Small Arms Thread

Dmurphy · Post by **Dmurphy** » 06 Oct 2009 12:14

Damn it!

I always get confused!

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 11 Oct 2009 22:17

Weapons failed US troops during Afghan firefight

a small but vocal number of troops in Afghanistan and Iraq has complained that the standard-issue M4 rifles need too much maintenance and jam at the worst possible times.

Kailash · Post by **Kailash** » 13 Oct 2009 12:18

DRDO develops new guns for armed forces

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 16 Oct 2009 02:27

Was reading 23red sept issue of jdw. tar21 had complaints from both IDF and Indian army. Both stopped using it for a while. IMI was sold to IWI and all problems were fixed. Tar 21 will become IDF main weapon. Micro tavor will be used for special forces of IDF. Tar21 was used extensivly during gaza operations and it was used by Indian special forces in Mumbai.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 16 Oct 2009 05:54

and by RR in kashmir over the last couple of years.
Some modifications were recommended to IAI and these were incorporated.

Any reports / anecdotes on how the TAR-21's have been performing in kashmir?

saptarishi · Post by **saptarishi** » 16 Oct 2009 21:33

Gagan wrote:and by RR in kashmir over the last couple of years.
Some modifications were recommended to IAI and these were incorporated.

Any reports / anecdotes on how the TAR-21's have been performing in kashmir?

all rifles have some glitches,tar-21 have some.
what's the status of zittara CARBINE, will it be rejected for MSMC

Sandipan · Post by **Sandipan** » 16 Oct 2009 23:30

Five Years down the line, we may still be talking about tests and refinements being done to MSMC and its sisters. So by that time keep importing

koti · Post by **koti** » 17 Oct 2009 11:56

The Zittara is not contesting against MSMC AFAIK. Is is bloody expensive and too complex. It might be limited to use by Special forces(Civilian and military) whereas MSMC might replace all the Grease guns we see around.

saptarishi · Post by **saptarishi** » 17 Oct 2009 13:54

OK I GOT IT

ParGha · Post by **ParGha** » 17 Oct 2009 22:34

koti wrote:The Zittara is not contesting against MSMC AFAIK. Is is bloody expensive and too complex. It might be limited to use by Special forces(Civilian and military) whereas MSMC might replace all the Grease guns we see around.

1. Has the Indian Army issued a specific request for MSMC? Or is this an OFB/DRDO project of its own?
2. What is the idea behind 5.56x30mm? Why not the better supported and more widely used 5.7x28mm FN? 5.56x30 mm is a rather rare round, I can only think of one experimental Colt design which came up with it but never went into production.
3. Where does one draw the line between complexity and safety? And how should it drawn for a force like the Indian Army, which is professional but still only has tenuous logistical support?

Not a fan of the "Zittara" - a number of things about it makes me suspicious that there is more to it than meets the eye, not the least of which is its parent's (Tavor) sky-high unit price. But a competitor must be able to stand on its own, that is the reason I ask. I have seen it written by a number of officers who think the concept of a SMG - at least for themselves - is outdated; they would prefer to carry a compact AKMoid or INSAS even outside their COIN duties. An intermediate round is just a logistical pain; they would rather have the same rounds as their soldiers, plus a compact pistol for sake of tradition and rank (some of them even disdain that in favor of an extra bottle of water or magazine of ammo). Indian Army never had the Grease Gun (M3), but people do have many complaints about the simple blow-back design of the Sterlings and Uzis, including incidences of cook-offs. It is a very simple design, so it is good... but is also unsafe, which is not good. The AK operating mechanism is also simple, but it is much safer. So simplicity, safety and logistical stream-lining is possible without major trade-offs.

koti · Post by **koti** » 18 Oct 2009 09:59

Here is one more Insas trashing article. Don't know how new this is...

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Sadd ... 979790.cms

AmitR · Post by **AmitR** » 18 Oct 2009 10:14

koti wrote:Here is one more Insas trashing article. Don't know how new this is...

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Sadd ... 979790.cms

Shishir Arya, TNN 7 September 2009, 12:53am IST

koti · Post by **koti** » 18 Oct 2009 11:54

I actually meant when the information is gathered, not published.
Thanx by the way.

