INSAS Indian Small Arms System

[gogbot]

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

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.

Dont be so naive, bullpup is an old technology, which has its own advantages. It's technology of the 70's and 80's. I would hardly call a simple bullpup weapon state of the art.

21st century assault rifles tend to be refinements of innovations made in previous decades. For example Israel's IMI Tavor TAR-21 is a 21st-century assault rifle that continues earlier trends of design: it has a compact bullpup layout, uses the 5.56x45mm NATO cartridge, can be set up for left- or right- handed shooters, exists in several modular variants, is made of lightweight composite materials, and comes standard with a reflex sight. The United States funded development of a replacement for the M16 rifle, eventually leading to the XM8 rifle, an experimental 21st-century design. Based on the Heckler & Koch G36 it had similar features, but added electronics such as a laser sight, round counter, and integral infrared and visible lights. The XM8 was a modular design: the rifle could fulfill different roles by changing the parts. Weapons manufacturer Heckler and Koch has also created a redesigned M4 assault rifle. The new weapons, the HK416 (firing 5.56x45 NATO) and the HK417 (firing 7.62x51 NATO), have updated features, but are not completely different weapons platforms. They feature a piston (not gas-operated) action, Picatinny rails, a drop free magazine release, a bolt that is sealed from the action (reducing dirt, heat and chance of failure) and other additions.

Another trend of the 21st century is the combination of sophisticated electronics with modern rifle designs. The US spent millions on the Objective Individual Combat Weapon program, to create a more advanced combat rifle. The XM29 OICW rifle design was finalized in in the early 2000s- it featured an integrated laser rangefinder, thermal vision and night vision capabilities, and an integral smart grenade launcher. The project was cancelled in 2004, but the US's experimental XM29 rifle lead to other countries developing similar systems. France's PAPOP program is currently underway to create a computerized infantry weapon system. South Korea's prototype XK11 Korean New Rifle has a ballistics computer, a laser rangefinder, and a digital scope that provides the operator with combat data and is capable of night operation through thermal imaging.

If F-INSAS is anything as it is hyped to be,

Then the goal of making a state of the art weapons system for the solider, means

taking this large unwieldy, sofisticated and complicated weapon

Equipped with a laser range-finder as well as a ballistics computer, it allows the operator to engage in precision attacks against the target.

A computer scope is integrated to the gun, which in turn is linked to a goggle with digital display that can be used both during the day as well as night with thermal imaging, and inform the operator with various data such as target range.

Aside from being able to fire 20 to 30 rounds of standard 5.56 mm NATO munitions depending on the size of the magazine provided, there is a 20 mm air-burst grenade launcher that can hold six grenade rounds to be used to take out multiple targets.

Into a more compact and battlefield durable tool for the soldier.

1. Assault rifle (Multi-caliber)
2. Grenade launcher
3. Orientable screen
4. Camera
5. Laser designator and telemeter
6. Batteries and computer
7. Weapon selector

That would be a state of the art weapon system. Anything less will be obsolete by the time its inducted into a million+ strong force.

And also keep in mind.

Small arms technology including the assault rifle may be described as a mature technology. However, changes in battlefield realities can be expected to lead to technological changes. As weapons evolve, the delicate balance for assault rifle systems between power, weight, recoil and terminal effects will likely shift once again in an attempt to defeat body armor, to match the range of full-power cartridges, and to penetrate through windshields and thin-skinned vehicles while still producing good terminal effects. Possible future directions are armor piercing or saboted sub-caliber tungsten darts, more powerful cartridges, application of new composite materials such as carbon fiber or carbon nanotubes, and use of exotic metals such as titanium and scandium. As personal body armor technology improves, for example from the development of Magnetorheological fluid-based smart materials, assault rifle designs will be forced to adapt in order to remain effective. Changes in assault rifle technology may come from maturation of other fields - as camera technology becomes more advanced, cameras may be integrated into rifles. Much research and development has already been put into integration of rifles with advanced electronics.

The future of the assault rifle may not be entirely in the design of the firearm itself, but rather in the ammunition it fires. Reducing weight and cost being one of the original reasons for the development of the intermediate powered round and subsequently the assault rifle, that goal has been taken to a whole new level with the development of caseless ammunition which does away with the weight and cost of shell casings. Limitations of current technology prevent this idea from being successful but the concept is still being researched.

Any one looking for a modern cutting edge system will be looking for a lot more important features then just a bullpup design

For example.
The modular design

Our entire INSAS line does not even compare. For that matter so far only the western powers and Israile have managed to produce truly state of the art rifles.

Our Russian friends have not had any ideas since the AK-47, And are truly stretching the limit of the Ak life, All their weapons have been just improvements on the AK. So far its higher caliber rounds are making it the the more powerful gun compared to more advanced western weapons, But muli caliber weapons will be the end of the Automatic Kalashnikov

So if the IA wants a new gun, its most likely going to be from France, US or most likely Israel .
In the case of France or Israel it will also involve DRDO in some way as well

i hope they see reason and use this opportunity to obtain a state of the art weapon

 

[sayareakd]

their is even better rifle i saw that, it was the ultimate rifle. here it is

it has got all and everything which one want from gun, you can see this in 'Fifth element'.

here i found a video of the same. enjoy!!!!!

