Small Arms Thread

atreya · Post by **atreya** » 17 Feb 2010 17:32

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NEWS/news ... wsid=12398

Commenting on the other tenders where St. Kinetics is participating, Choy said the company’s SAR-21 assault rifles were undergoing trials for meeting the requirements of the Home Ministry tender for procuring around 40,000 guns

This is a replacement for INSAS, I believe?

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NEWS/news ... wsid=12392

Is this referring to the MSMC?

OR the MINSAS?

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 17 Feb 2010 18:40

SMG ko jai ho!.. let our special forces get it!

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 17 Feb 2010 19:52

Why are there none who root that DRDO make some weapons for them?

Bharadwaj · Post by **Bharadwaj** » 17 Feb 2010 20:08

atreya wrote:
Is this referring to the MSMC?

OR the MINSAS?

The 200m range seems to match the figures quoted in some article for the msmc. I thought minsas was dead?-something to do with excess flash....

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 17 Feb 2010 20:20

RayC wrote:Why are there none who root that DRDO make some weapons for them?

The problem is it would become inter gov /org deal. Who likes that? no middle agents nor firangi clout to jazz up.

Bheem · Post by **Bheem** » 17 Feb 2010 20:33

from def expo: INSAS series will not be upgraded and INSAS will replaced by imports. Long live indigestion errr indigenisation.

arun · Post by **arun** » 18 Feb 2010 09:11

^^^ Josy Joseph on the topic of the Indian Army dumping the INSAS in favour of imports in DNA:

Now, army wants to dump the indigenous Insas rifle

merlin · Post by **merlin** » 18 Feb 2010 10:57

arun wrote:^^^ Josy Joseph on the topic of the Indian Army dumping the INSAS in favour of imports in DNA:

Now, army wants to dump the indigenous Insas rifle

Hmm, now I wonder who in the IA and MoD want to make money out of this.

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 18 Feb 2010 10:59

merlin wrote:
arun wrote:^^^ Josy Joseph on the topic of the Indian Army dumping the INSAS in favour of imports in DNA:

Now, army wants to dump the indigenous Insas rifle
Hmm, now I wonder who in the IA and MoD want to make money out of this.

The army wants to dump the Insas as it allegedly doesn’t measure up to its requirements. One of the arguments is that it does not instantly kill the enemy. But its defenders pointed out that it was not supposed to kill the enemy, but injure him so that in a battlefield more of his fellow soldiers are busy evacuating the injured.

ArmenT · Post by **ArmenT** » 18 Feb 2010 21:04

The army wants to dump the Insas as it allegedly doesn’t measure up to its requirements. One of the arguments is that it does not instantly kill the enemy.

Are they proposing to switch the caliber requirements of the new weapon as well then? That is going to be a very interesting logistics exercise.

5.56x45mm does kill at normal engagement ranges as well.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 19 Feb 2010 09:05

The issue is whether 5.56 mm/ INSAS is lethal or not can be comprehended by these questions:

Does the terrorist not die when fired upon?

What weapon do the soldiers use to kill them?

Instead of wasting precious money in converting to other rifles, the same money should be used to gap the void in many other infantry systems essential for war and CI.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 19 Feb 2010 09:14

RayC wrote:The issue is whether 5.56 mm/ INSAS is lethal or not can be comprehended by these questions:

Does the terrorist not die when fired upon?

What weapon do the soldiers use to kill them?

Isn't the reduced lethality one of the reasons that our soldiers prefer the AKM in COIN ops?

Bheem · Post by **Bheem** » 19 Feb 2010 09:29

Army is definitely going to dump the INSAS, the only issue is how long will they take to do trials & select the winner. Say only hmmmmmmmmmmm 10 years........??????

Anyway DRDO confirmed clearly that there in NO proposal to upgrade INSAS series and their proposal for new rifle is rejected/not allowed. Welcome importsSSSSSSSSSSSS.

Punj LLOyd was showing an anti-material 12.7mm bullpup rifle weighing 11.5kg compared to Vidhwansak 24kg but has Not been called for trials inspite of trying with the army. Imports jindabaddddddddd

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 19 Feb 2010 09:43

L98A1

The standard issue for the British Army.

