Small Arms Thread

nikhil_p · Post by **nikhil_p** » 16 Feb 2009 15:39

Is it just me or does the Army directorate use a YAHOO id???
what happened to the good old .gov.in domain ids?

Nitesh · Post by **Nitesh** » 16 Feb 2009 15:48

nikhil_p wrote:Is it just me or does the Army directorate use a YAHOO id???
what happened to the good old .gov.in domain ids?

It's kinda strange that I have seen lot of people using yahoo id it's not only army but other departments as well. One time I asked the question why they use it? Are they using the free service or paid one. The answer was the mail server is not maintained properly and some times they don't receive the email. Hence they use yahoo as alternative sometimes you can find the id printed on there visiting cards also.

KiranM · Post by **KiranM** » 16 Feb 2009 18:15

ParGha wrote:
(m) Butt Stock. Various types of butt stock are being offered the world over. The butt should have an integral, permanently affixed waterproof storage compartment and a comfortable back plate that should be shock absorbent and non-metallic. Please provide details of the butt stock in terms of the abovementioned parameters.
If this means that a bullpup is out of question, excellent!

Why is bull pup not desired?

TIA

KiranM · Post by **KiranM** » 16 Feb 2009 21:06

RayC wrote:

Sniper teams should move with a security element (section or platoon) whenever possible. This allows them to reach their areas of operation faster and more safely than if they operated alone. The security element also protects the snipers during operations.

Sir, wont the number of personnel attract attention to the sniper being protected? If detected, the best protection for a sniper, I thought, was E&E. Wont the numbers be a liability?

TIA.

ParGha · Post by **ParGha** » 17 Feb 2009 18:08

KiranM wrote:
ParGha wrote:If this means that a bullpup is out of question, excellent!
Why is bull pup not desired?

TIA

Nothing wrong or undesirable about bullpup configuration itself. Some implementations have been good, but more others seem to be plagued with troubles (not all of which is the design's faults by any means); personally I liked the FAMAS.

From a large organization's point of view (Indian force will be placing at least a 500,000 unit order) the question really is whether this "new" configuration offers something that standard configs absolutely don't? And whether such a hypothetical advantage is worth the expenses and effort of erasing the institutional practices of 50+ years with standard config assault rifles? The answer to many countries has been no, and for other countries it has been, yes. IMHO it is also, no. Ultimately IA has to sit down and think about the pros and cons (both exist) and make its call.

A Sharma · Post by **A Sharma** » 18 Feb 2009 18:52

RAJYA SABHA

Replacement of ageing and obsolete defence weaponry is part of modernization of the Armed Forces which is a continuous process based on threat perception, technological changes and budget allocation. The process involves formulation of a Long Term Integrated Perspective Plan (LTIPP), five years Services Capital Acquisition Plan (SCAP) and Annual Acquisition Plan (AAP). Procurement of required equipment and weapon system is carried out as per the AAP and in accordance with the Defence Procurement Procedure (DPP). On the basis of experience gained in its implementation, the DPP-2006 was reviewed and the DPP-2008 came into effect from 1.9.2008. The DPP-2008 has incorporated certain measures to expedite the process of procurement. In addition, the delegation of financial powers to the Service Headquarters for sanctioning capital proposals have been enhanced.

The procedure for procurement of defence equipment under revenue head is already laid down in the Defence Procurement Manual (DPM) 2006.

While contract for procurement of Assault Rifles has been concluded recently, procurement case for Howitzers and Night Vision Devices are in progress.

This information was given by Defence Minister Shri AK Antony in a written statement to Shri BK Hariprasad in Rajya Sabha today.

Any idea which assault rifle are we buying?
TIA

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 18 Feb 2009 20:24

I think he is talking about Tavor TAR-21.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 19 Feb 2009 16:22

KiranM wrote:
Sir, wont the number of personnel attract attention to the sniper being protected? If detected, the best protection for a sniper, I thought, was E&E. Wont the numbers be a liability?

TIA.

The sniper would not be within the section/ platoon per se when he is engaging.

The sniper is independent, but the area around requires to be sanitised and 'attack proof' (so to say) when he is engaging, there is no enemy action to distract. That is to put it simple terms.

