AK-203 Scrap

Angel of War

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2021
Messages
1,673
Likes
5,921
Country flag
Check recent procurements, M21 getting phased out.
I have already made a post regarding that . But no further reports came out after 2020 .

Dont care much for the guns, My point was about the ammo. 7.62x39 is perfectly fine for our needs for infantrymen, only better alternative would be to go for 6.5/6.8, which is a super risky thing given that its entirely untested.
I still don't agree with you . I believe 7.62*51mm is the calibre of choice .
 

Angel of War

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2021
Messages
1,673
Likes
5,921
Country flag
Saar these aren't vietnam era M14s, they have been accurised and given new stocks and some new internal parts including barrels, i was able to find some papers on these accurising programs where they extensively mentioned how they did it all, for e.g. the gas system in this one was widened up to increase gas flow in piston area, and they also chipped some millimetres of material off the gas piston thing...
still an M14 despite the upgrades . Comparing modernised M14s with Vietnam era M14s is the same as comparing M16A4 with vietnam era M16s. All weapons systems need upgrades to stay relevant in the changing battlefield
 

Flying Dagger

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 26, 2019
Messages
2,926
Likes
7,879
Country flag
so ! think about what we will need for a real war not for killing terrorists . You having some comprehension issues ? Once you're attacking an integrated defensive position of the enemy held by a company or two a couple hundered meters away supported by a mortar troop , what will you do ? Those mortars will make sure you don't get within assault range of the their positions
200 metres away ? Ak won't work ?

And with terrorist that's the war we face 24*7.

thanks for this post , I've been justifying the need to equip our conventional forces with 7.62*51mm rifles , you've helped me prove my point
@Flying Dagger
They already have it ,Ak round is meant for those involved in coin ops jungle region etc . A heavier 7.62 NATO round not only limit the numbers of rounds a soldier carry but provide no additional advantage when better performance can be achieved with intermediate round and less recoil. We have seen the way SLR limited and was reason for many dead Indian soldiers against insurgents carrying Aks..

And you do know Ak exist in 5.56 /5.45 round too?

And you were talking abt Gali Ace too if i remember correctly which is essentially an AK.

So first end this dilemma you have.

Regarding rounds we use well a universal intermediate like 6.8 mm which can serve for carbine assault battle and LMG is the ideal way to go for now but things will happen according to our budget and ability for now.


If we aren't in deep investment wise as you say. That gives GoI the opportunity to cite current "instabilities" around the globe (e.g. Ukraine war) to delay and eventually scrap this stupid deal. Maybe throw them another 50k ish order off the shelf and can the whole thing. Never understood the point of AK-203 when we have Bulgarian AK copies and FAB furniture available.
A production line in India with quality assurance and trained labour , money coming back to India and job creation.

What more do you want to understand ?
 

SwordOfDarkness

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2021
Messages
1,447
Likes
7,143
Country flag
200 metres away ? Ak won't work ?

And with terrorist that's the war we face 24*7.
I disagree with your assessment of army being COIN oriented, I dont see that at all. But yeah, AKs are more than enough good, even without optics till 300-400 mtrs. They are accurate and retain enough energy till that distance (as they are not velocity dependant (like 5.56 for fragmentation), rather depend on yaw).
 

Angel of War

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2021
Messages
1,673
Likes
5,921
Country flag
200 metres away ? Ak won't work ?

And with terrorist that's the war we face 24*7.
I don't think you know a lot about COIN ops . Most of the engagements are at close quarters within a 100 meters in forests and door to door in the urban centres . Do take time to study about the circumstances in which these engagements take place . Then we can discuss
They already have it ,Ak round is meant for those involved in coin ops jungle region etc . A heavier 7.62 NATO round not only limit the numbers of rounds a soldier carry but provide no additional advantage when better performance can be achieved with intermediate round and less recoil. We have seen the way SLR limited and was reason for many dead Indian soldiers against insurgents carrying Aks..
You have fixated yourself so heavily on COIN ops as if pakistan army and PLA don't exist.
Let me tell you something - AK works wonders against insurgents , But it dosen't do the same magic in a real war
 

AUSTERLITZ

Regular Member
Joined
May 25, 2013
Messages
397
Likes
1,393
Country flag
Galil ACE is a great rifle with interchangeable barrels.Main issue is high cost.
7.62x39is going nowhere.6.5 is as yet experimental round,enormously costly and useless without 25,000 dollar specialized optics on the rifle.Unaffordable,we might pick it up for our special forces at a future date.Will NEVER be used as standrad infantry.Because army can't afford the costs.Also our adversaries pakis have ak-56s and old g3 battle rifles.Easily outclassed.They wanted AK-103 but no money.The chinese new rifles are not battle rifles,they are assault rifles.Chinese infantry doctrine emphasizes massed firepower to saturate defences rather than long range precision kills which is not possible with conscript army.They will try to swamp us.Under such conditions 7.62x51 is not always a great choice.We can get outgunned and swamped.Also battle rifles are just horrible in jungles,mountaintop assaults and COIN.They are ineffective without costly optics.So battle rifles for whole army is not possible.Also amount of 7.62x51 rounds you can carry are lower by 1/3.