Effective Range 450m with standard sight.

INSAS

Effective range 450m

One does not require to fire beyond this range with a rifle. For engagement beyond this range there is a plethora of other weapons.

Ammunition carried by the soldier is not limitless and resupply is not instantaneous. Therefore, the temptation to take on the enemy at greater ranges where accuracy is not guaranteed and in the bargain finishing the ammunition even before the battle is joined, is curbed by not requiring to have rifles that fire beyond 300m which is the ideal range to identify and take on the enemy with naked eyes.

Using a scope the eye cannot perceive the immediate environment around him (the soldier) since the eye is looking through the scope in what is known as the 'far distance'. Firing with the naked eye and using iron sights allow one to alongside observe the immediate combat environment.

What is the specifications of the rifle the IA has asked for?

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 19 Feb 2010 09:53

Cooper advocated four basic rules of gun safety:

1. All guns are always loaded. Even if they are not, treat them as if they are.

2. Never let the muzzle cover anything you are not willing to destroy. (For those who insist that this particular gun is unloaded, see Rule 1.)

3. Keep your finger off the trigger till your sights are on the target. This is the Golden Rule. Its violation is directly responsible for about 60 percent of inadvertent discharges.

4. Identify your target, and what is behind it. Never shoot at anything that you have not positively identified.

sunny y · Post by **sunny y** » 19 Feb 2010 12:50

Anyway DRDO confirmed clearly that there in NO proposal to upgrade INSAS series and their proposal for new rifle is rejected/not allowed. Welcome importsSSSSSSSSSSSS.

But Bheem ji I thought DRDO was already involved with multi caliber rifle for FINSAS & they were planning to introduce first batch by 2012. If that's the case then replacement for INSAS has already been decided. I don't think MoD is going to allow any new purchases of rifles because after just 2 years DRDO's rifle will be in the market. I bet this IA RFP drama will last for more than 2 years by which time there will be no need for any new rifle.

Punj LLOyd was showing an anti-material 12.7mm bullpup rifle weighing 11.5kg compared to Vidhwansak 24kg but has Not been called for trials inspite of trying with the army. Imports jindabaddddddddd

This is very sad. Do have any link ??

Thanks

manish · Post by **manish** » 19 Feb 2010 15:34

sunny y wrote:
Punj LLOyd was showing an anti-material 12.7mm bullpup rifle weighing 11.5kg compared to Vidhwansak 24kg but has Not been called for trials inspite of trying with the army. Imports jindabaddddddddd
This is very sad. Do have any link ??

Thanks

I think these were most probably ST Kinetics weapons that they were proposing to build under license. They had a stall together at the Defexpo.
I do have a couple of pictures of rifles that they had over there.

A bullpup AR named SAR 21.
SAR 21 Assault Rifle

The SAR 21 ranks among the world's most advanced assault rifles. The rifle's 1.5 x optical scope and laser-aiming device enhance its accuracy, making it the ideal weapon for quick target engagement. The bullpup design allows for easy operation in tight space situations, while its low recoil and patented features enable better protection and control during firing.

A 5.56mm LMG which they claim to be the lightest in the world.
Ultimax 100 Light Machine Gun

At 4.9kg, the Ultimax 100 still holds the record for being the lightest 5.56mm calibre machine gun in the world. Designed for one-man operation, the Ultimax 100 combines lightweight features with other patented attributes for a dramatic increase in accuracy and firepower.

And then this baby in a corner drawing all the attention to itself. This is the CIS 40 AGL.
CIS 40mm Automatic Grenade Launcher (CIS 40 AGL)

The CIS 40 AGL is extremely versatile. It fires both CIS 40mm High Velocity Ammunition and US-type classified 40mm High Velocity Ammunition, and is modular in construction. It needs low maintenance and significantly reduces the need for maintenance spares.

They had a 155mm Howitzer and a tracked vehicle named the 'Warthog' on display as well, along with an info board detailing their plans for a greenfield mfg facility for weapons mfg.

