Search results

Can you please provide the source of IA testing. I am more interested about the tests

I don't understand what the fuck is actually wrong with the guys who create these new requests!? Will they change the requirements to 5.56*45 after couple of years!? Then what a new 6.8*43 round!!?? Why can't they just think properly!? We're talking about something that'' gonna stay for 20...

Sirji totally agree on that, except Marksman rifle. Marksman rifle needs 1-2 MOA, if I remember correctly then Dragunov has 1.2 MOA. In some instances, we have used modified INSAS as DMRs. What stops us in doing same MODs to 7.62*51 rifles. I'd add MMGs to what @tharun had said. If 7.62*51...

I really want fair selection process between 7.62 OFB and foreign vendors.

British proposed 16/17 inch bayonet replacing the existing i.e. 12 inch one. As a result weight of the gun increased. IA didn't accept it through, we also adopted smokeless powder prior to British. Source: Forgotten Weapons (YouTube). You can also visit C&Rsenal. C&R mostly focusing on WW1...

When going through firearm videos, I found this one. I remember a thread for 7.62*51 NATO, couldn't find the appropriate thread. Here is a bit of history. PS. Are we still using 12 inch bayonets!?

A layman's question. To my knowledge, we use lead core with copper cover as full metal jacket rounds or steel core and tip with copper cover for armor piercing rounds. Al is neither strong as steel in AP rounds nor as cheap to be used in FMJ rounds... Does the costly and softer Al is suitable...

Don't we have Ghataks for 7.62*39. Good old AK's can be manufactured from our OFBs.... Why do we need multiple and costly guns, since they are going to be a stop gap... Is our Ghataks are in really bad shape.....

Folks I am layman in terms of fire arms.... But our Forces are waiting for MCIWS... And Ghatak & Excalibur are being used as stop gap..... So why do we need another tender for assault rifles.... Can anyone please explain