Small Arms Thread

darshhan · Post by **darshhan** » 13 Jul 2010 02:18

^^HK 417 and SCAR-H.Both use 7.62 X 51 caliber rounds.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heckler_%26_Koch_HK417

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCAR-H

ArmenT · Post by **ArmenT** » 13 Jul 2010 11:12

ramana wrote:So which rifles use the 7.62mm x 51 caliber rounds? Is the requirement a way to purchase a certain make? And who mkaes that round?

7.62x51 mm is a NATO standard round. Lots of people make it (including India's OFB). Lots of rifles use it too, given that it was a NATO standard before the 5.56x45 mm. became popular e.g. M-14, FN-FAL/Ishapore 1A1, H&K G3 etc.

vic · Post by **vic** » 16 Jul 2010 18:47

tejas wrote:I saw a DRDO holographic sight in a recent Tech. Focus article but I can't remember which one. Consulting my good friend Google, look what I found. Can't believe this was missed by all the rabid jingoes on the forum. Hopefully this pans out though I did see a recent news report about shiny new sights from Germany

http://beta.thehindu.com/news/cities/Th ... 439498.ece

OFB lists a Red dot sight on its webpage but I dont know how much orders it has garnered

ParGha · Post by **ParGha** » 16 Jul 2010 20:38

Indian Army has approved bulk production of 40mm UBGLs for INSAS and Romanian AKMs. It will become a section level weapon.

(Sorry, can't post link from mobile device).

Raghavendra · Post by **Raghavendra** » 16 Jul 2010 20:58

ParGha wrote:Indian Army has approved bulk production of 40mm UBGLs for INSAS and Romanian AKMs. It will become a section level weapon. (Sorry, can't post link from mobile device).

A Sharma has posted it here http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 41#p903941

Craig Alpert · Post by **Craig Alpert** » 26 Jul 2010 06:46

CHA CHING!!!! MSMC INSAS derived receiver, Uzi type magazine feed. 5.56x30mm caliber rounds. ITL Mars collimating sight.

ONLY if they take it to FULL SCALE PRODUCTION

vic · Post by **vic** » 26 Jul 2010 10:03

Look at very interesting posters behind!

vic · Post by **vic** » 26 Jul 2010 11:19

Cut and poste from a Halal forum

With reference to the poster behind Ajai Schukla:-

The new rifle (replacement of INSAS?) seems to have fully collapsible butt stock (with rubber butt plate and cheek rest?). It has a picatinny rail on top with dual sight system. The iron sights seem to be removable & perhaps to be fixed on picatinny rail. There seems to be option for mounting a forehandle on lower recevier, so there should be picatinny rail on lower receiver also. Seems to have options to fit multiple barrel lengths (quick change?). The upper receiver seems to be detachable for quick change. The forend looks like G36, so does it have plastic body? There seem to be details about a new 5.56mm round which are not clear. Even the grenade launcher seems a new design as it has a handle.

I hope these pics are not just diagrammatic representations from some other compay, cut and pasted. Interesting a very dim picture next to FINSAS soldier seems like a bullpub rifle.

Multicaliber normally means that by changing the upper receiver, one change the caliber. In this way 5.56mmx45, 5.56mmmx30, 6.8-6.5-6 or even 9 mm can be adopted with the same lower receiver. For the 7.62mm round, one would new rifle as the changes would be too many.

My guess would be it is mixture of G36 looks, INSAS mechanism and collapsible stock like HK416 sub carbine. Though a fully collapsible stock on plastic body is not common, which would mean metal body (aluminium or steel?)

ParGha · Post by **ParGha** » 27 Jul 2010 19:05

Craig Alpert wrote:CHA CHING!!!! MSMC INSAS derived receiver, Uzi type magazine feed. 5.56x30mm caliber rounds. ITL Mars collimating sight.

ONLY if they take it to FULL SCALE PRODUCTION

Is there a real requirement for it? The reason I ask is that I have heard and read from numerous junior officers how they find the SMG concept completely irrelevant in the modern battle field. I get this impression from a broad cross section - indians (SLI, AR, Grenadiers, Gunners) and others alike. Almost all of them preferred to carry a compact folding butt AKM in operations; other than the legendary reputation of the gun itself, it had many operational advantages: commonality of ammo in the whole unit, flexible engagement range, officer couldn't be easily picked out for targetted killing, etc. (Plus a couple of reasons we won't discuss). Most agree that if compact INSAS or Zittaras became common issue in their units, they would go with it. So why try to push an unwanted weapon onto them?

Craig Alpert · Post by **Craig Alpert** » 27 Jul 2010 19:27

ParGha wrote:
Most agree that if compact INSAS or Zittaras became common issue in their units, they would go with it. So why try to push an unwanted weapon onto them?

