Small arms and Light Weapons

[Tridev123]

Can anybody make a comparison between the Insas 5.56 calibre rifle magazine capacity and other 5.56 calibre weapons magazine. Do rifles like M16, Tavor 5.56 also have only 20 round magazines. Thought 5.56 calibre bullets are smaller in size compared to 7.62 calibre. Even AK 47 7.62 has 30 round magazines. The extra 10 rounds could prove decisive in close quarter battles.

 

[Anikastha]

Can anybody make a comparison between the Insas 5.56 calibre rifle magazine capacity and other 5.56 calibre weapons magazine. Do rifles like M16, Tavor 5.56 also have only 20 round magazines. Thought 5.56 calibre bullets are smaller in size compared to 7.62 calibre. Even AK 47 7.62 has 30 round magazines. The extra 10 rounds could prove decisive in close quarter battles.

u can get extra larger mag if u want....i think every gun has a mag size limit.....for stability , weight etc......

 

[vampyrbladez]

Stupidest idea ever! M27 aka HK416 for M249 SAW. Without suppressive fire how will squad maneuver?

AFAIK this idea has been scrapped. They were planning to replacing every M4A1 with an M27 IAR but capped it at 15,000 only. Now they use it as a DMR/Battle Rifle more than a SAW.

https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/ne...t-or-working-with-them-youre-not-getting-one/

https://www.guns.com/news/2018/04/30/hk-wins-29-million-contract-for-more-m27-rifles-to-marine-corps

Meanwhile M249s will continue to stay in the field!

https://defence-blog.com/army/u-s-army-looks-to-buy-more-m249-squad-automatic-weapons.html

https://www.guns.com/news/2019/04/04/fn-snags-9-9-million-pentagon-contract-for-machine-gun-barrels



https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/of...rps-quest-for-the-best-rifle-for-infantrymen/

Meanwhile the US Army has the right idea going for an intermediate round between the 5.56x45 mm and 7.62x51 mm for the 6.8x43 mm. Marines have been forced to adopt the guns as soon as they are made available.

https://taskandpurpose.com/army-squad-marksman-rifle-fielding

https://www.military.com/daily-news...oots-early-version-next-gen-squad-weapon.html

Next Generation 6.8 mm prototypes. (2017 design) As you can see they have pushed the receiver below the barrel to allow for the recoil spring and guide rod for a bigger caliber to fit the dimensions of an M4A1 carbine.

View attachment 36404

See comparison of 6.8x43 mm round with 7.62x39 mm. The former has around 20% more energy at all ranges but is more expensive! However compared to 7.62x51 mm, it adds only 3-4 rounds extra and is far more underpowered.

@Tridev123 here you go!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Tridev123]

@vampyrbladez, Thanks for the exhaustive reply. I agree that if a better intermediate round than the usual 5.56*45 7.62*39 or 7.62*51 is available for assault rifles, it should be explored as an option. But good sense dictates that the final de should be made by our army after in country trials. We cannot go by certificates issued by other countries. But my original question was, a soldier having a 20 round magazine rifle, will he not be at a disadvantage while facing an enemy using a 30 round rifle. An observation, the 30 round Insas rifle looks horrible and out of shape. Our OFB needs to look at aesthetics also while designing weapons. Western and even Russian rifles look sexy compared to our Insas.

 

[Gessler]

Stupidest idea ever! M27 aka HK416 for M249 SAW. Without suppressive fire how will squad maneuver?

How do you think IA squad maneuvers with INSAS LMGs?

 

[vampyrbladez]

How do you think IA squad maneuvers with INSAS LMGs?

Worst bloody idea! A 5.56mm rifle without automatic mode and just semi or burst only. Combine that with 20 round flimsy magazines.

Then a 5.56mm 'LMG' with no belt fed option, just 30 round clips!

Look at what USMC says now after their M27 IAR experiment!

“Given the smaller size of our operational units, the M249′s volume of fire provides a greater tactical benefit than the advantages provided by the M27,” said Maj. Nicholas Mannweiler.

https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/ne...t-or-working-with-them-youre-not-getting-one/

 

[ArgonPrime]

Worst bloody idea! A 5.56mm rifle without automatic mode and just semi or burst only.

Hmmm....do you know what the standard issue infantry rifle of the USMC is??It's the M16A4, a rifle which also lacks a full automatic mode,just like the INSAS rifle. I've never seen them complaining, heck , they even refused to replace their M16s with M4s.Ever wonder why??

Combine that with 20 round flimsy magazines.

