Small arms of India

[Chinmoy]

INSAS bullet not meant to kill enemy. It is made with purpose to injure enemy. So its doing its job.

Absolutely. Its not only about INSAS, its about the 5.56 round. The whole idea behind the round is to decapitate enemy rather then killing him. But due to changing war scenario in India, I do think that 5.56 should be employed in CQB, where it would be more effective, instead of COIN.

 

[Chinmoy]

also, a major grouse in using the 5.56 round was that it was meant to incapacitate the enemy soldier, who would then be assisted by his fellow soldiers hence draining the enemy manpower. the reason why it's not so effective against terrorists is that they don't give a fuck if their buddy is wounded. they're there to get killed (hopefully taking out a few good guys in th process). that's where the 7.62 round is much more powerful and deadly.

the 5.56 rounds of m4 and ak74 are extremely lethal (m4's rounds split up inside the body and tear up much more, while the ak's bullet tumbles once it enters the flesh), but the question of stopping power still remains i guess. the 7.62 packs a greater punch in any case.

maybe what we need is the 6.5 round. i read somewhere that it carrier the same punch of the 7.62 while still being light enough. Koi practical usage wala ho to kripya prakaash daale ispe.

7.62 does pack a more lethal punch then 5.56, but the problem is with its size which IA or Indian Paramilitary does use. IA/IPM does use AK ARs with 7.62x39mm whereas in case of INSAS they are using 5.56x45mm. Now diameter wise 7.62 is a larger round then 5.56, but at the same time its a shorter bullet at 39mm then INSAS which is 45mm. Does AK round is more stubbier and its size makes it more compact heavy then the round used by INSAS. Along with it, the muzzle velocity of INSAS is greater then AK. Means the round fired by INSAS would have a longer flight path then that of an AK round and as a result INSAS does have an extended range then AK.

We could compare the scenario with that of throwing a bigger and heavier cricket ball and shooting a lighter marble with catapult on a glass pane. The cricket ball will crash the pane whereas the marble when shot from a catapult will leave a clean hole in it. Now one simple way to compensate this damaging effect is to design the 5.56 round with a stub nose. This will slow the bullet in its flight and would have the same smashing and tumbling effect like those of ACP or 7.62 round. But then the problem would be of range which will decrease incrementally because of drag. I think for range as well as effect, OFB should look with something intermediary like 6.5mm Grendel round.

 

[The Last Stand]

I must disagree with your statements on the 5.56's power.

AFAIK, not only was the 5.56 TOO effective when it was released, because it was a light round and the hollow point fragmented like crazy, it had very good stopping power, because of JUST how painful it was.

They actually banned those type of rounds on humanitarian grounds and made FMJ mandatory on all military rounds instead of HP or others.

In current context, yes, 5.56 lacks stopping power against drug-addled terrorists. 7.62 is more effective because how much more energy it carries not because it is better designed. And yes, any soldier would prefer a 7.62 over a 5.56 in such situations.

 

[Chinmoy]

I must disagree with your statements on the 5.56's power.

AFAIK, not only was the 5.56 TOO effective when it was released, because it was a light round and the hollow point fragmented like crazy, it had very good stopping power, because of JUST how painful it was.

They actually banned those type of rounds on humanitarian grounds and made FMJ mandatory on all military rounds instead of HP or others.

In current context, yes, 5.56 lacks stopping power against drug-addled terrorists. 7.62 is more effective because how much more energy it carries not because it is better designed. And yes, any soldier would prefer a 7.62 over a 5.56 in such situations.

More then the rounds I am comparing the platforms where it is used. 7.62 is no doubt a powerful round then 5.56, but when firing from an AK, which does have a lower muzzle velocity then INSAS, where does this power comes from? Obviously its size. 5.56 doesn't gets fragmented, not at least when it punctures human tissue. But yeah, in heat of battle and all those adrenalin rush, drugs or no drugs, the effect would be same unless you get any vital hit.
When fired from an INSAS, 5.56 does have more K.E the a 7.62 fired from AK-47. But due to the size, 7.62 does have more P.E in a sense.

 

[kr9]

It is true that 5.56mm does fragment and create cavitation inside tissue. However, the bullet must hit the right kind of tissue (with the optimum density) & at a certain angle for it to behave with the above mentioned ballistic performance. And this gets difficult at longer ranges.

Also, the huge bullet drop due to drag and loss of velocity is high for the 7.62x39mm. - which is not the same as 7.62x51mm (which I wholly support).

