. ARAD is also available in 7.62x51.

Who are they building it for?

[Thakur_B]

Some rumoured token SF order. Rest they are manufacturing small periodic orders of Tavor and X95 from Armed forces and CAPFs. Almost everyone in small arms segment is sitting without orders, whether they are SSS, CMT, Jindal or Kalyani.

[Manish_P]

...Almost everyone in small arms segment is sitting without orders, whether they are SSS, CMT, Jindal or Kalyani.

That's the saddest tale of all, more frustrating than the fighters circus, more depressing than the MBT saga

[nachiket]

Some rumoured token SF order. Rest they are manufacturing small periodic orders of Tavor and X95 from Armed forces and CAPFs. Almost everyone in small arms segment is sitting without orders, whether they are SSS, CMT, Jindal or Kalyani.

Small orders for SF or piecemeal orders for upgrade kits and accessories can never sustain a firearms industry. Most of these companies will go out of business or exit this space in the not too distant future. Our addiction to either depend completely on incompetent OFB or go for screwdrivering a foreign design (AK-203, X-95, etc.) will ensure this outcome.

Forget about coming up with a design from scratch we don't even seem capable of executing a project to derive a rifle design based on the basic AK or AR (15 or 18) action and productionize it. It is absolutely shameful that we are paying the Russians for the AK-203 when it is little more than a slightly refined AKM with better furniture.

Even with the INSAS we essentially tried to do what the Israelis had already done with the Galil years ago - adapt the basic AK action for 5.56 and create a design which maintains the reliability of the AK with better ergonomics and less recoil with lighter 5.56 ammo. But we managed to mess that up with terrible quality control and design issues which were never fully fixed, at least to the army's liking. After that the army had a bout of schizophrenia and started asking for unobtainium (multi-caliber rifle), dumped the design which came out of it which was never going to be acceptable thanks to the ridiculous requirements and just straight up went shopping overseas for something that could have been possible to be done indigenously had they not wasted time with the MCIWS.

[nachiket]

One question I've had about our Paras and SF is how the oft repeated trope about the 5.56 ammo being deemed inadequate leading to the IA trying to replace the INSAS with AK's for COIN does not apply to the SF? They seem happy with their Tavors, M4's and now the ARAD despite being involved in all kinds of COIN ops.

[Pratyush]

One question I've had about our Paras and SF is how the oft repeated trope about the 5.56 ammo being deemed inadequate leading to the IA trying to replace the INSAS with AK's for COIN does not apply to the SF? They seem happy with their Tavors, M4's and now the ARAD despite being involved in all kinds of COIN ops.

It's a very good question. Unfortunately due to lack of publicly available after action analysis by the armed forces or the CAPFs. It's nearly impossible to answer within the Indian context.

Outside the Indian context and within the context of the US army adoption of the M16 and the red army adoption of the Ak 74. Along with the Russian adoption of the new combat rifle in terms of the Ak 12 in terms 5.45. It is relatively clear to me that the a light bullet will high muzzle velocity was useful on the battlefield.

Besides, from what I understand, based on US publications, and depending on the seriousness of the publications objective of the bullet was said to be one of the following;

1) wound 1, you take 3 out of the battlefield".
2) managing the logistics, resupply and the weight of the combat load out of the infantryman.

Now within the context of Indian counter insurgency firefight. Where the insurgents are mostly looking for a meeting with the 72. The concept of wound 1 and take 3 out of the battlefield doesn't apply. When it comes to 5.56 mm.

I have not seen any serious study of the terminal ballistics of the USSR 7.62x39, which shows that it's superior to the NATO 5.56mm.

This could just be a case of the army having built an urban legend in its own institutional mind due to different anecdotes of the infantrymen.

I.e, they are expecting certain performance from their firearms and are disregarding any evidence to the contrary.

[Pratyush]

In addition to the above, based on the counter insurgency/ terrorism experiences of both the US army and the Russian military/ FSB troops.

Both nations have developed a large calibre bullets along with firearms. In the shape of.458 SOCOM and the.50 calibre in case of the Russian forces .

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ShAK-12

This shows that in case of both the nations, they have faced situations where both the 5.56 and the 7.62 have proven to be insufficient in terms of counter terrorism operations.

Secondly, and more importantly, these new developments show that both the nations have a robust system for after action analysis and feedback. Along with trained human resources needed to devise solutions for such situations.

[nachiket]

Besides, from what I understand, based on US publications, and depending on the seriousness of the publications objective of the bullet was said to be one of the following;

1) wound 1, you take 3 out of the battlefield".
2) managing the logistics, resupply and the weight of the combat load out of the infantryman.