Simply because they go out and buy it from Israel by paying a premium, while rejecting the DRDO products (which might not be 100 % as the Israleis Uzzi, but it is a work in progress) Remeber Weapons and ammunitions are something that one needs to develop not only to sustain the local economy, but to ensure 100% realibility during war time so that no one can squeeze your balls when you want to use it during the time of crisis. Most units out in the field today are given INSAS as a standard rifle, J&K and others SF is a different scenarios as rightly you mentioned AK-s are their life savers, however for CQB and 26/11 type missions, the so called "INDIGENIOUS" versions sure sounds like a thrift saver. Give the products time to evolve and you'll have complete self realiablity of the choices of weapons you want to choose from the indigenious stable.

One CANNOT compare for the sake of commonality with other weapons and ammunitons the reason NOT wanting indigenious products. Remeber EACH situation requires a specialized weapons, Mountain Warfare, CQB, High Altitude, Tropics ityadi ityadi, You can't have a Jack of ALL trades unless you want it to be a Master of NONE!

If the soldiers are given a choice of weapons to choose from when they step out on the battle field, it is their call. If they feel that DRDO's product will NOT save their lives, then there is NOTHING DRDO can do about that, in the end it is THEIR lives that are at stake!!!!

ParGha · Post by **ParGha** » 27 Jul 2010 21:23

Don't make it a domestic vs imported debate - INSAS is domestic, A-7s can be dometically produced for no fees - the question I asked was, what is the tactical significance of SMGs?

The answer, at least from what I have read and heard, is - very little significance.

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 27 Jul 2010 22:11

^^
MSMC is not an SMG with a weak round. It is a carbine with a powerful 5.56x30mm round. Seeing that PARA, RR COMMANDO, J&K SOG and SFF use Tavors (5.56x45mm) and seem to be happy with it, IMO MSMC would prove to be a favourite among many in the forces (if it has no problems and is inducted). It is a extremely light and compact weapon with decently powerful round. If it also proves itself reliable, then what more do you need in a carbine?

ParGha · Post by **ParGha** » 27 Jul 2010 22:44

With 5.56x30mm armed PDWs, you will still be outranged by terrs with 7.62x39mm AKs. And you won't be able to exchange ammo with rest of your unit. And if becomes known that particularly valuable targets - officers, NCOs, radio opers, CGL crew - carry it, they will be the "kill me" sign. The question is not what you need in PDW/SMGs, the question is whether they are needed at all in modern battlefield.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 27 Jul 2010 22:49

just a general Q, which militaries use similar weapons, if any ? in what role ? ATM we don't have an equivalent in IA do we ?

sarabpal.s · Post by **sarabpal.s** » 27 Jul 2010 22:59

After watching this MSMC I find the one best role for this gun is CQB, I guess in Delhi Metro CISF can use this gun, I find them(CISF) with INSAS in crowded metro Very difficult to move and also for such short range MSMC is best.

Other views welcome

ParGha · Post by **ParGha** » 27 Jul 2010 23:04

Personal Defense Weapon (PDW) concept came about in early 80s to be a weapon for rear-area and non fire-team troops (officers, radio opers, drivers, crew members etc) that could replace traditional pistol-caliber SMGs (like uzi, sterling etc) with caliber that could penetrate light body armor. Two major developments were FN P90 and HK M7; Colt also tried with 5.56x30mm, but abandoned it - DRDO resurrected it.

Most serious militaries which have seen combat recently recognize that there are no clear lines of engagement - radio opers and officers cannot expect that fire-teams will first engage the enemy and they will only have to defend against some who make it close; enemy can attack from any side and any range. Plus main assault rifles have also become very compact and easy to carry. So the PDW concept doesnt find many takers in militaries.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 27 Jul 2010 23:10

I know the concept, but is any military using it in that role ? is it a possible CQB wapon in the MP-5 mould ?

ParGha · Post by **ParGha** » 28 Jul 2010 00:18

Both Germans and Belgians use them in the PDW role in limited numbers.

ParGha · Post by **ParGha** » 28 Jul 2010 00:21

For the record, I have no opinion - my own or relayed - of these in police and gendarme roles.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 28 Jul 2010 09:42

Sterling Carbine is the closest which comes to PDW in IA Service...still in use with Support Arms. As for the MSMC, what is the number we're talking about here - in terms of demand?

vic · Post by **vic** » 28 Jul 2010 10:31

PDW is more of a police or self defense weapon but I still see a production of around 2-3 lakh units over a period of 10-20 years. In any case, with better propellants a normal rifle 5.56x45 will become still shorter and will be capable of playing the role of carbine in military use.

