Indian Special Forces (archived)

[Bhadra]

"Ghatak" are not units...
Gladiators are the the few chosen ones to lead the assault ....

A ghatak platoon while not permanent has rotating soldiers who display the greatest proficiency within the battalion and the commando school. They get separate kit and more specialized training within the battalion. The whole battalion does not rotate through these platoons and as such they are units. And the concept of ghataks is 2 decades old.

So am confused as to what you are referring to[/QUOTE]

Whatever, but can we come to the question I asked.
Ghatak as a concept...??
Training of Ghataks... ??

I called them gladiators because they are a few chosen ones to do some dirty work

Secondly, there is no system, backup, organisational structure, doctrine and philosophy to equip and train them.

Should it be formalised or allowed to run as they are ??
Too many questions !!

 

[rkhanna]

A ghatak platoon while not permanent has rotating soldiers who display the greatest proficiency within the battalion and the commando school. They get separate kit and more specialized training within the battalion. The whole battalion does not rotate through these platoons and as such they are units. And the concept of ghataks is 2 decades old.

So am confused as to what you are referring to

Whatever, but can we come to the question I asked.
Ghatak as a concept...??
Training of Ghataks... ??

I called them gladiators because they are a few chosen ones to do some dirty work

Secondly, there is no system, backup, organisational structure, doctrine and philosophy to equip and train them.

Should it be formalised or allowed to run as they are ??
Too many questions !![/QUOTE]

Okay now i understand what you are asking. First of all a Ghatak Platoon provides a battalion with LRRP/Sniper Scout Capability and also acts as a QRT. There is no such "dirty work"

Currently across battalions/regiments there is no standardized training or kit for them. Early last year on this thread only i had proposed the following 2 structures

1) All Ghatak platoons within a Regiment should be Amalgamated within A Ghatak Battalion of the Regiment. Belgaum Commando School should be given the responsibility of Having Standardized Level I Commando Training and Kit across Regiments. Regiment themselves will impart Level II commando training that suits their tasking / geography etc

- Think of Marine Force (Radio/Recon) Battalions within MAGTFs -

- Regiment CO will then employ them keeping the overall theater Ops Picture in Mind.

This will free up SOF units from Tactical Missions and will pursue strategic Ones.

2) Combine The Paras and the SFF into an AirMobile Brigade Formation - US Army Ranger Regiment fashion - - All Special Operations Aviation Assets - Fixed Wing Transport, Helos, Attack Helos and other Aux units - Engineers, Artillery should be all under this Formation.

- The Orbat of this should have a Vanilla Para SF Unit + Garud + Marcos Elements rotate through on 6 month deployments

- This should also form the Nucleus of any Expeditionary Capability of ours in the future (We simply dont have the money to build an Expedentiary capability in a Marine envoirment yet - so as a quick fix to pursue national interest the above would be the cheapest of options as it primarily requires repooling of Men and Materials and any money spent would be only on re/upskilling

- This Formation Will be A Subset of out Joint Special Operations Command
- SOD + SG will be outside of this JSOCOM and will report directly to CS/NSA

 

[Bhadra]

Very interesting answers and debate.

Firstly Ghatak (platoon - if one may call them like that) are part of Infantry battalions. Hence their role, tasks and mission must be related to the doctrine of employment of an Infantry battalion. They are a force of the commanding officer / battalion and their employment outside that constricted envelop should not be contemplated to begin with. However let me state that there is no imaginable mil task, no terrain and no contingency including NBC where an Infantry battalion will / can not be tasked. Therefore, the Ghatak's being their best should be trained and brought up accordingly.

As a force, an organisation and as a concept they are still a "to begin with" So we shall not think of people like MGTFs, GARUD, MARCOS, SOD, SG etc. etc and let them remain maximum upto PARA SF domain - that too with lots of difficulties. But the nearest and possible element they will function with is PARA SF, if need be or as required.

Secondly, we must take away the counter terrorist, counter insurgency focus of our SF from Ghataks since RR, AR and CPO units will be focused there. Infantry battalions are more to focus on their conventional military tasks. Therefore, they have to be specialised in operational and terrain oriented tasks - say mountaineering, high altitude warfare, Canal crossing, raids, ambushes, Sniper Operation, Desert operations, Operations in jungles and amphibious operations, helicopter operations and NBC direction of all types of fires and support elements such as air, artillery etc.

