Indian Special Forces

[abingdonboy]

How do the Israelis manage this tho, also this imo would be a case of Equipment hampering the output quality instead of training since we know for the fact that the Ambidextrous firing is part of the training since long time and this should make the case stronger since under utilising a present capability is never good.

One has to ask how India’s most elite units trailed this product and didn’t unearth this issue considering this was already something they trained to do.

same process is used to keep Indian products constantly in trails but you uncover waiver after waiver for imports

 

[abingdonboy]

What's with the Jai ho? you guys seriously need to turn the needless sarcasm down, serves no constructive purpose here.
every opinion contradictory to the so called "gucci gang" here isn't jai ho.

I'd rather take the word of an ex-Delta guy when he says ambidextrous shooting can be managed from the end-users perspective without much of an issue with the TAR, rather than a normal civvie who's got no experience with firearms.

Oh, and to also point out here, the design thought process from the Israelis who designed the TAR-series with urban combat in mind where ambidextrous firing is a normal requirement.

But still, if you guys think you know better than the collective minds of the group stated above, then Jai Ho to you too Vro

Tavor is so good that’s why to this day IDF’s most elite professionals use the M4, Tavel never made its way to all IDF units and already they have designed the Arad that is a conventional design

 

[abingdonboy]

The guys standing around it look like RR

 

[SGOperative]

One has to ask how India’s most elite units trailed this product and didn’t unearth this issue considering this was already something they trained to do.

same process is used to keep Indian products constantly in trails but you uncover waiver after waiver for imports

If i am not wrong this was first sent to the SFF who pointed some issues and most of em were fixed and if you ask me its a really decent gun for the airborne guys, Political purchase always goes above everything from our experience so dont really know who would take the accountability here.

 

[ManhattanProject]

What's the advantage of training with VTAC style barricades ?

VTAC 9-Hole Barricade Drill – Firearms Training - Guns and Ammo

The Viking Tactics (VTAC) Barricade will help you train to get back into the fight, quickly.

www.gunsandammo.com

.
This might help.

 

[Inderjeet Singh]

 

[ManhattanProject]

View attachment 149521

Nice pants.

 

[Automatic Kalashnikov]

View attachment 149521

3 PARA sf?

 

[armyofhind]

Tavor is so good that’s why to this day IDF’s most elite professionals use the M4, Tavel never made its way to all IDF units and already they have designed the Arad that is a conventional design

And how exactly are you drawing this conclusion?

Sure they do use the M4, but they use a whole mix of weapons. Heck, S13 uses AK's for amphib ops as well.
There is ample open source content which shows IDF SF units using the X95.

So what is the argument here?

The vanilla Tavor got replaced in use in the IDF by the X95, which is a development on the same platform, if I have my facts right. Weight saving, changing the position of the charging handle, and cosmetic changes aside, both weapons are essentially the same.

Tavor is so good that’s why to this day IDF’s most elite professionals use the M4, Tavel never made its way to all IDF units and already they have designed the Arad that is a conventional design

Are you sure about that?

IDF Are NOT Replacing the Tavor -

Last week a number of Israeli news outlets reported that the IDF had decided to replace the Tavor. The IDF have now confirmed that this isn't the case.

www.thefirearmblog.com

IDF continuing to acquire Micro Tavor assault rifles

Despite various reports over the last few days regarding the acquisition of light weapons by the IDF, a check by the writer of this article has found that the IDF is continuing to acquire the Micro Tavor assault rifle made by Israeli company IWI. The decision is part of a multiyear plan that was...

www.israeldefense.co.il

 

[Fire and groove]

If you are switching shoulders on a tavor you should be prepared to kiss brass.
One enormous positive thing i have seen are these vtac style barricades, it means someone in the para sf is looking at how foreign sf train and are adding a few things to their training.

View attachment 149502

Shooting from different ports is a big deal in training, hopefully they're working drills transitioning position to position.

 

[Aditya Ballal]

PARACOM SYSTEMS – BEST MILITARY GEAR!

paracomsystems.in

 

[EternalNxg]

Garud special forces officer with PM

 

[Inderjeet Singh]

 

[Waanar]

What's with the Jai ho? you guys seriously need to turn the needless sarcasm down, serves no constructive purpose here.
every opinion contradictory to the so called "gucci gang" here isn't jai ho.

I'd rather take the word of an ex-Delta guy when he says ambidextrous shooting can be managed from the end-users perspective without much of an issue with the TAR, rather than a normal civvie who's got no experience with firearms.

Oh, and to also point out here, the design thought process from the Israelis who designed the TAR-series with urban combat in mind where ambidextrous firing is a normal requirement.