 

[Rahul Singh]

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.

So, what exactly was, so state of the art, back in 90s? INSAS had all the features, what contemporary weapons like M-16 and Galil were having.
---------------------------------

Army from day one had started complaining about this riffle because in addition to one crucial thing, their fighting hands and probably their bosses metality were not prepared to digest the nature of 5.56 ammo. Then we had kargil (a battle field which will put any so-called best to utmost level of torture test) where some flaws were cited. But instead of contacting DRDO to improve the weapon(a natural step in case of new weapon) the army indirectly reached media and started mud shelling DRDO for INSAS. But this didn't deterred DRDO, they came back with follow-on products of INSAS, the EXCALIBUR MK-1 and MK-2, both relatively lighter and fully automatic, but army rejected them flatly. To me, clear hints of army's intentions.........DRDO kept coming in with improvements and army kept on rejecting DRDO's products to that extent that DRDO ultimately gave up and said "no follow-on on INSAS". Cheese, time arrived, decks got cleared, now army will import IAR and their corrupt top brass(slap me if i'm wrong but Sukhna land scam is too public and too embarrassing to ignore) will enjoy flesh and buck.

Guys, its hard to digest that if army was in so dire need of an advanced IAR, then why they didn't initiated a joint effort with DRDO in time, for the development of a perfect IAR? After all, developing IAR can not be harder than building a SSBN, no? So who is the culprit? Of course DRDO is not 'Gangajal', but is army any better, well, this exactly the question is?

Atlast, i would like to say that if DRDO is mercilessly blamed and rudely bashed for wasting tax payers money then why can't army be asked to fairly justify the money it spends in foreign market?

I am proud of Indian Army and i'm proud of DRDO but at the same time i'm not blind and can't take pride in things of nuisance value. DRDO will have to be accountable and so will have to be army.

 

[mattster]

Guys, guys.....Come on !!! Those of you defending the INSAS. Please give it up.

For starters - it looks like a freaking toy gun with the wooden stock and all.
I have not fired the INSAS and compared it with other rifles, but just looking at it - it reeks of substandard poor fit and finish.

The last thing you want to do is put combat troops on the battle-field.
Give the Jawans in the Indian Army state of the art Rifles with scopes, IR sights, etc, and take those INSAS Rifles and hand them to the Police in major cities in India so that the next time there is a Mumbai type attack, they actually have a weapon on their hand and not some bolt-action World War 2 joke of a Rifle.

 

[Sridhar]

few INSAS variants from last year INDESC expo . Click on the pic to view higher resolution.

Photo credit : Suman sharma

 

[ppgj]

For starters - it looks like a freaking toy gun with the wooden stock and all.
I have not fired the INSAS and compared it with other rifles, but just looking at it - it reeks of substandard poor fit and finish.

just by looking at it you can judge it?? and so well??

why don't you take a look at Ray sir's post?? he has used and experienced it and opines about it and he has served IA in senior position.

 

[Vinod2070]

Has the army ever defined it's requirements for a gun and worked with DRDO and the industry to get it developed in India? What stop them from doing that and devoting funds to the development and monitoring at every state?

While we have all the respect for IA and want the very best for it, I do think that its procurement policies are not above reproach and it is not seen to be thinking long term. Indegenization is the way to go and the military has to be a major stakeholder of that goal.

 

[gogbot]

their is even better rifle i saw that, it was the ultimate rifle. here it is

it has got all and everything which one want from gun, you can see this in 'Fifth element'.

here i found a video of the same. enjoy!!!!!

Don't be such a tool

What have you deemed state of the art then. Just because it can fire a bullet using a combination of older firing styles does not make the gun state of the art as of today.

If you think i am the one who's speaking our of his ass, then take a peak at this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch#playnext=1&playnext_from=TL&videos=lVh846hdU2M&v=2ADvl2WJb8g

F-INSAS equipment

Weapons

The weapons sub-system is built around a multi caliber individual weapon system with the fourth caliber attached to a

grenade launcher

. These include a 5.56 mm, a 7.62 mm and a new 6.8 mm under-development for the first time in India.

The UBGL (Under Barrel Grenade Launcher) will be capable of launching air bursting grenade.

The sub-system includes a thermal weapon sight and laser range finder to provide the soldier with range and direction information. The Global Positioning System (GPS) location information, allows the soldier can call for indirect fire accurately. There are two types of next generation infantry rifle under development in cooperation with Israel.