Bheem · Post by **Bheem** » 19 Feb 2010 18:55

sunny y wrote:
Anyway DRDO confirmed clearly that there in NO proposal to upgrade INSAS series and their proposal for new rifle is rejected/not allowed. Welcome importsSSSSSSSSSSSS.
But Bheem ji I thought DRDO was already involved with multi caliber rifle for FINSAS & they were planning to introduce first batch by 2012. If that's the case then replacement for INSAS has already been decided. I don't think MoD is going to allow any new purchases of rifles because after just 2 years DRDO's rifle will be in the market. I bet this IA RFP drama will last for more than 2 years by which time there will be no need for any new rifle.

Punj LLOyd was showing an anti-material 12.7mm bullpup rifle weighing 11.5kg compared to Vidhwansak 24kg but has Not been called for trials inspite of trying with the army. Imports jindabaddddddddd
This is very sad. Do have any link ??

Thanks

You are incorrect on F-INSAS. DRDO has not been permitted to design new rifle. Anti-material thingie is based on oral conv at def expo, though I also took pics, which are somewhere, I should get around to posting them soon

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 20 Feb 2010 09:02

The LMG in the picture above has the magazine below.

This will not permit firing at an elevated target as it would be obstructed by the ground on which the LMG is being fired from.

E.g. If you see the picture, just imagine wanting to engage an elevated target with the bipod still on the platform.

atreya · Post by **atreya** » 20 Feb 2010 09:44

RayC wrote:The LMG in the picture above has the magazine below.

This will not permit firing at an elevated target as it would be obstructed by the ground on which the LMG is being fired from.

E.g. If you see the picture, just imagine wanting to engage an elevated target with the bipod still on the platform.

True! What will they do then? Lift the LMG off the ground and fire?

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 20 Feb 2010 09:53

atreya wrote:
RayC wrote:The LMG in the picture above has the magazine below.

This will not permit firing at an elevated target as it would be obstructed by the ground on which the LMG is being fired from.

E.g. If you see the picture, just imagine wanting to engage an elevated target with the bipod still on the platform.
True! What will they do then? Lift the LMG off the ground and fire?

If one lifts the LMG off the ground and fires automatic, then the accuracy is gone!

Prima facie, the LMG magazine is a faulty design.

Weapons that have to fire long distance perforce require to be accurate. Hence, they are bipod or tripod mounted for stability to offset the shudder when firing automatic.

ArmenT · Post by **ArmenT** » 20 Feb 2010 10:00

Would have been nicer to have it belt fed, or have the magazine mounted sideways or top.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 20 Feb 2010 10:15

Belt fed means one has to carry the ammunition boxes and that would require extra manpower and would impede rapid change of position or moving from the temporary position to the main and then to the alternate. The LMG is a section weapon and a section is, to use a popular phrase, 'cutting edge' of the battle that conforms to the rapidly changing environment of combat.

An MMG or HMG does not have to move rapidly and hence are company weapons. They are belt fed

Normally the LMG magazines are fed on top.

Venu · Post by **Venu** » 20 Feb 2010 10:17

~Self deleted~

ArmenT · Post by **ArmenT** » 20 Feb 2010 10:26

^^^
Still, RayC sir does have a point. Note that the LMG is resting on the ground at three points -- two from the bipod legs and one from the magazine.

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 20 Feb 2010 10:32

Venu wrote:
RayC wrote:The LMG in the picture above has the magazine below.

This will not permit firing at an elevated target as it would be obstructed by the ground on which the LMG is being fired from...<snip>
RayC sab, with no intention to offend you, the magzzine is actually not below, but on the left of the main structure. The angel at which the photo is taken is the culprit here. I don't think the designers of the gun will miss out on a such basic detail while designing it.

JMT

Its not on the left, its below

ArmenT · Post by **ArmenT** » 20 Feb 2010 10:37

RayC Saar: FN Minimi and its American variant, the M249 are belt fed, as was the M249's predecessor, the Stoner 63.

Venu · Post by **Venu** » 20 Feb 2010 10:48

~Self deleted~

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 20 Feb 2010 10:54

RayC wrote: Normally the LMG magazines are fed on top.

That is true for the Bren LMG. But the Bren I think is on the way out. Even the INSAS LMG has a conventionally mounted magazine. Are there any other LMGs besides the out of production Bren which have the top mounted mag?

