New Assault Rifles for Indian Army

[ghost]

Equipping Cutting Edge Infantry


Equipping Cutting Edge Infantry » Indian Defence Review

the writer of the article the retired lt general is the one who was quoted saying things like "insas is crap" in a foreign forum then i go through his article claiming that the assault rifle in the race are the like h&k g36 ,sar 21,steyur aug etc when even a lame defence follower would know this for a fact that f insas is all about multi calibre.....with all due respect to army this gentleman lt general do not show in good light just outright .......hence this article is also outright.........

 

[ALBY]

Am waiting for the AK12 to be rolled out of the tula factory.I still believes in Russian reliability. And the weapon incorporates some of the modern aspects o other small arms.Considering a weapon to be procured or produced in such mass numbers and also the indian conditions, i think AK12 will be a good choice .And i hope izhmash will rectify all its flaws and will present a reined weapon which will carry on the reputation of its legendary predecessor.

 

[ghost]

i have often heard in this forum about so called "indian condition's" i really want to ask is india situated on mars?I know india have areas of extreme heat,cold ,humidity and so on but then such extreme condition's are also present elsewhere in the world .all the major military assault weapon are developed taking in mind all of the exterme condition's in mind coz you never know where and which part of the world it would be used.take the case of m16 it was used in the humid tropical jungles of vietnam to snowfield of south korea to mountain of Afghanistan to dessert of iraq.what i mean to say is it reliability depend on the mind and knowledge of people developing it not on the country developing it like russia do not have dessert but still ak works well in extreme heat and dust.

 

[JBH22]

Am waiting for the AK12 to be rolled out of the tula factory.I still believes in Russian reliability. And the weapon incorporates some of the modern aspects o other small arms.Considering a weapon to be procured or produced in such mass numbers and also the indian conditions, i think AK12 will be a good choice .And i hope izhmash will rectify all its flaws and will present a reined weapon which will carry on the reputation of its legendary predecessor.

I really don't get the fuss for unproven design such as Beretta acquired for BSF or even TAR-21 for that matter.

Going for cheaper and reliable solutions such as the AK-100series or AK-12 would have been best imho.

Last but not least its high time we get rid of these old Bren LMG.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

What is your experience with small arms, dont tell that its Internet or few rounds at range ..

====================

Indian Condition may refer to Natural condition in which how Solider work with their weapons, The Condition also refer to the way we operate our firearms in harsh conditions ..

Take a example of INSAS, If its in peace area it goes through proper maintenance and regular firing ( Twice a month ) each solider fires 100rnds, If its in a field area it dont goes through regular maintenance but it works without much troubles ..

i have often heard in this forum about so called "indian condition's" i really want to ask is india situated on mars?

.what i mean to say is it reliability depend on the mind and knowledge of people developing it not on the country developing it like russia do not have dessert but still ak works well in extreme heat and dust.

 

[arnabmit]

No, MSBS is better than Masada/ACR, looks similiar to them, but is much better designed system. ARX 160 is not even comparable in capabilities with MSBS, Italian design have too many unnececary gizmos, making it more complicated and expensive. As for weight, assault rifle can't be too light or too heavy.

Please be specific:
Much better designed how?
Not comparable in capabilities how?
What unnecessary gizmos?
ARX-160 retails for less than $2000, how much is MSBS supposed to cost?
"assault rifle can't be too light or too heavy" is just a vague obfuscatory sentence which offers any debatable point. Lighter AR leads to less fatigue to soldiers, and that is a fact.

No, MSBS can be converted with use of a standard tools each soldier have + modules that can be provided in boxes via logistics. You do not need armory to reconfigure MSBS from standard to bullpup.

Also upper receiver is common between standard and bullpup, what you need is only different lower and hand guard.

Since the lower receiver is the actual gun and the upper receiver is a switchable attachment, using the same upper with 2 different lowers means 2 different guns. Therefore it is not a convertible gun, but 2 different guns with a common upper.

ARX 160 is not trully modular.

How is it not? Please be specific.

No armory tools are needed for MSBS, everything can be done in a field by use of standard tools provided with rifle to soldiers.