So, what exactly was, so state of the art, back in 90s? INSAS had all the features, what contemporary weapons like M-16 and Galil were having.
---------------------------------

Army from day one had started complaining about this riffle because in addition to one crucial thing, their fighting hands and probably their bosses metality were not prepared to digest the nature of 5.56 ammo. Then we had kargil (a battle field which will put any so-called best to utmost level of torture test) where some flaws were cited. But instead of contacting DRDO to improve the weapon(a natural step in case of new weapon) the army indirectly reached media and started mud shelling DRDO for INSAS. But this didn't deterred DRDO, they came back with follow-on products of INSAS, the EXCALIBUR MK-1 and MK-2, both relatively lighter and fully automatic, but army rejected them flatly. To me, clear hints of army's intentions.........DRDO kept coming in with improvements and army kept on rejecting DRDO's products to that extent that DRDO ultimately gave up and said "no follow-on on INSAS". Cheese, time arrived, decks got cleared, now army will import IAR and their corrupt top brass(slap me if i'm wrong but Sukhna land scam is too public and too embarrassing to ignore) will enjoy flesh and buck.

Guys, its hard to digest that if army was in so dire need of an advanced IAR, then why they didn't initiated a joint effort with DRDO in time, for the development of a perfect IAR? After all, developing IAR can not be harder than building a SSBN, no? So who is the culprit? Of course DRDO is not 'Gangajal', but is army any better, well, this exactly the question is?

Atlast, i would like to say that if DRDO is mercilessly blamed and rudely bashed for wasting tax payers money then why can't army be asked to fairly justify the money it spends in foreign market?

I am proud of Indian Army and i'm proud of DRDO but at the same time i'm not blind and can't take pride in things of nuisance value. DRDO will have to be accountable and so will have to be army.

INSAS may have incorporated modern technology such as the carbon fiber structure and Transparent cartridges etc. But the basic firing mechanism of the gun is the same as older rifles such as the FN-FAL and AK-47.

It met our requirements and security concerns at the time, as well as our budget. But by no means was it one of the most advanced or even noteworthy weapons of the end of the century.

1970s–1990s: Development of features and form factors
FAMAS bullpup rifle (France). Adopted in 1978.
QBZ-95 (China), using 5.8x42mm rounds. Adopted in 1995.
The G36 (Germany), was adopted by the German Army in 1997.
The L85A1 bullpup rifle was adopted by the British Army in 1985.
M4 carbine (U.S.).

Many of these automatic firearms used the same rounds as in older eras, but developed new layout designs, materials, and features, like standard telescopic and reflex sights.

In the 1980s and 1990s, high velocity, smaller-caliber ammunition was becoming the standard of assault rifle ammunition. Following the trend set by the United States (which went from 7.62x51mm to 5.56x45mm), the Soviet Union developed its own smaller-caliber cartridge: the 5.45x39mm. In 1974, the 5.45x39 AK-74 became the successor to the AK-47/AKM series. Though AK-74s began utilizing synthetic materials as opposed to wood, the weapon largely maintained the design of the AK-47. China in the 1980s introduced the 5.8x42mm DBP87 round, to compete with the assault rifle rounds of NATO and Russia.

New developments were rifle designs that utilized modularity, new form factors, sights, electronics, and new materials. A number of bullpup rifles entered service in the late 1970s, 1980s and 1990s. Although bullpup design had existed since the 1930s, the United Kingdom's EM-2 was one of the few bullpup assault rifles prior to this time. Examples of the trend include the FAMAS, Steyr AUG, and SA80. All three are bullpup rifles that make heavy use of composites and plastics, the FAMAS and AUG both have ambidextrous controls, and the AUG, and SA80 both added a low-power telescopic sight to the standard service version. The QBZ-95, SAR-21, and the Tavor TAR-21 follow a similar trend as well, with a bullpup configuration and heavy use of composites.

The German Heckler & Koch G36, adopted in the late 1990s by Germany and Spain , had integral telescopic and red dot sights and a composite exterior. The G36C, a compact variant, featured a different barrel assembly, a shorter foregrip, and a Picatinny rail in place of the standard sight assembly to accommodate a detachable sight.

Through the 1990s, modular accessories for use on rifles, of a variety of types, started to become widespread with the rapidly increasing practice of mounting Picatinny pattern rails on firearms. This was primarily driven by the growing visibility and number of tactical police, counter-terrorist units, SWAT teams, special forces, and other groups that desired the capability to specifically tailor their weapons. Tactical lights, visible lasers, weapon suppressors, infrared lights, drum magazines, ergonomic accessories (such as vertical foregrips), folding or collapsible stocks, and a plethora of other options appeared. As these options became available to civilians, customization of weapons other than assault rifles, such as the SKS rifle became common.