Sanjay M · Post by **Sanjay M** » 28 Feb 2009 11:21

Hey, I just had an idea --

We've all heard about how plasma can reduce aerodynamic drag resistance on a body traveling through it. Russian scientists were the first to discover this phenomenon, and have been researching it for the purpose of developing new ways to enhance aerodynamic flight. Hence, the new budding field of plasma-aerodynamics.

But what about if this effect were used in a rifle, to allow a bullet to be accelerated to higher velocity within the rifle barrel, and reducing recoil in the process? I think it could be relatively easy to ionize the air or combustion gases inside the rifle barrel into plasma, to permit easier passage of the bullet down the barrel.

Or what about even to allow the bullet to continue traveling with reduced resistance across its trajectory to the target, after it has left the rifle? This would mean the bullet would have to carry an electrical charge to ionize the air into plasma while it traveled, or else a laser-sight would ionize that air along the bullet's path into plasma.

Is there any possible practical benefit to this?
I'm thinking that this principle could work usefully for any ballistic weapon, including even artillery.

jobatra · Post by **jobatra** » 28 Feb 2009 12:10

^^
how does drag have effect on recoil?

Also, to field ionize air you high electric field, which can be achieved through charging the bullet (and having a very sharp tip), but the charge will instantly be neutralized by the plasma. unless you have a source/sink of electrons on your bullet or shell.

You could create a plasma in the barrel, but I'm not sure what the benefit of reducing drag over a few meters will be.

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 28 Feb 2009 12:12

Sanjay M wrote:Hey, I just had an idea --

We've all heard about how plasma can reduce aerodynamic drag resistance on a body traveling through it. Russian scientists were the first to discover this phenomenon, and have been researching it for the purpose of developing new ways to enhance aerodynamic flight. Hence, the new budding field of plasma-aerodynamics.

But what about if this effect were used in a rifle, to allow a bullet to be accelerated to higher velocity within the rifle barrel, and reducing recoil in the process? I think it could be relatively easy to ionize the air or combustion gases inside the rifle barrel into plasma, to permit easier passage of the bullet down the barrel.

Or what about even to allow the bullet to continue traveling with reduced resistance across its trajectory to the target, after it has left the rifle? This would mean the bullet would have to carry an electrical charge to ionize the air into plasma while it traveled, or else a laser-sight would ionize that air along the bullet's path into plasma.

Is there any possible practical benefit to this?
I'm thinking that this principle could work usefully for any ballistic weapon, including even artillery.

Playing too many video games?

Plasma rifles and Rail guns ( which is an electrical rifle ) are widely used in fiction ( read video games and movies ). I do not know of any Plasma rifle been tested but a Railgun has indeed been tested by US Navy. According to Wikipedia, it can accelerate 7 pound projectiles to a speed of 7 mach. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railgun

rudradeep · Post by **rudradeep** » 28 Feb 2009 12:49

But Sir, if there is indeed such an area sanitization operation before the sniper can operate, would it not actually attract more enemy combatants? Also, would this not distract the sniper from his primary goal of recon or maybe HVA elimination by alerting the enemy of your presence in the area?

Would it not actually be better for the sniper to operate alone with stealth as his aid?

TIA...

ArmenT · Post by **ArmenT** » 28 Feb 2009 13:27

Real rail guns are also not anywhere close to being called "Small Arms". For one thing, there's no way for a single person to carry one. Another problem is that they take quite a bit of electricity to operate. Plasma weapons have the same problem. You'll need a portable reactor to operate one.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 28 Feb 2009 14:09

this came by email from a long time lurker.

http://www.business24-7.ae/articles/200 ... 8b856.aspx

India unveils 'fastest to wear anti-bullet vest', expects deals with the UAE

Felt good to see something from India recieve attaention on front page of a local Arab business daily.

Also think, maybe it did be a good idea if someone posted stuff from the IDEX at UAE. Being in the Gulf, you will notice the rapid build up of UAE's and S.Arabia's militaries. It's becoming a important area for us. What with India trying to project power through opening a small naval base in Oman, this place is becoming ore important. In case of a onflict in S.Asia, UAE & S.Arabia, could provide strategic depth for Pakistan. Maybe, some of the guru's could comment on this.