Having laid out the possible role, tasks and scenarios for Ghataks, I raise following question ;

What should be their organisational structure within Infantry Unit? Should additional manpower be provided for it ?
How to provide the personal continuity, relief, redundancy and change over so that no one is Ghatak for more than five years ? That too is long actually.

Individually they are well trained - many of them Commando course qualified but remain ill trained as a subunit. How best to achieve their proficiency and cohesiveness as a subunit ?

What best equipment policy should be followed for them considering that they are going to be about 400 or so in numbers ? It means 12000 SF soldiers enough to scare any one.

They need to be best of rock climbers, rope fixers, mountaineers, Jungle crawlers and survivors, Everestors, swimmers, river boatmen and rafters, explosive experts, sensor experts, fire controller, communication experts , Long Rangers, snippers and the best killers. After all these all are finer aspects of infantry soldering and of being "Ghatak".

Now tell me how can an archaic and formal organisation like Infantry battalion achieve that !

 

[Unknowncommando 2]

Take a closer look at the new Helmets & heavy duty BPJs of #CRPF QAT. This Advance Combat Helmet is reinforced with additional armour at the rear side. Fortunately both views are available in this picture.

 

[Unknowncommando 2]

SF Commando carrying Romanian AK with TDI Quad Rail Handguard & BEL rail mount for PNVS . #IndianArmy

 

[Gessler]

Suppressors also increase muzzle velocity and reduce recoil.
Contrary to popular belief.

Yep. The myth that they reduce the velocity or stopping power of rounds emanates probably from video games - where this is done for purposes of game-balancing. But it's got no basis in reality at least as far as modern examples go.

However, at least in Special Forces, if the intent is to really quieten down the gun as much as possible (and not a halfway compromise to reduce sound as would be the case in Infantry usage), suppressed weapons are typically used in conjunction with subsonic ammo (reduced-powder loads). It is this which causes the loss of velocity and ability to penetrate surfaces to the same degree (when compared with the regular loads).

That said, suppressed AR-15 based CQB carbines (short-barrel rifles) with subsonic loads might just be the perfect weapon for NSG...but they don't seem like they want to get rid of and/or reduce the usage of 9mm anytime soon.

That is correct. The USMC offical page carried a detailed combat review article on the effectiveness of suppressors on their long guys. Outside of SOCOM and MARSOC most marine MGTAF SOC units also carry full supressors in their units

I believe USMC was contemplating issuing suppressors to ALL of the Marine infantry at one point.

 

[MuzzleVelocity]

Yep. The myth that they reduce the velocity or stopping power of rounds emanates probably from video games - where this is done for purposes of game-balancing. But it's got no basis in reality at least as far as modern examples go.

However, at least in Special Forces, if the intent is to really quieten down the gun as much as possible (and not a halfway compromise to reduce sound as would be the case in Infantry usage), suppressed weapons are typically used in conjunction with subsonic ammo (reduced-powder loads). It is this which causes the loss of velocity and ability to penetrate surfaces to the same degree (when compared with the regular loads).

That said, suppressed AR-15 based CQB carbines (short-barrel rifles) with subsonic loads might just be the perfect weapon for NSG...but they don't seem like they want to get rid of and/or reduce the usage of 9mm anytime soon.



I believe USMC was contemplating issuing suppressors to ALL of the Marine infantry at one point.

I might be completely bonkers and wrong. But I feel a lot of veterans probably love the sound and feel of their weapon firing. Probably gets their adrenaline rushing.
So you might get soldiers not using suppressors just for the reason of "woh mazaa nahi hai".

Again I might be completely wrong. But it's a guess.

 

[mist_consecutive]

I might be completely bonkers and wrong. But I feel a lot of veterans probably love the sound and feel of their weapon firing. Probably gets their adrenaline rushing.
So you might get soldiers not using suppressors just for the reason of "woh mazaa nahi hai".

Again I might be completely wrong. But it's a guess.

Yep, you are completely bonkers and wrong. Ever fired a gun? They are loud, I mean really loud. It pains the ears. You go completely deaf in a gunfight.
And supressors do not muffle the sound to soft purring of cat. It's still high, but maybe 20-30 decibels low.

