DRDO Multical Rifle Unveiled

[ghost]

@ghost,

I appreciate your effort behind the renderings you have done.

Have you considered moving over into 3D? Try Blender. You can download it for free. The learning curve, as I hear, is a bit steep, however, there are plenty of tutorials online that you could use to learn it.

Thank you for the link and suggestion.I have downloaded it,will make good use of it after getting the know-how.

 

[sbm]

7.62 NATO/M43? NATO is 7.62 x 51 and M43 is 7.62 x 39. So I guess it's the latter. No 7.62 x51 MCIWS yet I take it.

 

[Gessler]

7.62 NATO/M43? NATO is 7.62 x 51 and M43 is 7.62 x 39. So I guess it's the latter. No 7.62 x51 MCIWS yet I take it.

That's right. These are the calibers MCIWS is expected to be developed in -

There is no 7.62 Nato planned for MCIWS as far as I know.

 

[sbm]

That would be the logical step for a 7.62mm Indian rifle.

 

[Gessler]

The content is open to interpretation/scrutiny...I have an ongoing online conversation with Prasun K. Sengupta -

Me: Coming to the point about IA infantry weapons...there are a lot of supposed procurement projects and tenders currently on...with a new tender being for procuring a 7.62x51mm NATO assault rifle. OFB is also believed to be competing.

Given the timeframe, I'm led to believe a modernized SLR/FN FAL might be the OFB's offer (with a new handguard, stock & P-rail integration options, the FAL still remains an excellent rifle).

Anyway, do you have any idea for who exactly this new 7.62x51 rifles are for? Regular infantry or the Rashtriya Rifles/Assam Rifles type counter-insurgency units? Are we going to replace their existing AKM/Vz.58 Kalashnikovs with these new Nato-caliber rifles or will a new 7.62x39 AK-based rifle will be procured separately in the future?

Also, any progress on the MCIWS/AAR project?

PKSG: The 7.62 x 51 SLRs are all meant for the entire IA, but for immediate reqmts of the troops under HQ Northern Command, direct imports will be made because the reqmt is urgent. MCIWS is dead, period, since it is not workable under battlefield conditions.

Me: Prasun ji...so you're saying that the MCIWS (now called Advanced Assault Rifle/AAR), is dead??

This weapon -

...will not be procured?? So what are we going to replace the INSAS rifles with? Foreign guns?

PKSG: That's right. The baseline design of the new 7.62mm SLR is that of the GHAATAK from OFB Ishapore. So, RIP MCIWS.

++

Now this was shocking for me...however I decided to address the matter at hand and sought a clarification (if any) as to why OFB is looking to make a 7.62x51mm Nato caliber rifle out of a 7.62x39 Kalashnikov frame...while a proper, tried-and-tested 7.62x51 platform exists in the FN FAL/SLR and we already have the rights to build it. Waiting for a response & I'm hoping to alleviate any misunderstandings if there were any. Have also contacted Saurav Jha and sought his views about the OFB 7.62 platform. Let's see what happens...but so far, the future looks bleak for OFB/Indian-made firearms in general if this information turns out right.

Is OFB looking to give us a Nato-caliber AK? This Vepr-1V (in .308 win) might give you an idea -

 

[sbm]

I spoke to the head of weapons development at OFB once and it will be an OFB rifle selected. What it will be was less clear. The Rifle 1C was not liked by the army so it could be that PKSG is right. On the other hand, one really wonders?

 

[Alok Arya]

Import mafia active not only in army but also in ofb . I highly believe that if any foreign wendor selected tot and work should be shared to ofb as well as a private player and asked both to carry out future research work so in future need of import not arise .

 

[Alok Arya]

Can any one throw light why MCIWS rejected by army .

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Prasun K. Sengupta Make lots of facts out of thin air, He did this before many times more, Their is an Army team heading the MICWS program so does MK1C with DRDO &OFB and still active ..

 

[Gessler]

Prasun K. Sengupta Make lots of facts out of thin air, He did this before many times more, Their is an Army team heading the MICWS program so does MK1C with DRDO &OFB and still active ..

On this issue, I really hope you're right and MCIWS passes it's trials.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Trails will be kept ongoing for now, At least 3 years more in user hands ..

