Small arms of India

Kunal Biswas

Member of the Year 2011
Ambassador
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
31,122
Likes
41,042
These parts are outsources from an Indian company which has links with FAB defense, They offer various upgrades to defense forces, Besides this MKU also have its own variety of upgrades for 1b1 as well as AKMs ..
 

singh100ful

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2016
Messages
102
Likes
74
Country flag
These parts are outsources from an Indian company which has links with FAB defense, They offer various upgrades to defense forces, Besides this MKU also have its own variety of upgrades for 1b1 as well as AKMs ..
Any pics available of the MKU upgrdes to 1B1
 

Jagdish58

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2014
Messages
796
Likes
644
Does Rastriya Rifles use Ghatak or TAR . Or it is just used by Central armed police force & state police???
 

Kunal Biswas

Member of the Year 2011
Ambassador
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
31,122
Likes
41,042
A lot of Norinco AKs captured and latter used by forces, Modification on these cause least paper work compare to issued rifles ..

IMO this is not Indian or Indian origin. The Rivet on the rifle look chinese origin to me. Possible this is a battlefield pickup?
 

Kunal Biswas

Member of the Year 2011
Ambassador
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
31,122
Likes
41,042
A lot of Norinco AKs captured and latter used by forces, Modification on these cause least paper work compare to issued rifles ..

IMO this is not Indian or Indian origin. The Rivet on the rifle look chinese origin to me. Possible this is a battlefield pickup?
 

sbm

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2011
Messages
406
Likes
228
Country flag
Kunal, you going to AI 2017? If so, can you ask at the OFB to get some clarity on what is being done with the 7.62 x 51mm Rifle? Ghatak or MCIWS basis? That's a question to anyone going. Thanks in advance.
 

sbm

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2011
Messages
406
Likes
228
Country flag
Thanks. These are the chances to find out something.
 

Kunal Biswas

Member of the Year 2011
Ambassador
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
31,122
Likes
41,042
The quantity is in sufficient numbers, PNS for LMGs is a must ..

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

IDRW is not a reliable source to quote from, Most of the news are opinions stated as facts ..

The weapon which will be imported is for SF and not regulars, At present MK1C is in its final phase of user trails ..

Same report has been published on multiple news portals today, that means date for RFP or tender is getting closer.

Even if it is true, it would take atleast a decade for complete replacement of more than a million Insas.
But the question is Kunal are even the 2nd gen PNS available in adequate numbers to Indian infantry. It seems that induction has not been universal yet.
 

deepak ghanvatkar

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2017
Messages
72
Likes
25
please read editorial
http://www.thestatesman.com/opinion/rifle-rejected-1488829113.html

Tuesday, 7 March, 201



Rifle rejected
  • Editorial

    March 7, 2017 | 02:09 AM
Since much of the equipment with the Indian military has been in service for over 20 years, it is a euphemism for officials to say that the INSAS rifle is being “retired”. More accurate would be the term “rejected”. Yet given the extreme sensitivity of the defence establishment, particularly when yet another bid at self-reliance has come unstuck, an authentic presentation of ground realities would amount to an embarrassing rap on the knuckles for the Defence Research & Development Organisation and the Indian Ordnance Factory Board.

Though some 200,000 units of the rifle and its variants ~ which with much unwarranted hype had been hailed as the “Indian Small Arms System”~ had been produced and issued to the troops, they had never found much favour with the soldiers. Alternatives were procured in limited numbers for use in specific operations until the recent realisation that the effectiveness and morale of the troops was being adversely impacted by their having to use a weapon in which they had little confidence. Right from the time the INSAS rifle was given its baptism of fire in Kargil (1999) came reports of malfunctioning on several counts, but these were sought to be explained away as “teething troubles”, and were never rectified to the satisfaction of the men whose lives depended on their basic weapon. Is it not ironic that a country which takes pride in producing world-class warships has failed to develop a standard rifle? That points to the DRDO being scientifically top-heavy, not adequately focused on meeting the requirements of the user.