 

[Gessler]

Bulk of SOCOM budget goes toward the really big ticket items like infrastructure and support assets which allow them the ability to respond to any location and situation anywhere on the globe.

Network infra, communications, transportation assets (specialized helos like MH-47G and development of such things as the Stealth Black Hawk that no one knew existed until OBL raid, although such projects are mostly funded by black budgets).

Adoption of personal equipment (stuff worn by a soldier on his body) is relatively inexpensive. If smaller countries like Poland, Nigeria and Indonesia can do it, we can do it.

To drive the point home further for those that might think gearing up along the lines of USSOCOM units is only for the powerful P5 countries...

Indonesian KOPASKA

New Zealand NZSAS

Australian SASR

Austrian Jagdkommandos

Canadian JTF-2

Norwegian FSK

Brazilian GRUMEC

South Korean UDT/SEALs

So, as I was saying...a "Combatant Standard" across SF units worldwide. To such a degree, that for most of these units in their typical gear, if one were to remove the insignia & flag-patches (and in some cases, weapons), it becomes nearly impossible to tell one from the other.

 

[ezsasa]

To drive the point home further for those that might think gearing up along the lines of USSOCOM units is only for the powerful P5 countries...

Indonesian KOPASKA

View attachment 34047

New Zealand NZSAS

Australian SASR

Austrian Jagdkommandos

Canadian JTF-2

Norwegian FSK

Brazilian GRUMEC

South Korean UDT/SEALs

So, as I was saying...a "Combatant Standard" across SF units worldwide. To such a degree, that for most of these units in their typical gear, if one were to remove the insignia & flag-patches (and in some cases, weapons), it becomes nearly impossible to tell one from the other.

Any estimates on what are numbers of each of these forces? and what is the estimate of indian SF numbers?

 

[Kay]

I am not against the modern gizmos the SFs are getting, but feel there is a fundamental disconnect.

US special forces are the tip of an expeditionary force. They are foreigners in a hostile country fighting a foreign force.

Our special forces are fighting our own people brainwashed and gone rogue. We cannot act and look like foreigners with no ties to the land and people, because someday we will like the sons and grandsons of today's Naxalites, Ulfas, NSCNs and Kashmiri militants to join the mainstream as productive citizens. That is why our special forces have to look like them, infiltrate and fight up close. Their job is enforcing law, order and government authority, not act like mercenaries.

Looking and acting like Blackwater will create a fundamental alienation of our own population. The solution to our internal problems is multifaceted - political, economic and security. Just focusing on heavy handed security will be counter-productive.

 

[Gessler]

Any estimates on what are numbers of each of these forces? and what is the estimate of indian SF numbers?

Varies from one to other - not all are same structure or of same organisation. Tier-1 operators number in few hundreds, but the same type of equipment & gear is used by Tier-2 as well, which number in several thousand.

Some SpecOps units are highly specialized and rarely cross 500 men. Others, like the SAS, SASR, 75th Rangers, non-NSW SEALs etc. are regiment-strength units. Much like our Paras (although not all battalions of Parachute regiment are actually SF).

Thing is, it's less to do with how many there are, and more to do with what is their intended role. That's why operators of the 75th Ranger Regiment (numbering some ~4,000) are outfitted similarly as Tier-1 operators:

In my opinion, the units in India which need to adopt the NATO-spec combatant standard are:

Special Group (SG)
Para SF (and rest of Para Regmt)
MARCOS
Garuds
Ghatak commandos

Non-military:
NSG
Special Frontier Force (technically non-military)
The Commando elements and Quick Action Teams under the CAPFs

...just what I can say off the top of my head.

I am not against the modern gizmos the SFs are getting, but feel there is a fundamental disconnect.

US special forces are the tip of an expeditionary force. They are foreigners in a hostile country fighting a foreign force.

Our special forces are fighting our own people brainwashed and gone rogue. We cannot act and look like foreigners with no ties to the land and people, because someday we will like the sons and grandsons of today's Naxalites, Ulfas, NSCNs and Kashmiri militants to join the mainstream as productive citizens. That is why our special forces have to look like them, infiltrate and fight up close. Their job is enforcing law, order and government authority, not act like mercenaries.