I did some digging and found this info about different calibers. (see table):

Any thoughts??

I think that the 6.8 could be a winner, but I am truly impressed with the 7.62x51mm. Pity it is difficult to control in automatic fire.


Also, if interested, you can read a comparison report between 6.8mm and the 5.56mm here:
http://loadoutroom.com/4053/5-56mm-vs-6-8mm-you-decide/

 

[The Last Stand]

7.62 meant here is the NATO round, 7.62x51.

Powerful, decent range, and quite reliable.

It is just not a great round for assault rifles with high rate of fire because of recoil.

 

[The Last Stand]

I actually don't have the time right now, but I can dig out reports from Vietnam, where it was documented just how horrific 5.56 HP wounds were.

Hollow point is extremely bad for health.

Full Metal Jacket rounds as used today do not fragment like Hollow point.

They are used in war because they are not as painful, nor do they tear through internal organs when fragmenting and cause haemorrhage.

And yes, 7.62 is a very good round.

I too believe intermediates are the future, and it is only a matter of time before intermediate rounds with impressive performance become as reliable and as cost-effective as the in-service 5.56/7,62 x 39 rounds.

 

[Chinmoy]

It is true that 5.56mm does fragment and create cavitation inside tissue. However, the bullet must hit the right kind of tissue (with the optimum density) & at a certain angle for it to behave with the above mentioned ballistic performance. And this gets difficult at longer ranges.

Also, the huge bullet drop due to drag and loss of velocity is high for the 7.62x39mm. - which is not the same as 7.62x51mm (which I wholly support).

I did some digging and found this info about different calibers. (see table):
View attachment 7097

Any thoughts??

I think that the 6.8 could be a winner, but I am truly impressed with the 7.62x51mm. Pity it is difficult to control in automatic fire.


Also, if interested, you can read a comparison report between 6.8mm and the 5.56mm here:
http://loadoutroom.com/4053/5-56mm-vs-6-8mm-you-decide/

One more interesting and informative read about 5.56, 6.8 mm cartridge. Really loved it....

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2015/04/04/not-so-special-a-critical-view-of-the-6-8mm-spc/

 

[The Last Stand]

One more interesting and informative read about 5.56, 6.8 mm cartridge. Really loved it....

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2015/04/04/not-so-special-a-critical-view-of-the-6-8mm-spc/

I think personally that there is very much a reason why most militaries remain with the 5.56, and this article makes a very interesting case.

I'll have to go through it again once to understand some of that.

 

[delta]

i dont think the armies of the world would be against the 5.56 because they were horrified by its lethality. it's not exactly the agent orange of bullets and if anything, theyd be more than happy to continue with the round. in any case, i have read the accounts of infantry preferring the 7.62 over the 5.56 because of its raw stopping power.

i reiterate - the 5.56 is an excellent round to be used against infantry, but not so much against crazed terrorists. one wants to live and keep on fighting, while the other is usually happy to die for his cause.

still, good arguments on both the sides nonetheless. one of the few threads where i really liked the quality of discussion

 

[guru-dutt]

It is true that 5.56mm does fragment and create cavitation inside tissue. However, the bullet must hit the right kind of tissue (with the optimum density) & at a certain angle for it to behave with the above mentioned ballistic performance. And this gets difficult at longer ranges.

Also, the huge bullet drop due to drag and loss of velocity is high for the 7.62x39mm. - which is not the same as 7.62x51mm (which I wholly support).

I did some digging and found this info about different calibers. (see table):
View attachment 7097

Any thoughts??

I think that the 6.8 could be a winner, but I am truly impressed with the 7.62x51mm. Pity it is difficult to control in automatic fire.


Also, if interested, you can read a comparison report between 6.8mm and the 5.56mm here:
http://loadoutroom.com/4053/5-56mm-vs-6-8mm-you-decide/

6.8X43mm grendel ammo is the future but i dont think it will be standard like NATO5.56mm till say at least end of this decade even for say nations like USA, UK, France,Germany, Japan , Russia, Israel so just forget what we might do

as for indian army we have huge stock piles of 5.56X45mm ammo which cant be changed to even 6.8X45mm to save costs

so 5.56X45mm ammo will still be used by Indian armed forces for at least couple of decades

 

[EliteFoxtrot]

Its quite hard to replace 5.56mm with 6.8mm or it is nearly impossible till 2020i guess, to adopt those rounds first we have to induct MCIWS in massive number and deploy in hostile area to check whether it is compatible there or not.

