Indian Special Forces

[Automatic Kalashnikov]

Which SF are these

 

[Killbot]

Which SF are these
View attachment 93172
View attachment 93173

Garud.

 

[tejas10]

Tavor with a bayonet
View attachment 93171

Nice pic. First time I’ve seen an IA bull pup with a bayonet fixed apart from the British who love that in any engagement.

 

[ALBY]

no its not ask anyone who has shot one over the interwebs. The recoil is alot more than even an overgassed ar15.
And its just not as reliable as people make it out to be, any good quality AR is just as reliable.
Its also significantly heavier and costs alot more than a good AR.

Cost of the weapons u said above too are super expensive. Around 3k USD or above. Could u share any link regarding this reliability issues of Hk416

 

[ALBY]

Is video file not supported in this forum? Not able to see the upload option.

Video links only

 

[Johny_Baba]

@AVINASH4061 sir, pls take a look at these videos. Ig it’s probably the first time they’re firing the gun so it’s like this, but if I, not wrong they’ll need to change the training process and impart recoil management techniques.
Please ignore the background music.

Recoil management on a 7.62x51mm ? that too on full auto ? THAT TOO ON AR PLATFORM ?!

i'd like to point out some things,
when 7.62x51mm came out post ww2 it was said to be in same power category, also firing similar bullet to .30-06 but at same time being "compact" compared to that, like having about 17 percent lighter overall weight and being somewhat shorter in overall length to that,
and later arm-twisting by certain sleuths in the US (backed by pig churchill) forced newly formed NATO to adopt to that round, practically fuxxing many firearms programs apart, most notably FN FAL which was destined to be one of NATO's primary arm (other being G-3 of H&K+CETME) back then supposed to be chambered in .270 or .280 (more specifically .280/30 British round) and what not...
so this resulted in whole Battle Rifle doctorine being popularised in post-WW2 world among US-their allies and some former colonies like India who followed their former colonial masters (British, of course) in military small arms programs (you can still see its effects here in many ways),

anyways so first point with 7.62 NATO is it's almost like you are firing a compact version of .30-06 from supposed "Assault Rifles" and then complain about excessive recoil ?

Then I'd highly recommend to read Eugene Stoner's patent of "Gas operated bolt and carrier system" which describes how gas system on AR-pattern firearms works,
in his own words,

It is a principal object of this invention to utilize the basic parts of an automatic rifle mechanism such as the bolt and bolt carrier to perform a double function. This double function consists of the bolt's primary function to lock the breach against the pressure of firing, and secondarily, to act as a stationary piston to actuate the automatic rifle mechanism. The primary function of the bolt carrier is to lock and unlock the bolt by rotating it and to carry it back and forth in the receiver. The secondary function of the bolt carrier is to act as a mov able cylinder to actuate the automatic rifle mechanism. By having the bolt carrier act as a movable cylinder and the bolt act as a stationary piston, the need for a con 0. 5 20 25 30 35 ventional gas cylinder, piston and actuating rod assem bly is eliminated. It is an object of this invention to provide a gas system which is lighter and less expensive to produce because of its simplicity than the present gas systems now used in automatic rifle mechanisms. - It is another object of this invention to utilize the energy of the expanding gas developed by the firing of the weapon, for actuating the automatic rifle mechanism directly by use of a metered amount of the gas coming from the barrel. This invention is a true expanding gas system instead of the conventional impinging gas system. By utilization of a metered amount of gas from the barrel, the automatic rifle mechanism is less sensitive to different firing pressures caused by variations in the propelling charge. It is therefore still another object of this in vention, to provide a rifle mechanism which is not affected by variations in the propelling charge.

Basically what he's saying is contrary to popular beliefs piston behind bolt of the AR's mechanism is actually a "reverse piston" i.e. it remains locked to the barrel extension while expanding gases pushes Bolt Carrier rearwards, which has a camming surface on it and by virtue of an attached camming pin on the bolt it rotates it and whole things works yada yada...

...so putting it in further simpler terms is
>Gases are directly acting on the bolt carrier itself (via expansion inside yes)
>Bolt carrier is in-lined to the barrel-buttstock and recoil spring on it is housed inside the buffer tube which is part of it's buttstock

so you see the thing here ? a full powered round like 7.62 NATO when it's fired from such design it shall apply tremendious push to the working parts directly and at end some of that will also transfer to the shooter, reverse is also true for e.g. you fire a 'lighter recoiling' round compared to that like 5.56x45mm and recoil on it is well dampened due to same design.