Looking and acting like Blackwater will create a fundamental alienation of our own population. The solution to our internal problems is multifaceted - political, economic and security. Just focusing on heavy handed security will be counter-productive.

I believe you do not get what were are talking about here. Hearts and Minds is the job of Rashtriya Rifles and JKP...and they do exactly that (within realistic expectations). In other words, the job of units who's intent it is to police or otherwise hold a territory.

SF operations are not about hearts & minds. SF men do not sit & chat with locals and try to build a better understanding (unless they are not on an Op, or otherwise off-duty, in which case they will if they feel like it).

SF ops are simply about coming, dealing with the threat, and going away.

That said, even SF operations vary to a great deal - in an incidence where it is required for them to be discreet (so as either to seem friendly to the locals as you said, or to make it inconspicuous to observers that there is SF presence among the regular military) they do dress accordingly. Whether it's us or Americans.

These are Delta operators at Tora Bora:

But what about when there is no need to dress like that? What about when going for operations inside PoK, resolving situations with pirates like MARCOS do, or parachuting around an enemy airbase and disrupting or capturing it, like what Garuds are trained for?

I'm talking about these cases.

 

[Kay]

It is unfortunate that Indian army gets dragged into fighting the terrorists (Pakistan sponsored) and militants (local brainwashed youth) in Kashmir and NE, which should be handled entirely by Rakshamantri.
There should be complete separation of concerns. Our para force commandos, Marcos and Garuds are operating in Kashmir and many of them losing their lives in situations which do not do justice to their training and dedication.
Solution is to get CAPFs and local police forces the equipment and training to handle this situation, transfer Rashtriya and Assam Rifles under Rakshamantri and get our Paras, Marcos and Garuds out of this.

 

[Gessler]

It is unfortunate that Indian army gets dragged into fighting the terrorists (Pakistan sponsored) and militants (local brainwashed youth) in Kashmir and NE, which should be handled entirely by Rakshamantri.
There should be complete separation of concerns. Our para force commandos, Marcos and Garuds are operating in Kashmir and many of them losing their lives in situations which do not do justice to their training and dedication.
Solution is to get CAPFs and local police forces the equipment and training to handle this situation, transfer Rashtriya and Assam Rifles under Rakshamantri and get our Paras, Marcos and Garuds out of this.

They are already under Raksha Mantri (aka Minister/Ministry of Defence). You probably mean to say Grah Mantri (Home Minister/Ministry of Home Affairs).

I agree in principle to what you say - internal security roles should be the job of MHA units alone. However, as I've previously said in a reply to Bhadra, it's also important that the military special forces maintain a high ops tempo. And that is maintained by routinely engaging in combat situations.

The alternative to having their role revoked in J&K (while doing justice to their need for maintaining a high tempo of operations) is to make PoK, Myanmar, and other countries their regular playground.

But that requires a whole new level of political will and long-term planning. It's an entirely different debate.

 

[ezsasa]

Varies from one to other - not all are same structure or of same organisation. Tier-1 operators number in few hundreds, but the same type of equipment & gear is used by Tier-2 as well, which number in several thousand.

Some SpecOps units are highly specialized and rarely cross 500 men. Others, like the SAS, SASR, 75th Rangers, non-NSW SEALs etc. are regiment-strength units. Much like our Paras (although not all battalions of Parachute regiment are actually SF).

Thing is, it's less to do with how many there are, and more to do with what is their intended role. That's why operators of the 75th Ranger Regiment (numbering some ~4,000) are outfitted similarly as Tier-1 operators:

In my opinion, the units in India which need to adopt the NATO-spec combatant standard are:

Special Group (SG)
Para SF (and rest of Para Regmt)
MARCOS
Garuds
Ghatak commandos

Non-military:
NSG
Special Frontier Force (technically non-military)
The Commando elements and Quick Action Teams under the CAPFs

...just what I can say off the top of my head.



I believe you do not get what were are talking about here. Hearts and Minds is the job of Rashtriya Rifles and JKP...and they do exactly that (within realistic expectations). In other words, the job of units who's intent it is to police or otherwise hold a territory.

SF operations are not about hearts & minds. SF men do not sit & chat with locals and try to build a better understanding (unless they are not on an Op, or otherwise off-duty, in which case they will if they feel like it).