As for reliability, currently even lab tests show that MSBS have high reliability, and it is still work in progress, as I said, requirement is to have at least the same reliability as AK, because otherwise our military won't adapt this rifle.

In the video you shared, the company representative said it needs tools. Use of tools is much slower and cumbersome than pressing a button to disassemble/reconfigure, which is offered by the ARX-160.

What should I see here? It is ugly, non elegant design, rifle is too bulky, there is too much funcy stuff.

I don't know, perhaps we Slavs are far more practical than Italians. For us rifle is a tool, it needs to be functional, ergonomic, reliable, accurate, simple and with reasonable cost. I do not need so many impractical as ARX 160 offers.

Also ergonomics of ARX 160 are poorer, just look at the stock, MSBS stock is far more ergonomic with adjustable cheek pad. Also charging handle is non recuperating, while still can act as forward assist, as far as I see, ARX 160 charging handle is directly connected to the bolt so it moves with the bolt, also handle is much smaller, which does not help with ergonomics.

So I completely do not understand all this ARX 160 fanboyism, when from objective point of view, this rifle does not offers more than any other modern assault rifle.

"It is ugly, non elegant design, rifle is too bulky, there is too much funcy stuff" are just personal perceptions which has no bearing on the debate on the capability of a gun. My and many other's perception is that it is sleek and elegant design, with smooth curves which prevent snagging the gun in the clothing and gear.

Yes, the lack of adjustable cheek rest is a negetive in the ARX-160, but I read that this feedback was sent to Beretta, and would be included in ARX-160A4.

Since the Charging handle can be moved away from the face, it does not matter if the charging handle is non-recuperating. In fact it is good that the design is kept simple without a fancy complex gizmo like a non-recuperating charging handle.

The charging handle is decent enough size to be used even with a gloved hand. No issues there. Only a very clumsy person with fumble with it.

My "fanboyism" is based on facts and user reviews. Whereas your "fanboyism" about the MSBS seems to stem from personal subjective opinion on a product which is still half on paper.

 

[Damian]

Please be specific:
Much better designed how?
Not comparable in capabilities how?
What unnecessary gizmos?

1) Better ergonomics and other solutions
2) Can Masada/ACR be reconfigured in to bullpup design in field? No, you have answer
3) For example this idiotic charging handle in ARX 160, why I would want a recicropating charging handle that is needed to switch from one side to another? It is complete BS, in MSBS you have much simpler non recicropating ambidextrous charging handle, which is also bigger which means better ergonomics.

ARX-160 retails for less than $2000, how much is MSBS supposed to cost?

2000USD? Aha, right. MSBS is not finished yet so no price, however this price can't be high, or there will be problem with orders from our military which does not have some sort of incredible budget and there are other modernization program that needs funding.

Since the lower receiver is the actual gun and the upper receiver is a switchable attachment, using the same upper with 2 different lowers means 2 different guns. Therefore it is not a convertible gun, but 2 different guns with a common upper.

I am unable to understand such idiotic "logic".

How is it not? Please be specific.

Can't be reconfigured in to bullpup. Fully modular means that there are many types of configuration, ARX 160 have only single configuration with different callibers and barrel lenghts.

In the video you shared, the company representative said it needs tools. Use of tools is much slower and cumbersome than pressing a button to disassemble/reconfigure, which is offered by the ARX-160.

So you want to do this during battle? How? You will take a round from magazine to change ejection port mode so you can fire by leaning to the left?

Unpractical and idiotic.

"It is ugly, non elegant design, rifle is too bulky, there is too much funcy stuff" are just personal perceptions which has no bearing on the debate on the capability of a gun. My and many other's perception is that it is sleek and elegant design, with smooth curves which prevent snagging the gun in the clothing and gear.

My personal perception is that this is just another, ugly Italian rifle.

Yes, the lack of adjustable cheek rest is a negetive in the ARX-160, but I read that this feedback was sent to Beretta, and would be included in ARX-160A4.

We will see. But the fact that they forget about such simple thing on prototype level, don't show their engineers in the best light.