Sanjay M · Post by **Sanjay M** » 28 Feb 2009 15:08

I'm not talking about railguns, which accelerate bullets through electromagnetically-induced impulse.
I'm still talking about guns that propel bullets using combustion of the powder charge.

I'm not talking about 'plasma guns' in the sense of a directed-energy weapon that delivers energy onto the target in the form of charged plasma.

I'm talking about using the aerodynamic properties of plasma to make a conventionally fired bullet/shell travel faster and with less air resistance, exiting with higher muzzle velocity.

A helicon coil-antenna can efficiently generate plasma, and could be accommodated within the shape of a rifle barrel.
Perhaps the energy to power it could come from harvesting some of the energy of the powder-charge combustion, which normally generates a lot of heat and shock.
Perhaps thermoelectric and/or even piezoelectric conversion could generate useful power. Even a traveling bullet is quite hot -- how do you think kevlar vests work?

Longer-range or higher-calibre weapons might benefit from recoil reduction, as reduced air-resistance means more acceleration relative to the supplied impulse.

Large calibre bullets/shells with their higher cross-sections will have higher drag, making drag reduction particularly useful. Mach waves can also be destabilizing to a bullet/shell in flight, and significantly drain its kinetic energy.

For a ballistic weapon having a long barrel (rifle, artillery gun), it could make sense to use that barrel length to create a lower-drag plasma channel, for higher muzzle-velocity.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 28 Feb 2009 22:09

KiranM wrote:
RayC wrote:

Sniper teams should move with a security element (section or platoon) whenever possible. This allows them to reach their areas of operation faster and more safely than if they operated alone. The security element also protects the snipers during operations.

Sir, wont the number of personnel attract attention to the sniper being protected? If detected, the best protection for a sniper, I thought, was E&E. Wont the numbers be a liability?

TIA.

If troops move to a location, the enemy cannot straight away know the quantum until they probe. It takes time.

How would anyone know who has moved there and why?

Therefore, they would also not know that it is a sniping mission!

While the enemy moves out to probe and is engaged with the troops giving protection to the sniper (who is acting independent of the troops action), the sniper would get on with his task and then he would melt away as would those giving protection!

In fact, the troops giving protection would be ideal to draw away attention from the sniper!

derkonig · Post by **derkonig** » 28 Feb 2009 23:57

Nitesh wrote:
nikhil_p wrote:Is it just me or does the Army directorate use a YAHOO id???
what happened to the good old .gov.in domain ids?
It's kinda strange that I have seen lot of people using yahoo id it's not only army but other departments as well. One time I asked the question why they use it? Are they using the free service or paid one. The answer was the mail server is not maintained properly and some times they don't receive the email. Hence they use yahoo as alternative sometimes you can find the id printed on there visiting cards also.

I honestly hope that our armed forces as well the GoI babus are well aware of the bullying that chicoms are capable of towards cos like Google, yahoo & that the chicoms can very well get hold of any data they want from these cos.

ArmenT · Post by **ArmenT** » 01 Mar 2009 00:41

RayC wrote: If troops move to a location, the enemy cannot straight away know the quantum until they probe. It takes time.

How would anyone know who has moved there and why?

Therefore, they would also not know that it is a sniping mission!

While the enemy moves out to probe and is engaged with the troops giving protection to the sniper (who is acting independent of the troops action), the sniper would get on with his task and then he would melt away as would those giving protection!

In fact, the troops giving protection would be ideal to draw away attention from the sniper!

One of the techniques that was very successfully used by US troops in Vietnam: They used to send patrols around the jungle trails a lot, in the beginning of the war. Since the patrols happened on a fixed schedule, the local Vietcong used to arrange their own schedule around them. They would wait for the patrol to go past them and then use the trail themselves, since they were confident that a second patrol was not following. Then the USMC changed tactics a little and put a couple of snipers in the group. The snipers would disengage from the main group midway through the route and wait for the VC to use the trail after the patrol group had gone. They had a lot of success with this technique.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 01 Mar 2009 12:30

Patrols should never be on the same schedule or the same route repeatedly. That is asking for an ambush and huge casualties!