It's yet another example of the apparent lack of foresight and common sense among our top level military hierarchy.
Yes, it is indeed a problem but it's really not that serious of an issue which cannot be rectified very easily by making the 30 round LMG magazines standard issue since they're fully compatible with the rifles.But there has to be the will.
By the way, from what I've heard, the soldiers prefer PKMs or FN MAGs over INSAS LMG, but I can't say for sure.

Then a 5.56mm 'LMG' with no belt fed option, just 30 round clips!

Again goes to show the lack of imagination on the top brass' part, those old coots were so hung up on their nostalgia of the venerable Bren LMG which they had fought with, that they failed to realize how far the world had come and how much the nature of warfare had changed from what it was during their time!!
And it's not just limited to the infantry officers, heck no!!We've seen this same thing with every other arm including the Armored corps officers.Just a cursory glance at the GSQR they had formed for the MBT Arjun shows how far detached from the prevailing ground situations they had been.

Look at what USMC says now after their M27 IAR experiment!

https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/ne...t-or-working-with-them-youre-not-getting-one/

Nothing to disagree there.

 

[vampyrbladez]

Hmmm....do you know what the standard issue infantry rifle of the USMC is??It's the M16A4, a rifle which also lacks a full automatic mode,just like the INSAS rifle. I've never seen them complaining, heck , they even refused to replace their M16s with M4s.Ever wonder why??

They hate the M16A4s so much they replaced it with the M4A1.

."It’s about time," said Sgt. Jonathan Ferriera, a mortarman with 1st Battalion, 8th Marines, who first used the M4 during a 2010-2011 deployment to Afghanistan's Helmand province. "The M4 holds every quality that the M16 does: everything an M16 can do, the M4 does better."

https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/ne...runts-react-to-switch-from-the-m16-to-the-m4/

https://www.businessinsider.com/complaints-about-the-marine-corps-m16a4-rifle-2018-6?IR=T

No M16A4s in USMC active service as of 2019.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...ious-assault-ship-carrying-hundreds-of-maines

 

[ArgonPrime]

They hate the M16A4s so much they replaced it with the M4A1.



https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/ne...runts-react-to-switch-from-the-m16-to-the-m4/

https://www.businessinsider.com/complaints-about-the-marine-corps-m16a4-rifle-2018-6?IR=T

Yet they continued to use the M16A4 up until the fall of 2018 instead of replacing them with M4s!!And no, M4s do not do everything better!!The M4s have significantly reduced effective engagement range and accuracy due to its shortened barrels.

No M16A4s in USMC active service as of 2019.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...ious-assault-ship-carrying-hundreds-of-maines

Not true, while they are definitely on their way out with a version of HK416, the process hasn't been completed yet.

Anyway, full auto feature on a standard issue rifle is just pointless and leads to wastage of ammo and nothing else, nothing of value that is.

 

[binayak95]

Worst bloody idea! A 5.56mm rifle without automatic mode and just semi or burst only. Combine that with 20 round flimsy magazines.

Then a 5.56mm 'LMG' with no belt fed option, just 30 round clips!

Look at what USMC says now after their M27 IAR experiment!



https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/ne...t-or-working-with-them-youre-not-getting-one/

Ehh, this is a long going debate over sheer volume of firepower vs precision fire.

There is no right answer, it depends on your infantry doctrine and how your men are trained.
US soldiers are trained since WWI to practice 'walking fire', firing on the move, suppressing enemy positions and then maneuvering - similar to what Germans did with their MG42s. (this walking fire concept is why the BAR was introduced by the way)

Our doctrine is similar yet different. Infantry platoons have FN Mags in the MG section that provide a solid base of belt fed 7.62x51 rain! Infantry squads need to be able to use each others' ammo and spares, and supplies. Thus, INSAS rifles and INSAS LMGs. A very solid concept and one that works fine in theory and in practice.
Most nations follow a similar line of thought. INCLUDING, might I add, the USMC with the new M27 IARs.

 

[binayak95]

They hate the M16A4s so much they replaced it with the M4A1.



https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/ne...runts-react-to-switch-from-the-m16-to-the-m4/

https://www.businessinsider.com/complaints-about-the-marine-corps-m16a4-rifle-2018-6?IR=T

No M16A4s in USMC active service as of 2019.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...ious-assault-ship-carrying-hundreds-of-maines

Oh boy, M16A4 is identical to the M4A1 in all aspects except the length and weight.

M4A1 is best suited for 400m and below engagements while the M16 (with its longer barrel) can reach out to 500-550m accurately. Unnecessary for modern combat.

THATS the problem. Dont judge your army and its equipment by comparing it to another army that has wholly different operational experience and doctrine.

Armies always fight the last war.

 

[ArgonPrime]

Ehh, this is a long going debate over sheer volume of firepower vs precision fire.There is no right answer, it depends on your infantry doctrine and how your men are trained.