 

[The Last Stand]

i dont think the armies of the world would be against the 5.56 because they were horrified by its lethality. it's not exactly the agent orange of bullets and if anything, theyd be more than happy to continue with the round. in any case, i have read the accounts of infantry preferring the 7.62 over the 5.56 because of its raw stopping power.

i reiterate - the 5.56 is an excellent round to be used against infantry, but not so much against crazed terrorists. one wants to live and keep on fighting, while the other is usually happy to die for his cause.

still, good arguments on both the sides nonetheless. one of the few threads where i really liked the quality of discussion

I must contradict myself, I was quoting some old articles which were apparently on 5.56 JHP lethality and I couldn't find them today ( will keep trying).

But interesting reads on Hollow points.

http://www.thegunzone.com/hague.html

"The Contracting Parties agree to abstain from the use of bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core, or is pierced with incisions."

Basically, no hollow point or soft-cored ammunition. So FMJ is the preferred military standard, while HP/JHP may be used in law-enforcement AFAIK.

http://whskee.blogspot.in/2012/02/lethality-of-556mm.html

From apparently a veteran, yes, I will find something more trustworthy later.

"Back in the early M16 days, we were not in standard with the NATO SS109 round. We were using the 55-grain M193 round. It was extremely effective on fleshy targets such as VC Guerrillas. So much so that it was being called inhumane. What made the round so effective was the high muzzle velocity (3,100fps) and the way the bullet traveled. The round wobbled slightly, and on impact, it almost immediatly would yaw (tumble). The yaw combined with a high velocity would cause the bullet to fragment violently in the target, causing severe trauma."

Sort of what I had known earlier.

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/20...gthebull410-5-56-ball-ammo-federal-55gr-m193/

A ballistic gelatin test of the M193 with a 16" barrel, but still you can see how that thing fragments. Not what anyone would want to be hit with. (OUCH)

I'm going through two more articles, and I'll add on to this with more details soon™ (means when I get the time, and I'm lazy)

 

[kr9]

I must contradict myself, I was quoting some old articles which were apparently on 5.56 JHP lethality and I couldn't find them today ( will keep trying).

But interesting reads on Hollow points.

http://www.thegunzone.com/hague.html

"The Contracting Parties agree to abstain from the use of bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core, or is pierced with incisions."

Basically, no hollow point or soft-cored ammunition. So FMJ is the preferred military standard, while HP/JHP may be used in law-enforcement AFAIK.

http://whskee.blogspot.in/2012/02/lethality-of-556mm.html

From apparently a veteran, yes, I will find something more trustworthy later.

"Back in the early M16 days, we were not in standard with the NATO SS109 round. We were using the 55-grain M193 round. It was extremely effective on fleshy targets such as VC Guerrillas. So much so that it was being called inhumane. What made the round so effective was the high muzzle velocity (3,100fps) and the way the bullet traveled. The round wobbled slightly, and on impact, it almost immediatly would yaw (tumble). The yaw combined with a high velocity would cause the bullet to fragment violently in the target, causing severe trauma."

Sort of what I had known earlier.

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/20...gthebull410-5-56-ball-ammo-federal-55gr-m193/

A ballistic gelatin test of the M193 with a 16" barrel, but still you can see how that thing fragments. Not what anyone would want to be hit with. (OUCH)

I'm going through two more articles, and I'll add on to this with more details soon™ (means when I get the time, and I'm lazy)

I will admit 5.56 JHPs are more lethal than 5.56 FMJs (JHPs will beat FMJs any day when it comes to tissue damage).
But JHPs will prove ineffective against body armour. And since its use is not permitted in military rifles, and because the 6.8mm round is still some time away, we are stuck with OFB 5.56mm FMJs - hence my opinion that we need to modify our FALs to supplement our INSAS.

 

[The Last Stand]

I will admit 5.56 JHPs are more lethal than 5.56 FMJs (JHPs will beat FMJs any day when it comes to tissue damage).
But JHPs will prove ineffective against body armour. And since its use is not permitted in military rifles, and because the 6.8mm round is still some time away, we are stuck with OFB 5.56mm FMJs - hence my opinion that we need to modify our FALs to supplement our INSAS.

Well, the general 5.56 ball compared with the high rate of fire and high ammunition loads soldiers can carry is what made the 5.56 so popular with militaries around the world.

FAL as a support weapon has low rate of fire and is quite heavy, and so is 7.62 ammunition.

The fact remains such measures should be at best TEMPORARY.