That is why patrols must have different timings and different routes all the time. In fact, the route out should NEVER be the route in.

That is why when one goes to the Mosque to celebrate Id, it is ordained that the Route In should never be the route Out.

Volume 2, Page 148b: Taking different routes to and from musalla
Most of the people of knowledge are of the opinion that it is preferred for a person to go to the salah by one route and then to return home through another route, regardless of whether he be the imam or a member of the congregation.

Jabir reports: "On the days of 'id, the Prophet would take different routes." This is related by al-Bukhari.

Abu Hurairah says: "When the Prophet went to salatul 'id, he would return through a different route." This is related by Ahmad, Muslim, and at-Tirmizhi

http://abdurrahman.org/sunnah/fiqhussunnah/fus2_39.html

k prasad · Post by **k prasad** » 02 Mar 2009 12:52

RayC wrote:
KiranM wrote:
Sir, wont the number of personnel attract attention to the sniper being protected? If detected, the best protection for a sniper, I thought, was E&E. Wont the numbers be a liability?

TIA.
The sniper would not be within the section/ platoon per se when he is engaging.

The sniper is independent, but the area around requires to be sanitised and 'attack proof' (so to say) when he is engaging, there is no enemy action to distract. That is to put it simple terms.

Snipers can be protecting or operating with a platoon or a company of troops, but then, their role will no longer be that of a sniper, but more of a designated marksman, irrespective of the training....

However, when the sniper operates alone (or with spotter), independent of any troops, that is when he is truly sniping.

ArmenT wrote:
RayC wrote: If troops move to a location, the enemy cannot straight away know the quantum until they probe. It takes time.

How would anyone know who has moved there and why?

Therefore, they would also not know that it is a sniping mission!

While the enemy moves out to probe and is engaged with the troops giving protection to the sniper (who is acting independent of the troops action), the sniper would get on with his task and then he would melt away as would those giving protection!

In fact, the troops giving protection would be ideal to draw away attention from the sniper!
One of the techniques that was very successfully used by US troops in Vietnam: They used to send patrols around the jungle trails a lot, in the beginning of the war. Since the patrols happened on a fixed schedule, the local Vietcong used to arrange their own schedule around them. They would wait for the patrol to go past them and then use the trail themselves, since they were confident that a second patrol was not following. Then the USMC changed tactics a little and put a couple of snipers in the group. The snipers would disengage from the main group midway through the route and wait for the VC to use the trail after the patrol group had gone. They had a lot of success with this technique.

Yes.... if you're interested, the book "Ultimate Sniper", which is a bible of sniping is available for download on rapidshare.... it is truly brilliant.

KiranM · Post by **KiranM** » 02 Mar 2009 13:43

^^^ Prasad, I think what Ray Sir is alluding to is the section operating around the sniper team. May be few KMs away, to 'mask' the presence of sniper. Also to provide a hedge against pursuit of sniper by enemy forces. This scenario will be more prevalent at the frontlines which is more common to Indian situation.

The scenario you are talking about is behind enemy lines or in areas of heavy enemy presence.

k prasad · Post by **k prasad** » 02 Mar 2009 13:53

KiranM wrote:^^^ Prasad, I think what Ray Sir is alluding to is the section operating around the sniper team. May be few KMs away, to 'mask' the presence of sniper. Also to provide a hedge against pursuit of sniper by enemy forces. This scenario will be more prevalent at the frontlines which is more common to Indian situation.

The scenario you are talking about is behind enemy lines or in areas of heavy enemy presence.

I know Kiran... this tactic is a common way to infiltrate sniper teams into an area of operation. It was extremely common in Nam, where the Jungle and the number of troops made it easy. Now, the Khans are also doing it in Iraq and A'stan (from what I have read, initially, the teams were directly infiltrated, but that made them more detectable, so this tactic was brought back in).

