Small Armaments & Infantry Equipment - News & Discussion

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 16 Aug 2020 09:59

Visually looks very similar to the IWI Dan .338 for sure

ks_sachin · Post by **ks_sachin** » 16 Aug 2020 12:16

Thakur_B wrote:
dinesh_kimar wrote:
Looks like a Carcal rifle
Most likely ToT of IWI Dan 0.338. OFB was looking for a partner in this category couple of years back.

So too good to be true sir.....

souravB · Post by **souravB** » 16 Aug 2020 15:02

^^The threaded muzzle is a dead giveaway. Hell would freeze over and thaw again before OFB would even begin to think to make modular muzzle devices.

Thakur_B · Post by **Thakur_B** » 16 Aug 2020 15:23

souravB wrote:^^The threaded muzzle is a dead giveaway. Hell would freeze over and thaw again before OFB would even begin to think to make modular muzzle devices.

Their 7.62x51 sniper has a threaded barrel.

souravB · Post by **souravB** » 16 Aug 2020 16:21

Thakur_B wrote: Their 7.62x51 sniper has a threaded ~~barrel~~ muzzle.

Thanks. I somehow must have missed that from the pictures that are on the internet.
The pictures even zoomed seemed like it only had BUIS on the barrel and no threads.

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 16 Aug 2020 16:45

Manish_P wrote:Visually looks very similar to the IWI Dan .338 for sure

Doesn't look same to me at all, there are probably at least half a dozen that look "similar". Guys if you know exact details that they got "ToT" if any, else don't take a speculative dump on OFB no?

ks_sachin · Post by **ks_sachin** » 16 Aug 2020 17:20

abhik wrote:
Manish_P wrote:Visually looks very similar to the IWI Dan .338 for sure

Doesn't look same to me at all, there are probably at least half a dozen that look "similar". Guys if you know exact details that they got "ToT" if any, else don't take a speculative dump on OFB no?

It externally is almost an exact copy. Infact the butt is so similar cannot be anything but the Dan.
Tell me one original design by the OFB in small arms Saar!!!

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 16 Aug 2020 19:48

I wonder who is giving ToT to whom, they all look the same onlee

Thakur_B · Post by **Thakur_B** » 16 Aug 2020 20:19

SSS defence featurette.

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 16 Aug 2020 20:50

abhik wrote:I wonder who is giving ToT to whom, they all look the same onlee

Exactly, and from a far enough distance they ALL will look similar.. which is why you either need to see them real close (externally and internally) and until then try and use other methods to deduce possible influences- one of which is to see if our guys had any tie-ups / license manufacturing / local assembly etc etc or they did it entirely on their own (entirely possible) .. and if all else fails, there is of course the Chinese way..

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 16 Aug 2020 21:49

ks_sachin wrote:
abhik wrote: Doesn't look same to me at all, there are probably at least half a dozen that look "similar". Guys if you know exact details that they got "ToT" if any, else don't take a speculative dump on OFB no?
It externally is almost an exact copy. Infact the butt is so similar cannot be anything but the Dan.
Tell me one original design by the OFB in small arms Saar!!!

There you go again.
The OFB rifle meets the GSQR and is made in India.
You want a bureaucrat to be Colt or Browning or Kalashnikov?

Thakur_B · Post by **Thakur_B** » 16 Aug 2020 22:04

OF Trichy has started manufacturing of Arsenal M6 UBGL for CRPF. This particular model has been in service in large numbers with BSF/CRPF/ITBP and has been seen equipping both INSAS and various AKMs.
Though its has been known for a while that TAR is a copy of Bulgarian Arsenal AR-M1F41 with milled receivers, it is not yet clear if OFB has licensed these Arsenal products or are simply doing things the Chinese way. All the TAR needs is a decent dust cover with pic rails and it shall be superioir to the AK-203. Plus no need to pay Russians $200 royalty fee per rifle like they re asking for AK-203.

Thakur_B · Post by **Thakur_B** » 16 Aug 2020 22:10

Thakur_B wrote:

SSS defence featurette.

AKM Retrofit by SSS Defence.

Dragunov Retrofit by SSS Defence.

Few more takeaways from the interview, SSS Defence is working on 9mm SMG asn 0.338 Machine gun as well.

