DRDO Multical Rifle Unveiled

[Immanuel]

6.8mm may sound nice and better but not battle proven, 5,56mm on other hand did in many ways, 64gr 5.56mm is lethal and i hope more lethal 5.56mm get inducted ..

What has 6.8mm not being battle proven have anything to do with deploying it on a wide scale, what needs to be proven in order for it to be battle proven? it is a round, it obviously has more stopping power than the 6.5, 7.62 and 5.56 and better energies at impact. I am not saying the 5.56 is not lethal but it won't knock a armoured soldier dead, a well trained soldier during battle is pumped full of adrenaline and that means in many cases won't even feel the hit unless the hit is in a vital organs. more so during all these years, if anything is proven is that the 5.56 lacks true effective knock down power.

As far as 5.56 against armour, nice video, its pretty hopeless against modern plates at 50yrds.

 

[Immanuel]

5.56 should be ok against normal soft body armour but modern hard plates will be tough to crack at 50 yrds let alone penetration at 700m as someone suggested

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Logically you sound correct but fielding is another ball game ..

SS109 is a fine 5.56mm ammo used by NATO forces, But its combat ability in CT area proved its weak points ( Battle proven yet failed ) , Latter OFB made 5.56mm came in and done the job well ( Battle proven and successful )

Now, When we talk about some experimental ammo, It may sound logically superior but it has flaws which will only come out in years of operational service, Why need to repeat same SS109 fasco when we have battle proven and successful 5.56mm in many forms, If you need stopping power it will came with new design of 5.56mm itself ..

===================
===================

Test of the 5.56mm NATO MK 262 Mod 1 77 gr OTM from Black Hills. The MK262 Mod 1 is topped by a Sierra MatchKing bullet, and is an active-duty military cartridge. Test shot at 100 yards using clear gel from ClearBallistics.com. Video includes review of the cartridge, test shot, and some close-up views of the clear block.

The Mk 262 is a match quality round manufactured by Black Hills Ammunition made originally for the Special Purpose Rifle (SPR). It uses a 77-grain (5.0 g) Sierra MatchKing bullet that is more effective at longer ranges than the standard issue M855 round.

Two versions of the round have been procured to date. Initial production runs, designated Mark 262 Mod 0, lacked a cannelure. Subsequent production, designated Mk 262 Mod 1, added a cannelure to the bullet for effective crimping.

According to US DoD sources, the Mk 262 round is capable of making kills at 700 meters. Ballistics tests found that the round caused "consistent initial yaw in soft tissue" at more than 300 meters. Apparently it is superior to the standard M855 round when fired from an M4 or M16 rifle. It evidently possesses superior stopping power, and can allow for engagements to be extended to up to 700 meters when fired from an 18 inch barrel. It appears that this round can drastically improve the performance of any AR15 platform weapon chambered to .223/5.56 mm. Superior accuracy, wounding capacity, stopping power and range power has made this the preferred round of many Special Forces operators..

=====================
=====================

Have seen things at action ( Range ) 64gr OFB 5.56mm has ability to shred a Level 3 plate at 250ms ( shorter range was given based on availability ) ..

Also will add, 6.8mm so does 6.5mm are also useless against new generation of plates which are able to stop even 7.62 Nato ..

What has 6.8mm not being battle proven have anything to do with deploying it on a wide scale, what needs to be proven in order for it to be battle proven? it is a round, it obviously has more stopping power than the 6.5, 7.62 and 5.56 and better energies at impact. I am not saying the 5.56 is not lethal but it won't knock a armoured soldier dead, a well trained soldier during battle is pumped full of adrenaline and that means in many cases won't even feel the hit unless the hit is in a vital organs. more so during all these years, if anything is proven is that the 5.56 lacks true effective knock down power.

As far as 5.56 against armour, nice video, its pretty hopeless against modern plates at 50yrds.

 

[abingdonboy]

man actually the sanctioned ammo quantity is 700 per person.But they carry only less than 150 or 200 max ammo.Resst of the ammo will be in the cam oor unitss armoury.The men patroling will not be going with 700 ammo.I am prett sure about this cooz whenn chatting with an ITBP soldier he said that every personn is allotted about 700 bullets but they carry only 3/4 mags with them.And how the are going to carry 700 bulets with them ?It need 23 mags if iit is of AK or 35 mags if it is of 5.56 INSAS.And the flak jacket could hold only 4 mags in pouches

Fair points mate but the ITBP isn't the IA.

