Should next-gen guns kill or wound? Army debates

[spikey360]

Army is required to kill. Their guns should kill. Showing generosity to the enemy is like signing your death warrant and that of those you want to protect.

 

[rockey 71]

1.In regular combat the smaller bullet will wound more often than kill. Similarly now soldiers carry grenades that wound (Arges) rather than kill (HE grenades). Two soldiers are needed to carry one wounded man to safety. So you have really written off three from the raging battle. Plus the logistics added.
2. However, in spl ops there will be no opportunity to kill twice. An injured enemy may pounce back. So you need the larger bullet to ensure a kill the first time.

 

[garg_bharat]

The bullet should kill. An injured or maimed soldier is worse than a dead soldier. The power is in the mind, not body.

We are dealing with ideology which are opposite of our own. We need to finish off the ideologues and the ideas pool.

This concept of injury is meaningless as an injured soldier will come back to the fight, and even otherwise, will prepare 100 soldier more.

So there is no point going for smaller bullets. Up size if you will.

 

[garg_bharat]

The 5.56mm bullet was adopted for better accuracy and greater range. Its penetration power should be greater, not less.

The most injury/deaths on the battlefield happen from bigger weapons like artillery and missiles. Bullets no longer are effective to push back an enemy.

 

[Bornubus]

1.In regular combat the smaller bullet will wound more often than kill. Similarly now soldiers carry grenades that wound (Arges) rather than kill (HE grenades). Two soldiers are needed to carry one wounded man to safety. So you have really written off three from the raging battle. Plus the logistics added.
2. However, in spl ops there will be no opportunity to kill twice. An injured enemy may pounce back. So you need the larger bullet to ensure a kill the first time.

BSF on Bangladesh border use 7.62 so that cattle thieves and Infiltrators are dead on the spot.

One such incident happened three days back and hundreds in the last few years resulted in killings of Bangladeshi thieves and Infiltrators.

However i don't know what bullet Myanmar military use to kill illegal Rohingya migrants.Must be 7.62

 

[Navnit Kundu]

Even M4 uses similar round of INSAS but M4 is full auto.

Only M 16A2 (3 round burst) used by USMC is similar to INSAS.

MCIWS will rectify all these anomalies and should be inducted ASAP.

BC yahan ek rifle develop karne man decade lag lag jate hain.

Well said. There is no need for the design to be indigenous just for the jidd of it. We should just issue global RFP, pick a gun which suits our needs, take a lifetime licence for it and start manufacturing as many as we want. What is more important is having a better design and sovereign control of weapons production during embargo, and getting a lifetime licence allows us to accomplish the same. We should only go for indigenous tech if indeed our design adds some new features which other guns don't have. There's no point having a desi gun just for the sake of pride, when its performance parameters are worse than other contemporary weapons. In fact, if we had selected AK47 instead of INSAS then this problem wouldn't have arisen in the first place. First OFB lobbied for 'kaam chalau' INSAS which was a mishmash of various other guns because we didn't have our own design, then they said that they will be ready with a new design within a decade, now more than a decade has passed but still no concrete results, just prototypes like Excalibur and Kalantak which hasn't even been cleared for mass production. How we survive as a nation is a mystery to me.

I saw in some other forum where people were bickering that Tejas doesn't have an Indian seat and uses an imported seat from the UK. What difference does it make? a seat is not critical tech, no one is ever going to face an embargo for a seat, and seats don't need replacement and spares so you can buy once and move on. Still people expect DRDO to start a separate branch for making seats. It will cost us more per seat considering the R&D and become another bloated department like our DRDO pesticide branch.

BSF on Bangladesh border use 7.62 so that cattle thieves and Infiltrators are dead on the spot.

One such incident happened three days back and hundreds in the last few years resulted in killings of Bangladeshi thieves and Infiltrators.

However i don't know what bullet Myanmar military use to kill illegal Rohingya migrants.Must be 7.62

Dayyyum! you're just dishing it out to him like, Seedi si baat na mirch masala, kehke rahega kehne wala...