Now within the context of Indian counter insurgency firefight. Where the insurgents are mostly looking for a meeting with the 72. The concept of wound 1 and take 3 out of the battlefield doesn't apply. When it comes to 5.56 mm.

This theory of the 5.56 round being developed to wound instead of kill because it takes more men out of the fight is a myth with no basis in reality. Unfortunately it has acquired a life of its own on the internet. The 5.56 round came out of the SCHV (small caliber high velocity) program of the US Army and the original requirements make no mention of this "wounding is better than killing" philosophy. They do however state that it should have accuracy and ballistics similar to the .30-06 round (used in the M1 Garand) till 500 yds.

Think about it, a wounded soldier can still pick up his rifle and shoot at you. We have innumerable stories of our own soldiers carrying on fighting after being wounded. Why would you want to intentionally let your enemy do that instead of completely incapacitating him at the very least? Even the criticisms of the 5.56 round after the US experience in Iraq and Afg concerned an apparent lack of stopping power - meaning the enemy kept shooting after being hit not that the enemy troops weren't taking care of the wounded and therefore the "wound 1 take 3 out" philosophy didn't work.

[nachiket]

In addition to the above, based on the counter insurgency/ terrorism experiences of both the US army and the Russian military/ FSB troops.

Both nations have developed a large calibre bullets along with firearms. In the shape of.458 SOCOM and the.50 calibre in case of the Russian forces .

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ShAK-12

This shows that in case of both the nations, they have faced situations where both the 5.56 and the 7.62 have proven to be insufficient in terms of counter terrorism operations.

Secondly, and more importantly, these new developments show that both the nations have a robust system for after action analysis and feedback. Along with trained human resources needed to devise solutions for such situations.

Both of these are niche rounds with serious limitations and aren't widely used. .458 SOCOM is only used by gun enthusiasts. The US army never really did anything with it. The ShAK-12 was also specifically built for FSB urban combat units. Again a very niche round with limited applicability.

[nachiket]

The American answer to the 5.56mm issues is the SIG-MCX rifle with the new 6.8x51mm round. But they seem to be going slow with it and still figuring out teething issues. Of course this round is about as heavy and more powerful than the old 7.62x51. So I'm not sure what happens to all the reasons why the 5.56 was adopted to replace the 7.62x51 in first place viz.:
1. Being able to carry more ammo due to it being lighter. Most shots in combat are misses so more ammo is required.
2. Less recoil and lighter rifle. More controllable in full-auto if needed.
3. Most small-arms engagements don't happen beyond 3-400m so the higher accuracy at longer ranges provided by larger rounds like the 7.62x51 and now the 6.8x51 is not worth the tradeoffs.

All of these will apply to the new round as well.

[Pratyush]

Snip....

This theory of the 5.56 round being developed to wound instead of kill because it takes more men out of the fight is a myth with no basis in reality. Unfortunately it has acquired a life of its own on the internet. The 5.56 round came out of the SCHV (small caliber high velocity) program of the US Army and the original requirements make no mention of this "wounding is better than killing" philosophy. They do however state that it should have accuracy and ballistics similar to the .30-06 round (used in the M1 Garand) till 500 yds.

Think about it, a wounded soldier can still pick up his rifle and shoot at you. We have innumerable stories of our own soldiers carrying on fighting after being wounded. Why would you want to intentionally let your enemy do that instead of completely incapacitating him at the very least? Even the criticisms of the 5.56 round after the US experience in Iraq and Afg concerned an apparent lack of stopping power - meaning the enemy kept shooting after being hit not that the enemy troops weren't taking care of the wounded and therefore the "wound 1 take 3 out" philosophy didn't work.

Which is why I stated in my original post, depending of the seriousness of the publication.

[Pratyush]

Both of these are niche rounds with serious limitations and aren't widely used. .458 SOCOM is only used by gun enthusiasts. The US army never really did anything with it. The ShAK-12 was also specifically built for FSB urban combat units. Again a very niche round with limited applicability.

When the respective users came up against the specific circumstances where the weakness of the respective in service anmo was revealed. The system was able to devise a technical solution to the problem.

That is the main point. It's not really relevant if the solution was widely adopted. What matters, is that the solution was available for widespread adoption, if it was needed to do so.