Intertwined with the growth of the modular accessories was the concept of rifles being modular themselves. While some assault rifles can be modified through the use of attachments (such as the M4 carbine with SOPMOD), other assault rifles like the H&K G36, can have their entire function modified. The G36 can be converted from a standard rifle to a compact carbine for closer engagements or a squad automatic weapon for support, simply by swapping parts. Interchangeable or quick-detachable barrel assemblies of different lengths are emerging for some weapons, with retrofit kits to provide similar capabilities on older types. The AR-15 in particular has an entire industry that has grown to make variations of every component of the rifle. A variety of upper receivers of many types of operation (bolt, direct gas impingement, gas piston, blowback) are manufactured that allow the weapon to fire different ammunition than the standard assault rifle round (from small target rounds such as .22 LR to pistol rounds such as .380 ACP) without permanently changing the rifle.

 

[gogbot]

Guys, guys.....Come on !!! Those of you defending the INSAS. Please give it up.

For starters - it looks like a freaking toy gun with the wooden stock and all.
I have not fired the INSAS and compared it with other rifles, but just looking at it - it reeks of substandard poor fit and finish.

The last thing you want to do is put combat troops on the battle-field.
Give the Jawans in the Indian Army state of the art Rifles with scopes, IR sights, etc, and take those INSAS Rifles and hand them to the Police in major cities in India so that the next time there is a Mumbai type attack, they actually have a weapon on their hand and not some bolt-action World War 2 joke of a Rifle.

Looks has nothing to do with capabilities.

It may have used older firing actions, but it met all the requirements of the modern battle rifle at the time.

But today assult rifles have evolved, and the need for subsystems just as electronic sights and grenade launchers is seem as bare minmium

 

[notinlove]

15 year service life for a rifle is enough isn't it?? what do you guys wanna do , use it till 2050??

 

[Rahul Singh]

Guys, guys.....Come on !!! Those of you defending the INSAS. Please give it up.

Can't do so. Its a beautiful gun having a very very accurate firing. And what more, while doing NCC training i have seen this riffle, touched it, learned to disassemble and reassemble, last but not least i used it to pierce target and scored excellent point even after being one of the worst shooter with ISHAPOR SLR.

For starters - it looks like a freaking toy gun with the wooden stock and all.
I have not fired the INSAS and compared it with other rifles, but just looking at it - it reeks of substandard poor fit and finish.

Oh my goodness i think i must write a mail to DRDO asking them to paint all INSAS in non glossy black paint so that it becomes advanced overnight! Wooden look like stock! Huh! butt, grip and hand guard are made of high strength plastic. And about their colour better ask IA. OFB have an all black version of INSAS but why IA chosen wooden coloured version instead is something army can know.

The last thing you want to do is put combat troops on the battle-field.
Give the Jawans in the Indian Army state of the art Rifles with scopes, IR sights, etc, and take those INSAS Rifles and hand them to the Police in major cities in India so that the next time there is a Mumbai type attack, they actually have a weapon on their hand and not some bolt-action World War 2 joke of a Rifle.

Even basic INSAS IAR have all the rails and attachments to hang these tits-bits. Its the army, to whom, it is left to choose, what they want on these riffles. And police and paramilitary already carry these riffle but with relatively less lethal bullets. Guards protecting Delhi Metro Station carry foldable butt version of INSAS. Lets not get distracted. I do acknowledge that army needs advanced and fully equipped IAR but question is, can't Bharat produce G-36 or XM8 kind of riffle? Answer is YES, toady every piece of technology required to make an advanced IAR is available within Bharat, so why import?

15 year service life for a rifle is enough isn't it?? what do you guys wanna do , use it till 2050??

Question is not this, question is why army didn't joined hands with ARDE to develop top notch version of INSAS in due time? However 15 years is not enough. M-16 served for almost four decades and still serving.

 

[notinlove]

Question is not this, question is why army didn't joined hands with ARDE to develop top notch version of INSAS in due time? However 15 years is not enough. M-16 served for almost four decades and still serving.

I beg to differ, i guess you are a bit ill informed.

Who said army didn't join hands with ARDE?

Army told ARDE The problems with INSAS and they fixed it , isn't that joining hands?

Army will be paying 10 lakhs for a rifles which costs around 1.5 lakhs just so that OFB and ARDE can get a lot more technology transfer and can perform better. is that not joining hands??

army will be inducting 2,18,320 advanced carbines developed by ARDE indigenously . is that not joining hands??

and its better that we don't talk about M16 service life , it has not served 40 years in the same versions, there have been hundreds of it and about 99 percent were rejected by armies, same is the case with INSAS base model was accepted by the army, now they are waiting for a variant that will suit their needs. just because drdo has developed 10 models of INSAS doesn't mean that army has to induct it, they will induct what suits their requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Indian army is being vilified for so less that its disgusting . these are the people who take bullets for us and we jump upon them at the first chance we get, due to a lousy title to a lousy report given by a lousy good for nothing journalist.

Lets for a second forget about ballistics computers, and laser range finders, lets look at the basics.

Every rifle jams , even after cleaning , some do it more some do it less , one which does it less is a good rifle and we need that for our jawans.
We want to give something that is light weight and provides them a capability boost , so they can cover more distance and lose less energy in the process and win wars for us.

And the argument that it is lethal and fires is pretty outdated , every rifle fires and every rifle is lethal , that is its job, we need one that is better than other and that's that.

