New Assault Rifles for Indian Army

[Johny_Baba]

Alright folks,

I found something interesting about Tavor-7 which i think i should share with you.

Watch this video


So,When IWI was marketing about Tavor-7 being 'fully ambidextrous',they also meant ambidextrous ejection as in this gun one can easily swap the side it ejects spent cartridges from right to left or vice versa by simply opening and closing respective dust covers,or as it appears from this video.

What i think the procedure behind that could be is this
- you disassemble whole weapon,put the bolt in other direction with extractor and ejector facing other sides than before (i.e. 180° from default) then reassemble it and swap off those dust covers to make it eject on other side

Plus,two videos i found on internet showing firing in semi auto and full auto



Notice the Controllability of this gun,as i think it is very much similar to SCAR-H

 

[Immanuel]

If true, let's go ahead and buy the Tavor-7, most of them will be made at home by Punj Llyod

 

[Chinmoy]

If true, let's go ahead and buy the Tavor-7, most of them will be made at home by Punj Llyod

Then what about the training??? Obviously 1.15Lakh is not for SF only.

 

[tharun]

Alright folks,

I found something interesting about Tavor-7 which i think i should share with you.

Watch this video


So,When IWI was marketing about Tavor-7 being 'fully ambidextrous',they also meant ambidextrous ejection as in this gun one can easily swap the side it ejects spent cartridges from right to left or vice versa by simply opening and closing respective dust covers,or as it appears from this video.

What i think the procedure behind that could be is this
- you disassemble whole weapon,put the bolt in other direction with extractor and ejector facing other sides than before (i.e. 180° from default) then reassemble it and swap off those dust covers to make it eject on other side

Plus,two videos i found on internet showing firing in semi auto and full auto



Notice the Controllability of this gun,as i think it is very much similar to SCAR-H

Looks like it had little bit high recoil.
Increase in bolt carrier group weight like Fn-Scar it may decrease the recoil.

 

[Johny_Baba]

If true, let's go ahead and buy the Tavor-7, most of them will be made at home by Punj Llyod

Punj Lloyd made guns still have their barrels forged in Israel,rest things are being made and assembled here.

Just saying.

 

[Vorschlaghammer]

Alright folks,

I found something interesting about Tavor-7 which i think i should share with you.

Watch this video


So,When IWI was marketing about Tavor-7 being 'fully ambidextrous',they also meant ambidextrous ejection as in this gun one can easily swap the side it ejects spent cartridges from right to left or vice versa by simply opening and closing respective dust covers,or as it appears from this video.

What i think the procedure behind that could be is this
- you disassemble whole weapon,put the bolt in other direction with extractor and ejector facing other sides than before (i.e. 180° from default) then reassemble it and swap off those dust covers to make it eject on other side

Plus,two videos i found on internet showing firing in semi auto and full auto



Notice the Controllability of this gun,as i think it is very much similar to SCAR-H

This is the bolt for FAMAS

As seen here, it has 2 cutouts for the extractor claw, and the ejector plunger in at the bottom. Here the bolt is configured for right side ejection, since the darker colored ejector is on the left of this picture and the lighter colored part is simply a plug. To switch the ejection, the user simple flips the extractor claw and the plug, and opens the ejection port cover on the receiver.

But FAMAS has a straight delayed blowback action, where Tavor has a rotating bolt, so it used to have two variants of the bolt, one left handed another right handed. Not sure if it has changed in the latest gen.

Steyr AUG too has 2 variant of bolts, marked left and right handed.

In fact most major Bullpup designs since the 70s, except for the SA-80 series were designed for "ambidextrous" ejection.

 

[Johny_Baba]

This is the bolt for FAMAS

As seen here, it has 2 cutouts for the extractor claw, and the ejector plunger in at the bottom. Here the bolt is configured for right side ejection, since the darker colored ejector is on the left of this picture and the lighter colored part is simply a plug. To switch the ejection, the user simple flips the extractor claw and the plug, and opens the ejection port cover on the receiver.