SF ops are simply about coming, dealing with the threat, and going away.

That said, even SF operations vary to a great deal - in an incidence where it is required for them to be discreet (so as either to seem friendly to the locals as you said, or to make it inconspicuous to observers that there is SF presence among the regular military) they do dress accordingly. Whether it's us or Americans.

These are Delta operators at Tora Bora:

But what about when there is no need to dress like that? What about when going for operations inside PoK, resolving situations with pirates like MARCOS do, or parachuting around an enemy airbase and disrupting or capturing it, like what Garuds are trained for?

I'm talking about these cases.

When you say NATO standard, it includes assault rifle too is it?
Optics are on the way, we have already seen some being used in the ops over the past year or two..
New comm sets will probably depend on which Software defined radio is selected for IA.
BPJ helmets are already in, but for now cut helmets are only for team leaders..
These are the costly items...
Rest of the gear should be easier to change....

 

[Kay]

They are already under Raksha Mantri (aka Minister/Ministry of Defence). You probably mean to say Grah Mantri (Home Minister/Ministry of Home Affairs).

I agree in principle to what you say - internal security roles should be the job of MHA units alone. However, as I've previously said in a reply to Bhadra, it's also important that the military special forces maintain a high ops tempo. And that is maintained by routinely engaging in combat situations.

The alternative to having their role revoked in J&K (while doing justice to their need for maintaining a high tempo of operations) is to make PoK, Myanmar, and other countries their regular playground.

But that requires a whole new level of political will and long-term planning. It's an entirely different debate.

Yes, my bad, I was thinking of MHA.
Using our own complex problem spots as training ground is not a good idea. Cross border discreet operations are perfectly fine. We need teams similar to BAT.
Better to focus on resolving the issues.

 

[Gessler]

I'm copy pasting one of my posts from another forum which dealt with Sandeep Unnithan's recent DailyO article about SF equipment order being delayed on DAC table...

https://www.dailyo.in/politics/para...try-of-defence-indian-army/story/1/30043.html

The chart from Sandeep's article:

My post that attempted to dissect some of the things in the list:

"

Appreciate this report for bringing the list out, unlike the previous totally lacklustre reports which couldn't bring the specifics to the fore regarding anything, and resorted to extremely vague terminologies. However, this isn't without bad news, as always, unneeded bureaucratic nonsense & red-tape screwing up procurement yet again.

The 7.62 x 51 mm FN Scar, made by a US unit of Belgium’s FN Herstal, is required to upgrade the firepower of SF operators in dense jungles of the Northeast and Myanmar.

Understandable....heavy brush environments (i.e. wooded area/heavy foliage etc.) more often than not favours heavier calibre rounds over the smaller ones, owing to their superior ability to penetrate without losing too much of their ballistic properties while going through leaves, branches & stumps.

And in that calibre, the SCAR H makes about as much sense as the best of them.

The case for a new lightweight belt-fed 7.62 x 51 machine gun to replace 50-year old OFBmade ‘1B’ LMGs, has been pending since 2005. The LMGs are critical squad support weapons giving the small six-unit teams of the Para-SF units heavy firepower.

In their absence, SF units resorted to stripping machine guns from de-commissioned battle tanks or using weapons recovered from militants.

...the ad-hoc MGs they're talking about here are the PKM/PKTs taken from retired T-55 MBTs and/or captured from slain terrorists (they also include the Chinese copies of the same). Without discounting the merit of the weapon (PK is an excellent gun), it's quite appalling that the top SF units of a $3 trillion economy have to scavenge weapons from the field because they're not provided what they want. It's frustrating just to know, to be honest - however this bit itself about the PKs is not new to me or to many here.

The Mk.48 Mod 0/Mod 1 would make for an excellent squad-level MG in 7.62 Nato, the particular variant (Mk.48) was developed out of the FN Minimi (aka M249 SAW) keeping requirements of the US SOCOM in mind, I'd think it would serve the Indian SFs very well:

1,400 FN Scar (L) or HK-416 assault rifles,

The SCAR L is a very real possibility as a replacement for the 5.56 M4A1s (I said as much in this thread a while ago), however, I have doubts regarding the buy of HK416. Now, it's not impossible to imagine HK416s making their way to India as in an FMS deal, it's the US DoD which places the orders and Heckler & Koch has no ban on selling to the US DoD, however, the Germans have very clear rules regarding end-users...