The scenario I'm talking about does NOT apply well behind enemy lines, because a platoon operating like that would become bullet magnets.... far too dangerous. In such situations, snipers usually sneak through the lines, rather than go with troops. The platoon tactic works especially well for COIN ops or in areas under our control, but with heavy enemy presence...

another tactic of the sniper team is to "buttonhook" on a trail by leaving the trail, doubling back and watching for any enemy troops following behind.... a team in enemy territory will usually do that to ensure that they aren't being followed. If they are being followed, the team is in a perfect position to ambush the enemy. Slightly different from the situation above, but related I guess.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 02 Mar 2009 14:09

kprasad.

Could you tell us the difference between designated marksman and a sniper and the difference in task?

Thank you.

The Designated Marksman (DM) is a military marksman role in a U.S. infantry squad. The term sniper is used in Soviet and Russian doctrine. The analogous role in the Israeli army is "squad sniper."

We don't follow the US doctrine.

Further, when our Arty OPs sneak into enemy area to bring down fire, they are known as Commando OPs.

Therefore, even if our snipers go behind enemy lines, they will still be known as snipers.

Even our normal soldiers sneak behind enemy lines as a team or otherwise. It all depends on the task assigned and nomenclatures really do not make any difference to skills. Our snipers are trained to be snipers and one can call them what suits one. Their task with the section or independent and their skills will be the same.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 02 Mar 2009 14:24

From US FM 3

F-1. SNIPER TEAMS

Snipers avoid sustained battles. They operate in two-man teams, each consisting of one sniper and one observer, normally cross-trained. The observer carries an M16-series rifle; the sniper carries the sniper weapon system, and each member has a side arm. Team members help each other with range estimation, round adjustment, and security.

a. Employment. The commander or designated sniper employment officer controls sniper teams from a central location. Once deployed, snipers generally operate independently. They must understand the commander's intent, his concept of the operation, and the purpose for their assigned tasks. This allows the teams to exercise initiative within the framework of the commander's intent and to support the commander's concept and accomplishment of the unit's mission. Snipers are effective only in areas that offer good fields of fire and observation. They must have the freedom of action to choose their own positions once on the ground. The number of sniper teams participating in an operation depends on their availability, the expected duration of the mission, and the enemy's strength.

b. Security Element. Sniper teams should move with a security element (squad or platoon) whenever possible. This allows the teams to reach their areas of operation faster and safer than if they operated alone. The security element also protects the snipers during operations. When moving with a security element, snipers follow the following guidelines:

(1) The leader of the security element leads the sniper team.

(2) Snipers must appear to be an integral part of the security element. To do so, each sniper carries his weapon system in line with and close to his body to hide the weapon's outline and barrel length. Snipers also conceal from view all sniper-unique equipment (optics and ghillie suits).

(3) The snipers' uniforms must be the same as that of security element members. Snipers and element members maintain proper intervals and positions in the element formation.

Gaurav_S · Post by **Gaurav_S** » 02 Mar 2009 14:33

RayC sir when we are discussing about snipers, may I ask you if IA has ever deployed and used snipers in the past in real situation?

Also, I read part of 'Ultimate Sniper' which said USMC uses multiple sensors that are cigarette pack size to locate snipers in Iraq and Afghanistan. Do we have snipers that are this sophisticated?

k prasad · Post by **k prasad** » 02 Mar 2009 14:35

RayC wrote: The Designated Marksman (DM) is a military marksman role in a U.S. infantry squad. The term sniper is used in Soviet and Russian doctrine. The analogous role in the Israeli army is "squad sniper."

We don't follow the US doctrine.

Further, when our Arty OPs sneak into enemy area to bring down fire, they are known as Commando OPs.

Therefore, even if our snipers go behind enemy lines, they will still be known as snipers.

Even our normal soldiers sneak behind enemy lines as a team or otherwise. It all depends on the task assigned and nomenclatures really do not make any difference to skills. Our snipers are trained to be snipers and one can call them what suits one. Their task with the section or independent and their skills will be the same.

Excellent explanation Ray-sir... can you give us some info on the Indian Army's sniper tradition, and their operating doctrine....

