Quote Originally Posted by Killswitch View Post
1 million soldiers use it because the rifle was FORCED upon the armed forces by the DRDO, OFB and the politicians looking to save the jobs of their friends in those organizations.
The Army wanted the Steyr Aug/ HK g 41, NOT the Insas.
Why is it important to have good conventional arms (rifles tanks planes ships) when you have atomic neighbors?
Ill tell you why:
If we cant hold a enemy invasion by strength of arms we have 3 choices:
Surrender and lose territory OR go nuclear which means mass casualties after retaliatory strikes.
Or we can just hope America will save us.
.
OFB and DRDO should be ashamed. Our troops deserve better than the 2nd and 3rd rate junk thar is forced upon them over and over again.
I wont stop calling it junk just to make other people feel better. The troops deserve the best kit, nothing less.
But what killwsitch wrote is correct. DRDO product need to compete rather than use "Forces" as keptive market and guaranteed consumers. That mars research, innovation and quality of product. DRDO and PSU need to be manufacturers rather than bosses forcing down their products.
If INSAS was 'forced' on the captive market, i.e. the Army, then are many other products which could have been forced on to the Armed Forces.
And yet, the DRDO or the Govt could not 'force' it on anyone.
Therefore, that part of Killsworth's argument is incorrect.
Is the INSAS a world beater?
Maybe not.
Is it otherwise acceptable?
Yes.
It is not for civilians to decide as to what is good or what is bad for the Army. The Army is quite competent to do so for themselves, for after all, their lives are at stake.
Which weapon is perfect and without fault or stoppages?
The much touted US M16 was discarded for the AKs in Iraq! Why? Because the AK was rugged and failsafe in comparison.
The Patton Tank was touted as a world beater. What happened? Asal Uttar bears witness! Factory new and a total failure. One can say that it is the man behind the machine that caused the failure. True. But then what makes one feel that the INSAS is not subjected to the theory the Man Behind the Machine?
The Army wants 'A' or 'B' is the refrain from many including Killsworth. How do they know? Are they from the Perspective Planning Dte, WE Dte, SD or Mil Ops Dte? A jawan would not know the difference between the INSAS or Steyr Aug/ HK g 41 and it is they who will have to handle the same.
What is the guarantee that Steyr Aug/ HK g 41 will not jam in the High Altitude?
A weapon or weapons platform is not selected merely by looking a mil tech glossies and its market. There are the User Trials in all climatic conditions and in all types of terrain it is to be used and then there is the Technical Trails and Maintainability checks.
Interestingly, those who use the INSAS do not call it a junk, but those who don't are great votaries for foreign weapons and weapons platform and some of them are not even Indian taxpayers!
There are many options to 'save' the country and not merely the ones mentioned. One has to understand the Doctrines that are current to realise it, but then are they in the public domain?