I don't like the ak-203 but its a solid proven rifle.Galil is too costly.IMO if they prove themselves we should go for SSS P-72 family.

This Rapid engagement combat rifle fits the bill.Its got a free floating barrel(a feature of ak-12) for better accuracy,short stroke piston for less recoil and better accuracy.Also you have the barrel covered so you can use C-Clamp shooting technique without burning your hand like in traditional AK.They say they can deliver this at affordable prices.Best thing is it can be used with both 7.62x39 and 7.62 x51 barrels which would solve logistics issues in mixed units.

It also comes with a whole family.
Here is the P-72 DMR.800 M range and can be used with both barrels.If we want a bolt action 7.62x51 then we can go for viper.

This is the carbine they are offering.We know 25% of the small arms in an infantry battalion are carbines.I am against creating a logistics problem by having 5.56 for carbines and rest different round.None of the major armies do that- russians have aks-74u carbine for example.With this we can get a 7.62x39 carbine or with different barrel 5.56 for tank crews etc.

I like what these SSS guys are offering if they pass the tests and the price is right.If we have a single family of weapons it will tremendously reduce training times,and we can customize this wepaon at will unlike ak-203.
 

Angel of War

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2021
Messages
1,673
Likes
5,921
Country flag
I disagree with your assessment of army being COIN oriented, I dont see that at all. But yeah, AKs are more than enough good, even without optics till 300-400 mtrs. They are accurate and retain enough energy till that distance (as they are not velocity dependant (like 5.56 for fragmentation), rather depend on yaw).
We can take hints from PLA and Ruskies . Why they ditched 7.62*39
 

Angel of War

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2021
Messages
1,673
Likes
5,921
Country flag
And you do know Ak exist in 5.56 /5.45 round too?

And you were talking abt Gali Ace too if i remember correctly which is essentially an AK.

So first end this dilemma you have.

Regarding rounds we use well a universal intermediate like 6.8 mm which can serve for carbine assault battle and LMG is the ideal way to go for now but things will happen according to our budget and ability for now.
Le bhai :facepalm: , we are talking about 7.62*39mm AKs and you jumped straight to 5.45mm ! Maine kab kaha 5.45 AK me problem hai ? We are talking about flaws in 7.62*39 Aks
 

SwordOfDarkness

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2021
Messages
1,447
Likes
7,143
Country flag
We can take hints from PLA and Ruskies . Why they ditched 7.62*39
Chinese reason is not what you think :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Their generals wouldnt stop selling the army stockpile of soviet ammo on the black market, so they made their inventory completely different to make this impossible.

Ruskis did it when hard armour started proliferating.
 

Angel of War

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2021
Messages
1,673
Likes
5,921
Country flag
Chinese reason is not what you think :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Their generals wouldnt stop selling the army stockpile of soviet ammo on the black market, so they made their inventory completely different to make this impossible.

Ruskis did it when hard armour started proliferating.
oh , so chinni generals ran a corruption league :rofl:
 

Flying Dagger

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 26, 2019
Messages
2,926
Likes
7,879
Country flag
I disagree with your assessment of army being COIN oriented, I dont see that at all. But yeah, AKs are more than enough good, even without optics till 300-400 mtrs. They are accurate and retain enough energy till that distance (as they are not velocity dependant (like 5.56 for fragmentation), rather depend on yaw).
Well i have mentioned more that that but coin ops are on list of army and should be . CQC/CQB/Coin ops

The previous post mentioned 200 m distance so I picked that up. And yes the drop in 300 m is not more than 6 inch which does the work pretty effectively.


Le bhai :facepalm: , we are talking about 7.62*39mm AKs and you jumped straight to 5.45mm ! Maine kab kaha 5.45 AK me problem hai ? We are talking about flaws in 7.62*39 Aks
Flaw isn't in Ak then if you meant round then say you want the cal change. 7.62 isn't ideal for all though too much recoil for carbine so not suitable and lesser rounds slightly heavier rifle etc are some other disadvantages which can be met by an intermediate round .

By 2050 our adversaries will be laughing at us if we continue to use AKs by that time
Your post...

AKs are infamous for bring inacurrate
Infamous?

You have posted multiple times about Aks initially and the deal to build them .