Lets look at an excerpt from the article

he global RFP (request for proposal) issued for a new assault rifle for the army stipulated that it had to be lighter than 3.5kg, making impossible for the Insas to even compete in the tender; an Insas weighs 4.1kg.

Now this is what i call classic flame bait reporting. this reporter is trying to portray as if army has stipulated the 3.5 kg figure just to keep INSAS out of the competition , and you all took the bait. can't you just for a second think that there might be some other reason of weight stipulation(it is so obvious i won't even bother writing about it)???

here is another excerpt

It may not be as finished as others, but then you get an Insas for only Rs24,000. Its comparative guns are in the range of Rs1.25 lakh

So a jawan's life is not even worth a lakh rupees , way to go.

Army has been criticised for not having a vision , and now when they do something that has vision , they get crucified for it. somtimes i feel that our biggest enemy is not external but internal.

 

[gogbot]

Question is not this, question is why army didn't joined hands with ARDE to develop top notch version of INSAS in due time? However 15 years is not enough. M-16 served for almost four decades and still serving.

The M16 was cutting edge for its time, No other weapon like it has existed before then. It used new materials like plastic, And a firing action that required far less recoil then its competitor the Ak-47. albeit at the loss of power

The US Has gradually shifted to the M4-A1 carbine over the years as their service rifle

.

M16's are still in use but not as the main service gun. Some thing similar can be arranged for the INSAS.

But come on in all honestly we need a newer more advanced gun. INSAS is good but its not even close to being the best gun out there. I want our troops to have something better.

Lets get real, we need something far more superior for the army. Something like whats in that Video

We need a new multi-caliber rifle with Electronic sights and air bursting grenades standard. A more light weight, more compact and considerably less recoil weapon.
Which may or mow not incorporate either a bullpup or modular design.

if DRDO can do it then that's great, if not we can use the New DPP and work with a foreign partner to get a state of the art weapon.

If any of you ever want F-Insas to be reality you need to stop hugging the INSAS-mk1 and accept mare work needs to be done

F-INSAS equipment

Helmet and Visor

The helmet is an integrated assembly equipped with thermal sensors, video cameras and chemical and biological sensors. The visor is intended to be integrated and to act as a heads-up display monitor equivalent to two 17-inch computer monitors.

Clothing

The personal clothing of this soldier of the future would be lightweight with a bullet-proof jacket. The futuristic jacket would be waterproofed yet breathable. The new attire that will enable the troops carry the extra load and resist impact of chemical warfare. The new uniform will have vests with sensors to monitor their health parameters and provide quick medical relief.

Weapons

The weapons sub-system is built around a multi caliber individual weapon system with the fourth caliber attached to a grenade launcher. These include a 5.56 mm, a 7.62 mm and a new 6.8 mm under-development for the first time in India. The UBGL (Under Barrel Grenade Launcher) will be capable of launching air bursting grenade. The sub-system includes a thermal weapon sight and laser range finder to provide the soldier with range and direction information. The Global Positioning System (GPS) location information, allows the soldier can call for indirect fire accurately. There are two types of next generation infantry rifle under development in cooperation with Israel.

INSAS MK-1 Does not meet any of those requirements

Accessories

The soldier will be equipped with a palmtop to be able to communicate with other soldiers, and will be aware of the battlefield. The palmtop will tell the soldier where others are in relation to themselves. It will also enable them to transfer messages.

Thermal imagers, sensors and night vision equipment, currently deployed in weapon systems such as artillery and main battle tanks, will be customized to make them portable for soldiers to carry in the battle ground.

Procurements for program

Procurement requests for the 'open calibre' carbines is valued at around INR44 billion (USD1.1 billion) have been initiated with global manufacturers. The procurement covers night-vision devices, laser designators and detachable under-barrel grenade launchers.

Indigenisation of program

With the intent of to retain its strategic autonomy, self reliance and indigenisation of the program is being emphasized. Indigenous development of many equipment by Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) independently as the prime developer and system integrator as well as with private partnership is being encouraged like with Tata Advanced Systems and Rolta Thales Ltd. Out of five major technologies for the futuristic soldiers, the following two have been projectised in the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO).

1. Design and development of multi-Caliber Individual Weapon System.
2. Design and development of Air Bursting Grenade for Individual Weapon.

The IA high command claimed that it will digitize the battlefield in 10 years and make the F-INSAS a reality.
If that is the case, is'nt it obious from the moment they made the announcement that the INSAS series MK-1 would be retired as the service rifle some time this decade

 

[notinlove]

A very interesting article from 2001 that i found out.....