So yeah if your aim is to get an 'assault rifle' then 7.62 NATO chambered AR pattern rifle isn't an ideal solution if some recoil management is also desired for full auto fire.

Basically what we're getting with this deal is a standard "Battle Rifle" package with some modern stuff like rails and now trying to use it as an Assault Rifle, go figure.

Now again i perfectly know all recent requirements of having a 'shoot-to-kill' pattern rifle for mountain warfare requirements yada yada so hope to not go through whole discussions again and again.

But even before 7.62x51mm AR here we did have SLR in same round and heavy recoil was one of the reason for transition towards INSAS (other factors being whole "lessons" from the vietnam//falklands thing and some of our own experiences in Sri Lanka theatre during LTTE times)...now we're back to almost similar thing again, bravo!

Sidenote - i kept saying about it in a telegram group that choice of AR pattern rifle that too in 7.62 NATO is going to create recoil related issues here, apart from many other potential issues,
back then i was ridiculed by some people for my questioning of IA's usual goal shifting antics like this, now you see yourself...

“Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

 

[shuvo@y2k10]

As far as recoil goes, the OFB R-2 rifle which was developed in 2017 in response to the requirement of 7.62*51 mm caliber, had a lesser recoil than what was bought (Sig-716).

Lt. Gen Joshi (currently GOC, Northern Command) tested the rifle in RF Ishapore and commented about the recoil while firing from the hip.

This prompted OFB to add a muzzle brake on it, though Army's interest in that rifle died down shortly after.

 

[Maharaj samudragupt]

As far as recoil goes, the OFB R-2 rifle which was developed in 2017 in response to the requirement of 7.62*51 mm caliber, had a lesser recoil than what was bought (Sig-716).

Lt. Gen Joshi (currently GOC, Northern Command) tested the rifle in RF Ishapore and commented about the recoil while firing from the hip.

This prompted OFB to add a muzzle brake on it, though Army's interest in that rifle died down shortly after.

For monetary and other reasons , classified under officials secrets Act , 1923.

 

[Maharaj samudragupt]

I hab a quechion , my comrades .
Did the army got the whole lot of sigs from Usa ?
Plus tell me comrades , don't these rifles need spare parts ?
Will india make the same here or we have initiated our dependence on usa for a simple rifle.

 

[Aditya Ballal]

Recoil management on a 7.62x51mm ? that too on full auto ? THAT TOO ON AR PLATFORM ?!

i'd like to point out some things,
when 7.62x51mm came out post ww2 it was said to be in same power category, also firing similar bullet to .30-06 but at same time being "compact" compared to that, like having about 17 percent lighter overall weight and being somewhat shorter in overall length to that,
and later arm-twisting by certain sleuths in the US (backed by pig churchill) forced newly formed NATO to adopt to that round, practically fuxxing many firearms programs apart, most notably FN FAL which was destined to be one of NATO's primary arm (other being G-3 of H&K+CETME) back then supposed to be chambered in .270 or .280 (more specifically .280/30 British round) and what not...
so this resulted in whole Battle Rifle doctorine being popularised in post-WW2 world among US-their allies and some former colonies like India who followed their former colonial masters (British, of course) in military small arms programs (you can still see its effects here in many ways),

anyways so first point with 7.62 NATO is it's almost like you are firing a compact version of .30-06 from supposed "Assault Rifles" and then complain about excessive recoil ?

Then I'd highly recommend to read Eugene Stoner's patent of "Gas operated bolt and carrier system" which describes how gas system on AR-pattern firearms works,
in his own words,

Basically what he's saying is contrary to popular beliefs piston behind bolt of the AR's mechanism is actually a "reverse piston" i.e. it remains locked to the barrel extension while expanding gases pushes Bolt Carrier rearwards, which has a camming surface on it and by virtue of an attached camming pin on the bolt it rotates it and whole things works yada yada...

...so putting it in further simpler terms is
>Gases are directly acting on the bolt carrier itself (via expansion inside yes)
>Bolt carrier is in-lined to the barrel-buttstock and recoil spring on it is housed inside the buffer tube which is part of it's buttstock

so you see the thing here ? a full powered round like 7.62 NATO when it's fired from such design it shall apply tremendious push to the working parts directly and at end some of that will also transfer to the shooter, reverse is also true for e.g. you fire a 'lighter recoiling' round compared to that like 5.56x45mm and recoil on it is well dampened due to same design.

So yeah if your aim is to get an 'assault rifle' then 7.62 NATO chambered AR pattern rifle isn't an ideal solution if some recoil management is also desired for full auto fire.