In meantime its MK1C will replace 1B1 from service ..

On this issue, I really hope you're right and MCIWS passes it's trials.

 

[Johny_Baba]

I have some concerns for MCIWS (keep it in mind I belong to infamous 'Keyboard Warriors' Clan so feel free to correct me).Though @arnabmit.12445 and @Shaitan has already mentioned these points years ago,I would like to share my own views on it.

MCIWS is heavily inspired form AR-15 and took ergonomic features from it.During its earlier days,AR-15 (M-16 in U.S. Military) faced some problems which i think MCIWS may face if not rectified.

For reference,I have scanned following materials.

• The M16 by Gordon Rottman,Osprey Pub
  
• The Black Rifle,Volume 1
  ISBN
  0889351155 (ISBN13: 9780889351158)
  
• Various Forums on Internet
  etc.

(1.)Magazine release button.
------------------------------------
The Mag Release Button is not guarded by fence.Almost All Modern AR-15 or equivalents have guarded mag release to prevent accidental magazine release.There were numerous incidents of such events during initial days of AR-15 so they added fence in later models.

Early Variant of AR-15 made by Colt.Notice the unguarded Mag release button and lack of Forward Assist.

The M16A1 with both fenced mag release and Forward Assist.

Modern Combat Rifles utilizing STANAG mags also have fenced mag release.One Example - FN SCAR

(2.)Dust Cover is not provided.
---------------------------------------
This is bit strange...Even very first successful modern assault rifle,the renowned Sturmgewehr-44 had this and a 'MODERN' rifle developed by ARDE lacks it !

Stg-44.

In my opinion,this should be added.

(3.)Charging Handle and Forward Assist
---------------------------------------------------
Now,This is something I'd like to elaborate.

Some Earlier prototypes of AR-15 made by Armalite were simply AR-10 rechambered in 5.56 x 45 mm.
The AR-10 had two variants,Both of them had Top Mounted Charging Handles,but one had forward assist function (these variants were shipped largly to Portuguese,Dutch and Sudanese Armed Forces,later manufactured domestically in those countries.They are popularly called 'Portuguese AR-10').The Other variant was simpler compared to it with no forward assist function.

AR-10 Variants:Upper one is 'Portuguese' one,while Lower one is original Armalite-made.

AR-10 'Portuguese' (Though This is Dutch Variant,but very much similar to Portuguese one) - Forward Assist Operation.Go to 11:05

Thus,Very first AR-15s had similar charging handle configuration,although without Forward Assist function.

Which,they later changed to this familiar version,and since almost all Modern AR-15s have it.

Although they 'tried' to provide forward assist with this configuration too,but it added complexity to already complex design. (More in next post).

 

[Johny_Baba]

(Continuation of Last post)

So This is not an easy task to do so.

But again,Some mean should be provided for forward assist function.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Their will be lot of modification, before it get inducted ..

Excalibur MK1C is a gud example ..

 

[Scrutator]

Now this was shocking for me...however I decided to address the matter at hand and sought a clarification (if any) as to why OFB is looking to make a 7.62x51mm Nato caliber rifle out of a 7.62x39 Kalashnikov frame...while a proper, tried-and-tested 7.62x51 platform exists in the FN FAL/SLR and we already have the rights to build it. Waiting for a response & I'm hoping to alleviate any misunderstandings if there were any. Have also contacted Saurav Jha and sought his views about the OFB 7.62 platform. Let's see what happens...but so far, the future looks bleak for OFB/Indian-made firearms in general if this information turns out right.

That's an odd observation that FN FAL/SLR could be used as the basis for future 7.62x51 rifle. FN FAL/SLR is not fully automatic - the commonality is just the barrel will be of that caliber. Technically 7.62x39 is closer to making a 7.62x51 rifle as all that's required is to increase the cartridge space at the barrel end along with graduating the gas port for the requisite pressure; the backend auto-load mechanics could remain the same!

The above however is simplistic, the barrel probably would also need to be strengthened for increased pressure of the bigger cartridge.

But 7.62x39 Kalashnikov is far closer to the end goal than FN FAL/SLR is!

