Small arms of India

Discussion in 'Internal Security' started by A.V., Oct 11, 2009.

  1. Bleh

    Bleh Berry member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    1,197
    Likes Received:
    2,834
    My bad... although it is probably best if instead of converting them into a single PSU, the different OFB factories like Kanpur & Ishapur be turned into separate competing enterprises under public-private partnership.
    Slick!!!
    Why don't Pakis use these indigenous guns? They have China to partner up with & make a decent copy...
     
    Last edited: Sep 13, 2019
  2. vampyrbladez

    vampyrbladez Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2018
    Messages:
    4,306
    Likes Received:
    8,329
    Location:
    Underworld
    ARDE can make guns 100x better then OFB. Look at the degree of refinement in the JVPC as compared to the MSMC.

    [​IMG]

    MSMC - OFB/DRDO

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    JVPC - ARDE/OFB
     
  3. Bleh

    Bleh Berry member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    1,197
    Likes Received:
    2,834
    No shit! ARDE/DRDO combo is a credible R&D organisation.
    OFB factories on the other hand are just manufacturing units and are better off not being government-run, otherwise they will keep making shabby crap like Insas.

    They have no competiton, as the forces kept accepting their shabby crap without even asking for basic upgrades like p-rails, ergonomic grip, adjustable buttstock. Thus they will keep producing shabby crap in absence of any motivation to push their tech out standards ahead... However split & sold amongst public-private ventures to compete for the right to manufacture the products developed by ARDE, with the winner chosen on the basis of speed and quality of production, that might work very well.
    The development of indigenous AKM version was one such with Ghatak, Trichy etc. competing against each other. Today the winner Ghatak is used by almost all the paramilitaries.
     
    Last edited: Sep 13, 2019
  4. vampyrbladez

    vampyrbladez Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2018
    Messages:
    4,306
    Likes Received:
    8,329
    Location:
    Underworld
    Let it become a PSU with a serving Military officer as it's CEO/head. Caracal has done the same thing with amazing results.

    http://www.sadefensejournal.com/wp/the-caracal-car816-the-new-desert-assault-rifle/
     
  5. Bleh

    Bleh Berry member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    1,197
    Likes Received:
    2,834
    That might actually result in some biased R&D, influenced by the personal preferences of said military officer.

    Working alongside multiple attaches and liaisons from multiple forces, with everyone sending their own suggestions & demands, while the final product gets tested by multiple forces... that's the way to go.
     
    Arihant and Holy Triad like this.
  6. uoftotaku

    uoftotaku Regular Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2015
    Messages:
    924
    Likes Received:
    3,374
    Location:
    Singapore
    Caracal also paid big bucks to bring 2 former H&K designers into the fold.

    We haven't followed that type of model since Kurt Tank was brought in to design the Marut.

    I wonder why nobody has ever tried to do the same in other instances like Arjun for eg which desperately needed some help in early days.

    Seems like a missed opportunity all around.
     
  7. vampyrbladez

    vampyrbladez Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2018
    Messages:
    4,306
    Likes Received:
    8,329
    Location:
    Underworld
    We may be trying this Caracal model with AK 203 production.

    https://theprint.in/defence/army-ch...ceo-of-ak-203-rifle-factory-in-amethi/259019/
     
    SKC, aditya10r, Holy Triad and 2 others like this.
  8. Bleh

    Bleh Berry member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    1,197
    Likes Received:
    2,834
    Yeah, that too.

    We can design our own... but it speeds up the process to go into a joint venture, especially when we are lagging techwise & and have potential partners in allies like Israel.
    But it's better to have a taster instead of just cook... You are giving example of Insas, but even after 2010 Insas rifles were being manufactured without even p-rails & adjustable buttstock, forget upgradation to machined bodies and free-floating barrel.
    Getting the two parties to work together will actually smoothen the process & make the development more efficient... Shifting goal-posts can also be attributed to absence of any coordination between developer and user.