Basically what we're getting with this deal is a standard "Battle Rifle" package with some modern stuff like rails and now trying to use it as an Assault Rifle, go figure.

Now again i perfectly know all recent requirements of having a 'shoot-to-kill' pattern rifle for mountain warfare requirements yada yada so hope to not go through whole discussions again and again.

But even before 7.62x51mm AR here we did have SLR in same round and heavy recoil was one of the reason for transition towards INSAS (other factors being whole "lessons" from the vietnam//falklands thing and some of our own experiences in Sri Lanka theatre during LTTE times)...now we're back to almost similar thing again, bravo!

Sidenote - i kept saying about it in a telegram group that choice of AR pattern rifle that too in 7.62 NATO is going to create recoil related issues here, apart from many other potential issues,
back then i was ridiculed by some people for my questioning of IA's usual goal shifting antics like this, now you see yourself...

“Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

If your response in its entirety is directed at me, I know the 7.62 NATO is difficult to control at full auto, but many times we’ve seen troops hold the gun like a Kalashnikov or Insas, which is adding to the aforementioned inherent recoil problems. This is the first time they’re using an AR platform rifle and after a gap of 20-25 years a battle rifle, a large number of men have been trained from the beginning itself on the INSAS so obviously training methods will have to change too for a new family of firearms. I know we’ve used the FAL in the past so we can surely handle the rifle for sure, but don’t you think they should try and improve few techniques too exploit the full potential of the platform?

 

[Johny_Baba]

If your response is directed at me, I know the 7.62 NATO is difficult to control at full auto, but many times we’ve seen troops hold the gun like a Kalashnikov or Insas, which adding to the aforementioned inherent recoil problems. This is the first time they’re using an AR platform rifle and after a gap of 20-25 years a battle rifle, a large number of men have been trained from the beginning itself on the INSAS so obviously training methods will have to change too for a new family of firearms. I know we’ve used the FAL in the past so we can surely handle the rifle for sure, but don’t you think they should try and improve few techniques too exploit the full potential of the platform?

No my response wasn't intended to be directed to you as person, just figure of speech...pardon me if it felt like a personal attack but i've recently become tired of all these...things...that despite having had plethora of options somehow we always end up with such things and so,

rest for other parts in para, like training etc i think i shouldn't give much comments on it, controversial topic on its own.

 

[Aditya Ballal]

No my response wasn't intended to be directed to you as person, just figure of speech...pardon me if it felt like a personal attack but i've recently become tired of all these...things...that despite having had plethora of options somehow we always end up with such things and so,

rest for other parts in para, like training etc i think i shouldn't give much comments on it, controversial topic on its own.

Do you think we should have given up on the 5.56x45mm as the standard round for our infantry? SF perspective for most tasks 5.56 seems to still be the most effective round. Adopting any intermediate cartridge would definitely be a really big gamble.
Question is open to all.

 

[shuvo@y2k10]

I think Indian SF being a small community can experiment with rounds like 6.8mm or 6.5mm.

 

[Aditya Ballal]

I think Indian SF being a small community can experiment with rounds like 6.8mm or 6.5mm.

I would rather NSG try it out first as they’re smaller and more accepting of trying new stuff, plus there would be a lot less bureaucratic hurdles too.

 

[Automatic Kalashnikov]

I would rather NSG try it out first as they’re smaller and more accepting of trying new stuff, plus there would be a lot less bureaucratic hurdles too.

They won't see much (or any) operational use

 

[Aditya Ballal]

They won't see much (or any) operational use

Hmmm that’s also there

 

[ManhattanProject]

Cost of the weapons u said above too are super expensive. Around 3k USD or above. Could u share any link regarding this reliability issues of Hk416

i never said that the hk416 is unreliable, it just as reliable as any other modern well made AR15. But with the AR you have lighter weight, same ergonomics and far lesser recoil.

 

[Scramjet]

Some tech stuff :
FLIRs make pictures from heat, not visible light. Heat (also called infrared, or thermal, energy) and light are both parts of the electromagnetic spectrum, but a camera that can detect visible light won’t see thermal energy, and vice versa.

Thermal cameras detect more than just heat though; they detect tiny differences in heat – as small as 0.01°C – and display them as shades of grey or with different colors.