...for example, I put forth what happened with SIG Sauer in Germany very recently:

" German officials allege Sig Sauer manufactured at least 38,000 pistols in the company's facility in the town of Eckernforde between 2009 and 2011, before shipping the weapons to its U.S. entity's headquarters in New Hampshire, which then completed the transaction with Colombia. Sig Sauer is alleged to have covered up the shipment's final destination by submitting false paperwork, known as end-use certificates, to German export officials, stating that the weapons were bound solely for the United States. "

CEO Of U.S. Gun-Maker Faces Jail In Germany

(because export of weapons to Colombia was banned)

It is unclear to me personally what are the rules regarding end-user transfers of firearms manufactured within US however (as H&K has several production facilities in the US and more than likely these supposed HK416s will be produced there), however, H&K remains a German-owned and German-headquartered company answerable to German govt and laws. I'm skeptical of the 416s coming through.

That doesn't say anything regarding my personal preference however. I would definitely pick the HK416A5 over the SCAR L any day of the week. The Para (SF) operators, coming from the M4A1, would also find it easier to work with the AR-15 based HK design over the SCAR. End of the day, both are great guns - despite the SCAR L not having won particular praise among the US SOF community (owing to certain operating problems in extreme environments or so I've heard, don't know if they have been fixed).....pretty much everyone prefers the HK416 over it.

If for whatever reason the HK416s cannot come through to India, I'd still prefer a gas piston AR-15 from a reputed manufacturer (Barrett, LWRC, SIG etc.) over the SCAR-L. But that's just me.

In their absence, SF units resorted to stripping machine guns from de-commissioned battle tanks or using weapons recovered from militants. This procurement is part of a larger upgrade which includes Finnish Sako sniper rifles, Carl Gustaf Mark-4 rocket launchers and Beretta pistols and LSVs.

The Sako sniper rifles I believe are actually the Tikka T3x TAC-A1, which are already ordered by MARCOS as far as I know. The Tikka brand is owned by Sako. Like how everyone reported the Army was buying Beretta sniper rifles for the LoC, whereas the rifles were actually from Victrix Armaments who is the designer/manufacturer, the Victrix brand however had Beretta as their parent company.

Of course, the possibility of an actual Sako rifle, like the TRG-42, is not to be ruled out either, but I personally think it is the Tikka:

They do not specify which is the Beretta handgun being bought...I would think, there are 3 options from the company:

Px4 Storm

M9A3 (latest iteration of the 92FS which some Paras use, the "M9" designation was originally only for the US military-issued 92FS, but later on, Beretta started naming its 92FS successor model as M9A3 internationally...or at least that will be the case as the model was specifically developed for the MHS competition. It's not to be ruled out that it will acquire a different name for the international market now that SIG won that competition. But till then, we have no name to refer to it other than as M9A3:

APX (my personal favourite, don't ask why...it's also the only striker-fired pistol among these three)

"

Some inputs I got from others indicated the Sako TRG-M10 in .338 lapmag could also potentially be the aforementioned Sako sniper rifle:

 

[Gessler]

When you say NATO standard, it includes assault rifle too is it?
Optics are on the way, we have already seen some being used in the ops over the past year or two..
New comm sets will probably depend on which Software defined radio is selected for IA.
BPJ helmets are already in, but for now cut helmets are only for team leaders..
These are the costly items...
Rest of the gear should be easier to change....

You are talking about stuff for the regular infantry. I'm talking about things meant for SF units.

When you say NATO standard, it includes assault rifle too is it?

Yes - though, we are more or less already there. Tavor TAR-21, M4A1 are very much Western-spec weapons. And we have heard news recently that Para SF was intent on a buy of SCAR rifles in large numbers - I personally would have preferred a AR-15 based model (piston-driven, not direct impingement like our current M4A1s), but whatever, SCAR is still a great modern rifle.

See my post above for more insight.

New comm sets will probably depend on which Software defined radio is selected for IA.