 

[Gessler]

That's an odd observation that FN FAL/SLR could be used as the basis for future 7.62x51 rifle. FN FAL/SLR is not fully automatic - the commonality is just the barrel will be of that caliber. Technically 7.62x39 is closer to making a 7.62x51 rifle as all that's required is to increase the cartridge space at the barrel end along with graduating the gas port for the requisite pressure; the backend auto-load mechanics could remain the same!

The above however is simplistic, the barrel probably would also need to be strengthened for increased pressure of the bigger cartridge.

But 7.62x39 Kalashnikov is far closer to the end goal than FN FAL/SLR is!

Full-auto/selective fire FAL were produced and widely used, although not as much as the semi-auto version.

OFB already produced a full-auto SLR (Rifle 7.62mm 1C).

Even converting a semi-auto SLR (L1A1) to full-auto is super easy. Only need about 2-3 different parts (ejector block, trigger plunger and ofcourse the "fun switch"). I could look up some reports of British troops converting their L1A1s to full auto in the Falklands...on the field itself.

However I'm yet to fully go through the tender put out by the Army/MoD...but from the few glances I gave it, it doesn't seem to mention full-auto being a necessity. When you have the 308, even a semi-auto is extremely effective. I would take a guess and say that IA does indeed want selective fire option on their new 7.62x51 rifle...and don't worry, coming up with a factory-made full auto SLR isn't that difficult.

I would also differ with your opinion when you say a Kalashnikov conversion is easier/closer to the requirement than a select-fire version of an existing x51 Nato rifle. Big nope.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Army used full auto - short barrel SLR from OFB itself, But that`s a different topic ..

 

[singh100ful]

The content is open to interpretation/scrutiny...I have an ongoing online conversation with Prasun K. Sengupta -

Me: Coming to the point about IA infantry weapons...there are a lot of supposed procurement projects and tenders currently on...with a new tender being for procuring a 7.62x51mm NATO assault rifle. OFB is also believed to be competing.

Given the timeframe, I'm led to believe a modernized SLR/FN FAL might be the OFB's offer (with a new handguard, stock & P-rail integration options, the FAL still remains an excellent rifle).

Anyway, do you have any idea for who exactly this new 7.62x51 rifles are for? Regular infantry or the Rashtriya Rifles/Assam Rifles type counter-insurgency units? Are we going to replace their existing AKM/Vz.58 Kalashnikovs with these new Nato-caliber rifles or will a new 7.62x39 AK-based rifle will be procured separately in the future?

Also, any progress on the MCIWS/AAR project?

PKSG: The 7.62 x 51 SLRs are all meant for the entire IA, but for immediate reqmts of the troops under HQ Northern Command, direct imports will be made because the reqmt is urgent. MCIWS is dead, period, since it is not workable under battlefield conditions.

Me: Prasun ji...so you're saying that the MCIWS (now called Advanced Assault Rifle/AAR), is dead??

This weapon -

...will not be procured?? So what are we going to replace the INSAS rifles with? Foreign guns?

PKSG: That's right. The baseline design of the new 7.62mm SLR is that of the GHAATAK from OFB Ishapore. So, RIP MCIWS.

++

Now this was shocking for me...however I decided to address the matter at hand and sought a clarification (if any) as to why OFB is looking to make a 7.62x51mm Nato caliber rifle out of a 7.62x39 Kalashnikov frame...while a proper, tried-and-tested 7.62x51 platform exists in the FN FAL/SLR and we already have the rights to build it. Waiting for a response & I'm hoping to alleviate any misunderstandings if there were any. Have also contacted Saurav Jha and sought his views about the OFB 7.62 platform. Let's see what happens...but so far, the future looks bleak for OFB/Indian-made firearms in general if this information turns out right.

Is OFB looking to give us a Nato-caliber AK? This Vepr-1V (in .308 win) might give you an idea -

Can you ask him the reason for the rejection of MCIWS?

 

[sbm]

You know with OFB at AI 2017, this is a good place to get some clarity.

 

[Rchauhan]

Hey Guys , I wonder if You guys would like to comment on this TWEET about MCIWS being sold to Iraqi Govt