But still, if you guys think you know better than the collective minds of the group stated above, then Jai Ho to you too Vro

One hot brass flipping towards the eyes would blind the user.
Literally. And that's bound to happen when you fire hundreds of thousands of round.
Even though the chances are lower, it would happen even on a conventional rifle design.
This is why I said if our guys had ballistic glasses, that would make sure that an accidental brass while firing from another shoulder won't have any chance of hitting our soldiers in the eye.

And then you got irritated and proved my point.
So again, jai ho vro.

Steel reinforced brass deflecting eyeballs ftw.

 

[armyofhind]

One hot brass flipping towards the eyes would blind the user.
Literally. And that's bound to happen when you fire hundreds of thousands of round.
Even though the chances are lower, it would happen even on a conventional rifle design.
This is why I said if our guys had ballistic glasses, that would make sure that an accidental brass while firing from another shoulder won't have any chance of hitting our soldiers in the eye.

And then you got irritated and proved my point.
So again, jai ho vro.

Steel reinforced brass deflecting eyeballs ftw.

Ah the good old strawman argument.

For one, The discussion was around ambidextrous firing from the Tavor, and not about ballistic eyewear in the first place.

And that's bound to happen when you fire hundreds of thousands of round.

Don't make assumptions you cannot substantiate with facts.

the entire purpose of a brass deflector, is to keep the spent cases ejecting in a general area away from the shooter, and that area in space can be defined by the designer to a reasonable degree by the shape of the deflector.

Coming to the weapon in question here, if you look more carefully at the video I posted, on a TAR, when firing from the other shoulder, as long as a cheekweld is maintained, the ejection port is actually below the cheek.

Even if for your sake we assume that ejected brass flies upward, it isn't that hot that it'll tear through your cheek and skull and then reach your eye to blind you.

Nor does it follow a tight hyperbola to eject forward first, then turn around and fly backwards to come into the eye of the shooter. It's brass, not a homing missile.


Posting it again for reference.



Now, going by the regular way of approaching things, I'd trust the word of a professional like Larry Vickers when he says that ambidextrous firing from a TAR is a "piece of cake" (That's literally what he said) as long as a proper cheekweld is maintained while firing.
I'd trust that over the word of a normal civvie who has no experience with firearms.

BUT, normal logic seems to have taken a backseat on this thread here.
Over here, its more like - "trust me vro, I am a tactical expert vro, Larry Vickers can eat my shit."
And we are just supposed to go ahead and agree with whatever is being said, because if you say something contradictory, you will become Jai ho.

Coming to ballistic eyewear, sure, I'd want that too for our guys. heck, I'd want the entire Indian SF to be equipped with the BFG 9000 if I could get whatever I wanted, but that wasn't the point of the discussion here.

It was around shooting from both shoulders from a TAR, and I presented a source which is credible in the real world to substantiate that its possible, without any major issues.
Nothing has been presented to counter it except personal opinions and sarcasm.

Well sarcasm doesn't let you hide behind logical fallacies in the real world kiddo. Jai Ho.
My last 2 cents on this.

 

[Waanar]

Ah the good old strawman argument.

For one, The discussion was around ambidextrous firing from the Tavor, and not about ballistic eyewear in the first place.

Maybe between you and the other guy.
I raised the point of ballistic glasses and stuck to it. And then you decided that quoting you means I'm saying jai ho to specifically you (my bad for not specifying I'm joking and making a jab at bhikhari gang) and went all ham about the ambidexterity of Tavors.
Again, I stick to my argument.
Ballistic glasses will help with ambidextrous shooting in case a brass flies unpredictably into the eye which can happen.
Rhodesians used to cut off their FAL's carry handles because some operators got blinded by the brass deflecting off of it straight into their eyeballs. That's a well known case because it would eject with enough force to actually permanently blind the user.
On the other hand, you can ask people in the military.
It's REALLY common to get hit in the eyes with that one brass which takes someone out for a few hours at least.
Your entire argument has been Larry Vicker's claim that you can shoot ambidextrous. Yes, you most definitely can but is Larry Vickers giving an exhaustive review?
Is he even considering the chances of the brass hitting one's eye considering he has goggles on?

Even if for your sake we assume that ejected brass flies upward, it isn't that hot that it'll tear through your cheek and skull and then reach your eye to blind you.

Nor does it follow a tight hyperbola to eject forward first, then turn around and fly backwards to come into the eye of the shooter. It's brass, not a homing missile.

Again, it's common for soldiers to get hit in the eye with brass even on AR or AK platforms.
Doesn't take a homing missile to destroy your eye.
My mausa got blinded by a bug hitting his eye while he was driving his motorcycle without a helmet, that's how easy it is.

It was around shooting from both shoulders from a TAR, and I presented a source which is credible in the real world to substantiate that its possible, without any major issues.
Nothing has been presented to counter it except personal opinions and sarcasm.

Well sarcasm doesn't let you hide behind logical fallacies in the real world kiddo. Jai Ho.
My last 2 cents on this.