Their 0.338 sabre is meant for ARmy requirement while 7.62x51 Viper is meanst for CAPFs.

souravB · Post by **souravB** » 17 Aug 2020 01:44

^^Also 7.62x39 P72 is a long stroke piston system like AK with bells and whistles.

ks_sachin · Post by **ks_sachin** » 17 Aug 2020 02:04

ramana wrote:
ks_sachin wrote: It externally is almost an exact copy. Infact the butt is so similar cannot be anything but the Dan.
Tell me one original design by the OFB in small arms Saar!!!
There you go again.
The OFB rifle meets the GSQR and is made in India.
You want a bureaucrat to be Colt or Browning or Kalashnikov?

Sir please.

I have nothing against TOT or learning from others.

I have something about then claiming “new design” etc. This also creates a negative impression. YOs and Javan’s are not fools.

If a private company SSS has been willing to explore new designs surely the OFB / ARDE combo could have done better.

Gyan · Post by **Gyan** » 17 Aug 2020 03:13

In an item which is largely slow moving technology but requires very high reliability, Reverse Engineering is best solution rather than reinventing the wheel.

ks_sachin · Post by **ks_sachin** » 17 Aug 2020 03:30

Gyan wrote:In an item which is largely slow moving technology but requires very high reliability, Reverse Engineering is best solution rather than reinventing the wheel.

Sure no problem. Beg borrow and steal designs.earn and iterate.
The end game is self sufficiency.
But be intellectually honest or else you will lose the ability to learn..

pandyan · Post by **pandyan** » 17 Aug 2020 06:55

don't worry saar. after summer, winter and monsoon trials and 13 major and 24 minor modifications later, it will not even resemble a rifle.

It appears to me OFB has jumped the quality perception "issues", however, organizational memory (on both sides) is too hard to erase.

The other option is army should embrace SSS with open "arms". But, both are not happening and this means...what? I don't know

ks_sachin · Post by **ks_sachin** » 17 Aug 2020 07:48

pandyan wrote:don't worry saar. after summer, winter and monsoon trials and 13 major and 24 minor modifications later, it will not even resemble a rifle.

It appears to me OFB has jumped the quality perception "issues", however, organizational memory (on both sides) is too hard to erase.

The other option is army should embrace SSS with open "arms". But, both are not happening and this means...what? I don't know

Why do you want to add to my depression.....

Thakur_B · Post by **Thakur_B** » 17 Aug 2020 09:46

Carl Gustav Mk4 with Para SF.

IMO IA should opt for new gen optics for CG Mk4/3/2 in service. The new FCS13RE optic from Aimpoint is not just an optic, it's a fire control system which can multiply the hit probability by several fold on moving target depending on range with an on board computer. Much cheaper alternative to Javelin/Spike/MPTAGM for light targets / fortifications.

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 17 Aug 2020 10:00

The Mk4! Nice to know that we procured these.

ParGha · Post by **ParGha** » 17 Aug 2020 19:21

ks_sachin wrote:Tell me one original design by the OFB in small arms...

The 5.56x30mm MSMC and "Amogh" were fairly innovative, and there is room to also produce the "Amogh" in 9x19mm now that the 5.56x30mm has gained some customers in the Indian Coast Guard and some state police forces.

Thakur_B · Post by **Thakur_B** » 17 Aug 2020 22:53

The history of INSAS, from IA perspective. Very informative thread.
https://twitter.com/sanjaysinha18G/stat ... 6955828224

^^ Needs to be archived. Col sahab slams the original Insas the way it was supposed to be, but remains positive about Insas Mk1C (which one might remember, actually cleared army requirements but was not procured).

Also mentions how OFB steel core AKM and INSAS rounds consistently cut through level III armour. They are in fact matching NIJ Level IV penetration. When tested against light bullet proof vehicle, INSAS rounds went through the armour like knife through butter !! The reason attributed is because of IA requirement of penetration of steel helmet at 700 meters during the QSR stage, hence leading to development of 5.56x45 INSAS over 5.56x45 NATO.

ParGha · Post by **ParGha** » 18 Aug 2020 05:07

No mention of the mystery East German Wieger rifle? This was originally proposed as the replacement for SLR (everyone knew that the Steyr AUG was too expensive for the Indian Army): https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wieger_StG-940

ks_sachin · Post by **ks_sachin** » 18 Aug 2020 09:14

ParGha / Thakur_B

Is this an image of the Insas 1C

https://i.imgur.com/CHxJvNt.jpg

I have seen an image of another design but that has a straight magazine and I presume that is the 7.62X51.