    I am not supporting allowing them to ask for whatever the impossible f*** they want, but letting the father of Tom, Dick, Harry analyse all the requirements and pick out the feasible ones, with constant connection and negotiation about the progress. That way both parties would know which tech to be expected in which version along the development timeline... See what I am trying to say?
    If we actually did that with the LCA programme, Mark 1a would have already been planned from the beginning instead of ADA suggesting it as a stop gap out of the blue in 2015.
     
    Holy Triad and uoftotaku like this.
  9. vampyrbladez

    vampyrbladez Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2018
    Messages:
    4,306
    Likes Received:
    8,329
    Location:
    Underworld

    INSAS is a clusterfuck because the Army can't or deliberately messes up it's GSQR(s) , Navy and Airforce trust the Army with the design and OFB makes a badly optimised design to justify excessive overhead, labor and material cost.
     
    ArgonPrime, Holy Triad and uoftotaku like this.
  10. ezsasa

    ezsasa Senior Member Veteran Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2014
    Messages:
    11,242
    Likes Received:
    25,682
    Location:
    Andhra Pradesh, India
    Given the circumstances, there is a way to solve this without ruffling too many feathers..

    I say create a SPV(special purpose vehicle) comprising of engineers&gunsmiths of ARDE, OFB& IA from rifle programs along with govt representation.

    1) give them 100-200 crore corpus
    2) give a timeframe of 4/5 years for the SPV from the beginning
    3) 80% of team should be Hands on with machining.
    4) give them exemption from tendering process
    5) keep their working premises away from OFB factories, also closer to a military airport.
    6) except for barrel forging they should be able to procure from outside or make it in-house.
    7) give them a attached gun range for testing.
    8) a team for 100 people should be sufficient..
     
  11. Bleh

    Bleh Berry member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    1,197
    Likes Received:
    2,834
    Many first attempts start as clusterfuck... Merkava Mark 1 was a piece of shit. But instead of the issues getting ironed out time, crappy INSAS rifles being built in 2010 still didn't have even p-rails or adjustable buttstock.
    Why?...
    Because there no competition for the right to manufacture on basis of quality, nor anyone from the Army attached with the program to act as a bridge between user & manufacturer/developer. If it were then maybe the GSQR could have been negotiated to more realistic one!


    Same with Arjun project... No road to future upgradation was planned & every time the Army asked for a technological upgrade at par with modern standards, it sounded like shifting goalposts.
    Their demands like Thermobaric munition or Active Protection System weren't unjust at all, but there was no vision! They should have been inducting Mark 1A/B/C right from 2005, with clear planning of updating technological standards of older platforms in future. Installing APS would take a few days in the shop, new rounds could be fired by old guns... but they didn't buy unless everything was available & ready, while using 40-year-old Tincans whose an unupgraded ones would be of next to no use in war.

    Maybe some Tom, Dick or Harry could have suggested installation of T-90 tech on Arjun like the RCWS as a stopgap measure... right back in 2000.
     
    Last edited: Sep 13, 2019
    SKC, ArgonPrime, aditya10r and 3 others like this.
  12. Unknowncommando 2

    Unknowncommando 2 Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2016
    Messages:
    2,500
    Likes Received:
    10,877
    Location:
    Maharashtra,India
    [​IMG]
    CRPF COBRA Commando

    Arsenal AR-M1F41
    Arsenal M6 UBGL
    Trijicon ACOG 3×24 Sight
     
  13. vampyrbladez

    vampyrbladez Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2018
    Messages:
    4,306
    Likes Received:
    8,329
    Location:
    Underworld
    Look at what these jokers are up to now!

    https://www.firstpost.com/business/...inst-proposal-to-corporatise-psu-7290281.html
     
    kunal sung, ArgonPrime, Bleh and 2 others like this.
  14. Shaitan

    Shaitan Zandu balm all day Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2010
    Messages:
    3,982
    Likes Received:
    5,411
    Location:
    Judica
    Shit, I give them guts to get into the small arms in India, period. They're trying to control the small arms, it's ammo, and optics. I really hope the trials turn good and they get rewarded with health orders.

    Really, India has some small, but specialized private firms that are very ambitious. We're looking at a start of something big with several of these companies, I believe.

    Just found the images only.
     