Bro i agree with ur points even i was about to state that in normal patrol it is highly unlikely for a trooper to carry 700+ ammo.Even the us navy seal carry 8 magazine of 30 rounds which is 240 rounds as standard for mission.A quote from navy seal eyewitness account book "the last moment, still worried about this entire venture, I grabbed three extra magazines, which gave me a total of eleven, each holding thirty rounds. Eight was
standard, but there was something about Operation Redwing. It turned out everyone felt the same. We all took three extra magazines. "
This shows in normal condition it is unlikely for forces to carry 700+ round but my guess is that his uncle would have mentioned about their lrp which would usually be of more than 2 days and in such case he might be carrying extra ammo in his backpack or bag so that he would be self sustain for longer hours even in deep jungles or hills far away from their camp. You are right It is no where possible to carry such ammo in one flak jacket on normal patrol but my guess is he meant the LRP or own personal choice.

No you're both right, I meant to say that not all this ammo was carried in Magazines, he didn't give an exact figure but said most would be carried in their packs with a few spare fully-loaded mags and then about 6-7 on their person and one in the Rifle. And yes, this was for multi-day missions. He said when he was part of a districts QRT they would carry significantly less ammo as they had plenty of access to extra ammo- he said of the QRT's vehicles that were made up of a certain number of jeeps and trucks (I won't give specifics) that 1 truck would always be a supply truck with 1000s of rounds of ammo, explosives, medical provisions etc.

 

[abingdonboy]

man actually the sanctioned ammo quantity is 700 per person.But they carry only less than 150 or 200 max ammo.Resst of the ammo will be in the cam oor unitss armoury.The men patroling will not be going with 700 ammo.I am prett sure about this cooz whenn chatting with an ITBP soldier he said that every personn is allotted about 700 bullets but they carry only 3/4 mags with them.And how the are going to carry 700 bulets with them ?It need 23 mags if iit is of AK or 35 mags if it is of 5.56 INSAS.And the flak jacket could hold only 4 mags in pouches

FCC should be a separate attachment, with the ability to connect with this sight.




With due respect, 700+ rounds is in excess of 9 kilos of ammunition. That is a tall tale.

Para carry 40 kg weight and run for 40km almost 3-4 times in week. It is called 40-40 run.

Exactly sir, 9kg of weight is not much to these guys. He is by far the fittest man I know and the PARAs on the whole are a very tough/fit bunch of guys (he wasn't SF so but naturally they are also very fit).

 

[abingdonboy]

The only AR currently being made in RFI is INSAS. I am talking about what might be made in the future.

Why would the Tavor be made in India? Where is the demand? The ONLY way this would make sense would be if the entire IA adopted the Tavor as their standard-issue AR which doesn't look all that likely. NOTHING has been mentioned about this, could you please elaborate sir? Explain what you know.

 

[DivineHeretic]

@Abingdondoy,

The MCIWS will reduce logistics no doubt, but logistical issues is another matter. It will take some years after induction of the MCIWS for the logistical issues to be ironed out. And topmost on that list would be delivering wrong parts for wrong caliber.

And as far as digitizing stores is concerned,

the U.S. Department of Defense "has confirmed that it accidentally shipped some components of intercontinental ballistic missiles to Taiwan."-2008
Oops! U.S. sends wrong spare parts – for nuke missiles – to Taiwan - World Views

Six AGM-129 ACM cruise missiles, each loaded with a W80-1 variable yield nuclear warhead, were mistakenly loaded on a United States Air Force (USAF) B-52H heavy bomber at Minot and transported to Barksdale. The nuclear warheads in the missiles were supposed to have been removed before taking the missiles from their storage bunker. The missiles with the nuclear warheads were not reported missing and remained mounted to the aircraft at both Minot and Barksdale for a period of 36 hours. During this period, the warheads were not protected by the various mandatory security precautions required for nuclear weapons.