If this is then it look more like it..

Thakur_B · Post by **Thakur_B** » 18 Aug 2020 21:06

ks_sachin wrote:ParGha / Thakur_B

Is this an image of the Insas 1C

https://i.imgur.com/CHxJvNt.jpg

I have seen an image of another design but that has a straight magazine and I presume that is the 7.62X51.

If this is then it look more like it..

Yes it is. The 7.62x51 rifle is pure OFB product called R2.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 18 Aug 2020 21:10

It doesn't matter how good it is anymore. The army seems to be ditching the 5.56x45mm round for good, apart from the few Tavors and M4's in service with the Para SF. I hope the CRPF and other paramilitary forces do acquire it though.

Having learnt a lot of lessons with the INSAS I am sure if the DRDO (not OFB) had worked on a clean sheet design for a 7.62x51mm rifle, they could have come up with something good enough to buy instead of the SIG's. But they never got that chance.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 18 Aug 2020 21:41

ramana wrote:Nachiket, Orders need budget. And RNS has made it clear no import for those areas.

He is like YB Chavan.

Don't be fooled by rhetoric.
His first important work was to pilot the CDS decision.
Next was to get the BVR missiles while on a visit to Russia
Push the Hammer purchase for Rafales to make them all round fighter planes.
Next is the no import list.

So try to take off the glasses and see clearly.

Ramana sir, I do not believe the reason NAMICA or LCH haven't been ordered is a lack of money. How do you otherwise explain the MoD being able to find money for 22+6 Apaches but spending a huge amount of time negotiating with HAL for only 15 LCH? NAMICA did not even reach that stage. First reaction after the Chinese deployed Type-15's in Ladakh was to look at Russian Spruts.

I do not believe I am wearing glasses, but I did get a feeling of wool being pulled over my eyes with the list of product "launches" for products that have long existed or don't have orders as a show of commitment to atmanirbharta. I don't believe I was the only one who got that feeling. I do not for a second doubt the PM or the RM's intentions, but I do have an idea of how the bureaucracy in the MoD and the forces seems to work after watching our procurement process over the years.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 19 Aug 2020 02:34

FIRST LOOK: Indian Private Sector Answer To Kalashnikov Rifle Out Soon
https://www.livefistdefence.com/2020/08 ... -soon.html
18 August 2020

ks_sachin · Post by **ks_sachin** » 19 Aug 2020 09:11

Thakur_B, ParGha, SouravB here is a question for you guys..

How pronounced is the loss of zero with the AK design and the removable top cover?

S

Thakur_B · Post by **Thakur_B** » 19 Aug 2020 09:23

Very. The most important work in Ak12/15/308 rifles is the locking mechanism for the dust cover. Railed AK dust covers are common by a dime a dozen, every manufacturer has introduced rigidity by strengthening the cover, but it remains a problem nevertheless. The problem also lies in the donkey kick equivalent overgassed recoil of AKM. AK100 series moderated the gas flow, but it still is significant. Almost every ex warpac country is going for a clean sheet design instead of an AK redesign for this very reason.

Poles were the first to adopt 5.56 AK in the form of Beryl WZ-96. They chose to option for an add on rail mount instead of milled dust cover in Iraq and Afghanistan. Their new rifle, MSBS GROT is again very SCAR like AR180 pattern rifle.

Czechs have the Bren 800 family. Again AR180 pattern rifle.

Of the older AKs in 5.56NATO, Fn-FNC and SiG (now SAN Swiss Arms) opted for AR-15 pattern upper and lower receiver configuration. Only Galil and INSAS persisted with the AK dust cover pattern construction.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 19 Aug 2020 10:22

Thakur_B wrote:Very. The most important work in Ak12/15/308 rifles is the locking mechanism for the dust cover. Railed AK dust covers are common by a dime a dozen, every manufacturer has introduced rigidity by strengthening the cover, but it remains a problem nevertheless. The problem also lies in the donkey kick equivalent overgassed recoil of AKM. AK100 series moderated the gas flow, but it still is significant. Almost every ex warpac country is going for a clean sheet design instead of an AK redesign for this very reason.