But FAMAS has a straight delayed blowback action, where Tavor has a rotating bolt, so it used to have two variants of the bolt, one left handed another right handed. Not sure if it has changed in the latest gen.

Steyr AUG too has 2 variant of bolts, marked left and right handed.

In fact most major Bullpup designs since the 70s, except for the SA-80 series were designed for "ambidextrous" ejection.

Right,my friend.

Let's have a discussion on weapons that have ambidextrous ejection feature and such mechanisms.

My hypothesis is,Key with ambidextrous ejection in firearms is Symmetry.

About FAMAS,i would just like to add this drawing since it clears the explanation that you gave in your post.

( BTW,notice that Mickey Mouse shaped cavity in Bolt Carrier :biggrin2: )

As seen here, it has 2 cutouts for the extractor claw, and the ejector plunger in at the bottom. Here the bolt is configured for right side ejection, since the darker colored ejector is on the left of this picture and the lighter colored part is simply a plug. To switch the ejection, the user simple flips the extractor claw and the plug, and opens the ejection port cover on the receiver.

You can see that that 'micky mouse' shaped bolt carrier have a vertical line of symmetry and mechanism for ejection (consisting combination of extractor and ejector) lies on that line.

Since FAMAS is a blowback firearm (of lever delayed blowback fashion) it doesn't have a rotating bolt so keeping such symmetry is quite easy with this.

How 'symmetry' traslates with rotating bolt weapons ?

My thinking is,since ejection happens after 'unlocking' phase such rotating bolt would have to keep symmetry at its Bolt Face during its ejection phase.

Bolt Face of Tavor TAR-21 (and X-95) doesn't have such symmetry,hence one would have to buy those 'Left Hand' bolts to make it eject on left side or so.

But what about AUG ? I mean it does have a symmetrical bolt (Stoner-pattern multi lug bolt) even then it requires those "Right Hand" (default) and "Left Hand" bolts to change its ejection side.

The thing is,Those guys in Steyr DELIBERATELY made it that way i.e. one type of Bolt is only able to eject in one side.

Why am i saying this ? Refer these pictures i made.

Thing is,you can swap AUG bolt to 180° but back of the bolt doesn't have provision for placing Bolt Retainer Pin on other side since it only has a single hole at one side.That "Left Hand" bolt is nothing but a RH bolt having Bot Retainer Pin at other side (plus,Bolt Retainer Recess Surface inside Retainer Cavity is also swapped on other side).

They could've made it trully ambidextrous,but i think it was deliberate to earn some extra money for special "Left Hand" bolts.

Here is my idea of making an "Ambidextrous" Bolt for Steyr AUG

Similarly,if Israelis had wished they could've made TAR-21 and X-95 a trully ambidextrous gun without need of special LH or RH bolts as some 'Symmetrical' bolt like Stoner Pattern Multi Lug Bolt (used in AR-15 and other western guns) could've done that task.

I'm saying this because there're indeed some guns which incorporate Ambidextrous Ejection without need of special LH or RH bolts.
I am going to talk about such Ambi Ejection guns in my next post.

 

[Johny_Baba]

(Continuation of last post)

Some Guns with Ambidextrous Ejection feature
-----------------------------------------------------------

First example is Polish MSBS Radon

Have a look on Radon's Bolt

Bolt head with lugs, extractor and ejector. Note the semi-circular opening for the spring guide-rod cut down at the front end.

Bolt carrier and bolt stripped. Note a beveled head of the cam pin and the side cut out for inserting the cam pin into the cam path.

In Radon,ejection direction can be changed at field-strip level.To change the ejection direction all one has to do is rotate the bolt by 180 degrees.The bolt locks always turning to the right, regardless of ejection direction.