 

[Bornubus]

Well said. There is no need for the design to be indigenous just for the jidd of it. We should just issue global RFP, pick a gun which suits our needs, take a lifetime licence for it and start manufacturing as many as we want. What is more important is having a better design and sovereign control of weapons production during embargo, and getting a lifetime licence allows us to accomplish the same. We should only go for indigenous tech if indeed our design adds some new features which other guns don't have. There's no point having a desi gun just for the sake of pride, when its performance parameters are worse than other contemporary weapons. In fact, if we had selected AK47 instead of INSAS then this problem wouldn't have arisen in the first place. First OFB lobbied for 'kaam chalau' INSAS which was a mishmash of various other guns because we didn't have our own design, then they said that they will be ready with a new design within a decade, now more than a decade has passed but still no concrete results, just prototypes like Excalibur and Kalantak which hasn't even been cleared for mass production. How we survive as a nation is a mystery to me.

I saw in some other forum where people were bickering that Tejas doesn't have an Indian seat and uses an imported seat from the UK. What difference does it make? a seat is not critical tech, no one is ever going to face an embargo for a seat, and seats don't need replacement and spares so you can buy once and move on. Still people expect DRDO to start a separate branch for making seats. It will cost us more per seat considering the R&D and become another bloated department like our DRDO pesticide branch.



Dayyyum! you're just dishing it out to him like, Seedi si baat na mirch masala, kehke rahega kehne wala...

Most probably Army will select desi MCIWS since it fulfill all the requirement in one package.

Only few countries have indigenously develop Multi calibre.

 

[Storm shadow]

Well 6.5 or 6.8 are ideal for Infantry/SF and COIN, they are only slightly heavier than the 5.56 and thus allow enough ammo to be carried. 5.56 is ideal for Police and law enforcement. .45 is ideal for CQB/SMG. 7.62*51 are ideal for paramiliary for static defenses (BSF/ITBP/SSB) with plenty of ammo lying around, they have the kill power. These same rounds are ideal for the infantry's squad snipers and .50 cals are ideal for platoon scout snipers.

The solution is to have various rounds for different units.

That really depends on what type of ammo you are talking about,bro.I mean,if we can standardize on something like Mk262 or Mk885A1 variants,then I don't see why it can not be made standard issue for the regular infantry.But yeah,the present SS109 is woefully underpowered for infantry use,that I must agree with.

 

[Storm shadow]

The best bet is to go in for a 5.56mm auto weapon

Yet the average infantryman is never really trained to use their personal weapons in full auto settings!!

with an effective range of 300m,

Why not restrict it to just 200 meter or better yet,just a hundred meter??

with a fairly high rate of fire

Yeah,so that in the heat of battles,the infantry men end up expending excessive amount of ammunition,there by either running out of their stock in the middle of a fire fight (ala Vietnam) or ending up with their rifles overheated and jammed (ala ill fated Royal Nepalese Army soldiers with their full auto INSAS variants) - either way,they would wind up dead.No thanks,they don't need that.The real life isn't COD kiddo,just grow up now.

 

[Storm shadow]

Well said. There is no need for the design to be indigenous just for the jidd of it. We should just issue global RFP, pick a gun which suits our needs, take a lifetime licence for it and start manufacturing as many as we want. What is more important is having a better design and sovereign control of weapons production during embargo, and getting a lifetime licence allows us to accomplish the same. We should only go for indigenous tech if indeed our design adds some new features which other guns don't have. There's no point having a desi gun just for the sake of pride, when its performance parameters are worse than other contemporary weapons. In fact, if we had selected AK47 instead of INSAS then this problem wouldn't have arisen in the first place. First OFB lobbied for 'kaam chalau' INSAS which was a mishmash of various other guns because we didn't have our own design, then they said that they will be ready with a new design within a decade, now more than a decade has passed but still no concrete results, just prototypes like Excalibur and Kalantak which hasn't even been cleared for mass production. How we survive as a nation is a mystery to me.

I saw in some other forum where people were bickering that Tejas doesn't have an Indian seat and uses an imported seat from the UK. What difference does it make? a seat is not critical tech, no one is ever going to face an embargo for a seat, and seats don't need replacement and spares so you can buy once and move on. Still people expect DRDO to start a separate branch for making seats. It will cost us more per seat considering the R&D and become another bloated department like our DRDO pesticide branch.

Another one thinks he's got all of it figured out,it's getting pure boring now.