Yes, and I said the risk of being blinded by a naughty brass can be reduced by using ballistic glasses after which you went level 500 berserker mode.
Heck, I don't even remember saying anywhere that I disagreed with your assessment.

Just because I quoted you doesn't mean I'm trying to counter your argument. It means I'm adding something.
You know adding? The thing you do where you bring another thing to the thing already present to expand the scope of both the things which would otherwise not be as large of a thingamajig?
Yes.
That thing.

 

[abingdonboy]

Ah the good old strawman argument.

For one, The discussion was around ambidextrous firing from the Tavor, and not about ballistic eyewear in the first place.


Don't make assumptions you cannot substantiate with facts.

the entire purpose of a brass deflector, is to keep the spent cases ejecting in a general area away from the shooter, and that area in space can be defined by the designer to a reasonable degree by the shape of the deflector.

Coming to the weapon in question here, if you look more carefully at the video I posted, on a TAR, when firing from the other shoulder, as long as a cheekweld is maintained, the ejection port is actually below the cheek.

Even if for your sake we assume that ejected brass flies upward, it isn't that hot that it'll tear through your cheek and skull and then reach your eye to blind you.

Nor does it follow a tight hyperbola to eject forward first, then turn around and fly backwards to come into the eye of the shooter. It's brass, not a homing missile.


Posting it again for reference.



Now, going by the regular way of approaching things, I'd trust the word of a professional like Larry Vickers when he says that ambidextrous firing from a TAR is a "piece of cake" (That's literally what he said) as long as a proper cheekweld is maintained while firing.
I'd trust that over the word of a normal civvie who has no experience with firearms.

BUT, normal logic seems to have taken a backseat on this thread here.
Over here, its more like - "trust me vro, I am a tactical expert vro, Larry Vickers can eat my shit."
And we are just supposed to go ahead and agree with whatever is being said, because if you say something contradictory, you will become Jai ho.

Coming to ballistic eyewear, sure, I'd want that too for our guys. heck, I'd want the entire Indian SF to be equipped with the BFG 9000 if I could get whatever I wanted, but that wasn't the point of the discussion here.

It was around shooting from both shoulders from a TAR, and I presented a source which is credible in the real world to substantiate that its possible, without any major issues.
Nothing has been presented to counter it except personal opinions and sarcasm.

Well sarcasm doesn't let you hide behind logical fallacies in the real world kiddo. Jai Ho.
My last 2 cents on this.

Larry is ex Delta but he’s an old guy now and does almost all his testing exclusively on a flat range. Maintaining a proper cheek weld is the standard for civilians in such low intensity situations but in real combat where you have to switch hands on the go, fire from behind cover etc?

another case of defending the indefensible just because Indian SF do it. They can be wrong and in many cases simply are. Another instance where they Are doing one thing and every decent unit in the world is doing the opposite

 

[armyofhind]

Larry is ex Delta but he’s an old guy now and does almost all his testing exclusively on a flat range. Maintaining a proper cheek weld is the standard for civilians in such low intensity situations but in real combat where you have to switch hands on the go, fire from behind cover etc?

another case of defending the indefensible just because Indian SF do it. They can be wrong and in many cases simply are. Another instance where they Are doing one thing and every decent unit in the world is doing the opposite

More strawman stuff.
It is the standard for civilians in low intensity situations? Really?
How is a situation where you are in harm's way, whether that is from a home invader, robber, or enemy combatant low intensity?
If you're learning how to fire a weapon, you are doing so to be able to defend yourself in an actual situation, and there the intensity will be high, for sure.
If you've to fire a rifle effectively, maintaining a cheekweld is the basics for accuracy.

To add to that, an SF soldier is expected, and trained, to keep his reflexes sharp and his drills smooth in a combat situation, that's the whole point.
You're contradicting yourself here.

Don't come up with any logic under the sun, just to keep trying to prove a point.

Larry is ex Delta but he’s an old guy now and does almost all his testing exclusively on a flat range. Maintaining a proper cheek weld is the standard for civilians in such low intensity situations but in real combat where you have to switch hands on the go, fire from behind cover etc?

another case of defending the indefensible just because Indian SF do it. They can be wrong and in many cases simply are. Another instance where they Are doing one thing and every decent unit in the world is doing the opposite

Turn that logic around, and it doesn't make it wrong just because Indian SF do it.
That's your opinion, it's not a fact.

Your opinion as a layman doesn't count for much against the opinion of a professional who's worked around firearms for the most part of his adult life, especially when the two are in direct contradiction.

As for the other units in the world, Israelis do it with the X95 too. Essentially the same weapon as the TAR. I've already pointed out in another post where what you had had talked about the IDF rejecting the Tavor - which isn't the case in reality.

 

[Automatic Kalashnikov]

 

[Automatic Kalashnikov]