Source: http://www.sadefensejournal.com/wp/?p=2975

 

[Johny_Baba]

(Continuation of last post)

Other gun which can eject on both sides is ARAK-21 "Ambidextrous" by Faxon Arms

Faxon Arms ARAK-21 "Ambidextrous" Upper for AR-15 pattern Lower Receiver

Complete weapon

Have a look on internals of ARAK-21's bolt carrier

AR-15 Bolt compared to ARAK-21 Bolt

Here,also,ejection direction can be changed at field-strip level.To change the ejection direction all one has to do is rotate the bolt by 180 degrees.The bolt locks always turning to the right, regardless of ejection direction.

Source:
-> http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2015/01/14/gun-review-faxon-arms-arak-21/
-> http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2017/07/jeremy-s/faxon-firearms-arak-21-upper-receiver-gear-review/

Another weapon that comes to my mind is Croatian VHS-2 Assault Rifle
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My final verdict is it is indeed possible to make firearms which can eject on both sides and such firearms have 'Symmetrical' bolts and options to swap them 180 degree (as to change positions of Extractor and Ejectors) during disassembly to incorporate such ambidextrous ejection function.

Hence,my assumption is with Tavor-7 they might've changed its bolt from "Tavor Pattern" bolt to symmetrical one such as Stoner Patter bolt to incorporate such ambidextrous at disassembly level.

 

[Johny_Baba]

One notable exception here,which neither requires special bolts nor requires disassembly to swap bolt to other side is Beretta ARX-160

Here is the Bolt of ARX-160

This is a symmetrical bolt but unique about this system is it doesn't have a dedicated ejector,but two spring loaded extractors at exactly 180 degree opposite to each other.

To change ejection side,all one has to do is push a button located at the back of the receiver to other side with a pointed object,like a bullet or so.


How does it work ? well,Refer to this video

From these timeframes,we can see those spring loaded extractors and that 'tab' that actuates one of them as per its position during rearward motion of the bolt and that incorporates ejection via pushing spent cartridge out.

Similar mechanism is also incorporated in Beretta MX4 Sub-Machine Gun.

 

[Vorschlaghammer]

@Johny_Baba excellent info and details. I'd just like to add that seems to me, with a fairly long receiver, where the ejection port is not just in front of the shooter's face, and with a shell deflector hump, lefty shooters can manage right side ejection. Ofcourse blowback type repeating actions extract under high pressure, and the ejections may be too violent for comfort for them.

In case of bullpups, this provision for both side ejection becomes essential, for obvious reasons. One solution is to have bottom or forward ejection, FN FS-2000 has the forward ejection system, but the rifle itself didn't become popular. And a bottom ejection port is very uncommon for shoulder rifles, outside of LMG and HMGs, cause of the placement of the magazine well.

And as you have already noticed, most of the modern designs, that account for ambidextrous user handling, use the AR-18 style 7 or more lug rotating bolt, and other than the obvious advantage of the bolt having to rotate relatively less to clear the locking surfaces, due to the narrow lugs, if one can safely design a way to have the cam pin on different locations, it is indeed possible to orient the bolt to have desirable direction of ejection, cause the bolt itself is symmetrical. Although military grade bullpup rifle manufacturers generally just do the easy way of having separate left and right handed bolts.

Lastly, I'm no expert and have no experience with testing military rifles, but it's much easier to find pictures of stoner type bolts with sheared lugs, than to find similar pics or stories for AK or Garand. Also plunger type ejectors with weak or broken spring can have ejection problems, but bolt slot+ receiver protrusion ejection systems have nothing to go wrong.

Maybe a bolt like the Leader Dynamics T2MK5 can be a suitable middle ground. It has a symmetrical bolt head and the locking lugs are relatively thicker.

I do believe there is no perfect solution for firearm designs, it's just a matter of achieving the best balance between factors like weight, reliability, accuracy etc. Every user/customer has different levels of emphasis on these attributes, depending on their requirement. The designs similarly change, depending on what type is most conducive to those requirements.

 

[Vorschlaghammer]

I'm not sure if this is probable or not, but a M16 type bolt in a rifle with ejection ports cut on both left and right side could work.