RayC wrote: Further, when our Arty OPs sneak into enemy area to bring down fire, they are known as Commando OPs.

Therefore, even if our snipers go behind enemy lines, they will still be known as snipers.

Even our normal soldiers sneak behind enemy lines as a team or otherwise.

Yes sir... since they are usually carried out by spec ops, they are deservedly called so....

RayC wrote:kprasad.

Could you tell us the difference between designated marksman and a sniper and the difference in task?

Thank you.

The Designated Marksman (DM) is a military marksman role in a U.S. infantry squad. The term sniper is used in Soviet and Russian doctrine. The analogous role in the Israeli army is "squad sniper."

We don't follow the US doctrine.

It all depends on the task assigned and nomenclatures really do not make any difference to skills. Our snipers are trained to be snipers and one can call them what suits one. Their task with the section or independent and their skills will be the same.

Yes sir... exactly my point as well...

My impression from teh US doctrine is that it is just a nomenclature based on the role, rather than the training and the skills - DM is usually when they give long range fire support to a group of soldiers. I think the Sniper role is somewaht different in that they have to go it alone, without any support to give, or to have, from any infantry elements.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 02 Mar 2009 15:04

As I understand the US Army tends to finetune and thus gives nomenclatures of each type of task and the personnel to be used. It is a good idea and at the same time it is specialised.

Now, if there is no Designated Marksman in the section or squad and instead a sniper is available, would it mean that the sniper will not be used if it is a paramount necessity? Would the snipers designation change for the task?

Therefore, such designation is merely a skill benchmark.

In our Army we are trained for a certain task, but it does not mean that the person cannot perform tasks requiring lesser skill than what he is trained for.

To operate independently, the environment must be conducive. There is no magic wand and no one is a Rambo, even if one would like to feed that aura. If the environment is conducive, then even a normal soldier can be sent on a task, if specialised people are not available. Normal infantry sections have raided areas well behind the enemy lines. And yet, such activities are to be done by Commandos, if one goes by the book. We raided 9 miles inside and we were no Commando! But that surely would not mean that we were any less than say Commandos of any level, especially since the task was accomplished. Calling it Special Ops or not so special ops would make no difference to the task, organisation, personnel, weapons, mission or the result! Nomenclature would make no difference to their zeal, enthusiasm and dedication and motivation!

That is why these terms that are bandied as the be all and end all really does not appeal to me. Call me a cynic, if you wish. There are many unsung units who have done terrific jobs and yet there are high specialised units who have botched it up.

Members of Delta Force participated in the all too familiar botched rescue operation in Iran. What had been months of planning and training went to waste, when at a refueling spot in the Iranian desert (code-named 'Desert One'), a helicopter crashed into a tanker aircraft. The end result was 8 dead servicemen, plus scores of others injured. The mission objective was to rescue American hostages trapped in the American embassy by Iranian Revolutionary Guard. This was to be Delta's "Entebbe," or "Mogadishu," but it went down in counter-terrorist history as one of the greatest tragedies.

Nomenclatures are not the answer. The mission and its success are.

As far as the US snipers go, what you say is right, but then also see FM 3 which is a US Army Field Manual. I have higlighted the issues.

I don't find reasons why our snipers would not do the same, if required.

I maybe wrong, but in the US symbolism apparently is a big deal. For instance, what is so important for a US President to have a dog for his children and the hoop la over that instead of focussing on the sinking economy? Must a US President have to have a dog and the US equate it with the same enthusiam as selecting the Secretary of State?

I think the US is a great country in its own right and the US Army good. What however is intriguing is that they are prone to hyperbole and make even a small thing larger than life!

k prasad · Post by **k prasad** » 02 Mar 2009 15:10

Superb explanation sir...

Can you expand also on a few questions of ours:

1. What is our sniper doctrine? In terms of team size, selection, training etc.... as long as it is not classified, that is. from pics to date, indications suggest a single sniper operating, rather than sniper-spotter teams.

2. What is the state of Ghatak Platoons now?? What are they meant to be used for??

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 02 Mar 2009 15:25

k prasad wrote:Superb explanation sir...