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 28 Jul 2010 12:33

Now you have 14inch barreled carbines with the standard sized 5.56x45mm round which have the same power as full sized assault rifles becoming standard issue internationally, in bulpup form (such as the SAR21 carbine which the paramilitaries were considering before ST kinetics got blacklisted I think)they are extremely compact and light weight and are comparable to the MSMC in these qualities. I doubt the military will want to buy another class of weapon in the future, when their entire requirement can be met with the rifle/carbine and the submachine gun/pistol sharing the same round.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 28 Jul 2010 12:44

thanks ParGha.

jamwal · Post by **jamwal** » 29 Jul 2010 01:15

Cool picture of INSAS.

According to latest reports the Royal Oman army has sent Some good news to OFB in ishapore about the rifles's performance in desert conditions. The indigenously built rifle was sent to Muscat in March and is currently undergoing trial for the Oman army.

The Oman army people who are doing the user trials said that the rifles were subjected to endurance tests for extreme desert temperatures and sandstorms and performed well in both conditions.

Source blog

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 29 Jul 2010 09:21

I guess, one a weapon system passes IA trials, it can work in any environment of any Army.

nrshah · Post by **nrshah** » 29 Jul 2010 12:09

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_zUe7sq7m3h0/T ... arbine.jpg

Interesting pic, shows a pic of multi caliber rifle from DRDO for FINSAS

Pic courtesy - Ajay Shukla (Broadsword) - along with report - 155 mm gun purchase : DRDO enters fray - dated 29th july 2010

vic · Post by **vic** » 29 Jul 2010 12:46

nrshah wrote:http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_zUe7sq7m3h0/T ... arbine.jpg

Interesting pic, shows a pic of multi caliber rifle from DRDO for FINSAS

Pic courtesy - Ajay Shukla (Broadsword) - along with report - 155 mm gun purchase : DRDO enters fray - dated 29th july 2010

It is not a actual design, but just a diagrammatic representation which is also incorrect. Pls look at the length of the butt and the size of the Magzine. It might be approximate rendering of Zittara. In earlier pics of Ajai Schukla, there seemed to be some pics of actual design of a new rifle. But the pics are very low resolution.

rad · Post by **rad** » 31 Jul 2010 16:11

Can any on point out where the trigger is, on the new under barrel grnade launcher?

rad

Yogesh · Post by **Yogesh** » 31 Jul 2010 16:25

rohitvats wrote:I guess, one a weapon system passes IA trials, it can work in any environment of any Army.

that's to

koti · Post by **koti** » 31 Jul 2010 22:44

ParGha wrote:With 5.56x30mm armed PDWs, you will still be outranged by terrs with 7.62x39mm AKs. And you won't be able to exchange ammo with rest of your unit. And if becomes known that particularly valuable targets - officers, NCOs, radio opers, CGL crew - carry it, they will be the "kill me" sign. The question is not what you need in PDW/SMGs, the question is whether they are needed at all in modern battlefield.

Going by your logic, every unit should be equipped with AK. This would reduce the logistics issue for sure.
But this would also severely impede the effectiveness of the unit.

Assume a CI operation involving house to house search...
Or assume trying to use it from an armored vehicle...
Or its use for QCB by NSG or the likes...
Or as a secondary weapon for snipers or heavy gunners...
Or for CRPF deployments in urban environment...
Or for CISF in the airports or like...

A PDW significantly improves the effectiveness of a unit in all of the above mentioned scenarios and elsewhere.

And in a Battlefield, an important target like NCO, Radio Oper, etc can be identified by numerous ways other then by their weapon.
And in most of the above cases, logistics will not be much of a problem.

jamwal · Post by **jamwal** » 31 Jul 2010 23:43

Pardon me if I'm wrong, but it isn't true that 5.56 mm rounds have more range than 7.62 mm ?

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 31 Jul 2010 23:59

^^
On the contrary, higher caliber rounds have greater range.

jamwal · Post by **jamwal** » 01 Aug 2010 00:42

That's what I thought too. But in almost all episodes of Future Weapons, they insist that 5.56 mm round of M16 has greater range and accuracy but less stopping power than that of AK-47's 7.62 mm.

ArmenT · Post by **ArmenT** » 01 Aug 2010 06:23

Depends on a number of factors, including the amount of gunpowder in the cartridge, the quality of the gunpowder, bullet ballistics and aerodynamics, amount of rifling in the barrel etc. It is not a function of caliber, otherwise a civil war era musket would have the greatest range.

Consider two 5.56x45 mm. NATO standard cartridges, the M193 and M855. The M193 was the original cartridge for original M16. When the M16 A2 came out, they re-designed the barrel to spin the bullet a lot more for greater accuracy and stability at range and designed the M855 cartridge to be used with M16A2. Note that the M16A2 can also fire the M193 ammunition if needed.