Since the Charging handle can be moved away from the face, it does not matter if the charging handle is non-recuperating. In fact it is good that the design is kept simple without a fancy complex gizmo like a non-recuperating charging handle.

Non recuperating charing handle is actually as simple, in case of ARX 160, it's charging handle is more complex design thatn in case of MSBS or even the older AR-15 derivatives.

My "fanboyism" is based on facts and user reviews. Whereas your "fanboyism" about the MSBS seems to stem from personal subjective opinion on a product which is still half on paper.

MSBS currently is in the last stages of state trails, so it is not half on paper. And it's not subjective opinion, it based on logic. But as I said, we slavs preffer something that is simple, practical, that can be used as a tool, and have reasonable price. Not some mumbo jumbo with unnececary solutions, when there is something at least as effective yet simpler.

 

[ghost]

What is your experience with small arms, dont tell that its Internet or few rounds at range ..

====================

Indian Condition may refer to Natural condition in which how Solider work with their weapons, The Condition also refer to the way we operate our firearms in harsh conditions ..

first of all as you can see from my post i was refereeing to indian condition as to extreme condition such as heat,cold,dust etc thanks for pointing out about it being referred to the weapon handling condition's that being said indian army is a professional disciplined force which would be having guidelines for weapon handling just like all the other major armies around the world so the weapon system which have seen combat in other armies around the world and have worked well should work same with indian army as i am sure weapon handling in indian army would be no less than any other army.

now why "don't tell me" as you know being indian civilan and assault rifle are just opposite in india you being in army have practical experience knowhow about ak and insas other than that we are on same ground.you have the advantage of practical experience and full respect to that but dont insult the value of knowledge for example you said that what you miss in tavor is iron sight but as per my know how tavor has a flip up iron sight.again no disrespect meant.

 

[arnabmit]

1) Better ergonomics and other solutions
2) Can Masada/ACR be reconfigured in to bullpup design in field? No, you have answer
3) For example this idiotic charging handle in ARX 160, why I would want a recicropating charging handle that is needed to switch from one side to another? It is complete BS, in MSBS you have much simpler non recicropating ambidextrous charging handle, which is also bigger which means better ergonomics.

Again,
Better ergonomics how? In which part?

Neither can the MSBS be reconfigured in to bullpup design in field. The bullpup and the regular are 2 different guns which have a common/interchangeable upper. Are you trying to imply that a soldier would lug around 2 lowers with him on the field?

2000USD? Aha, right. MSBS is not finished yet so no price, however this price can't be high, or there will be problem with orders from our military which does not have some sort of incredible budget and there are other modernization program that needs funding.

Yep, US$ 1950 actually.

I am unable to understand such idiotic "logic".

If you find what the world accepts as idiotic, it really is no one's problem except yours.

Can't be reconfigured in to bullpup. Fully modular means that there are many types of configuration, ARX 160 have only single configuration with different callibers and barrel lenghts.

Neither can the MSBS be reconfigured in to bullpup. Refer above.

So you want to do this during battle? How? You will take a round from magazine to change ejection port mode so you can fire by leaning to the left?

Unpractical and idiotic.

No. If I am a right handed person, and my gun overheats/is rendered non-functional, I can pick up the weapon of my incapacitated left handed mate, reconfigure it in 3sec flat, and start shooting.

My personal perception is that this is just another, ugly Italian rifle.

Your personal perception has no bearing on the debate.

We will see. But the fact that they forget about such simple thing on prototype level, don't show their engineers in the best light.

Guns are made as per QR. Maybe this was not in the Italian army QR.

Non recuperating charing handle is actually as simple, in case of ARX 160, it's charging handle is more complex design thatn in case of MSBS or even the older AR-15 derivatives.

Not really. Have you seen the ARX-160 bolt? Here it is, it is simplicity itself!

MSBS currently is in the last stages of state trails, so it is not half on paper. And it's not subjective opinion, it based on logic. But as I said, we slavs preffer something that is simple, practical, that can be used as a tool, and have reasonable price. Not some mumbo jumbo with unnececary solutions, when there is something at least as effective yet simpler.