ArmenT · Post by **ArmenT** » 18 Oct 2009 12:04

koti wrote:Here is one more Insas trashing article. Don't know how new this is...

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Sadd ... 979790.cms

Some bits of the article are definitely DDM quality.

‘Zeroing (adjusting the sight for aim) has to be done each time the rifle is opened to clean or for any other reason. Lack of proper zeroing hampers the working of night vision device,’’ said the same source.

You should ask what does lack of zeroing have to do with the working of a night vision device anyway?

anirban_aim · Post by **anirban_aim** » 18 Oct 2009 13:42

Gerard wrote:Kalashnikov faces bankruptcy

Sad news Man. End of an era.

For years, the AK-47 assault rifle has been the world's most popular weapon, the gun of choice for dictators, gang members and Third World revolutionaries

What a Dork. Has he never heard of the Vietnam & Korean Wars, or does he think that they were all rag tag revolutionaries.

Igorr · Post by **Igorr** » 19 Oct 2009 15:13

anirban_aim wrote:
Gerard wrote:Kalashnikov faces bankruptcy
Sad news Man. End of an era.

For years, the AK-47 assault rifle has been the world's most popular weapon, the gun of choice for dictators, gang members and Third World revolutionaries
What a Dork. Has he never heard of the Vietnam & Korean Wars, or does he think that they were all rag tag revolutionaries.

the info is totally BS!

The selling of AKs has only grown in 2009 due to the boom in US market. A legal issue of a number of millions against Izhmash from a private has no chance IMHO. Maximum they will pay the debts, but in realty their business is flowing this year.

BTW, their new 40 mm grenade-launcher for AK-100 class can be adjusted to the old models of AK. Video. So may be useful for Indian Force in Kashmir now using 7.62x39 mm AKM/AKMS.

ssmitra · Post by **ssmitra** » 20 Oct 2009 02:44

shyamd wrote:Was reading 23red sept issue of jdw. tar21 had complaints from both IDF and Indian army. Both stopped using it for a while. IMI was sold to IWI and all problems were fixed. Tar 21 will become IDF main weapon. Micro tavor will be used for special forces of IDF. Tar21 was used extensivly during gaza operations and it was used by Indian special forces in Mumbai.

Tavors in mumbai??? I presume u are talking about the Nov26...
Do not recall any pictures of Tavors being used. Anyone have any pictures of them in mumbai....

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 20 Oct 2009 03:06

^^ Yeah, even I don't remember any tavors being used. I searched google chacha too but got no positive on that front.

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 20 Oct 2009 23:16

http://s698.photobucket.com/albums/vv34 ... vwqqhl.jpg
This rifle was shown at Indian Defence Expo. Which rifle is it? Some heavily modified M4?

And what about the following? Modified AK-103s?
http://s698.photobucket.com/albums/vv34 ... 08fm6q.jpg
http://s698.photobucket.com/albums/vv34 ... sb7lue.jpg

ADDED LATER:
Did some googling. The first one seems to be CAA (command arms accessories) modified M4.
The next two seem to be caa modified AKs (though not sure about the version).

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 20 Oct 2009 23:23

the mumbai pictures thread in BR archives is one of the most exhaustive collection of images from the mumbai operations. there were no tavors in that. neither any articles.

Igorr · Post by **Igorr** » 21 Oct 2009 01:00

Parijat Gaur wrote:
And what about the following? Modified AK-103s?
http://s698.photobucket.com/albums/vv34 ... 08fm6q.jpg
http://s698.photobucket.com/albums/vv34 ... sb7lue.jpg

An AKM 7.62x39 mm rifle (according to the stock) after an individual tuning. Most probably of some Eastern European manufacturer or a civilian Sayga-7.62. Not AK-103 for sure coz no signs for 'automatic fire'.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 21 Oct 2009 03:43

Rahul M wrote:the mumbai pictures thread in BR archives is one of the most exhaustive collection of images from the mumbai operations. there were no tavors in that. neither any articles.

I just quoted the JDW article. I don't recall seeing any either.

koti · Post by **koti** » 25 Oct 2009 12:32

Is it possible to use 5.56x30 ammo with regular Insas(5.56x45) with some magazine adapter?