My point is not that we shouldn't induct the gun because of these issues, but merely to preempt such situations through better awareness.
And yes, some units have received 7.62x51 rounds instead of 7.62x39, as well as 7.62x51 in place of 7.62x54 in the IA. These are minor irritants, one which can never be completely removed till a human element is present in the loop.

 

[DivineHeretic]

double post

 

[DivineHeretic]

@Abingdondoy,

The MCIWS will reduce logistics no doubt, but logistical issues is another matter. It will take some years after induction of the MCIWS for the logistical issues to be ironed out. And topmost on that list would be delivering wrong parts for wrong caliber.

And as far as digitizing stores is concerned,

the U.S. Department of Defense "has confirmed that it accidentally shipped some components of intercontinental ballistic missiles to Taiwan."-2008
Oops! U.S. sends wrong spare parts – for nuke missiles – to Taiwan - World Views

Six AGM-129 ACM cruise missiles, each loaded with a W80-1 variable yield nuclear warhead, were mistakenly loaded on a United States Air Force (USAF) B-52H heavy bomber at Minot and transported to Barksdale. The nuclear warheads in the missiles were supposed to have been removed before taking the missiles from their storage bunker. The missiles with the nuclear warheads were not reported missing and remained mounted to the aircraft at both Minot and Barksdale for a period of 36 hours. During this period, the warheads were not protected by the various mandatory security precautions required for nuclear weapons.

My point is not that we shouldn't induct the gun because of these issues, but merely to preempt such situations through better awareness.
And yes, some units have received 7.62x51 rounds instead of 7.62x39, as well as 7.62x51 in place of 7.62x54 in the IA. These are minor irritants, one which can never be completely removed till a human element is present in the loop.

 

[pmaitra]

Why would the Tavor be made in India?

Don't know. I also don't know why it would not be made in India. I did not say that the Tavor will be made in RFI. Please read my original comment again.

Where is the demand?

Don't have the figures.

The ONLY way this would make sense would be if the entire IA adopted the Tavor as their standard-issue AR which doesn't look all that likely. NOTHING has been mentioned about this, could you please elaborate sir?

RFI, or for that matter any other ordnance factory, is not meant to exclusively produce standard issue rifles.

It is not true that nothing has been reported.

Here is the link: Ordnance Factory Board

By Tavor, what I meant is this:

Zittara – Indian locally produced version of the MTAR-21 Micro Tavor modified to use the local 5.56×30mm MINSAS cartridge manufactured by the Ordnance Factories Board.

Source: IMI Tavor TAR-21 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Explain what you know.

I don't have any explanation. I just stated what I came to know.

 

[abingdonboy]

man actually the sanctioned ammo quantity is 700 per person.But they carry only less than 150 or 200 max ammo.Resst of the ammo will be in the cam oor unitss armoury.The men patroling will not be going with 700 ammo.I am prett sure about this cooz whenn chatting with an ITBP soldier he said that every personn is allotted about 700 bullets but they carry only 3/4 mags with them.And how the are going to carry 700 bulets with them ?It need 23 mags if iit is of AK or 35 mags if it is of 5.56 INSAS.And the flak jacket could hold only 4 mags in pouches

FCC should be a separate attachment, with the ability to connect with this sight.




With due respect, 700+ rounds is in excess of 9 kilos of ammunition. That is a tall tale.

Don't know. I also don't know why it would not be made in India. I did not say that the Tavor will be made in RFI. Please read my original comment again.


Don't have the figures.


RFI, or for that matter any other ordnance factory, is not meant to exclusively produce standard issue rifles.

It is not true that nothing has been reported.

Here is the link: Ordnance Factory Board

By Tavor, what I meant is this:

Source: IMI Tavor TAR-21 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


I don't have any explanation. I just stated what I came to know.

Well if you're talking about the Zittara/MTAR (which it looks like you are) then I don't think this has much to do with the Indian Military as all 3 SFs have the TAR/CTAR-21s not the MTAR and the those who do use the MTAR/X-95 in India (CAPFs and certain state police forces) have been receiving orders for a while now. Perhaps IWI sees a huge market on the Law Enforcement front in India i.e. other CAPFs/State PDs in India going for the MTAR/X-95 which I guess could be true....