I had the thought of what if the hole is a through hole, and to change the direction of the ejection, the shooter disassembles the bolt, takes out the cam pin, rotates the bolt, inserts the cam pin from the other side, and re-assembles the bolt. The cam slot in the bolt carrier stays at the same place, so in theory the bolt face extractor and ejector orientation should be 180 degree reversed.

 

[Vorschlaghammer]

Maybe a Patreon supporter of Ian from Forgotten weapons can submit this question about configurable ejection direction, to be answered in a Q&A video.

 

[Johny_Baba]

I'd just like to add that seems to me, with a fairly long receiver, where the ejection port is not just in front of the shooter's face, and with a shell deflector hump, lefty shooters can manage right side ejection. Ofcourse blowback type repeating actions extract under high pressure, and the ejections may be too violent for comfort for them.

Yes,even i think same as you.With conventional rifles having right side ejections as default that ejects empty cartridges fairly far from the shooter's face even lefties could use it without much hassle so as long as both parties can happily use same firearm one should avoid such task of making it eject on other side and so.

In case of bullpups, this provision for both side ejection becomes essential, for obvious reasons. One solution is to have bottom or forward ejection, FN FS-2000 has the forward ejection system, but the rifle itself didn't become popular. And a bottom ejection port is very uncommon for shoulder rifles, outside of LMG and HMGs, cause of the placement of the magazine well.

Agree with that.Moreover to that since bullpup configuration is a quite compact package compared to conventional design it would be quite difficult to provide those other ways of ejecting cartridges like forward ejection,bottom drop and so.Although forward ejection is very very old method of ejecting cartridges dating back to the era of Maxim Gun,very few designs have actually applied it since conventional ejection is mostly adequate in all requirements.Though it is coming back to the fashion especially in bullpups with Kel-Tec RFB and Desert Tech MDR rifles.

Though i cannot comment much on forward ejection since i have very limited knowledge about it.Perhaps in future i would give my opinions on it based on some solid revision.

Same goes for bottom drop.I think bottom drop was mainly used in open bolt guns e.g. Bren Gun since opening at the bottom of bolt extension/gas piston is used to safely 'drop' those spent cartridges and all such guns have 'top loading' instead of usual bottom loading.A noticeable exception here is FN P90 which is indeed a top loader but is a closed bolt weapon.

Both configurations seems possible to me and i think someday we would see more designs with such configurations in future.

And as you have already noticed, most of the modern designs, that account for ambidextrous user handling, use the AR-18 style 7 or more lug rotating bolt, and other than the obvious advantage of the bolt having to rotate relatively less to clear the locking surfaces, due to the narrow lugs, if one can safely design a way to have the cam pin on different locations, it is indeed possible to orient the bolt to have desirable direction of ejection, cause the bolt itself is symmetrical. Although military grade bullpup rifle manufacturers generally just do the easy way of having separate left and right handed bolts.

Yep.

Lastly, I'm no expert and have no experience with testing military rifles, but it's much easier to find pictures of stoner type bolts with sheared lugs, than to find similar pics or stories for AK or Garand. Also plunger type ejectors with weak or broken spring can have ejection problems, but bolt slot+ receiver protrusion ejection systems have nothing to go wrong.

That is indeed true that AK type chamfered locking lugs are quite reliable than Stoner type multi radial lugs and so but it doesn't mean AK never fails and so.Both have their unique advantages and disadvantages and so.
Perhaps i would talk about it later with pics to give my view on that.

Maybe a bolt like the Leader Dynamics T2MK5 can be a suitable middle ground. It has a symmetrical bolt head and the locking lugs are relatively thicker.

Hhmm....from initial observation it doesn't seem to be a symmetrical design,mainly because it's triangular and rotating it to 180 degrees would make that bottom lug to come on top and so.
Still,would look deeper in this weapon to see if it could be done in some way.

 

[Johny_Baba]

I'm not sure if this is probable or not, but a M16 type bolt in a rifle with ejection ports cut on both left and right side could work.