The AK-203 also has that locking lever mechanism for the cover I believe, one of the differences from the 103. The Indian "203" which was displayed during defexpo which looked like the love-child of the 103 and 203 thankfully seemed to retain the locking lever.

ks_sachin · Post by **ks_sachin** » 19 Aug 2020 10:41

nachiket wrote:
Thakur_B wrote:Very. The most important work in Ak12/15/308 rifles is the locking mechanism for the dust cover. Railed AK dust covers are common by a dime a dozen, every manufacturer has introduced rigidity by strengthening the cover, but it remains a problem nevertheless. The problem also lies in the donkey kick equivalent overgassed recoil of AKM. AK100 series moderated the gas flow, but it still is significant. Almost every ex warpac country is going for a clean sheet design instead of an AK redesign for this very reason.
The AK-203 also has that locking lever mechanism for the cover I believe, one of the differences from the 103. The Indian "203" which was displayed during defexpo which looked like the love-child of the 103 and 203 thankfully seemed to retain the locking lever.

Thankur_B correct me if I am wrong.

Nachiket the issue is not the locking lever itself but the fact that the top rail cover has to be removed at all to get to the innards of the weapon - which will happen when ever cleaning is required. In AR pattern rifles either both the top and bottom receivers swing apart or come apart with. The top cover itself is not separated into two parts as part of the routine disassembly for cleaning.

The fact that rear sights are on the top cover means that when ever the top cover is removed the zero gets affected.

S

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 19 Aug 2020 10:41

Thakur_B, can you also comment on why we might have chosen the SIG-716i which is the Direct Impingement variant instead of the G2 Patrol version which uses a short-stroke piston. What could have driven that decision? The rifles seem to have comparable specs otherwise. Also why did SIG make two versions of the same rifle with 2 different actions? Seems very unusual.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 19 Aug 2020 10:44

ks_sachin wrote: Thankur_B correct me if I am wrong.

Nachiket the issue is not the locking lever itself but the fact that the top rail cover has to be removed at all to get to the innards of the weapon - which will happen when ever cleaning is required. In AR pattern rifles either both the top and bottom receivers swing apart or come apart with. The top cover itself is not separated into two parts as part of the routine disassembly for cleaning.

The fact that rear sights are on the top cover means that when ever the top cover is removed the zero gets affected.

S

Oh ok I get it now. I guess we have to live with that drawback. The RR guys seem to love their AK's so maybe they don't find that problem too bad perhaps.

ParGha · Post by **ParGha** » 19 Aug 2020 23:06

nachiket wrote:Also why did SIG make two versions of the same rifle with 2 different actions? Seems very unusual.

#1 Cost. The G2 Patrol is at least $600 more expensive than the 716i version.
#2 Weight. The G2 Patrol is about 0.5kg heavier than the 716i version.

For the average American hunter, if he has to spend $1800 for a G2 -- it is almost the same as getting an AR-style 5.56x45mm for hogs/coyotes (~$800), and a separate bolt-action 7.62x51mm rifle for elk (~$800). A $1200 716i is an attractive price-point for some people, where they can own one rifle for both varmint/pest-control and seasonal hunting.

ks_sachin · Post by **ks_sachin** » 20 Aug 2020 05:07

After all this do we really need the AK203 production line?

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 20 Aug 2020 11:56

ks_sachin wrote:After all this do we really need the AK203 production line?

No. No one pays royalty for AK design. Even USD 200. I would rather go with Munger made AK's that are quite reliable. The makers are all ex IA/OFB fitters.

Both Trichy and SSS AK designs use milled receivers. Doesn't it affect cost of acquisition and cost of part replacement?

ParGha and ThakurB can you share your assessment of the SSS weapons?

Their enhancement/upgrade kits are popular with field commanders who buy using their discretionary budget and I think that's what keeps generating revenue for them.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 20 Aug 2020 12:05

Doesn't direct impingement lead to more heating and require more cleaning for fouling? Both cases are frequent in sustained combat.

For example, Jaffna University

ks_sachin · Post by **ks_sachin** » 20 Aug 2020 12:17

tsarkar wrote:Doesn't direct impingement lead to more heating and require more cleaning for fouling? Both cases are frequent in sustained combat.

For example, Jaffna University

tsarkar I am sure the IA has thought of that..

What happened WRT weapons malfunction in Jaffna university?