INSAS Indian Small Arms System

[ppgj]

Though I am using Singh's post for reply, the issues I am raising is general having observed some of the posts.

I have graduated from the .303 to 7.62 SLR to AK 47 and then onto the INSAS. I have no complaints against any of the weapons. Even as a senior officer, I still had to pass the Annual Range Classification and so the rank has nothing to do with firing weapons.

I learn that there is a thought that the INSAS is too fragile and has stoppages. Well, yes, INSAS is fragile compared to the AKs. Stoppages occur due to defective ammunition and poor maintenance. It can happen to any weapon. However, if there is a grouse, it is because the jawans are comparing it the AKs which are relatively maintenance proof. The grouse is causative of a lazy mindset in my opinion. Further, jawans are rugged and so they empathise with anything that is rugged. There has been no complaints about the accuracy of the INSAS vs AK 47.

There is also a group that feels that 5.56 is not lethal. If it were not so, how come terrorists succumb to INSAS fire? And anyway, why don't they stand in front and face a INSAS shot and stay alive to tell the tale?

In my opinion, all this change of calibre hype is US military industry driven. If an Army has to change their weapons, imagine the profits reaped by the military industry!!

The British Army has a rifle that is 5.56 and has an effective range of 450m, so does INSAS. There is no requirement to fire beyond with a rifle since there is a plethora of weapons that are designed for longer distances. Accuracy at long distance is difficult to maintain and so long distance weapons are normally automatic in fire and so the hit probability increases. Now, if the rifle also is automatic and long distance, then by the time the enemy closes in or we close in, the ammunition will be expended. Then, the whole action will come to nought. That is why being able to hit at 300 yds is adequate and more so since the individual being fired at can be identified with the naked eye.

One could say the rifle could have a scope. True. But if you look through a scope, you are lost to the immediate combat environment! A rifleman has to be aware of the immediate combat environment.

The INSAS is perfectly fine in the CI environment as is AK 47. What makes it unfit? I hope someone will elaborate.

sir you hit the nail on the head. thanks.

 

[p2prada]

What makes it unfit? I hope someone will elaborate.

This is the same question even I asked. The Army is not clear on why the INSAS is to be replaced. Perhaps they are looking at newer technology.

 

[Rahul Singh]

I think problem is there with the age old mentality of some section of IA. I know some people even complain that INSAS doesn't have a full auto mode. What in hell they ask this question for, it was the IA who opted out of full auto mode citing ammo conservation as a reason. To those people who say in last 15 year ARDE didn't come up with any design in the field of IAR. Guys ARDE developed EXCALIBRE MK-1 then MK-2, 'Kalantak', 'Amogh', these riffles were radical improvement over basic INSAS. But IA seems so determined to buy "firangi banduk" that it didn't given any chance to them......Last but not least, a nation who strives to become a superpower of anykind, but can not make a IAR, would be biggest shame. IAR development is not that hell hard, all you need is better material and their development. Today, India is not that poor in this segment, and even if we are, then import that piece of technology. An active participation by user, use of expertise developed by Indian privet sector companies and little patience can solve this problem once and for all.

 

[ppgj]

I think problem is there with the age old mentality of some section of IA. I know some people even complain that INSAS doesn't have a full auto mode. What in hell they ask this question for, it was the IA who opted out of full auto mode citing ammo conservation as a reason. To those people who say in last 15 year ARDE didn't come up with any design in the field of IAR. Guys ARDE developed EXCALIBRE MK-1 then MK-2, 'Kalantak', 'Amogh', these riffles were radical improvement over basic INSAS. But IA seems so determined to buy "firangi banduk" that it didn't given any chance to them......Last but not least, a nation who strives to become a superpower of anykind but can not make a IAR would be biggest shame. IAR development is not that hell hard, all you need is better material and their development. Today India is not that poor in this segment even if we are then import that piece of technology. An active participation by user, use of expertise developed by Indian privet sector companies and little patience can solve this problem once and for all.

right rahul. here is video by our member sayar -


& now the OFB gives warranty for its products.

http://frontierindia.net/indian-ordnance-factories-now-offer-warranties

 

[Vinod2070]

It does appear that there is some bad blood between IA and DRDO. Both are not too trusting of each other and appear to work at cross purposes, often talking at each other through the media.

Agreed that IA needs the best, they should still work with DRDO/Indian industry to define their requirements as an active user and make sure that they get the product they need. This has worked well for the navy and even with IAF to an extent.

I think IA has burned their hands with DRDO in the past (where the didn't deliver what they committed) and are not too trusting of their capabilities.

In the national interest, both these organizations need to work together. We can't be importing things like rifles, tanks, artillery, rocket batteries et al forever. IA as the user should set a target of indigenization of major systems in the next decade and actively work to accomplish that with DRDO and the industry, rather than stifling indigenous efforts.

 

[Rahul Singh]

Frankly, i don't take DRDO holier than cow and while looking at the corruption within the army which at this point floating on the top doesn't guarantee that army is doodh ka dhula. Its the army,developer and MOD which will have to sit on table to discuss and pach up any differences. For that army will have to put their money in the programs with the penalty clause on delay and for less satisfactory work. A nation like Bharat with such a big aspiration just can't import pistols and IAR for a million strong army.

A ray of hope. If 3.5 KG is the bar then why not INSAS EXCALIBUR. It weights 3.81 KG without magazine. Use of lighter material can slice that extra weight. And if we don't have those materials, then import them simply.

 

[Rahul Singh]

Foreign IAR which can be contender of army's bid for new so-called advanced IAR.

G-36E- 3.6 Kg

XM8 - 2.659 Kg

AK-103 -3.4 Kg

SIG SG 550 - 4.5 kg

SAR 21- 3.82 kg

Galil ARM- 4 kg.