[Pratyush]

The American answer to the 5.56mm issues is the SIG-MCX rifle with the new 6.8x51mm round. But they seem to be going slow with it and still figuring out teething issues. Of course this round is about as heavy and more powerful than the old 7.62x51. So I'm not sure what happens to all the reasons why the 5.56 was adopted to replace the 7.62x51 in first place viz.:
1. Being able to carry more ammo due to it being lighter. Most shots in combat are misses so more ammo is required.
2. Less recoil and lighter rifle. More controllable in full-auto if needed.
3. Most small-arms engagements don't happen beyond 3-400m so the higher accuracy at longer ranges provided by larger rounds like the 7.62x51 and now the 6.8x51 is not worth the tradeoffs.

All of these will apply to the new round as well.

This is an extremely interesting program on the whole.

The project is a text book example of how to design a revolutionary small arms system. By dividing it into several small components and the then working towards stitching the different parts of program into a coherent whole. Starting from,

1) the performance of the bullet.
2) specifying the chamber pressure the firearm should be able to handle.
3) optics.

I believe that, if the system works as intended. Then the US army will make a wholesale shift to this new calibre. They have invested a lot of intellectual resources at an institutional level to come up with the basic technical solution.

[nachiket]

When the respective users came up against the specific circumstances where the weakness of the respective in service anmo was revealed. The system was able to devise a technical solution to the problem.

That is the main point. It's not really relevant if the solution was widely adopted. What matters, is that the solution was available for widespread adoption, if it was needed to do so.

You could say the same thing about any number of firearms dev programs which created a product that was never adopted. The success of the product is eventually determined by the potential users being satisfied enough to buy it and they didn't. Otherwise DRDO's MCIWS should be counted as a success too.

This is an extremely interesting program on the whole.

The project is a text book example of how to design a revolutionary small arms system. By dividing it into several small components and the then working towards stitching the different parts of program into a coherent whole. Starting from,
.....

Countries like the US undoubtedly have better human and technical resources available with multiple firearms companies with a decades or more history of firearms R&D and manufacturing. So it is not surprising to see that when they are faced with an issue they have a lot of resources on tap to come up with solutions. Our problem is we have never invested in developing such resources in house. On top of that we are very eager to fritter away whatever we have after one or two failures at least some of which were due to far fetched requirements.

Designing a rifle is one thing, converting it into a usable product which can be easily mass manufactured to an acceptable level of quality and reliability is a different ball-game as we found during the INSAS saga. But unlike other countries our response to it was to go running to foreign manufacturers instead of trying to fix the rifle or come up with a better design, almost as if people were just waiting for an excuse to do it.Compare this to something like the British SA80 which was universally hated by their troops but they stuck with it and eventually produced a much improved version which fixed all the issues with it. We couldn't do that with the INSAS however.

And for all the praise of the US Army and their system remember that they aren't immune from asking for unobtainium and funding development programs which go nowhere. They have tried to replace the M16/M4 multiple times till now and failed. If the SIG-MCX/M5 succeeds in doing that it would be the first rifle to do so. Just look at the past efforts like the XM8 which wasn't adopted, the OICW which was a fiasco thanks to the army attempting to integrate a rifle and a grenade launcher into one firearm, the FN SCAR which was supposed to replace the M4 with US Special forces but did not, the HK 416 which was again meant to replace the M4 but did not etc.

[Pratyush]

The points you have made are quite valid. Both in context of the US army and the Indian army.

Second WRT, the DRDO MCIWS. I have not been able to understand the thought process behind the program. I would definitely like to understand the thought process, before I can say if the program was a success or failure.

Because, I come from a place where a product could be a successful design but fails to find the market because of xyz reasons. To me it's important to learn the the cause of failure. So that lessons are learnt and similar failure can be avoided in future.

Now I understand that Indian system is singularly incapable of learning lessons. But I as an individual should learn those lessons.

[nachiket]

Second WRT, the DRDO MCIWS. I have not been able to understand the thought process behind the program. I would definitely like to understand the thought process, before I can say if the program was a success or failure.

Because, I come from a place where a product could be a successful design but fails to find the market because of xyz reasons. To me it's important to learn the the cause of failure. So that lessons are learnt and similar failure can be avoided in future.

If you are building something to fulfil the requirement of a specific customer and they do not accept the product it must be considered a failure. Of course this rifle never went into full production and was never tested in the field so we don't know how it would have performed.

The requirement came from the understanding that no single caliber of ammunition is good enough to fulfil all the different roles and battlefield conditions that IA infantrymen find themselves in. So the idea is that instead of buying different rifles for every purpose we design a single rifle that can fire different types of ammo. All you have to do change the barrel (which needs to be easily removable), the magazine and the bolt assembly. So the MCIWS was designed to do just that and be able to fire 5.56mm, 7.62x39mm and 6.8x43mm (Remington SPC) ammo.