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 20 Feb 2010 11:08

Eyes do deceive.

Clipped Left or right, as I see the photo with my eyes, a sizeable part of the magazine is below the LMG.

If one could inform as to what is the nomenclature of the LMG, we can always Google and get more details.

In countries that have combat environments in the mountains, any obstruction that would prevent firing at elevated positions, will not be acceptable.

It could be on top fed or side fed as Armen has mentioned.

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 20 Feb 2010 11:15

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 20 Feb 2010 11:17

Some Russian LMGs.

They have mountains.

ArmenT · Post by **ArmenT** » 20 Feb 2010 11:20

Venu wrote:
ArmenT wrote:^^^
Still, RayC sir does have a point. Note that the LMG is resting on the ground at three points -- two from the bipod legs and one from the magazine.
Double that. Its is not resting on magzine. The magzine is clamped on the left side of the gun and it has no contact to the ground. I don't think they will arrange a leg on a part that will be removed often. The third leg is exactly at the intersection of the bipod legs. Magazine arrangement is blocking its view.

Sir, I think I've figured out the problem. I believe you're looking at the wrong photo. We're not referring to the third picture in manish's post above. We're referring to the second one (i.e.) this one:

The third photo in manish's post is a bit bulkier than an LMG.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 20 Feb 2010 11:25

Since there were reports here about the IA wanting to change the INSAS, I had the opportunity to talk to a senior officer.

There are conflicting opinions.

There is no quibbles on the INSAS being an accurate weapon, but there are some who are of the opinion that it is fragile and has quite a few stoppages.

I personally think that since many have used the AKs, which are soldier proof and requires less maintenance than the INSAS, they are unhappy with the INSAS.

If they are fragile, I am sure the DRDO can rectify it. As far as stoppages go, clean the weapon a little better than what is being done.....after all it is our design and manufacture and cheap!

Or is there a gold pot at the end of the rainbow?

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 20 Feb 2010 11:27

Self deleted

Venu · Post by **Venu** » 20 Feb 2010 11:27

Armen, you are spot on. Thanks for bringing me back from gaga land. I have been hovering on that 3rd pic, so much so that when RayC and krishnan were talking about the LMG, I still had this in mind and thinking it to be an ultra modern LMG made with the lightest and the strongest material ever known to the Indian kind.

RayC sab and Krishnan, I concede. My apologies. Its an honest mistake though, with no intention of offending you both.

manish · Post by **manish** » 20 Feb 2010 12:25

Oops, sorry gentlemen, I see that my posts have led to a bit of a confusion. Please check them again now, it should be a bit better with the names and links to webpages with more details.

The last one is a 40mm automatic grenade launcher.

ParGha · Post by **ParGha** » 20 Feb 2010 22:18

ArmenT wrote:RayC Saar: FN Minimi and its American variant, the M249 are belt fed, as was the M249's predecessor, the Stoner 63.

The SAW can accept both linked ammo from a belt and also unlinked ammo from a standard M16 mag (though it would have to be an extremely effed-up scenario where the LMG gunner runs out of ammo before the riflemen). I wouldn't be very surprised if the Indian Army, which historically uses a lot of FN/FN-inspired small arms (SLR, FN35, MAG-58; even INSAS most closely reminds me of an FNC), eventually adopts the SAW.

ParGha · Post by **ParGha** » 20 Feb 2010 23:25

RayC wrote:An MMG or HMG does not have to move rapidly and hence are company weapons. They are belt fed

Do Indian non-mechanized infantry battalions have HMGs? What do they use? I have only seen a few old SFF's CIA-supplied Browning .50s, some war trophies from '65 and '71...

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 21 Feb 2010 01:57

ParGha wrote:
RayC wrote:An MMG or HMG does not have to move rapidly and hence are company weapons. They are belt fed
Do Indian non-mechanized infantry battalions have HMGs? What do they use? I have only seen a few old SFF's CIA-supplied Browning .50s, some war trophies from '65 and '71...

If memory serves me right, IA did induct HMG as company(?) weapon for sometime. But it seems, IA did not see any incremental benefit from the induction and subsequently withdrew the weapon. I very distinctly remember seeing photograph of a soldier on LOC with HMG in a bunker.