It is unfortunate that though the shortcomings of the INSAS have never been a “military secret”, the red-tape involved in selecting a replacement has not been unraveled thus far. So while terrorists are using reliable, sophisticated weapons, the jawans are expected to counter them with inferior arms. The track-record of “probes” is not impressive, but surely there is a case for exposing those who failed the jawans by “covering-up” the deficiencies in the INSAS rifles? Simultaneously there is need to fast-track the replacement process, and since the “numbers” are considerable both public and private sector industrial units be tasked with producing whichever weapon (of imported design) is selected: competition will give the production exercise the “edge” that is missing from monopolistic ventures.

Then the “phasing out” must be expedited. How the INSAS “duds” will be disposed of is another tricky issue: unlike in the past, they cannot be “dumped” on the paramilitary and police. Today’s realities point to a blurring of the difference between military and police operations ~ often they function in tandem, as in J&K ~ and the men in khaki cannot be deemed “children of a lesser God”.
 

armyofhind

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2014
Messages
1,535
Likes
2,921
Country flag
please read editorial
http://www.thestatesman.com/opinion/rifle-rejected-1488829113.html

Tuesday, 7 March, 201



Rifle rejected
  • Editorial

    March 7, 2017 | 02:09 AM
Since much of the equipment with the Indian military has been in service for over 20 years, it is a euphemism for officials to say that the INSAS rifle is being “retired”. More accurate would be the term “rejected”. Yet given the extreme sensitivity of the defence establishment, particularly when yet another bid at self-reliance has come unstuck, an authentic presentation of ground realities would amount to an embarrassing rap on the knuckles for the Defence Research & Development Organisation and the Indian Ordnance Factory Board.

Though some 200,000 units of the rifle and its variants ~ which with much unwarranted hype had been hailed as the “Indian Small Arms System”~ had been produced and issued to the troops, they had never found much favour with the soldiers. Alternatives were procured in limited numbers for use in specific operations until the recent realisation that the effectiveness and morale of the troops was being adversely impacted by their having to use a weapon in which they had little confidence. Right from the time the INSAS rifle was given its baptism of fire in Kargil (1999) came reports of malfunctioning on several counts, but these were sought to be explained away as “teething troubles”, and were never rectified to the satisfaction of the men whose lives depended on their basic weapon. Is it not ironic that a country which takes pride in producing world-class warships has failed to develop a standard rifle? That points to the DRDO being scientifically top-heavy, not adequately focused on meeting the requirements of the user.

It is unfortunate that though the shortcomings of the INSAS have never been a “military secret”, the red-tape involved in selecting a replacement has not been unraveled thus far. So while terrorists are using reliable, sophisticated weapons, the jawans are expected to counter them with inferior arms. The track-record of “probes” is not impressive, but surely there is a case for exposing those who failed the jawans by “covering-up” the deficiencies in the INSAS rifles? Simultaneously there is need to fast-track the replacement process, and since the “numbers” are considerable both public and private sector industrial units be tasked with producing whichever weapon (of imported design) is selected: competition will give the production exercise the “edge” that is missing from monopolistic ventures.

Then the “phasing out” must be expedited. How the INSAS “duds” will be disposed of is another tricky issue: unlike in the past, they cannot be “dumped” on the paramilitary and police. Today’s realities point to a blurring of the difference between military and police operations ~ often they function in tandem, as in J&K ~ and the men in khaki cannot be deemed “children of a lesser God”.
Better to ask the opinion of men actually using the weapon in combat rather than believe the concocted opinions of some paper pusher editor of a bullshit newspaper.
Stories like these have appeared time and again to forward the narrative of peddling foreign arms to the forces.
 

Kunal Biswas

Member of the Year 2011
Ambassador
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
31,122
Likes
41,042
Please, Avoid posting these sort of news, there are plenty of similar reports which repeating similar words with spices, These sort of articles are broken in bits here at this very thread ..