No army in the world uses a multi-caliber weapon as its main infantry rifle. Not surprisingly this "jack-of-all-trades" solution did not work out so well and the IA abandoned it and immediately ran to SIG and the Russians to get two different guns in two different calibers. I daresay that if they had asked the DRDO to design two separate rifles in 7.62x51 and 7.62x39 they could have come up with viable designs based on the lessons they had hopefully learned from the INSAS program.

[Pratyush]

Thanks for your explanation of the program. No wonder that it was a failure.

[souravB]

Great points by Nachiket. I'd like to add one point each for

Why .223 was picked up
Most of the casualty on a battlefield is done by the artillery. One of the doctrine at first US forces & later by NATO forces adopted was using infantry to lay down suppressive fire to hold the line & call artillery/(in some cases)air support embedded with the division. For the task, a caliber was needed which can shoot straight till a safe distance & can be carried in plenty.

Why IA is enamored with 7.62 soviet
I do not think IA is too attached with the caliber or they wouldn't look around for rifles. IA (or atleast a big chunk of the seniors) is attached to the AKs. Everybody would if the choice was between SLR/INSAS & AKs. IA can & may want to use 7.62NATO but the rifles are not as much a glutton for punishment as AKs.

[srin]

Some rumoured token SF order. Rest they are manufacturing small periodic orders of Tavor and X95 from Armed forces and CAPFs. Almost everyone in small arms segment is sitting without orders, whether they are SSS, CMT, Jindal or Kalyani.

Forget about coming up with a design from scratch we don't even seem capable of executing a project to derive a rifle design based on the basic AK or AR (15 or 18) action and productionize it. It is absolutely shameful that we are paying the Russians for the AK-203 when it is little more than a slightly refined AKM with better furniture.

Even with the INSAS we essentially tried to do what the Israelis had already done with the Galil years ago - adapt the basic AK action for 5.56 and create a design which maintains the reliability of the AK with better ergonomics and less recoil with lighter 5.56 ammo. But we managed to mess that up with terrible quality control and design issues which were never fully fixed, at least to the army's liking. After that the army had a bout of schizophrenia and started asking for unobtainium (multi-caliber rifle), dumped the design which came out of it which was never going to be acceptable thanks to the ridiculous requirements and just straight up went shopping overseas for something that could have been possible to be done indigenously had they not wasted time with the MCIWS.

The issue is not with the design. It is with the requirements. You'd think they'd have done something by now.
We don't know which caliber for what purpose. So, we got a 7.62x51 Sig Sauer (with full auto !) in limited quantities but we wanted 7.62x39 AK203 as the general rifle.
And you've already touched upon the farce that was the MCIWS requirement.

[nachiket]

The issue is not with the design. It is with the requirements. You'd think they'd have done something by now.
We don't know which caliber for what purpose. So, we got a 7.62x51 Sig Sauer (with full auto !) in limited quantities but we wanted 7.62x39 AK203 as the general rifle.
And you've already touched upon the farce that was the MCIWS requirement.

The requirements were an issue with the MCIWS but not with the INSAS. That should have been straightforward but we managed to mess it up. Problem is we did not stick with it and refine the design. There were newer versions like the Excalibur made but none were adopted. Meanwhile the Americans have been using newer and newer versions of the M-16 with the same basic design since the Vietnam war. We just gave up and went running for imports.

[Pratyush]

Perhaps the objective was to import form the start. That is why the requirements were drafted in terms they were.

[Thakur_B]

SSS Defence G72 SMG at bottom. Didn't make it through in Army procurement for 550 Nos. SMG. Also didn't get through were Uzi and CZ Scorpion. Still standing in competition are Asmi and Taurus T9.

[Atmavik]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8TNiILqmy0I

On The Shop Floor Episode 1 | Solar Industries: Powering India’s Quest For Self-Reliance In

at 35:00 mins. the reliability of grenades has gone up from 50 % to 99%. interesting story the late shri Bipin Rawat using old grenades is shared.

[morem]

Some interesting drone hard kill systems shown in the video. As a person born and brought up in Nagpur, gladdens my heart to see this.

[Rakesh]

https://x.com/alpha_defense/status/1775563307551985755 ---> Tonbo Imaging beats Tata Advanced Systems.

Tonbo Imaging to supply 84+56 qty EK-Gen2 Night Sights for Dragunov Sniper Rifle (DSR) to the Indian Army. The total contract value is nearly ₹5 crore.

