Indian Special Forces

[Automatic Kalashnikov]

I heard they got binods but I am not getting the pic

I saw their pics with binoculars

 

[Scramjet]

I saw their pics with binoculars

Night vision Binocular ? Or dual tube night vision ?

 

[rkhanna]

I heard they got binods but I am not getting the pic

No clue. Given their level of tech I don't doubt it. But NVGs are a lessor priority in their kit I would suppose. Their primarily threat would come about in day light in public. But Between CAT and SIU they would definitely have a team at ready to deal with any situation. You wouldn't see them in public

 

[Automatic Kalashnikov]

Night vision Binocular ? Or dual tube night vision ?

Indian Special Forces

- On the right it seems to be a Atchisson AA 12 auto-shotgun with a 8-round box magazine (12ga). I'm not a 100% sure but far as I know, there are no real-world users of the AA12, military or law enforcement (could be wrong on the latter). I would sure love to hear the reasoning behind...

defenceforumindia.com

 

[Waanar]

Full length picatinny rail but he mounted his BEL on the handguard?

AK's upper receiver rattles and moves a lot. If the optic is mounted on it, there's a good chance it'll lose it's zero.

Tbf, this is the smarter thing to do compared to say.... What the other AK using SOFs do. Never understood the point of putting optics on an unstable part like that.

 

[Maharaj samudragupt]

AK's upper receiver rattles and moves a lot. If the optic is mounted on it, there's a good chance it'll lose it's zero.

Tbf, this is the smarter thing to do compared to say.... What the other AK using SOFs do. Never understood the point of putting optics on an unstable part like that.

Why doesn't army use feviquick then , to make what ever part you are saying stable ?

 

[Spadex]

Why doesn't army use feviquick then , to make what ever part you are saying stable ?

Ustad mar dalenge

 

[Gessler]

AK's upper receiver rattles and moves a lot. If the optic is mounted on it, there's a good chance it'll lose it's zero.

Tbf, this is the smarter thing to do compared to say.... What the other AK using SOFs do. Never understood the point of putting optics on an unstable part like that.

It's not really "upper receiver", just a top cover.

Aftermarket picatinny railed covers made of milled steel (like the FAB PDC or TWS rail) are pretty solid. Not as good as a pin-retained UR on AR-15s, but not as bad as the original flimsy sheet metal top cover on AKs either.

Russian SOFs are almost always seen with optics mounted there. As of this pic, it's operator preference.

But do note that this is mostly seen on 5.45x39 platforms, where the recoil is a lot milder than 7.62x39. The two-point retention on AK203/AK-15 top cover is a likely answer, but will have to wait & see for that.

 

[Maharaj samudragupt]

Ustad mar dalenge

Very sed , saar

 

[Waanar]

It's not really "upper receiver", just a top cover.

Aftermarket picatinny railed covers made of milled steel (like the FAB PDC or TWS rail) are pretty solid. Not as good as a pin-retained UR on AR-15s, but not as bad as the original flimsy sheet metal top cover on AKs either.

Russian SOFs are almost always seen with optics mounted there. As of this pic, it's operator preference.

But do note that this is mostly seen on 5.45x39 platforms, where the recoil is a lot milder than 7.62x39. The two-point retention on AK203/AK-15 top cover is a likely answer, but will have to wait & see for that.

Well, technically, it is referred to as the "upper receiver". The gods know why the fuck that is.
Plus, if you watch videos of reproduction AKs built by using the same parts, it's still DAMN wobbly. Definitely enough to lose zero.
Case in point-

Check the rattling when he fires near the last segment.

The only one whose upper receiver I haven't seen rattling away like a turd will have to be the Vityaz Sn or Saiga 9.
They have a single pin attachment in front which for all intents and purposes, works like a lever. It holds the cover pretty well, which is kind of the opposite of the way you'd want it (why tf is a subgun holding a zero more important than a full fledged rifle?)

I don't know man. I was hit on my head as a child..this world's too much for me..

I have a chair and a rope.
Guess I'll swing.

 

[Tactical Doge]

Well, technically, it is referred to as the "upper receiver". The gods know why the fuck that is.
Plus, if you watch videos of reproduction AKs built by using the same parts, it's still DAMN wobbly. Definitely enough to lose zero.
Case in point-

The only one whose upper receiver I haven't seen rattling away like a turd will have to be the Vityaz Sn or Saiga 9.
They have a single pin attachment in front which for all intents and purposes, works like a lever. It holds the cover pretty well, which is kind of the opposite of the way you'd want it (why tf is a subgun holding a zero more important than a full fledged rifle?)

I don't know man. I was hit on my head as a child..this world's too much for me..

I have a chair and a rope.
Guess I'll swing.

Check out small arms thread

 

[Waanar]

Why doesn't army use feviquick then , to make what ever part you are saying stable ?

Bhai, you have to clean it too.
And what if the fevikwik leaks into the FCG or the bolt and makes you an open bolt full auto AK by fixing the firing pin in place?

Were you being humorous? I can't tell.

Golly, I haven't slept in days.