As a full auto 7.62 weapon, AFAIK the SCAR-H remains unmatched, and I suppose Indian armed forces may be interested.

We have PSG-1s (semi-auto, and quite accurate for that purpose) and SP66 (More accurate, but bolt action) chambered in 7.62 in service and definitely the Dragunov with 7,62x54R ammunition as DMRs.

I do understand what you are getting at, though.

 

[hardip]

Indian army need...
5.56 Rifle..
450 meter 3.5 kg wight.. 700-800 rpm

6.8 rifle..
500 meter 4 kg weight..750rpm

7.62 rifle.
500-600 meter ..650rpm

Saw.. 5.56 like Rpd/negev/m249/MG4

lmg..7.62 M240/pkm/Mg7/MG121

AGL 40mm..
Pistol Grenade launcher..with Airburst capabelites..

....
sniper.. like m107.. 12.7/14.3mm
.. than our soldiers kik Pakistani terrorist's ass without any causality..

jai hind

 

[Chinmoy]

I am a great fan of COD series. Recently came across this vid in you tube and it did really made me proud

 

[hardip]

INDIAN ARMY THINK ABOUT THIS CHANGES...


Gilboa Snake assault rifle by GILBOA ISRAEL



The Gilboa Snake assault rifle was developed by Israeli
company Silver Shadow. Originally conceived by Amos
Golan, CEO of the company and designer of the famous
Cornershot system. Gilboa Snake rifle was designed
along the rather old concept of “salvo” fire. This concept,
previously developed and tested in USA under SPIW
program in 1950s and 60s, called for weapon that fires
several bullets at the same time or in very quick bursts, to
increase hit probability and provide faster target
incapacitation per single “observe – aim – pull the
trigger” cycle.

Several experimental multi-barreled automatic rifles were
developed and tested in USA and elsewhere, but the
Gilboa Snake seems to be the world’s first multi-barreled
salvo-type assault rifle to achieve production status.
The basic select-fire Gilboa Snake assault rifle is,
obviously, intended for military and law enforcement
Special Forces; however, Silver Shadow also designed a
“civilian-legal” version of the Snake rifle, which has two
triggers side-by-side, each controlling its own barrel, and
each capable only of semi-automatic fire.

The Gilboa Snake assault rifle has two barrels, mounted
side by side in a single receiver, made of aluminum alloy.
In select-fire version, both barrels are connected to a
single gas block with manual gas regulator. Single short-
stroke gas piston runs above and between the barrels, to
simultaneously and synchronously cycle two bolt carriers
with M16-type rotating bolts. In “civilian” version each
barrel is equipped with its own independent gas block and
piston.
In civilian mode, bolts are designed to eject spent cases
to the side.

Each bolt is designed to eject spent cases to the side, so
rifle ejects to the right and to the left through two
symmetrically located ejection windows. Military version
of the Gilboa Snake rifle has single trigger and three
position safety / fire selector, which allows for single
“double taps” (one shot from each barrel simultaneously
per single trigger pull), and for full automatic fire (also
simultaneously from each barrel). Ammunition is fed from
two M16-type magazines, independently inserted into
twin magazine housing below the rifle.

The Gilboa Snake rifle is equipped with proprietary return
springs system, located inside the upper receiver above
the bolt carriers, so it can be equipped with detachable
and/or side-folding shoulder stocks of various designs.
Sights of various types are installed using a centrally
located Picatinny rail that runs above the receiver.
Additional accessories such as tactical lights, lasers and
foregrips can be attached to the 3-rail handguard.
The Gilboa Snake assault rifle could be a great addition to
the world market with it’s innovative design and
interesting concept. I’m looking forward to see it in
action.


TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION OF GILBOA
SNAKE ASSAULT RIFLE
Caliber 5.56×45 NATO / .223 Rem
Action Gas operated
Length, mm 495 / 800
Barrel length, mm 241
Weight, kg 4.27
Rate of fire, rounds/minute ?
Magazine capacity, rounds 2 x 30

 

[hardip]

few more....
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.




about this Israeli Gun . Think.. nd consider A Question That How Advance Isreali Gun Technology Than India???

I know Answer is in Minimum *** (3) figure..

 

[hardip]

Officially dubbed the Gilboa Snake by
Israeli manufacturer Silver Shadow, it's more of a Personal
Defense Weapon (PDW)-type Short-Barreled Rifle (SBR). The
Snake is most notable for its twin 9.5-inch barrels and large
matching compensators with jagged standoff teeth, but it
should be noted that it's also piston-driven."