Can you expand also on a few questions of ours:

1. What is our sniper doctrine? In terms of team size, selection, training etc.... as long as it is not classified, that is. from pics to date, indications suggest a single sniper operating, rather than sniper-spotter teams.

2. What is the state of Ghatak Platoons now?? What are they meant to be used for??

There is the sniper course and I would not like to comment since it was evolving in my time and it may even have evolved by now into a concept.

The Ghatak concept has evolved and are a force multiplier. They have been used in operations. They are meant to carry out Commando actions, act as stay behind parties, go for enemy guns, blow dumps and so on. They were known as the Commando Platoon before the nomenclature changed to give it an Indian touch!

It is the CO's own little Delta Force (to give this small organisation a larger than life aura

)as the 81mm Mortars are the CO's own little Artillery!!

KiranM · Post by **KiranM** » 02 Mar 2009 15:44

RayC wrote:
The Ghatak concept has evolved and are a force multiplier. They have been used in operations. They are meant to carry out Commando actions, act as stay behind parties, go for enemy guns, blow dumps and so on. They were known as the Commando Platoon before the nomenclature changed to give it an Indian touch!

It is the CO's own little Delta Force (to give this small organisation a larger than life aura )as the 81mm Mortars are the CO's own little Artillery!!

Sir, was the intention also to free up Para Cdos from ops just outside FEBA and instead concentrate for deep behind enemy lines?

rkhanna · Post by **rkhanna** » 02 Mar 2009 15:49

The Ghatak concept has evolved and are a force multiplier. They have been used in operations. They are meant to carry out Commando actions, act as stay behind parties, go for enemy guns, blow dumps and so on. They were known as the Commando Platoon before the nomenclature changed to give it an Indian touch!

As a battalion CO recently told me. Ghatak Platoons are essentially like Force Recon Marines to a USMC Battalion.

rkhanna · Post by **rkhanna** » 02 Mar 2009 15:52

Sir, was the intention also to free up Para Cdos from ops just outside FEBA and instead concentrate for deep behind enemy lines?

Essentially Ghatak Platoons are deployed Tactically while SF are deployed Strategically. They serve two different ends. A Battalion CO will have to specially call for a SF unit to be deployed with him (and they may not always be available) where as a Ghatak Platoon can be used at the sole discretion of the Battalion CO.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 02 Mar 2009 15:58

KiranM wrote:
RayC wrote:
The Ghatak concept has evolved and are a force multiplier. They have been used in operations. They are meant to carry out Commando actions, act as stay behind parties, go for enemy guns, blow dumps and so on. They were known as the Commando Platoon before the nomenclature changed to give it an Indian touch!

It is the CO's own little Delta Force (to give this small organisation a larger than life aura )as the 81mm Mortars are the CO's own little Artillery!!
Sir, was the intention also to free up Para Cdos from ops just outside FEBA and instead concentrate for deep behind enemy lines?

No it was not to free the Para Cdos.

It was merely to act as a force multiplier in an operation. For instance, in an attack, it is always the aim to ensure that the enemy under attack cannot change the combat ratio through reinforcements. These Unit Commandos would lay blocks and prevent reinforcements or do so by blowing a bridge or go behind and hold a defile or raid an enemy gun position so that, at the critical moment of battle the enemy's concentration of fire diminishes and so on.

ArmenT · Post by **ArmenT** » 03 Mar 2009 10:35

RayC wrote:kprasad.

Could you tell us the difference between designated marksman and a sniper and the difference in task?

Thank you.

In the US, designated marksman is generally the best shooter in the squad. Your average Joe Q. Public is trained to shoot targets up to 300 yards and your true snipers are taught to shoot stuff at 1000+ yard ranges. Since sniper training takes time and they cannot be deployed everywhere as quickly as a squad can, there is a need for someone who can shoot pretty decently between say 300-800 yards or so. This is where the designated marksman comes in. They are trained to shoot at targets that a regular soldier with iron sights might have trouble hitting. To fill this role, they generally pick the best shooters out the group and give them a little more training in hitting targets beyond 300 yards.