 

[Maharaj samudragupt]

Bhai, you have to clean it too.
And what if the fevikwik leaks into the FCG or the bolt and makes you an open bolt full auto AK by fixing the firing pin in place?

Were you being humorous? I can't tell.

Golly, I haven't slept in days.

I was being a phunny man

 

[JBH22]

Not my point. The war is coming to Indian borders/cities very soon.

Unlikely to hit us in the hinterland,they will be cannon fodder thrown to the LOC.
This time we have farkhor air base also, the MIG 29 being purchased from Russia can be stationed there. May be we can get brigade size troops stationed there, if Tajik govt allows us.

 

[Inderjeet Singh]

 

[Inderjeet Singh]

Living Legend

 

[Gessler]

Well, technically, it is referred to as the "upper receiver". The gods know why the fuck that is.

Technically by who?

Dude, AKs don't have split receivers like AR15s (where the functions like trigger, feed system, bolt group are divided between upper & lower segments). In AKs, all these components are connected to, and sit inside the "lower" receiver. Ergo, the only receiver.

The top cover is just that, a top cover - designed to stop dust & crap from getting in & hot gases from being blasted into the shooter's face. Even if you remove it completely, the gun will function just fine:

How can a rifle function with part of its "receiver" missing?

Plus, if you watch videos of reproduction AKs built by using the same parts, it's still DAMN wobbly. Definitely enough to lose zero.
Case in point-

Check the rattling when he fires near the last segment.

Even in this video he's referring to it as the "top cover".

Anyway, coming to the point. There's no weapon that wouldn't wobble a bit when dealing with the recoil energy of well over a 1000 joules. As would be evident here:



Regarding the milled AK top covers I stick to what I said earlier: not as good as pin-retained upper receiver on AR15, but not as bad as stamped metal originals either.

That said, wobbling in of itself doesn't make you lose zero - you lose zero if after wobbling the part in question returns to a different position than where it was before the shot (this is the same principle behind free-floated barrels BTW). If the TWS rail in video (or the FAB one we use) manages to bring itself back to the original position within agreeable margin (which I think they can, given the tighter tolerances of milled components), then for a assault rifle with intended engagement ranges not exceeding ~250-300m tops, the results are likely to be pretty good.

I believe this is the reason why the SSO/FSB units don't mind placing optics on them. And what Larry meant when he said "for their purposes it seems to serve just fine".

Good enough even to stay competitive for the internal shooting competitions (where many Russian operators are known to bring AR-15 platforms):

 

[Waanar]

Technically by who?

Dude, AKs don't have split receivers like AR15s (where the functions like trigger, feed system, bolt group are divided between upper & lower segments). In AKs, all these components are connected to, and sit inside the "lower" receiver. Ergo, the only receiver.

The top cover is just that, a top cover - designed to stop dust & crap from getting in & hot gases from being blasted into the shooter's face. Even if you remove it completely, the gun will function just fine:

How can a rifle function with part of its "receiver" missing?



Even in this video he's referring to it as the "top cover".

Anyway, coming to the point. There's no weapon that wouldn't wobble a bit when dealing with the recoil energy of well over a 1000 joules. As would be evident here:



Regarding the milled AK top covers I stick to what I said earlier: not as good as pin-retained upper receiver on AR15, but not as bad as stamped metal originals either.

That said, wobbling in of itself doesn't make you lose zero - you lose zero if after wobbling the part in question returns to a different position than where it was before the shot (this is the same principle behind free-floated barrels BTW). If the TWS rail in video (or the FAB one we use) manages to bring itself back to the original position within agreeable margin (which I think they can, given the tighter tolerances of milled components), then for a assault rifle with intended engagement ranges not exceeding ~250-300m tops, the results are likely to be pretty good.

I believe this is the reason why the SSO/FSB units don't mind placing optics on them. And what Larry meant when he said "for their purposes it seems to serve just fine".

Good enough even to stay competitive for the internal shooting competitions (where many Russian operators are known to bring AR-15 platforms):

View attachment 105017

Idk dude, AK is an extremely weird system.
Also, while what you say definitely does apply to shiny Zenitco parts, rough extended use will definitely make it wobblier and wobblier till it sucks harder than Lisa Ann.
Plus, I can't tell by the pictures if those are actually aftermarket parts with our guys or Piccatiny rails arc welded on the upper reciever.

I refer to it as an upper receiver.
What bigger authority do you need than Waanar?

La ilaha il Waanar, o Mikhail u rasool Waanar.
Waanar hu Akbar.

 

[Gessler]

Idk dude, AK is an extremely weird system.
Also, while what you say definitely does apply to shiny Zenitco parts, rough extended use will definitely make it wobblier and wobblier till it sucks harder than Lisa Ann.

Luckily, hathiyaar ko "kholna aur jorna" IA saare soldiers ko sikhati hai basic se hi.

This is also why I'm not worried about Direct impingement fouling of chamber in our 716s. Field stripping, Cleaning & maintaining the rifle is part of life for IA infantry.

 

[Maharaj samudragupt]

Thode din me " Sig saur rifle ki chal , ttha use kholna aur jodna " wale videos ayenge