Well, some of your logic lacks sufficient argument.

 

[Damian]

Again,
Better ergonomics how? In which part?

Compare the rifles design, it is logical.

Neither can the MSBS be reconfigured in to bullpup design in field. The bullpup and the regular are 2 different guns which have a common/interchangeable upper. Are you trying to imply that a soldier would lug around 2 lowers with him on the field?

I think you do not understand a concept (which does not surprises me). You can do it in the field with basic tools provided to the soldier with rifle, and if you have modules. And no, these are not two different guns. What you know better than our engineers what they designed smart ass?

If you find what the world accepts as idiotic, it really is no one's problem except yours.

I do not need to accept what most of humanity accept, most of humans are pathethic idiots.

No. If I am a right handed person, and my gun overheats/is rendered non-functional, I can pick up the weapon of my incapacitated left handed mate, reconfigure it in 3sec flat, and start shooting.

Yeah, right on the battlefield during fire fight? I want to see that.

In MSBS is is far more practical, you only need to get acces to the bolt carrer group and rotate the bolt, not to mention that switching direction of brass ejection is not absolutely nececary in classic design, it is more important for bullpups.

Neither can the MSBS be reconfigured in to bullpup. Refer above.

Yes it can. Learn Polish and read about the design or listen interviews with one of the main engineers.

Guns are made as per QR. Maybe this was not in the Italian army QR.

Well, then I don't care, and definetely I am happy that such junk will not be issued to our armed forces.

Not really. Have you seen the ARX-160 bolt? Here it is, it is simplicity itself!

Where do you see simplicity compared to other bolts without rotatable charging handle?

Well, some of your logic lacks sufficient argument.

No, I am just not surprised that you don't understand.

 

[arnabmit]

Aah! The old "personal attack when no arguments stand" technique...

Since you fail to produce any substantive argument to support yours and refute mine, instead resort to personal attacks, I will consider your knowledge on guns not even a fraction of your knowledge of tanks.

I fare you well and will ignore your future posts on ARs as irrelevant rant.

Compare the rifles design, it is logical.



I think you do not understand a concept (which does not surprises me). You can do it in the field with basic tools provided to the soldier with rifle, and if you have modules. And no, these are not two different guns. What you know better than our engineers what they designed smart ass?



I do not need to accept what most of humanity accept, most of humans are pathethic idiots.



Yeah, right on the battlefield during fire fight? I want to see that.

In MSBS is is far more practical, you only need to get acces to the bolt carrer group and rotate the bolt, not to mention that switching direction of brass ejection is not absolutely nececary in classic design, it is more important for bullpups.



Yes it can. Learn Polish and read about the design or listen interviews with one of the main engineers.



Well, then I don't care, and definetely I am happy that such junk will not be issued to our armed forces.



Where do you see simplicity compared to other bolts without rotatable charging handle?



No, I am just not surprised that you don't understand.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

In simple words, Don't fall for Media advertisements ..

I may sound rude, But i never meant it for anyone ..

================

Military version of TAR-21 dont have Iron sights, Civilian versions do ..

Indian Military does not work in similar fashion as westerns do, here you dont have time to clean your rifle day long, The person has more work other than cleaning just Rifles at armory ..

first of all as you can see from my post i was refereeing to indian condition as to extreme condition such as heat,cold,dust etc thanks for pointing out about it being referred to the weapon handling condition's that being said indian army is a professional disciplined force which would be having guidelines for weapon handling just like all the other major armies around the world so the weapon system which have seen combat in other armies around the world and have worked well should work same with indian army as i am sure weapon handling in indian army would be no less than any other army.

now why "don't tell me" as you know being indian civilan and assault rifle are just opposite in india you being in army have practical experience knowhow about ak and insas other than that we are on same ground.you have the advantage of practical experience and full respect to that but dont insult the value of knowledge for example you said that what you miss in tavor is iron sight but as per my know how tavor has a flip up iron sight.again no disrespect meant.

 

[ghost]

In simple words, Don't fall for Media advertisements ..