On the other hand
NVGs/NODs/NVDs use optoelectronic image enhancement, which works by sensing small amounts of infrared light that are reflected off objects and then electrically amplifying that light into a characteristic glowing green/white image depending upon phosphor screen it has

The major pitfall of night vision image intensifiers is that its effectiveness decreases as nearby light decreases. This means that if the night is cloudy and overcast, blocking the light from the moon and stars, there is a dramatic decrease in the clarity of the night vision image. The same is true if fog is present, and intense rain can reflect light off many different surfaces, making it difficult to see clear images, these conditions render passive night vision devices unusable.

The major pro of using a thermal imaging camera is the fact that it requires no light to function, and strenuous weather conditions do not affect its function either. Through fog, smoke, overcast or dust storms, the thermal imaging camera will always show reliable, clear pictures that detect potential hazards with heat signatures.

To get the best of the two worlds, thermal and nvg monoculars are mounted together with a common
Interface that generates an overlapped image
(Pic 3)

Pic1: difference between natural/thermal image
Pic2 : NVG/NOD POV
Pic3 : PSQ 20 generated image (thermal + intensified)
Pic4 : para SF operatives with helmet mounted thermals (tonbo's)

 

[ManhattanProject]

Some tech stuff :
FLIRs make pictures from heat, not visible light. Heat (also called infrared, or thermal, energy) and light are both parts of the electromagnetic spectrum, but a camera that can detect visible light won’t see thermal energy, and vice versa.

Thermal cameras detect more than just heat though; they detect tiny differences in heat – as small as 0.01°C – and display them as shades of grey or with different colors.

On the other hand
NVGs/NODs/NVDs use optoelectronic image enhancement, which works by sensing small amounts of infrared light that are reflected off objects and then electrically amplifying that light into a characteristic glowing green/white image depending upon phosphor screen it has

The major pitfall of night vision image intensifiers is that its effectiveness decreases as nearby light decreases. This means that if the night is cloudy and overcast, blocking the light from the moon and stars, there is a dramatic decrease in the clarity of the night vision image. The same is true if fog is present, and intense rain can reflect light off many different surfaces, making it difficult to see clear images, these conditions render passive night vision devices unusable.

The major pro of using a thermal imaging camera is the fact that it requires no light to function, and strenuous weather conditions do not affect its function either. Through fog, smoke, overcast or dust storms, the thermal imaging camera will always show reliable, clear pictures that detect potential hazards with heat signatures.

To get the best of the two worlds, thermal and nvg monoculars are mounted together with a common
Interface that generates an overlapped image
(Pic 3)

Pic1: difference between natural/thermal image
Pic2 : NVG/NOD POV
Pic3 : PSQ 20 generated image (thermal + intensified)
Pic4 : para SF operatives with helmet mounted thermals (tonbo's)

View attachment 93234

View attachment 93235

View attachment 93236

View attachment 93238

we are still in the 1990s maybe in the next 30 years we will reach there.

 

[Aditya Ballal]

Some tech stuff :
FLIRs make pictures from heat, not visible light. Heat (also called infrared, or thermal, energy) and light are both parts of the electromagnetic spectrum, but a camera that can detect visible light won’t see thermal energy, and vice versa.

Thermal cameras detect more than just heat though; they detect tiny differences in heat – as small as 0.01°C – and display them as shades of grey or with different colors.

On the other hand
NVGs/NODs/NVDs use optoelectronic image enhancement, which works by sensing small amounts of infrared light that are reflected off objects and then electrically amplifying that light into a characteristic glowing green/white image depending upon phosphor screen it has

The major pitfall of night vision image intensifiers is that its effectiveness decreases as nearby light decreases. This means that if the night is cloudy and overcast, blocking the light from the moon and stars, there is a dramatic decrease in the clarity of the night vision image. The same is true if fog is present, and intense rain can reflect light off many different surfaces, making it difficult to see clear images, these conditions render passive night vision devices unusable.

The major pro of using a thermal imaging camera is the fact that it requires no light to function, and strenuous weather conditions do not affect its function either. Through fog, smoke, overcast or dust storms, the thermal imaging camera will always show reliable, clear pictures that detect potential hazards with heat signatures.

To get the best of the two worlds, thermal and nvg monoculars are mounted together with a common
Interface that generates an overlapped image
(Pic 3)

Pic1: difference between natural/thermal image
Pic2 : NVG/NOD POV
Pic3 : PSQ 20 generated image (thermal + intensified)
Pic4 : para SF operatives with helmet mounted thermals (tonbo's)

View attachment 93234

View attachment 93235

View attachment 93236

View attachment 93238

Duvi-B - Tonbo Imaging

tonboimaging.com

Duvi - Tonbo Imaging

tonboimaging.com

Is PSQ 20 something like these 2 products frok Tonbo Imaging?