Army wanted rifle that fire 7.62 AK round and they got it. Though the initial requirement were for quick barrel change to fire three different rounds that is 5.56 6.8 and 7.62 AK but the cost didn't permitted it.
 

Johny_Baba

अज्ञानी
Senior Member
Joined
May 21, 2016
Messages
2,219
Likes
9,375
Country flag
Galil ACE is a great rifle with interchangeable barrels
Everything else could be considered but this is not true, Galil does come with different barrel configurations but it's not interchangeable = someone replacing a barrel on his own.
 

Kuldeepm952

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2019
Messages
447
Likes
1,924
Country flag
We can take hints from PLA and Ruskies . Why they ditched 7.62*39
They replaced their ak round with 5.xx intermediate round. In our case Ak is used for entirely different purpose, ordered mainly for ct ops and then more orders due to faultiness of INSAS.
Now the right question would be to ask why induct this all circus when it's all clear that a 7.62nato ap won't penetrate a modern Armor even at 10m range and lighter 6.8spc and 6.5 grendel rounds show similiar ballistics to 7.62 nato while saving weight, means Saving logistical burden as well as burden on soldier. These 6.xx cartridges fulfil the sweet spot between weight savings of 5.xx, hitting power of 7.62ak and range of 7.62nato.
Moreover these 6.xx rounds exist and have been tested extensively rather than the new very risky 6.8*51mm stupid high pressure/high recoil round.
Our soldiers won't ever get a FCS like American new sig M5. So, logically a common rifle with either 6.8spc or 6.5grendel as standard issue with atleast 4x optics instead of this joke of frontline sig bullshit and ak for poor backline troops. According to some guys, china would be fielding new qbz 191 with 3x scope as standard and then our iron sight soldiers would be the turkey in a turkey shoot for chinese.

Anyway, ak deal is done and dusted, the best we can do is provide it with some good atleast 3x scopes and it can engage targets upto 500m with reasonable accuracy.
Though this 7.62 nato rifle drama should stop. Any use beside DMR is unpopular among infantry and we are already seeing complaints of quality and other things from soldiers as well some defence sources.
Now if Ak is selected as standard issue for whole army apart from initial 6 lakh units than I think Gov. should appoint a body to find out about such fuckups and try that person in court for wasting decades unable to even form resonable requirements for a simple equipment as a rifle.
 

SwordOfDarkness

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2021
Messages
1,447
Likes
7,143
Country flag
AKs are infamous for bring inacurrate
Nope, false theory. Rumour could be from darra made guns being labelled "AK".

AKs are good enough till 500-600 mtr for trained shooters with optics, and 300-400 mtrs for iron sights.

Check 9 hole reviews of both scoped and unscoped AK 103s, which are operation wise same as AK -203 (AK203 has the advantage of repeatable zero with top rail, but rest all same)
 

Angel of War

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2021
Messages
1,673
Likes
5,921
Country flag
Nope, false theory. Rumour could be from darra made guns being labelled "AK".

AKs are good enough till 500-600 mtr for trained shooters with optics, and 300-400 mtrs for iron sights.

Check 9 hole reviews of both scoped and unscoped AK 103s, which are operation wise same as AK -203 (AK203 has the advantage of repeatable zero with top rail, but rest all same)
A 1979 report, titled “Shooting effects of automatic weapons” lays out the statistical methodology that was used to test weapons during the Soviet era. There also is a huge resource of firing tables from 1977, that compare accuracy of various infantry weapons. Both experienced and average soldiers were tested with various weapons, from various stances, including firing from moving vehicles, at night, at even returning fire against muzzle flashes at night. From those tests, a measure of average shots to hit or destroy a target was measured against a variety of targets, including helicopters, cars, and enemy personnel.From one hundred to four hundred meters, the AKM loses a good 60 percent of it's energy .
The Soviets also measured these figures for burst fire against the ak74. Here the softer recoiling characteristics of the AK-74 start to shine. Firing from a supported prone position, a single three shot burst from an AK-74 is all that is needed to hit a running target out to five hundred meters. With the AKM, this can only be done out to three hundred meters. In a bounding overwatch situation, firing short bursts after a quick halt with the average soldier, the AK-74 required two bursts or six rounds to hit a standing target at one hundred meters, and five bursts or fifteen rounds to hit that same target at two hundred meters. With the AKM, eleven rounds are required at one hundred meters, and thirty-three are required at two hundred meters. The difference is dramatic, with almost double the rounds required with the AKM when bursting.
So It isn't really false bro , it's true to a good extent .
Also , Perhaps one of the most interesting tests is the longer bursts. Soldiers were instructed to shoot at a squad target using long bursts from one hundred to three hundred meters out. The number of shots required to neutralize 50 percent and 80 percent of the squad was recorded, against standing targets, and head and chest targets. From the prone supported position, the best soldiers needed twenty-two shots in long bursts to neutralize half a squad, and fifty-two shots to neutralize 80 percent of the squad with the AKM at three hundred meters. The average soldiers needed fifty-one and 119 shots to accomplish the same tasks. With the AK-74, the numbers for the best soldiers dropped to seventeen and thirty-nine, and to thirty-eight and eighty-eight for the average soldier, a marked improvement in full auto control and accuracy.