================

never has its more the experience shared by the actual users +basic logic + knowledge just like in case of insas i take into account ur experiences with it





Indian Military does not work in similar fashion as westerns do, here you dont have time to clean your rifle day long, The person has more work other than cleaning just Rifles at armory ..

i belive that if crpf can maintain their x95 in naxal infested area than our army can also maintain any modern assault rifle in active area which has passed it's test

 

[ghost]

in this pic we can see a syrian rebel using some kind of jugaad weapon .I didn't know where to place it but seem interesting enough so posting here....

 

[SPIEZ]

So I completely do not understand all this ARX 160 fanboyism, when from objective point of view, this rifle does not offers more than any other modern assault rifle.

Saar, it is very similar to claiming that everything coming out of Poland is the best in the worl.

No offense intended, but please try to learn more.

And FYI, we are not making purchasing decisions so your influence peddling is of no use here.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

X95 or TAR-21 and INSAS all of them have one thing in common, They are all AK influenced ..

TAR-21 & X-95 so does INSAS bolt carrier is same as AK, And other internal designs, Which makes them rugged ..

The designs which are mainly from AR-15 are highly unreliable in our conditions ..

=======================

I wont agree on reports from MOD regarding clearance of some firearm unless personally use it ..

i belive that if crpf can maintain their x95 in naxal infested area than our army can also maintain any modern assault rifle in active area which has passed it's test

 

[Damian]

Saar, it is very similar to claiming that everything coming out of Poland is the best in the worl.

Did I claimed so anywhere? No, however MSBS is definetely assault rifle that can compete with other modern designs, and there is nothing to be ashamed about it.

The designs which are mainly from AR-15 are highly unreliable in our conditions ..

Well, I would be carefull. High unreliability of AR-15 system is mostly a myth as far as I know from guys that are seriously involved in small arms history. Obviously it have it's issues, but then again, it is not that bad as some try to show it.

 

[ALBY]

Importing MBSS ,X95 or ARX160 for regular troops will be like a villager in UP buying porsches or ferraris for his day today afffairs
Yes they may be of top tech and there wont be anything near in it considering the cutting edge technology.But are these worth the money ?Will it make a drastic difference in todays battle field which couldnt be brought by a much cheaper AK12 or GALIL ACE?
In case of Tanks,fighters or ships difference in technology will play a cruicial role in battles but i dont think thats the case of small arms .
And also to what extend are these new geen rifles user friendly ?

 

[hitesh]

Importing MBSS ,X95 or ARX160 for regular troops will be like a villager in UP buying porsches or ferraris for his day today afffairs
Yes they may be of top tech and there wont be anything near in it considering the cutting edge technology.But are these worth the money ?Will it make a drastic difference in todays battle field which couldnt be brought by a much cheaper AK12 or GALIL ACE?
In case of Tanks,fighters or ships difference in technology will play a cruicial role in battles but i dont think thats the case of small arms .
And also to what extend are these new geen rifles user friendly ?

I totally agree with my friend, an ACE/Ak with a good scope is better then wasting money on these heavily costly X95 thats more costly than a M4 which means for 1 X95 you could buy 3-4 ACE/AK103 rifles .

 

[ghost]

Importing MBSS ,X95 or ARX160 for regular troops will be like a villager in UP buying porsches or ferraris for his day today afffairs
Yes they may be of top tech and there wont be anything near in it considering the cutting edge technology.But are these worth the money ?Will it make a drastic difference in todays battle field which couldnt be brought by a much cheaper AK12 or GALIL ACE?
In case of Tanks,fighters or ships difference in technology will play a cruicial role in battles but i dont think thats the case of small arms .
And also to what extend are these new geen rifles user friendly ?

i agree with you these would not make a huge difference in war but these can make a huge difference in a soldier comfort and ease and life .a foot soldier in indian army is the one who is actively engaged in border and ct operation still it is he who is most ignored.a soldier deserve nothing but best of equipment .better ergomics lighter weight good accuaracy and other feature sure are small things in battle scenario but big things in individual soldier life who's life depend on it ultimately.