I had the thought of what if the hole is a through hole, and to change the direction of the ejection, the shooter disassembles the bolt, takes out the cam pin, rotates the bolt, inserts the cam pin from the other side, and re-assembles the bolt. The cam slot in the bolt carrier stays at the same place, so in theory the bolt face extractor and ejector orientation should be 180 degree reversed.

It is indeed possible to make M16 type weapon to make it eject on left side with proper modifications but there are some limitations here,mainly related to the barrel extension and camming.

First,barrel extension on M16 have symmetrical layout to accomply locking with that symmetrical bolt but contours on it are not that ideal for such 180 degree operation,but it's still manageable since in market such barrel extensions are available which could be used in ambi ejections.

Here,Right one that can accept bolt in 180 degree fashion have its lugs chamfered on both sides,while normal one is chamfered only at front.

About camming,I'll explain it later since it is somewhat longer explanation.

 

[Vorschlaghammer]

What about flapper locking ? The bolt doesn't have to rotate there, and a FAMAS like arrangement is possible maybe. Replacing the flappers with locking rollers like in MG-42 can also be considered in this family, and MG-42 is essentially unchanged since WW2, in it's MG3 avatar.

Tilting bolts like in STG-44 and FAL have fallen out of favor it seems.

 

[Vorschlaghammer]

Check this out.


...........................

 

[Johny_Baba]

What about flapper locking ? The bolt doesn't have to rotate there, and a FAMAS like arrangement is possible maybe. Replacing the flappers with locking rollers like in MG-42 can also be considered in this family, and MG-42 is essentially unchanged since WW2, in it's MG3 avatar.

Tilting bolts like in STG-44 and FAL have fallen out of favor it seems.

I like your second idea more i.e. using Rollers instead of Flappers since rollers provide more efficient locking than flappers,so FAMAS style bolt carrier group with roller locking mechanism may work quite well.

Yeah,Tilting bolts are out of fashion and i think it is possibly due to rotating bolt and delayed blowback firearms getting mainsteam.Would love to see some modernised FAL based weapon in tilting block mechanism.

 

[abingdonboy]

Punj Lloyd made guns still have their barrels forged in Israel,rest things are being made and assembled here.

Just saying.

Eventually (when given clearance by govt) PL will make the entire gun in India and much of IWI's production will shift to India, this is the original plan.

 

[devhensh]

Alright folks,

I found something interesting about Tavor-7 which i think i should share with you.

Watch this video


So,When IWI was marketing about Tavor-7 being 'fully ambidextrous',they also meant ambidextrous ejection as in this gun one can easily swap the side it ejects spent cartridges from right to left or vice versa by simply opening and closing respective dust covers,or as it appears from this video.

What i think the procedure behind that could be is this
- you disassemble whole weapon,put the bolt in other direction with extractor and ejector facing other sides than before (i.e. 180° from default) then reassemble it and swap off those dust covers to make it eject on other side

Plus,two videos i found on internet showing firing in semi auto and full auto



Notice the Controllability of this gun,as i think it is very much similar to SCAR-H

Good post ! I have been following the development of this gun for a long time now...Let me add to this.....

Tavor 7 is diffrent from earlier versions of Tavors, not only because of caliber....But it's a short stroke instead of previous long stroke models(much like HK 416, which is short stroke)...short stroke models are comparitively, softer recoiling......

Another feature, which sets it apart is that,it's a short stroke gas piston with a 4-position variable gas regulator, (including an OFF position – a unique feature designed for special operation needs)...This off position totally cuts of gass, and allows for shooting of subsonic 7.62x51mm(for silent operations)...but the gun has to be manually cocked every time....

But i am not 100 % sure, that Tavor 7 would be chosen, over the Galil Ace 7.62x51mm, which is a much more proven and highly reliable platform.....Also, conventional armies always prefer non bulpup designs for general issue to Infantry( SF is a diffrent case)......But i would be happy to be proved wrong