RameshC · Post by **RameshC** » 25 Oct 2009 13:08

koti wrote:Is it possible to use 5.56x30 ammo with regular Insas(5.56x45) with some magazine adapter?

i though insas was capable of firing both rounds from the same type of mag...but not sure. BTW how's the INSAS's over the beach capability and how does it perform with water? can it be used by MARCOS units?

Igorr · Post by **Igorr** » 25 Oct 2009 14:31

koti wrote:Is it possible to use 5.56x30 ammo with regular Insas(5.56x45) with some magazine adapter?

Highly unprobably since different case dimention needs different lock.

RameshC wrote:BTW how's the INSAS's over the beach capability and how does it perform with water? can it be used by MARCOS units?

Interesting question... may be somebody has a report from the field? In general INSAS steadiness against water must not be much different from 5.45 AK-74M and 5.56 AK-101, i.e. expected to be safer than AR-15, but less safe than 7.62 AK serials. 5.45\5.56 calibers have bigger problem with water due to bigger capillarity issue with little calibers. So need to check if water isnt remained in the burrel before fire.

kancha · Post by **kancha** » 26 Oct 2009 21:10

koti wrote:Here is one more Insas trashing article. Don't know how new this is...

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Sadd ... 979790.cms

A bit late in the day to reply, but one thing that stands out in the entire article is the unhappiness with the role of the INSAS Rifle in anti terrorist operations. Some of the points are quite valid, but whenever one sees the photographs of our soldiers (even regular battalions, not just RR), they do seem to have adequate number of AKs for the job at hand.

But my contention is whether the primary role of training and equipping our army is just to deal with the terrorist scum? I don't think so and I also believe that the INSAS would have built keeping in mind the requirements of regular / conventional wars that the army might be called upon to fight in the future. Let us see whether the INSAS fits in -

Ability to injure, not kill - A terrorist on the run might not think twice about an injured buddy, but an injured buddy will definitely dampen the spirits of an attacking enemy, not to mention he would tie down a larger number of fellow soldiers to cater for his evacuation.

Accuracy - Effective Range of 400m in case of an INSAS is the same as that of an AK47 but as per wiki AK 47 page -

reliability of AK 47 comes at the cost of accuracy, as the looser tolerances do not allow for precision and consistency. Reflecting Soviet infantry doctrine of its time, the rifle is meant to be part of massed infantry fire, not long range engagements.

This is what a quick combo of google + wiki throws up, and to me it seems that the INSAS is just fine for the role it was meant to be used in, ddm notwithstanding.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 26 Oct 2009 23:37

This is an interesting link.

http://www.fsfu.net/assaultrifles.html

And another one:

http://www.firearmstactical.com/wound.htm

How far would the terrorist or Maoists be when engaged?

Umrao Das · Post by **Umrao Das** » 26 Oct 2009 23:55

The important questions to answer is why is we cant make good and different kind of Small Arms for our Forces BSF, Army para military.

Every third world country is able to do it, most notably warsaw pact countries, Belgium, Czechs Slovaks. It is baffeling that we invest hundereds of crores of Rs in OFPs and yet we import AK-47,guns and ammo as well. Go to any Barnes and Nobel or Borders book store see the number of small arms produced by different countries and the only place you find India is index as a user.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 27 Oct 2009 01:16

Umrao Das wrote:The important questions to answer is why is we cant make good and different kind of Small Arms for our Forces BSF, Army para military.

Every third world country is able to do it, most notably warsaw pact countries, Belgium, Czechs Slovaks. It is baffeling that we invest hundereds of crores of Rs in OFPs and yet we import AK-47,guns and ammo as well. Go to any Barnes and Nobel or Borders book store see the number of small arms produced by different countries and the only place you find India is index as a user.

This is very interesting.
For over 50 years this is continuing.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 27 Oct 2009 01:53

why not call tehelka or its equivalent.. to point this?

Igorr · Post by **Igorr** » 27 Oct 2009 02:59

Acharya wrote:
Umrao Das wrote: It is baffeling that we invest hundereds of crores of Rs in OFPs and yet we import AK-47,guns and ammo as well.
This is very interesting.
For over 50 years this is continuing.