Again, SF units need not be constrained by what equipment is selected for the regular infantry. That said, the thing of contention is not the radio itself, but the tactical headset that goes with it (bought separately). Headsets of this ilk are a better option (compared to the throat-mics and in-ear headphones our forces mostly use nowadays) in the fact that they:

• Afford better protection from shrapnel
• Provide active cancellation of high-decibel noises like gunfire & explosions so as to ensure user doesn't lose his hearing acuity (common issue for soldiers that see lot of combat)
• And at same time, enhance the perception of low-decibel noises like talking and footsteps (Active Noise Control).

I'm talking about headsets like these:

http://www.gentexcorptradeshows.com/cansec/sellsheets/Ops-Core-RAC-Headset.pdf

https://www.revisionmilitary.com/en/amfile/file/download/file_id/436/product_id/297/

...which are the whole reason why high-cut helmets were created in the first place (to accommodate such headsets. Otherwise, might as well go with regular full-cut ACH shell and get that extra bit of side/ear protection).

It really doesn't matter what type of radio you use. You just connect it to the headset via universal cable jacks.

BPJ helmets are already in, but for now cut helmets are only for team leaders..

Again, you're talking about infantry, I'm on about SFs. That said, team leaders are earmarked for helmets with integral radio headset...BUT, they are NOT high-cut helmets, and the headsets are not of the type SFs ought to be using. They look more or less like this:

... and are fitted to the inside of regular full-cut ACH (which may or may not have rails, btw):

 

[Gessler]

I'm copy pasting one of my posts from another forum which dealt with Sandeep Unnithan's recent DailyO article about SF equipment order being delayed on DAC table...

https://www.dailyo.in/politics/para...try-of-defence-indian-army/story/1/30043.html

The chart from Sandeep's article:

View attachment 34061

My post that attempted to dissect some of the things in the list:

"

Appreciate this report for bringing the list out, unlike the previous totally lacklustre reports which couldn't bring the specifics to the fore regarding anything, and resorted to extremely vague terminologies. However, this isn't without bad news, as always, unneeded bureaucratic nonsense & red-tape screwing up procurement yet again.



Understandable....heavy brush environments (i.e. wooded area/heavy foliage etc.) more often than not favours heavier calibre rounds over the smaller ones, owing to their superior ability to penetrate without losing too much of their ballistic properties while going through leaves, branches & stumps.

And in that calibre, the SCAR H makes about as much sense as the best of them.

...the ad-hoc MGs they're talking about here are the PKM/PKTs taken from retired T-55 MBTs and/or captured from slain terrorists (they also include the Chinese copies of the same). Without discounting the merit of the weapon (PK is an excellent gun), it's quite appalling that the top SF units of a $3 trillion economy have to scavenge weapons from the field because they're not provided what they want. It's frustrating just to know, to be honest - however this bit itself about the PKs is not new to me or to many here.

The Mk.48 Mod 0/Mod 1 would make for an excellent squad-level MG in 7.62 Nato, the particular variant (Mk.48) was developed out of the FN Minimi (aka M249 SAW) keeping requirements of the US SOCOM in mind, I'd think it would serve the Indian SFs very well:

The SCAR L is a very real possibility as a replacement for the 5.56 M4A1s (I said as much in this thread a while ago), however, I have doubts regarding the buy of HK416. Now, it's not impossible to imagine HK416s making their way to India as in an FMS deal, it's the US DoD which places the orders and Heckler & Koch has no ban on selling to the US DoD, however, the Germans have very clear rules regarding end-users...

...for example, I put forth what happened with SIG Sauer in Germany very recently:

" German officials allege Sig Sauer manufactured at least 38,000 pistols in the company's facility in the town of Eckernforde between 2009 and 2011, before shipping the weapons to its U.S. entity's headquarters in New Hampshire, which then completed the transaction with Colombia. Sig Sauer is alleged to have covered up the shipment's final destination by submitting false paperwork, known as end-use certificates, to German export officials, stating that the weapons were bound solely for the United States. "

CEO Of U.S. Gun-Maker Faces Jail In Germany

(because export of weapons to Colombia was banned)

It is unclear to me personally what are the rules regarding end-user transfers of firearms manufactured within US however (as H&K has several production facilities in the US and more than likely these supposed HK416s will be produced there), however, H&K remains a German-owned and German-headquartered company answerable to German govt and laws. I'm skeptical of the 416s coming through.