INSAS not performing to optimum level: Army
new delhi: the army has complained that the country's indigenous state-of-the-art 5.56mm indian small arms system (insas) is not performing to the optimum level with major defects like cold arrest, breakage and cracking of components reported in active areas like siachen glacier, kargil heights and other high altitude areas "major defects in assault rifles as well as light machine guns like change lever system, breakage of carrying handle, screw locking butt, crack of retainer and breakage of barrel bulge have come to the fore from forward areas," top army officials said. they said that these defects, which had come to the fore even during the kargil conflict, had been brought to the notice of rifle specialists at ishapore factory as well drdo scientists and that the defects were yet to be rectified. these defects as well as ordinance factories not keeping to delivery schedules had forced the army, with government clearance, to import one lakh ak-47 assault rifles from romania at a cost of rs 85 crore. the imported ak-47 had been used to equip special forces, like the commando groups, units engaged in counter insurgency in jammu and kashmir and the forces facing pakistani troops across the line of control (loc), officials said. they said a special task force comprising officials of master general of ordinance, directorate general of quality assurance, rifle specialists and drdo scientists had been constituted to rectify the defects. the comptroller and auditor general (cag) has also taken defence ministry to task for a three-year delay in fulfilling army plans to re-equip all its formations with indigenously developed 5.56 mm small arm system. "the army's plan was to equip all its forces with these light arms by 1998 and ordinance factories supplied only 2.75 lakh rifles and light machine guns as on march 2000," cag said in its latest report tabled in parliament. army officials said the light machine gun from the insas series had been put through user trials from november 1987 to april 1992 and cleared for troop trials which also were completed by 1995. army served a bulk order production in 1997 subject to carrying out modification in carrying handle, mount for optical sight, pistol grip and locking pin. cag in its report said that despite army having asked the ordinance board in july 1989 to speed up the process of development so as to introduce the weapon in 1990, "development and establishment of the weapon had lagged behind by eight years". the report said the worse was the case of the insas carbine, which small arms factory, kanpur, was not successful in developing even after 13 years leading to the army, supposed to be the bulk consumer, foreclosing its requirement of carbine in the present form. the cag also pulled up ordinance factories for massive shortfalls in supplies of small arms ammunition to the army during the last seven years saying against an order for 43.46 crore round of ammunition, the ordinance factories had supplied only 26.55 crore rounds. the report also said failure to produces carbines was even more glaring as a sum of rs 22.18 crore had been spent on purchase of machine alone. it also took to task ordinance factory, varangaon, saying it had taken more than 12 years for development of tracer ammunition for the 5.56 mm system. giving a year wise break up in failure to meet delivery schedule of the 5.56 rifles, it said in 1993-94 army against a requirement of 48,000 rifles placed an order for just 7000 without receiving even a single gun. and between 1995 and 2000 against a requirement of 5,28,000 rifles, the ishapore factory had only managed to supply half the number of 2,69,612 rifles, while to date against a requirement of 37,600 light machine guns, army had barely received 5,778.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...optimum-level-Army/articleshow/1245199981.cms

Now every rifle faces teething problems , so lets leave that part out as it has been rectified also, what is interesting though is the orders by army and delivery schedule , take a look at that.

Says tons about the ability and capability of DRDO and OFB doesn't it?

 

[Vinod2070]

Indian army is being vilified for so less that its disgusting . these are the people who take bullets for us and we jump upon them at the first chance we get, due to a lousy title to a lousy report given by a lousy good for nothing journalist.

Guys, I don't think anyone is criticizing the army soldiers. The criticism is for the way the army appears to favor imported products.

We have all the respect for the fighting soldiers, not necessarily for the procurement system of the army.

 

[Armand2REP]

Guys, I don't think anyone is criticizing the army soldiers. The criticism is for the way the army appears to favor imported products.

We have all the respect for the fighting soldiers, not necessarily for the procurement system of the army.

Exactly, don't criticise the soldiers. The British MoD did that when the SA80A2 continually jammed and lowered moral across the forces. It wasn't the Royal Marines fault MoD gave them shitty rifles even after replacing more shitty rifles. The fault lays at the top. If the soldiers who field the weapon don't trust it, it needs to be fixed.

 

[mattster]

I know this is just a very general sweeping statement - but somehow it seems that India still does not have high quality manufacturing, metallurgy, materials, and top-notch mechanical engineering and industrial engineering design skills.

With the exception of the Indian auto industry in recent years, almost every mechanical product designed and developed in India looks substandard and is simply not competitive on an international level in terms of quality and functionality.
That's a sweeping statement, but in general it seems to apply to all industries whether its defense or non-defense related.

I am not sure if this is because of the lack of talent in India, or the lack of investment in education and manufacturing infrastructure when it comes to manufacturing capability.
Maybe its a case of being left so far behind, that there is now too much catching up to do.

Whatever the case maybe, India has miles to go if it wants to catch up with China, Taiwan or even Malaysia.

If the Auto industry in India can produce cars and motorcycles that can hold their own against international standards, then why are the other industries so far behind ??

 

[Rahul Singh]

I beg to differ, i guess you are a bit ill informed.

Who said army didn't join hands with ARDE?

Army told ARDE The problems with INSAS and they fixed it , isn't that joining hands?