Indeed, the import of Tavors is very strange to me since is kept in mind only a borderline improvement over INSAS. Interesting why the I. forces in Kashmir almost totlly lack sub-barrel launchers, such it would be a really quantum leap in platoon's fire density.

Umrao Das · Post by **Umrao Das** » 27 Oct 2009 08:52

Quick info, note that TSP is also mentioned as exporter of Small Arms, India is no where.
****
PRODUCERS

What is the scale of global small arms production?

An estimated 7.5–8 million small arms are produced per year. The vast majority (about 7 million per year) consists of commercial firearms, the remainder of military-style firearms.

What is the global distribution of small arms and light weapons producers?

The world’s top three producing countries are the United States, the Russian Federation, and China. The countries of the European Union, if considered collectively, also constitute a top production source.
At least 30 countries can be regarded as significant producers of small arms.
More than 1,200 companies in at least 90 countries are involved in some aspect of small arms and light weapons production.
More than 70 countries have ammunition production facilities. (More information on ammunition.)

Which companies are the top five military small arms and light weapons manufacturers?

Military sidearms: Beretta (Italy), Heckler & Koch (UK/Germany), Smith & Wesson (US), Colt (US), FN Herstal (Belgium)
Rifles: Norinco (China), Heckler & Koch (UK/Germany), Izhmash (Russia), Colt (US), FN Herstal (Belgium)
Sub-machine guns: Norinco (China), Heckler & Koch (UK/Germany), Izhmash (Russia), IMI (Israel), KBP (Russia)
Machine guns: Norinco (China), Heckler & Koch (UK/Germany), Saco Defense (US), IMI (Israel), FN Herstal (Belgium)
Small arms ammunition: Sellier & Bellot (Czech Rep), Winchester Olin (US/Belgium), Nammo (Finland/Sweden/Norway), Giat (France), FN Herstal (Belgium)
Grenade launchers: Norinco (China), Heckler & Koch (UK/Germany), General Dynamics (US), Singapore Technologies (Singapore), KBP (Russia).

TRANSFERS

What is the scale of the global trade in small arms and light weapons?

The documented value of all small arms and light weapons exports in 2003 (as reported to UN Comtrade) was about USD 2 billion. However, research and anecdotal evidence suggests that the true value of the total authorized trade is likely about twice the reported value, or about USD 4 billion per year.
In 1999–2003, the global value in reported annual authorized small arms ammunition exports reached USD 700 million, but the true value is likely higher. Moreover, the reported value excludes transfers of light weapons ammunition and explosives such as grenades. (See more information on ammunition).

Who are the leading international exporters and recipients of small arms (based on available data)?

According to available data and estimates, the Russian Federation, the United States, Italy, Germany, Brazil, and China exported more than USD 100 million worth of small arms and light weapons in 2003 (in descending order). The same countries, plus Belgium, were the top exporters of small arms and light weapons in 2002. Exporters that are presumed to be important but about which relatively little is known include Bulgaria, China, Iran, Israel, North Korea, Pakistan, the Russian Federation, and Singapore.

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 27 Oct 2009 09:32

I absolutely agree.

Army equipment is something that even Myanmar manufactures nowadays. Importing tanks, APC's and grenade launchers is a shame.

The former Yugoslavia was probably the third largest arms producer in Europe by tonnage. Probably one of the reasons why the West was so desperate to break it up. Egypt of course continued licensed production and was co-opted.

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 27 Oct 2009 11:53

RayC wrote:This is an interesting link.

http://www.fsfu.net/assaultrifles.html

Sir,
This is a video game clan (loosely translated as group/team) website.
The characteristics of various rifles is stated according to how they behave in a particular video game (named Call of Duty 4:Modern Warfare).
They have nothing to do with the actual characteristics of a rifle.
Though some video game properties may be same as the actual ones, that is just about it.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 27 Oct 2009 12:00

Gaur wrote:
RayC wrote:This is an interesting link.

http://www.fsfu.net/assaultrifles.html

Sir,
This is a video game clan (loosely translated as group/team) website.
The characteristics of various rifles is stated according to how they behave in a particular video game (named Call of Duty 4:Modern Warfare).
They have nothing to do with the actual characteristics of a rifle.
Though some video game properties may be same as the actual ones, that is just about it.

Thanks.