Differences:
* Designated marksman is part of the rifle squad and is assigned to the squad permanently, whereas snipers are given separate missions. While true snipers may be escorted to the target along with regular troops, they are allowed to disengage from the escort unit and free-roam out towards their target, whereas a designated marksman stays with his squad.

* Designated marksman generally uses a rifle that uses the same ammo caliber as everyone else in the squad. This is because they need to be able to reuse another man's parts and ammo if the squad comes under heavy fire.

* You don't normally see designated marksmen going out with the ghillie suit. They generally have the same camo outfit as the rest of the unit (or sometimes a bit more, but not major camo like a ghillie suit)

* A designated marksman carries a semi or full auto similar to the rest of the squad. The DM's rifle usually has a scope though and a better match grade barrel. Snipers generally carry a bolt-action or a semi-auto.

* Snipers are accompanied by a spotter. A designated marksman doesn't have his own spotter.

Avinash R · Post by **Avinash R** » 03 Mar 2009 19:16

What's the opinion of members on leaving the safety open. Most likely will lead to mishaps. Someone will get hurt if the trigger is pulled accidentally or gun falls on the ground. Yes there are guns which have inbuilt safety which wont fire if they accidentally hit the ground but not sure of this feature on this gun.

SPG gets new guns; to keep safety latch open
Tuesday, March 3, 2009

Shameek · Post by **Shameek** » 03 Mar 2009 20:50

The Rifle Factory Ishapore is going to require almost double its INSAS production capacity for a huge order coming this year. I cannot state the source of this order or information. I have taken permission to post just this much.

ArmenT · Post by **ArmenT** » 03 Mar 2009 21:15

Avinash: It depends on the design that they are going to adopt.

If it is a Glock style trigger, then there isn't so much of a problem if it drops on the ground. If you look at any Glock pistol, you'll see it has a double trigger mechanism where the safety trigger is inside the main trigger. To fire the weapon you must first pull the safety trigger first.
http://reynosawatch.org/minstrel/2008/0 ... ng-system/ <-- See this for image.

You cannot fire the weapon without pulling the safety trigger, since it physically prevents the main trigger from being pulled. On top of that, there are two other safeties in the weapon:
1. A firing pin safety, which is a block of metal that blocks the firing pin from hitting the cartridge. When you pull the safety trigger, it drops the block of metal out of the way of the firing pin.
2. Drop safety, which is a ramp that guides the trigger bar away. The safety trigger also deflects the trigger bar away from the ramp when it is pulled.

Thus it is safe from being dropped (there are vids of glocks being dropped from rooftops and airplanes and dragged behind a truck on a rope), but it will fire when you pull the triggers.

vavinash · Post by **vavinash** » 03 Mar 2009 21:27

shameekg wrote:The Rifle Factory Ishapore is going to require almost double its INSAS production capacity for a huge order coming this year. I cannot state the source of this order or information. I have taken permission to post just this much.

Is it for the army? What variant? Kalantak? carbine? LMG

sum · Post by **sum** » 03 Mar 2009 21:33

Avinash R wrote:What's the opinion of members on leaving the safety open. Most likely will lead to mishaps. Someone will get hurt if the trigger is pulled accidentally or gun falls on the ground. Yes there are guns which have inbuilt safety which wont fire if they accidentally hit the ground but not sure of this feature on this gun.

SPG gets new guns; to keep safety latch open
Tuesday, March 3, 2009

Rajmata and her coterie seem to be getting all the protection with the SPG being beefed up more and more with new guns and even a specialised aircraft being procured.

What about its "poorer" cousin, the NSG? Any news of replacing their "slowly getting long in the tooth" weaponry of 80s vintage?

Avinash R · Post by **Avinash R** » 03 Mar 2009 21:40

^ArmenT yes i know that some guns have inbuilt safety to prevent such accidental firings. That's what i mentioned in the last line in the previous post.

But i'm not sure about the guns that the SPG are being equipped with.

The newsreport mentions assault rifle, pistol and sub-machine guns being inducted without naming them. All we know is they are from Belgium.

If the pistol is Belgium Five-seveN then no need to worry as the design is such that there's no risk of accidental firing. But not sure if this is the one which has been ordered.