FN SCAR-l: Mark 16- 3.5 kg

ARX-160 assault rifle - 3 kg with 406 mm barre

*all weight without ammo and in basic configuration.

Source. Modern Firearms

 

[Rahul Singh]

Videos of mentioned IAR.

 

[sayareakd]

This is the same question even I asked. The Army is not clear on why the INSAS is to be replaced. Perhaps they are looking at newer technology.

yeah they PERHAPS want this

 

[Rahul Singh]

Well said Anup........

 

[Agantrope]

I dont know what newer technology means???
Still more than half of the russian forces using the Ak-47 and Ak-74 which are more than 6 and 3 decades old.

SIG SG 550 is 3 decade old tech and improved over the time.

i still dont find a valid reason for INSAS rejection ////////////////////

 

[Armand2REP]

I dont know what newer technology means???
Still more than half of the russian forces using the Ak-47 and Ak-74 which are more than 6 and 3 decades old.

Russians phased out the AK-47 in the seventies.

 

[Rahul Singh]

I still dont find a valid reason for INSAS rejection ////////////////////

Widely reported reasons for rejecting INSAS are following.

a. It doesn't kill instantly. Well, this is usual with every riffle which uses 5.56mm ammo. Redesigning the ammo can solve the problem.
b. It doesn't have full auto mode. Ask the army, why they insisted on only single and 3 shoot burst?
c. Weight. Non of the riffle in INSAS class weights lighter. Galil's IAR version, which replicates INSAS more than any, weights +4 kg.
d. Magazine is fragile and breaks in extreme cold of siachen. Well, who else in the world have a battlefield as inhospitable and harsh as siachen .
e. INSAS doesn't deepens our pocket. Well, i'm sorry, DRDO can give kick backs....

 

[notinlove]

Ok , too much hue and cry over DRDO and INSAS ,
The Title of the Report is grossly wrong , Insas is not being dumped , India has 1.4 million strong military and just about as much reserve forces and paramilitary forces not to mention police , many of which still use old and obsolete guns , i reckon the total requirement for guns in india is at about 3 million , and here are the details for the rifle delas that we are talking about here.

The biggest of the three deals to be inked is the project to buy 43,318 `close-quarter battle' (CQB) carbines off-the-shelf from abroad for around Rs 4,400 crore, which is to be followed by the indigenous manufacture of another 1,16,764 similar guns under transfer of technology.

Do you think such a small number is enough to replace insas , the insas replaced will go to paramilitary and police units which still operate obsolete stuff

and about DRDO , they are getting their chunk of the pie as well

Under the second Rs 2,183 crore project, the Ordnance Factory Board is to manufacture 2,18,320 advanced carbines based on the new 5.56-mm model developed indigenously.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...n-carbines-and-rifles/articleshow/4795865.cms

moreover the indigenous production of those foreign carbines will give OFB a capability boost in metallurgy and manufacturing process.

So why the fuss?

 

[gogbot]

Widely reported reasons for rejecting INSAS are following.

a. It doesn't kill instantly. Well, this is usual with every riffle which uses 5.56mm ammo. Redesigning the ammo can solve the problem.
b. It doesn't have full auto mode. Ask the army, why they insisted on only single and 3 shoot burst?
c. Weight. Non of the riffle in INSAS class weights lighter. Galil's IAR version, which replicates INSAS more than any, weights +4 kg.
d. Magazine is fragile and breaks in extreme cold of siachen. Well, who else in the world have a battlefield as inhospitable and harsh as siachen .
e. INSAS doesn't deepens our pocket. Well, i'm sorry, DRDO can give kick backs....

Any number of reasons why the IA high command does these thing.

Franky though i dont get the big problem,

INSAS 1 has served the country for over a decade. It was never the state of the weapon system to begin with, But it was ours and fulfilled our requirements for the most part, and it did so for a very long time.

Infantry weapons have changed in the past decade and its a perfect time for the Army to get a new state of the art system, during this highly opportune time.

As long as the new weapon is part of the F-Insas program, i see no issue with replacing the INSAS Mk-1

 

[Vinod2070]

The imported rifles are costing a million bucks each? 40 times the INSAS!

I am not sure why we can't make a top of the line rifle in a few years.

 

[Armand2REP]

I to do not understand what India is doing here. Much like the JLTV, this and the rifles are something India should be able to develop and produce with ease. India can build aircraft carriers but not rifles???

 

[Agantrope]

I to do not understand what India is doing here. Much like the JLTV, this and the rifles are something India should be able to develop and produce with ease. India can build aircraft carriers but not rifles???

To be precise IA is lured towards the western campaign that their rifles are best in the world than any thing. Also DRDO f***ed IA in crunch time. So payback time for IA towards DRDO

 

[sayareakd]

Any number of reasons why the IA high command does these thing.

Franky though i dont get the big problem,

INSAS 1 has served the country for over a decade. It was never the state of the weapon system to begin with, But it was ours and fulfilled our requirements for the most part, and it did so for a very long time.

Infantry weapons have changed in the past decade and its a perfect time for the Army to get a new state of the art system, during this highly opportune time.

As long as the new weapon is part of the F-Insas program, i see no issue with replacing the INSAS Mk-1

What state of the art weapon you are taking about ??? bullpup rifles

 

[sayareakd]

It was Indian ARmy which has rejected the INSAS bullpup rifles, if you guys want to talk about the fully automatic version, IA dont want that type of rifle, it only want rifle which can delieve three round bust. IA motto is one enemy one bullet.

now coming to the 5.56 ammo of the INSAS it is meant to injure our enemy so that more troops of the enemy will be kept engage to look after the enemy solider.