The accuracy could have improved in AK203 . But the current generation of AKs in IA service aren't known to be very accurate
 
Last edited:

Angel of War

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2021
Messages
1,673
Likes
5,921
Country flag
Well i have mentioned more that that but coin ops are on list of army and should be . CQC/CQB/Coin ops

The previous post mentioned 200 m distance so I picked that up. And yes the drop in 300 m is not more than 6 inch which does the work pretty effectively.
You haven't mentioned anything about the scope of employment of our AKs beyond COIN ops . Not even once .





Infamous?

You have posted multiple times about Aks initially and the deal to build them .

Army wanted rifle that fire 7.62 AK round and they got it. Though the initial requirement were for quick barrel change to fire three different rounds that is 5.56 6.8 and 7.62 AK but the cost didn't permitted it.
Read this
A 1979 report, titled “Shooting effects of automatic weapons” lays out the statistical methodology that was used to test weapons during the Soviet era. There also is a huge resource of firing tables from 1977, that compare accuracy of various infantry weapons. Both experienced and average soldiers were tested with various weapons, from various stances, including firing from moving vehicles, at night, at even returning fire against muzzle flashes at night. From those tests, a measure of average shots to hit or destroy a target was measured against a variety of targets, including helicopters, cars, and enemy personnel.From one hundred to four hundred meters, the AKM loses a good 60 percent of it's energy .
The Soviets also measured these figures for burst fire against the ak74. Here the softer recoiling characteristics of the AK-74 start to shine. Firing from a supported prone position, a single three shot burst from an AK-74 is all that is needed to hit a running target out to five hundred meters. With the AKM, this can only be done out to three hundred meters. In a bounding overwatch situation, firing short bursts after a quick halt with the average soldier, the AK-74 required two bursts or six rounds to hit a standing target at one hundred meters, and five bursts or fifteen rounds to hit that same target at two hundred meters. With the AKM, eleven rounds are required at one hundred meters, and thirty-three are required at two hundred meters. The difference is dramatic, with almost double the rounds required with the AKM when bursting.
So It isn't really false bro , it's true to a good extent .
Also , Perhaps one of the most interesting tests is the longer bursts. Soldiers were instructed to shoot at a squad target using long bursts from one hundred to three hundred meters out. The number of shots required to neutralize 50 percent and 80 percent of the squad was recorded, against standing targets, and head and chest targets. From the prone supported position, the best soldiers needed twenty-two shots in long bursts to neutralize half a squad, and fifty-two shots to neutralize 80 percent of the squad with the AKM at three hundred meters. The average soldiers needed fifty-one and 119 shots to accomplish the same tasks. With the AK-74, the numbers for the best soldiers dropped to seventeen and thirty-nine, and to thirty-eight and eighty-eight for the average soldier, a marked improvement in full auto control and accuracy.

The accuracy could have improved in AK203 . But the current generation of AKs in IA service aren't known to be very accurate
 

Super Flanker

Aviation and Defence Enthusiast
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2021
Messages
3,642
Likes
7,114
Country flag
AKs are infamous for bring inacurrate
AKs are not as accurate as they are touted to be by people like you, I would advise you check the online reviews of people who have actually used AK series guns (i.e AKM, AK-103, AK-203 etc).

AKs are actually pretty accurate for targets at distances of 200 meters (650 feet). Some have said that it can comfortably hit targets with good accuracy even at 300 meters. I absolutely do not deny that the SiG-716 (7.62 x 51mm) which you are a fan of is better than the AK-203 in terms of Accuracy, range but you need to understand that AKs are still not as bad as portrayed.

 

Super Flanker

Aviation and Defence Enthusiast
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2021
Messages
3,642
Likes
7,114
Country flag
7.62x51 is usually overkill IMO. In some cases, it is better (eg mountain combat, LMG) but in most scenarios, the better handling, better capacity of the smaller round makes it good enough.
Can you please list me the per unit cost of SIG-716 rifle and AK-203 rifle? I feel like some of the members are being too biased towards AKs. AKs are known as some of the best ARs in the world and can hit targets at distances of upto 400 meters! A video Explaining the misconceptions or AKs.

 

Articles

Top