That doesn't say anything regarding my personal preference however. I would definitely pick the HK416A5 over the SCAR L any day of the week. The Para (SF) operators, coming from the M4A1, would also find it easier to work with the AR-15 based HK design over the SCAR. End of the day, both are great guns - despite the SCAR L not having won particular praise among the US SOF community (owing to certain operating problems in extreme environments or so I've heard, don't know if they have been fixed).....pretty much everyone prefers the HK416 over it.

If for whatever reason the HK416s cannot come through to India, I'd still prefer a gas piston AR-15 from a reputed manufacturer (Barrett, LWRC, SIG etc.) over the SCAR-L. But that's just me.

The Sako sniper rifles I believe are actually the Tikka T3x TAC-A1, which are already ordered by MARCOS as far as I know. The Tikka brand is owned by Sako. Like how everyone reported the Army was buying Beretta sniper rifles for the LoC, whereas the rifles were actually from Victrix Armaments who is the designer/manufacturer, the Victrix brand however had Beretta as their parent company.

Of course, the possibility of an actual Sako rifle, like the TRG-42, is not to be ruled out either, but I personally think it is the Tikka:

They do not specify which is the Beretta handgun being bought...I would think, there are 3 options from the company:

Px4 Storm

M9A3 (latest iteration of the 92FS which some Paras use, the "M9" designation was originally only for the US military-issued 92FS, but later on, Beretta started naming its 92FS successor model as M9A3 internationally...or at least that will be the case as the model was specifically developed for the MHS competition. It's not to be ruled out that it will acquire a different name for the international market now that SIG won that competition. But till then, we have no name to refer to it other than as M9A3:



APX (my personal favourite, don't ask why...it's also the only striker-fired pistol among these three)



"

Some inputs I got from others indicated the Sako TRG-M10 in .338 lapmag could also potentially be the aforementioned Sako sniper rifle:

Keeping this firearms procurement in mind (and going by the general trajectory of Westernization), I can say reliably that within the next 5-6 years, the Para SF units might look pretty similar to what the US 75th Rangers look today, complete with the SCARs, Mk.48s and everything;

 

[ezsasa]

You are talking about stuff for the regular infantry. I'm talking about things meant for SF units.



Yes - though, we are more or less already there. Tavor TAR-21, M4A1 are very much Western-spec weapons. And we have heard news recently that Para SF was intent on a buy of SCAR rifles in large numbers - I personally would have preferred a AR-15 based model (piston-driven, not direct impingement like our current M4A1s), but whatever, SCAR is still a great modern rifle.

See my post above for more insight.



Again, SF units need not be constrained by what equipment is selected for the regular infantry. That said, the thing of contention is not the radio itself, but the tactical headset that goes with it (bought separately). Headsets of this ilk are a better option (compared to the throat-mics and in-ear headphones our forces mostly use nowadays) in the fact that they:

• Afford better protection from shrapnel
• Provide active cancellation of high-decibel noises like gunfire & explosions so as to ensure user doesn't lose his hearing acuity (common issue for soldiers that see lot of combat)
• And at same time, enhance the perception of low-decibel noises like talking and footsteps (Active Noise Control).

I'm talking about headsets like these:

http://www.gentexcorptradeshows.com/cansec/sellsheets/Ops-Core-RAC-Headset.pdf

https://www.revisionmilitary.com/en/amfile/file/download/file_id/436/product_id/297/

View attachment 34066

...which are the whole reason why high-cut helmets were created in the first place (to accommodate such headsets. Otherwise, might as well go with regular full-cut ACH shell and get that extra bit of side/ear protection).

It really doesn't matter what type of radio you use. You just connect it to the headset via universal cable jacks.



Again, you're talking about infantry, I'm on about SFs. That said, team leaders are earmarked for helmets with integral radio headset...BUT, they are NOT high-cut helmets, and the headsets are not of the type SFs ought to be using. They look more or less like this:

View attachment 34065

... and are fitted to the inside of regular full-cut ACH (which may or may not have rails, btw):

Thathastu......
but we may have to wait a bit.... I am assuming Army Design Bureau will take this up at some point.. they do release compendium of requirements annually, I think they released two such compendiums so far...

Thank you for sharing this information!!!!