I was aware, but it was just to give an idea since I could not find a better link!

Now, if one checks the links to 'internal ballistics', 'external ballistics' and 'terminal ballistics' and co-relate to what is loosely termed as 'stopping power', it will allow better understanding.

I had once give such details to explain the effect of ballistics in High Altitude in one of the thread long back!

If one wants to know about the technicalities of any weapon system and in a simple manner of explanation, there is no better than the books by Brassey Publications!

koti · Post by **koti** » 30 Oct 2009 15:11

In the debate of 5.56 vs 7.62, the Kinetic Energy (K.E)of the 7.62 out performs the K.E of 5.56.
So why not increase the weigh of the 5.56 round till it attains 7.62 K.E?
This nullifies the advantage of 7.62 over it. The resultant round may have a higher recoil and lesser accuracy but it could successfully be integrated into C.I and similar roles.

Also, KE=1/2 MV^2
So, since 5.56 can attain higher velocities(lesser cross-section) there would be added armor piercing and relatively longer effective range.

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 30 Oct 2009 15:21

How do you increase the weight of something without altering the dimensions, in this case the bullet

koti · Post by **koti** » 30 Oct 2009 17:01

krishnan wrote:How do you increase the weight of something without altering the dimensions, in this case the bullet

There are many ways to do this.

Increase density
Use of heavier alloys or compounds
Tweaking the shape of the projectice etc

ArmenT · Post by **ArmenT** » 30 Oct 2009 20:49

koti wrote:
krishnan wrote:How do you increase the weight of something without altering the dimensions, in this case the bullet
There are many ways to do this.
Increase density
Use of heavier alloys or compounds
Tweaking the shape of the projectice etc

You forgot to add some other factors, such as cost, retesting and retooling, availability of materials, composition of propellant etc. Tweaking the shape of the projectile may need redesign of the chamber, barrel twist etc. NATO 5.56mm bullets already do come with slightly different weights. I'll put up some numbers below.

By the way,when you're talking about 7.62, are you talking about NATO standard round (7.62x51mm) or the Soviet 7.62 round (7.62x39mm). The Soviet round has roughly 2/3rd the kinetic energy of the NATO round (approx. 2000 joules for Soviet 7.62 vs. 3300 joules for NATO 7.62). Compared to this, the NATO 5.56x45mm round delivers around 1750-1800 joules (there are multiple versions of NATO 5.56 mm, some cartridge types contain bullets that are 0.1 gm. heavier).

One of the reasons NATO went to 5.56 was because it weighed less. Thus if two soldiers have the same basic weight of gear and equipment, the soldier carrying 5.56 ammo would have more ammunition than a solder carrying 7.62 ammo. Also note that NATO thinking at that time was that the smaller bullet would incapacitate rather than kill and a wounded soldier takes up more resources than a dead one. The idea is that a wounded man will scream and thrash around and thus demoralize his own side and they also have to spend manpower and resources to transport a wounded man to the rear and administer treatment and so forth and this will take extra personnel away from the front.

koti · Post by **koti** » 30 Oct 2009 23:58

ou forgot to add some other factors, such as cost, retesting and retooling, availability of materials, composition of propellant etc.

I'm thinking the cost will actually come down in the long run. This is as the single caliber option will be better then dual caliber deployment, storage and manufacturing.

By the way,when you're talking about 7.62, are you talking about NATO standard round (7.62x51mm) or the Soviet 7.62 round (7.62x39mm). The Soviet round has roughly 2/3rd the kinetic energy of the NATO round (approx. 2000 joules for Soviet 7.62 vs. 3300 joules for NATO 7.62). Compared to this, the NATO 5.56x45mm round delivers around 1750-1800 joules

Both of them have higher stopping power then the 5.56. I may imply both here.

One of the reasons NATO went to 5.56 was because it weighed less. Thus if two soldiers have the same basic weight of gear and equipment, the soldier carrying 5.56 ammo would have more ammunition than a solder carrying 7.62 ammo.

Yes. What I wanted to say is that the modified rounds be issued for C.I and QC roles. My Idea is to replace AK's with Insas that are used in these roles just by using improvised ammo.(No comment on ruggedness though)
That is if the new rounds would be able to provide as much stopping power as standard 7.62x39.