Its not possible to reproduce same re butts over and over again for identical baseless bashing articles.

please read editorial
http://www.thestatesman.com/opinion/rifle-rejected-1488829113.html

Tuesday, 7 March, 201



Rifle rejected
  • Editorial

    March 7, 2017 | 02:09 AM
Since much of the equipment with the Indian military has been in service for over 20 years, it is a euphemism for officials to say that the INSAS rifle is being “retired”. More accurate would be the term “rejected”. Yet given the extreme sensitivity of the defence establishment, particularly when yet another bid at self-reliance has come unstuck, an authentic presentation of ground realities would amount to an embarrassing rap on the knuckles for the Defence Research & Development Organisation and the Indian Ordnance Factory Board.

Though some 200,000 units of the rifle and its variants ~ which with much unwarranted hype had been hailed as the “Indian Small Arms System”~ had been produced and issued to the troops, they had never found much favour with the soldiers. Alternatives were procured in limited numbers for use in specific operations until the recent realisation that the effectiveness and morale of the troops was being adversely impacted by their having to use a weapon in which they had little confidence. Right from the time the INSAS rifle was given its baptism of fire in Kargil (1999) came reports of malfunctioning on several counts, but these were sought to be explained away as “teething troubles”, and were never rectified to the satisfaction of the men whose lives depended on their basic weapon. Is it not ironic that a country which takes pride in producing world-class warships has failed to develop a standard rifle? That points to the DRDO being scientifically top-heavy, not adequately focused on meeting the requirements of the user.

It is unfortunate that though the shortcomings of the INSAS have never been a “military secret”, the red-tape involved in selecting a replacement has not been unraveled thus far. So while terrorists are using reliable, sophisticated weapons, the jawans are expected to counter them with inferior arms. The track-record of “probes” is not impressive, but surely there is a case for exposing those who failed the jawans by “covering-up” the deficiencies in the INSAS rifles? Simultaneously there is need to fast-track the replacement process, and since the “numbers” are considerable both public and private sector industrial units be tasked with producing whichever weapon (of imported design) is selected: competition will give the production exercise the “edge” that is missing from monopolistic ventures.

Then the “phasing out” must be expedited. How the INSAS “duds” will be disposed of is another tricky issue: unlike in the past, they cannot be “dumped” on the paramilitary and police. Today’s realities point to a blurring of the difference between military and police operations ~ often they function in tandem, as in J&K ~ and the men in khaki cannot be deemed “children of a lesser God”.
 

deepak ghanvatkar

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2017
Messages
72
Likes
25
Please, Avoid posting these sort of news, there are plenty of similar reports which repeating similar words with spices, These sort of articles are broken in bits here at this very thread ..

Its not possible to reproduce same re butts over and over again for identical baseless bashing articles.
Thanks, Kunal Biswasji, I will avoid posting articles.
My purpose is to make everyone know that professional writers are made to write opinion which are doctored by their masters....but the real meaning derived is that some foreign entity must have engaged the news paper to plant such stories.

armyofhind said:
Better to ask the opinion of men actually using the weapon in combat rather than believe the concocted opinions of some paper pusher editor of a bullshit newspaper.
Stories like these have appeared time and again to forward the narrative of peddling foreign arms to the forces.
I agree that a person who has used both weapons professionally is actually eligible to say but, sadly the editor's can reach more public and the whole purpose is to encourage people to write letters to the editors dis-agreeing with views.

Incorrect publication is not known to people who know then they may not oppose and public will take editor as correct forgetting he is writer not a professional user of gun...
 

bhramos

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2009
Messages
25,625
Likes
37,233
Country flag
@Kunal Biswas Off topic but.. is this Carl Gustav? or is she wrong handling for Photo-shoot? if Photo-shoot their would not be any mud in Gun barrel !



didnt know where to ask question, if wrong thread, you change the thread.. sorry....
 

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top