Code: Select all

              5.56 NATO Ball Ammunition Ballistic Comparison
                   based on Aberdeen Proving Ground Data
       velocity (fps)    trajectory (in.)  drop (inches)  drift (inches)*
 range   M193   M855       M193  M855      M193   M855     M193    M855
(meters)
  0      3,200  3,100     -2.5   -2.5       0.0    0.0      0.0     0.0
100      2,774  2,751     +2.8   +4.4      -2.2   -2.3      1.3     1.1
200      2,374  2,420     +2.7   +5.8      -9.9  -10.2      5.8     4.9
300      2,012  2,115     -4.9    0.0     -25.1  -25.3     14.2    11.8
400      1,680  1,833    -23.0  -15.0     -50.8  -49.5     27.6    22.4
500      1,373  1,569    -56.2  -42.9     -91.6  -86.7     47.5    38.0
600      1,106  1,323   -113.1  -88.2    -156.1 -141.3     76.4    59.5
700        995  1,106   -206.8 -156.1    -257.3 -220.9    113.5    88.4
800        927  1,010   -339.9 -267.7    -398.0 -339.2    156.1   124.9

                                                   * Drift for 10 mph wind.
M193 Ball ammunition fired in M16A1 rifle with 250 meter battle sight zero.
M855 Ball ammunition fired in M16A2 rifle with 300 meter battle sight zero.

From the above table, you can see that the M193 bullet has an initially higher velocity than the M855 bullet (which spins a lot more coming out of the barrel). However, it starts to lose the velocity as the bullet starts to lose stability with distance. By 200 meters, the M193 bullet is travelling slower than the M855 bullet and is losing velocity a lot faster. Also note that upto 400 meters, there's little to choose between the M193 and M855 in terms of how much the bullet drops vertically. Then at 500 meters, the M193 bullet drops ~5 inches more to the ground than the m855, at 600 meters, the difference is ~15 inches and at 700 meters, the difference is ~36 inches. This means the M193 bullet should travel less distance and hit the ground a lot earlier than the M855. Note that these are not even different caliber bullets and both can be fired out of the same rifle! The difference is the ballistics of the bullet, as the M855 bullet profile is designed to follow a flatter trajectory. Also note the M855 drift is a lot less than the M193, which leads to greater accuracy at longer ranges.

Now consider the AK-47 bullet (the M43). It is a bigger bullet, the cartridge has more gunpowder and therefore the bullet has more momentum and packs a heavier punch. Note that when I said more momentum, this does not imply that an M43 bullet moves faster than an M855 bullet, because momentum = mass * velocity. M43 bullet has more mass, but less velocity, than an M855. Also, the bullet aerodynamics of the M43 ensure that the bullet flight path in the air is different. After about 300 meters, the M43 bullet starts to drop to the ground a lot faster than an M855 and its velocity is slower too. Hence if both bullets are fired at a horizontal angle from the same height, guess which one will hit the ground first.

jamwal · Post by **jamwal** » 01 Aug 2010 16:06

Thanks for explanation

ParGha · Post by **ParGha** » 02 Aug 2010 18:03

Koti, as I mentioned I have no opinion of these in police and gendarme roles. Armor may accept them, but they cannot single handedly guarantee mass production orders (unlike inf+art+eng requisition). Maybe if IAF and IN also pitch in with their own orders, it would become a decent sized order from the MoD. But it sounds like the primary targeted customer would be the MHA.

koti · Post by **koti** » 12 Aug 2010 00:26

Insas has a selective fire and 3-round burst mode. It should not be able to fire 2 round bursts(??).
But in the video below, the person fires the rifle violating this.

Also, you can find other videos where the same person fires the OFB 9mm pistol and a glock. One can clearly see the difference in the quality difference in the ammo used in the two pistols.

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 12 Aug 2010 01:41

^^
Well, you seem to have forgotten to post the video. However, even if one is using 3 round burst mode, one can fire only 2 rounds if the trigger is released early. Its similar to full auto mode where the no of rounds released depend upon the time till which the trigger is pressed.

Craig Alpert · Post by **Craig Alpert** » 12 Aug 2010 05:46

Solar Missiles Deployed by Terrorists Seized in J&K: Govt

Two solar missiles deployed by terrorists against security forces were seized by police in Kupwara district in June this year, Government said today.

The solar-powered missiles are self-firing and self-charging missiles and need no human assistance for triggering.

"Two solar missiles were recovered by the police during search operations in Kupwara district on June 1 this year and measures have been taken by forces to avert hostile strikes," Defence Minister A K Antony said in reply to a question in the Rajya Sabha.

ParGha · Post by **ParGha** » 12 Aug 2010 06:49

Craig Alpert wrote: Solar Missiles Deployed by Terrorists Seized in J&K: Govt

It is a simple rocket activated by certain intensity of light, using the same photo-electric effect used in automatic door-openers, energy-saving room-lights etc. Militants set it up at night to harass (not very accurate rockets) security forces early in the morning.