Army will be paying 10 lakhs for a rifles which costs around 1.5 lakhs just so that OFB and ARDE can get a lot more technology transfer and can perform better. is that not joining hands??

army will be inducting 2,18,320 advanced carbines developed by ARDE indigenously . is that not joining hands??

Allow me to reply to un-edited version of this post.

Yes, question is, how ill informed i am? And answer is. Yes i'm ill informed but i'm not naive. At least not of that grade that i can't pick a classic case of manipulation.

Joining hands for developing a product starts with sharing responsibility, work, knowledge and even financial burden, all from very beginning. Mere pointing fingers towards flaws that too in critic's voice doesn't mean 'joining hands'. User involvement during the development of product is dead required as it rules out catastrophic mismatching because user corrects every wrong move and step of the developer right at the native level. This is exactly what navy do and that is why they are getting SSBNs, SLBMs aircraft carriers, torpedo, SONARs, Radars etc from same organisation who is failing to deliver a working IAR to army.

and its better that we don't talk about M16 service life , it has not served 40 years in the same versions, there have been hundreds of it and about 99 percent were rejected by armies, same is the case with INSAS base model was accepted by the army, now they are waiting for a variant that will suit their needs. just because drdo has developed 10 models of INSAS doesn't mean that army has to induct it, they will induct what suits their requirement.

Who is saying that INSAS Mk-1 should continue serving army forever? And please do not compare present US arms developers with present Indian arms developers. US arms developers with active support from user have already passed through the extremely painful period when prime focus remains on knowledge base and know how build up. Unfortunately our industry is still caught in this phase and needs active support from user to pass through.

Indian army is being vilified for so less that its disgusting . these are the people who take bullets for us and we jump upon them at the first chance we get, due to a lousy title to a lousy report given by a lousy good for nothing journalist.

No body is criticizing fighting army instead criticizing corrupt section of the army which unfortunately holds decision making offices.

So a jawan's life is not even worth a lakh rupees , way to go.

Jawan's life is priceless, that is why army should opt for best equipments. But this best should not always mean west. Western equipments are costly and sucks up budget fast for less. Indigenous products are cheap and can be equally best hence allows procurement of extra comfort for Jawan.

Army has been criticised for not having a vision , and now when they do something that has vision , they get crucified for it. somtimes i feel that our biggest enemy is not external but internal.

What you are putting as a vision is only "old wine in new bottle". Army is virtually repeating history and will face same situation in future what it faced once FN FAL's Indian version ' Ishapore SLR' became obsolete.

But come on in all honestly we need a newer more advanced gun. INSAS is good but its not even close to being the best gun out there. I want our troops to have something better.

Lets get real, we need something far more superior for the army. Something like whats in that Video

We need a new multi-caliber rifle with Electronic sights and air bursting grenades standard. A more light weight, more compact and considerably less recoil weapon.
Which may or mow not incorporate either a bullpup or modular design.

if DRDO can do it then that's great, if not we can use the New DPP and work with a foreign partner to get a state of the art weapon.

If any of you ever want F-Insas to be reality you need to stop hugging the INSAS-mk1 and accept mare work needs to be done
[/QUOTE]

I think, a bit of misinterpretation leading to huge misconception. Guys i can assure you that here no one of so-called pro-DRDO group is denying the fact that army deserves and needed to be armed with advanced IARs quickly. 100% agree on that. But for that army should first initiate a program jointly with ARDE and or with others of their choice within India. Reason for the argument is very simple. Expertise gained through INSAS should not be lost. A follow-on program is must to retain and further develop the knowledge base and know how. Continuation in research will only improve the situation and will come up with better product every time. This will also contribute significantly towards considerable reduction in per unit cost of the weapon. The extra money can be used to equip soldiers better........

Indigenous weapons are more reliable and dependable in comparison to imported weapons for reasons which are not technical but rather political.

 

[notinlove]

Allow me to reply to un-edited version of this post.

Yes, question is, how ill informed i am? And answer is. Yes i'm ill informed but i'm not naive. At least not of that grade that i can't pick a classic case of manipulation.

Joining hands for developing a product starts with sharing responsibility, work, knowledge and even financial burden, all from very beginning. Mere pointing fingers towards flaws that too in critic's voice doesn't mean 'joining hands'. User involvement during the development of product is dead required as it rules out catastrophic mismatching because user corrects every wrong move and step of the developer right at the native level. This is exactly what navy do and that is why they are getting SSBNs, SLBMs aircraft carriers, torpedo, SONARs, Radars etc from same organisation who is failing to deliver a working IAR to army.

Yes i did use strong language and i edited it when i realised , is there anything wrong with it ? i for one m not shy of admitting my mistakes.
here is something from my previous post

defence ministry to task for a three-year delay in fulfilling army plans to re-equip all its formations with indigenously developed 5.56 mm small arm system. "the army's plan was to equip all its forces with these light arms by 1998 and ordinance factories supplied only 2.75 lakh rifles and light machine guns as on march 2000," cag said in its latest report tabled in parliament. army officials said the light machine gun from the insas series had been put through user trials from november 1987 to april 1992 and cleared for troop trials which also were completed by 1995. army served a bulk order production in 1997 subject to carrying out modification in carrying handle, mount for optical sight, pistol grip and locking pin.