  15. Raj Malhotra

    Raj Malhotra Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2009
    Messages:
    464
    Likes Received:
    482
    Anyway thx for pics. It shows we have developed 3 type of 5.56*45 rifles


    MCIWS based on HK416
    DRDO CQB Carbine based on SIG
    INSAS IC based on AK/Galil
    apart from less known bullpup INSAS, Kalantak, 2 trigger carbine etc

    but Army only interested in imports.

    Wonder what else we are developing in 7.62*51 Apart from upsized INSAS IC?
     
    maniacguy, ArgonPrime and abingdonboy like this.
  16. binayak95

    binayak95 Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2011
    Messages:
    1,337
    Likes Received:
    2,509
    Location:
    Cuttack, Orissa
    *Army only interested in bullpups*
    Neglects to mention that bullpup INSAS made the British LA85 look good.
    Failed trials consistently and then Para SF chose the Tavor.
    Tavors had hiccups in the initial use, were sent back, fixed by IWI and now I wonder how many porkies have been halaled to date by operators with Tavors. Hundreds, if not thousand +. Try and say that about the INSAS.
     
    kunal sung, VIP, ALBY and 8 others like this.
  17. piKacHHu

    piKacHHu Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2015
    Messages:
    75
    Likes Received:
    151
    Would like to add my observation:

    MCIWS is a kind of long stoke gas piston rifle in AR-15 mold. M-brakes are retained as in INSAS. It's large silhouette comparable to SCAR-H; plus it offers barrel change based on the caliber,

    DRDO CQB Carbine: It is more like short barrel Galil than Sig 550. However, it has same M-brake and charging handle as in INSAS/SLR.

    INSAS 1C: The design is more influenced by FN- FAL/SLR than AK/Galil (rather the gas system of AK). Otherwise, it shouldn't have lacked fully auto operation mode.

    I had a lot of expectation when IA announced INSAS replacement program almost a decade back; but nothing good came out of it. Domestic solutions offered are hardly encouraging given the piecemeal changes they were offering over the INSAS which they intend to replace. In the mean time, the last decade has witnessed advent of tactical SF operations (like OBL compound raid, Iraq etc.) in which performance of rifles are tested to its extreme.

    So, it's a bit harsh to blame the IA for interested in import. There is simply no decent product on offer! The contract for 7 lakhs AK-203 will be the end of any alternate indigenous development under DPSUs. May be it's a blessing in disguise. We may get improved AKs in shorter period of time rather than getting some nth iteration of overpriced INSAS with picattiny patches in decades. Because look at the pictures/videos of Joint military exercises (e.g. recent one going on with the US) and you will see a huge gap in terms of tactical equipment in our side. Ironically, these gaps can be filled easily because these tactical equipment don't cost much. I wish luck to the initiatives from private sector to provide some good local solutions for small firearms in future; till then you have to live & fight with the imported guns.
     
    ArgonPrime, ALBY, binayak95 and 3 others like this.
  18. Flying Dagger

    Flying Dagger Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2019
    Messages:
    491
    Likes Received:
    953
    True I think they need to be rewarded for this . If their products meet the requirements let them build one for army else give them contract to manufacture Sig and caracal instead of giving contracts to ofb and ruining the rifles.
     
    aditya10r, kunal sung, VIP and 4 others like this.
  19. Bleh

    Bleh Berry member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    1,197
    Likes Received:
    2,834
    MCIWS latest iteration..
    www.censusindia.gov.in.2011census.C-01.html - Copy.png
    Nah... Where are you getting all these!?

    1. With Ak-203 factory coming in, there's ZERO chance for Trichy with the Army. Already third-degree are in service in paramilitaries mostly.

    2&3. Carbine's status is vague... ARDE carbine or JVPC both are options. Excalibur much less likely.

    4. It'll still have to beat the Sig-716 in price. That was one cheap deal.
     
    Last edited: Sep 30, 2019
  20. vampyrbladez

    vampyrbladez Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2018
    Messages:
    4,306
    Likes Received:
    8,329
    Location:
    Underworld
    I was referring to MHA aka paramilitary acquisitions not Armed Forces ones.
     

Share This Page