[ramana]

DRDO Tech Focus on Small arms and Ammo.

https://www.drdo.gov.in/drdo/sites/defa ... t_2021.pdf

[nachiket]

DRDO Tech Focus on Small arms and Ammo.

https://www.drdo.gov.in/drdo/sites/defa ... t_2021.pdf

This is from Oct 2021.

One interesting detail in this is about the 5.56x30mm MINSAS round used in the JVPC. They have specifically mentioned its (soft) armor piercing capability and that it is comparable to the Belgian 5.7x28mm used in the FN P90 and H&K's 4.6x30mm used in the MP7 PDW. Those two rounds were specifically developed to provide a capability to defeat Kevlar body armor, originally to equip rear-echelon NATO personnel whose 9mm weapons may not be sufficient to deal with any Soviet/Russian troops who penetrated deep behind NATO lines. Neither gun ever ended up being used for that purpose and ended up serving in Police forces and SWAT units around the world. Our SPG also uses the FN P90.

Our 5.56x30mm round was originally developed for the INSAS carbine (Amogh) because ARDE wasn't able to develop a short-barreled carbine variant of the INSAS (M4 equivalent) which could fire the same 5.56.45mm round. Now that it is being used in the JVPC they can advertise it differently as a personal defense weapon with AP capability. Its is a far more compact gun as well compared to the Amogh.

[sanman]

What is this thing that China has? Does have a useful use case? How come nobody else has it?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tvz8WrlE5a8

[Pratyush]

But we do.

Ordinance factory Tiruchirappalli makes the shot Milkor MGL under licence.

The particular PRC weapon is unique. But the Indian Anti material rifles can fulfill the same niche as the PLA weapon. If long ranged Anti Sniper activities are required.

Having said that, looking at the towed 82 mm multiple shot automatic mortar being used by the Russians and the Ukrainians.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2B9_Vasil ... in%201970.

Along with the fact that the PRC has licensed produced versions of same along with several improvement.

The Indian army needs to be liberally equiped with both light weight Anti material rifles and second generation Anti tank missiles with a range of upto 4 kms to kill such systems.

[Manish_P]

What is this thing that China has? Does have a useful use case? How come nobody else has it?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tvz8WrlE5a8

One use case - urban warfare, putting grenades in through windows from long range.

The Chinese are 'rumoured' to have these trialled these on Somalia pirate craft. (some experts have opined high fire rate machine guns are more effective)

Good competent armies (like the IA) put lot of emphasis on marksmanship. This system eases the pressure somewhat. Especially considering the rising instances of eyesight related problems being found in Chinese single child soldiers.

[sanman]

What is this thing that China has? Does have a useful use case? How come nobody else has it?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tvz8WrlE5a8

One use case - urban warfare, putting grenades in through windows from long range.

The Chinese are 'rumoured' to have these trialled these on Somalia pirate craft. (some experts have opined high fire rate machine guns are more effective)

Good competent armies (like the IA) put lot of emphasis on marksmanship. This system eases the pressure somewhat. Especially considering the rising instances of eyesight related problems being found in Chinese single child soldiers.

According to the video, the main use case of this weapon is against us in Himalayas, as well as against Taiwan (beach bunkers).

I think India makes "Vidwansak" which heavily resembles Denel NTW-20 anti-materiel rifle from South Africa.

[Manish_P]

According to the video, the main use case of this weapon is against us in Himalayas, as well as against Taiwan (beach bunkers).

I think India makes "Vidwansak" which heavily resembles Denel NTW-20 anti-materiel rifle from South Africa.

Yes. Those might be primary use cases. Doesn't mean there can't be more...

The 20 mm anti-material ammo is very different from this - kinetic and ballistic. Serves a different purpose.

As mentioned by the other poster we use the Milkor multi barrel grenade launcher.

[sanman]

Yes. Those might be primary use cases. Doesn't mean there can't be more...

The 20 mm anti-material ammo is very different from this - kinetic and ballistic. Serves a different purpose.

As mentioned by the other poster we use the Milkor multi barrel grenade launcher.

Their weapon has 1-km range, which is a lot more than a grenade-launcher

[chetak]

Jindal Defence (Taurus-T9) has been declared as the L-1 in 550 𝟵𝘅𝟭𝟵𝗺𝗺 𝗠𝗮𝗰𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗲 𝗣𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗼𝗹 tender (different) of the Indian Army.

Taurus T-9 will be manufactured in India via ToT.

The contract value is ₹4,25,97,500







https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/co ... 965303.ece