Is that not active Participation ?
This is the story of before induction of the rifle, and even after induction when it faced problems due to quality control army got it fixed that is also active participation.What else do you want for active participation ??

Who is saying that INSAS Mk-1 should continue serving army forever? And please do not compare present US arms developers with present Indian arms developers. US arms developers with active support from user have already passed through the extremely painful period when prime focus remains on knowledge base and know how build up. Unfortunately our industry is still caught in this phase and needs active support from user to pass through.

WHO is saying that army will not induct the new rifle made by ARDE? do give me the answer to this one. because as i have posted earlier army will be inducting 2,18,320 advanced carbines developed by ARDE indigenously.

And about financial support. DRDO is a govenrment company it has 100 Percent financial support , which is not so for companies even in the west.

No body is criticizing fighting army instead criticizing corrupt section of the army which unfortunately holds decision making offices.

Corruption is everywhere , why don't you talk about the corrupt OFB chief who screwed the army backwards , and robbed them of their SAR-21?

Jawan's life is priceless, that is why army should opt for best equipments. But this best should not always mean west. Western equipments are costly and sucks up budget fast for less. Indigenous products are cheap and can be equally best hence allows procurement of extra comfort for Jawan.

I would like to hear how equally comfortable an INSAS is to a XM8 or bushmaster ACR , Last i heard it was about a kg heavier , jammed more often and did not have changeable caliber and barrel lengths . The point is INSAS was an ok rifle when it entered service but is old now and needs changing . every country is moving on to new guns and we need to do the same. we cannot stall our procurement process due to delays by DRDO, when they come up with good guns we will induct them.

What you are putting as a vision is only "old wine in new bottle". Army is virtually repeating history and will face same situation in future what it faced once FN FAL's Indian version ' Ishapore SLR' became obsolete.

Again only about 1.5 lakh foreign guns are being bought , to provide insight into technology and production methods the rest are supposed to be indigenous, if drdo cannot absorb technology and screws up again , it will not be armie's fault.

I think, a bit of misinterpretation leading to huge misconception. Guys i can assure you that here no one of so-called pro-DRDO group is denying the fact that army deserves and needed to be armed with advanced IARs quickly. 100% agree on that. But for that army should first initiate a program jointly with ARDE and or with others of their choice within India. Reason for the argument is very simple. Expertise gained through INSAS should not be lost. A follow-on program is must to retain and further develop the knowledge base and know how. Continuation in research will only improve the situation and will come up with better product every time. This will also contribute significantly towards considerable reduction in per unit cost of the weapon. The extra money can be used to equip soldiers better........

Exactly this is what i am saying. The point is as of now India is behind the world in rifle design and production , but that doesn't necessitate that we should be behind the world in procurement too and that is what army is doing. let me ask if army had not bought anything from foreign vendors then how many wars would we have won and more importantly would DRDO have had as much technology as they have today.i also support indigenous but only when it is upto world standards , Hell i am dying to see Tejas inducted because i believe it is upto the standards and maybe even better

 

[gogbot]

I think, a bit of misinterpretation leading to huge misconception. Guys i can assure you that here no one of so-called pro-DRDO group is denying the fact that army deserves and needed to be armed with advanced IARs quickly. 100% agree on that. But for that army should first initiate a program jointly with ARDE and or with others of their choice within India. Reason for the argument is very simple. Expertise gained through INSAS should not be lost. A follow-on program is must to retain and further develop the knowledge base and know how. Continuation in research will only improve the situation and will come up with better product every time. This will also contribute significantly towards considerable reduction in per unit cost of the weapon. The extra money can be used to equip soldiers better........

Indigenous weapons are more reliable and dependable in comparison to imported weapons for reasons which are not technical but rather political.

This is another misconception, INSAS-Mk 1 is being retired for F-INSAS

see

Indigenisation of program
[/B]
With the intent of to retain its strategic autonomy, self reliance and indigenisation of the program is being emphasized. Indigenous development of many equipment by Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) independently as the prime developer and system integrator as well as with private partnership is being encouraged like with Tata Advanced Systems and Rolta Thales Ltd. Out of five major technologies for the futuristic soldiers, the following two have been projectised in the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO).

1. Design and development of multi-Caliber Individual Weapon System.
2. Design and development of Air Bursting Grenade for Individual Weapon.

The IA high command claimed that it will digitize the battlefield in 10 years and make the F-INSAS a reality.
If that is the case, is'nt it obious from the moment they made the announcement that the INSAS series MK-1 would be retired as the service rifle some time this decade

http://www.indiastrategic.in/topstories66.htm

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NEWS/newsrf.php?newsid=11001