Then again we've been hearing about OFB making the Zittara/MTAR in India for a LONG time and this hasn't taken place to date for some inexplicable reason(s). I hope, if this is true, the OFB hasn't missed the majority of the orders for the MTAR (10,000s have already gone out from Israel).

@Kunal Biswas thoughts sir?

 

[abingdonboy]

@Abingdondoy,

The MCIWS will reduce logistics no doubt, but logistical issues is another matter. It will take some years after induction of the MCIWS for the logistical issues to be ironed out. And topmost on that list would be delivering wrong parts for wrong caliber.

And as far as digitizing stores is concerned,

the U.S. Department of Defense "has confirmed that it accidentally shipped some components of intercontinental ballistic missiles to Taiwan."-2008
Oops! U.S. sends wrong spare parts – for nuke missiles – to Taiwan - World Views

Six AGM-129 ACM cruise missiles, each loaded with a W80-1 variable yield nuclear warhead, were mistakenly loaded on a United States Air Force (USAF) B-52H heavy bomber at Minot and transported to Barksdale. The nuclear warheads in the missiles were supposed to have been removed before taking the missiles from their storage bunker. The missiles with the nuclear warheads were not reported missing and remained mounted to the aircraft at both Minot and Barksdale for a period of 36 hours. During this period, the warheads were not protected by the various mandatory security precautions required for nuclear weapons.

My point is not that we shouldn't induct the gun because of these issues, but merely to preempt such situations through better awareness.
And yes, some units have received 7.62x51 rounds instead of 7.62x39, as well as 7.62x51 in place of 7.62x54 in the IA. These are minor irritants, one which can never be completely removed till a human element is present in the loop.

A fair argument sir. It's all true and surely pre-emption is the best thing to do which I hope/suspect the IA will be aware of.

 

[Shaitan]

 

[pmaitra]

. . .

Not sure whether the use of the term "obsolete" is reasonable.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

OFB can make its own version of TAR-21, But that would upset IWI as it would breach copy write design material

IWI so does Russian were reluctant to provide TOT for rifles to OFB, They wanted OFB to do screwdriver work which is not possiable ..

Resulted in cancellation of the programs ( OFB Zittara & Russian AK103 ) ..

Well if you're talking about the Zittara/MTAR (which it looks like you are) then I don't think this has much to do with the Indian Military as all 3 SFs have the TAR/CTAR-21s not the MTAR and the those who do use the MTAR/X-95 in India (CAPFs and certain state police forces) have been receiving orders for a while now. Perhaps IWI sees a huge market on the Law Enforcement front in India i.e. other CAPFs/State PDs in India going for the MTAR/X-95 which I guess could be true....


Then again we've been hearing about OFB making the Zittara/MTAR in India for a LONG time and this hasn't taken place to date for some inexplicable reason(s). I hope, if this is true, the OFB hasn't missed the majority of the orders for the MTAR (10,000s have already gone out from Israel).

@Kunal Biswas thoughts sir?

===================
===================

Scam in large and going, nothing to add more ..

Not sure whether the use of the term "obsolete" is reasonable.

 

[shuvo@y2k10]

the whole point of issuing the regular army soldiers who are supposed to fight a conventional battle with low stopping power rounds like 5.56*45 so the enemy soldier is injured which takes other enemy soldiers of the battle to evacuate him and issuing 7.62*39 rounds with more stopping power to rashtriya rifles to engage with terrorist in kashmir is flawed in my opinion.for instance in all the wars with pakistan we have fought since independence the indian infantry soldier had to face both the regular paki soldier and when they fled the battlefield the fight is carried on by mujahideen/militia/terrorist etc-so even in a conventional war there are varying scenario and in order to adapt to these varying scenario's this MCIWS seems to be the ideal choice for soldier.also i would like to differ in my opinion with some other members here who are saying that 5.56 should go to infantry,and 7.62 to rashtriya rifles and 6.8 to special forces.you see i agree with the fact that ofb 5.56 is battle proven and succesful but this new 6.8mm round whose ballistic performances and stopping are unknown at this point of time is developed by drdo in consultation with the army and for it to be battle tested and succesful it should be given a chance.

 

[Shaitan]

 

[Twinblade]

the whole point of issuing the regular army soldiers who are supposed to fight a conventional battle with low stopping power rounds like 5.56*45 so the enemy soldier is injured which takes other enemy soldiers of the battle to evacuate him

That argument was a made up argument when detractors of the 5.56 round said that the survival rate with it was higher than 7.62x51. The only reason 5.56 was introduced was lower weight and volume of the round and fairly good ballistic properties at long ranges. Soldiers could carry much more ammunition at the same load and volume compared to 7.62 NATO.

 

[pmaitra]

the whole point of issuing the regular army soldiers who are supposed to fight a conventional battle with low stopping power rounds like 5.56*45 so the enemy soldier is injured which takes other enemy soldiers of the battle to evacuate him

That argument was a made up argument when detractors of the 5.56 round said that the survival rate with it was higher than 7.62x51. The only reason 5.56 was introduced was lower weight and volume of the round and fairly good ballistic properties at long ranges. Soldiers could carry much more ammunition at the same load and volume compared to 7.62 NATO.

I will add another perspective, to counter that "low" stopping power argument.

First of all, at distances of about 300 m, the 5.56 mm NATO* would cause so much internal tissue damage, that an injury is likely to be terminal, and likely too cause inevitable death.

Notice the asterix (*) next to "NATO?" Here's the catch. US military rounds are underpowered compared to US civilian rounds. Indian 5.56 mm rounds, while dimensionally same as 5.56 mm NATO rounds, are more powerful, and have a straighter, or less parabolic trajectory. While it is true that the US army did encounter complains about the loss of power of their 5.56 mm round at long distances during their campaign in Afghanistan, the Indian Army seems to have pulled off the Kargil War without much ado, as far as its 5.56 mm rounds are concerned. This issue should not be confused with the INSAS rifle's initial glitches.

So, while it is true that the 7.62 mm (x39 or x51) carries a lot of punch, the former has a more parabolic trajectory and does underperform the INSAS 5.56 mm rounds, but does seem to outperform the 5.56 mm NATO rounds; and the latter, while being very powerful, is completely unsuitable as a SAW round, while being suitable as an LMG round, and thus, makes introduction of the 5.56 mm round reasonable, as it can be used in the battle rifle (INSAS AR semi auto or triple burst), as a SAW (INSAS AR full auto), or SAW/LMG (INSAS LMG), thus reducing logistics, apart from weight.

I still believe that the decision to go for the 5.56 mm more powerful rounds was a good decision.

N.B.: I do not know whether the Indian 5.56 mm rounds are more powerful than US civilian rounds.

 

[Twinblade]

Para carry 40 kg weight and run for 40km almost 3-4 times in week. It is called 40-40 run.

700 rounds = 35 cartons of ammunition = 8250 cc/ 8.25 liters of volume. That is frankly, too much.

I will add another perspective, to counter that "low" stopping power argument.

First of all, at distances of about 300 m, the 5.56 mm NATO* would cause so much internal tissue damage, that an injury is likely to be terminal, and likely too cause inevitable death.

The trouble is there are far too many types of NATO ammunition. There is M193, SS109/M855 and many others, all with different bullet weight and velocities all fired from a gazillion different barrel lengths. Velocity too low, the bullet will not tumble, if it hits thinner part of the body/velocity too high, the bullet passes through clean without tumble. The 5.56 INSAS ammunition has traded some of it's velocity for added weight which improves fatality at longer ranges, but at shorter ranges it too will pass through clean.

Indian 5.56 mm rounds, while dimensionally same as 5.56 mm NATO rounds,

Actuallly, 5.56 INSAS cartridge is 3 mm longer.

N.B.: I do not know whether the Indian 5.56 mm rounds are more powerful than US civilian rounds.

5.56 INSAS is 64 grain, but has a lower velocity at around 890m/sec and lower barrel pressure. While it means lower kinetic energy, the bullet being heavier compared to M193 and SS109, loses lesser velocity at higher range, hence a flatter trajectory. Today the INSAS cartridge does not provide much advantage as there are several heavy 5.56 rounds, some as heavy as up to 77 grains. The cost advantage of these heavier rounds is yet to be seen.