In my opinion, precision fire with a reasonable volume would beat a higher volume of inaccurate wall of fire every damn time.And you don't really need to have a full auto setting to put a high volume of lead down range.

US soldiers are trained since WWI to practice 'walking fire', firing on the move, suppressing enemy positions and then maneuvering - similar to what Germans did with their MG42s. (this walking fire concept is why the BAR was introduced by the way)

Yet those US soldiers almost never fire their rifles ( or carbines) in full auto mode.Heck, even a small burst is extremely infrequent.

Our doctrine is similar yet different. Infantry platoons have FN Mags in the MG section that provide a solid base of belt fed 7.62x51 rain!

Not really that different since the US Platoons are also based around mobile GPMG sections and if I'm not mistaken, they've a version of the same FN MAG as their standard issue GPMG, correct me if I'm wrong.

Infantry squads need to be able to use each others' ammo and spares, and supplies. Thus, INSAS rifles and INSAS LMGs. A very solid concept and one that works fine in theory and in practice.

True but still I would say that designing a SAW with a 30 round box mags was a mistake, they should have gone for a belt-fed design instead...................or issue some sort of dual drum mags for the SAW operators at the very least.

P.S - I've been meaning to ask this from a long time now, what'd be the standard combat load out of a rifleman in the Indian Army during an active war situation??Like how many 5.56 rounds of ammo he would be issued with??

 

[vampyrbladez]

In my opinion, precision fire with a reasonable volume would beat a higher volume of inaccurate wall of fire every damn time.And you don't really need to have a full auto setting to put a high volume of lead down range.


Yet those US soldiers almost never fire their rifles ( or carbines) in full auto mode.Heck, even a small burst is extremely infrequent.

Not really that different since the US Platoons are also based around mobile GPMG sections and if I'm not mistaken, they've a version of the same FN MAG as their standard issue GPMG, correct me if I'm wrong.

True but still I would say that designing a SAW with a 30 round box mags was a mistake, they should have gone for a belt-fed design instead...................or issue some sort of dual drum mags for the SAW operators at the very least.

P.S - I've been meaning to ask this from a long time now, what'd be the standard combat load out of a rifleman in the Indian Army during an active war situation??Like how many 5.56 rounds of ammo he would be issued with??

1. LMGs have a higher MOA than Battle Rifles. The higher rate and volume of fire creates an arc of suppression which makes the enemy get pinned down in one spot. Meanwhile your units flank and neutralize the enemy. Basic Infantry Tactics 101.

2. The 5.56 mm aka .223 Cal is ideal for automatic fire due to it's lighter weight and decent muzzle velocity. US troops frequently used to damage their M4A1s during firefights and had to get heavier barrels to compensate for the heat generation due to sustained automatic fire.

3. The US version of FN MAG is the M240B. They still use the M60s as well.

4. That's why the M27 IAR got capped at just 14000+ instead of the planned 50000+ units.

5. The average Indian trooper would use either an AK 203/M1F41~M1F51 (7.62x39 mm) or the Sig 716 (7.62x51 mm) in battle. The 5.56x45 mm round is severely underpowered due to which the US military is moving towards the 6.8x43 mm round which has 20% more energy than the 7.62x39 mm but provides just a few more rounds than the 7.62x51 mm round which is still around 2-3 more powerful than it.

The 5.56x45 mm is ideal as a CQB carbine round for a Radioman/Weapon Crewman/Officer/Vehicle Crewman/Paratrooper type occupation. Places where you need to move light but have a decent ability to punch back if necessary.

 

[vampyrbladez]

Oh boy, M16A4 is identical to the M4A1 in all aspects except the length and weight.

M4A1 is best suited for 400m and below engagements while the M16 (with its longer barrel) can reach out to 500-550m accurately. Unnecessary for modern combat.

THATS the problem. Dont judge your army and its equipment by comparing it to another army that has wholly different operational experience and doctrine.

Armies always fight the last war.

M16A4 is burst fire and M4A1 is fully automatic. The .223 round is designed for sustained automatic fire.

INSAS is burst fire but has a barrel slightly longer than an M4A1 but nowhere near the length of an M16A4. This makes it doubly underpowered.

MMGs are good for fixed emplacements. You need an FN MAG type weapon (2 per platoon) to properly utilize maneuver warfare. INSAS LMG is the laziest and most bullshit (as well as inefficient) way to implement that by turning an automatic carbine into an LMG like the Chauchat.

You go into wars never knowing how you'd emerge!

 

[vampyrbladez]

BTW check this gem out!

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...tol-was-made-for-the-bradley-fighting-vehicle

 

[ArgonPrime]

1. LMGs have a higher MOA than Battle Rifles.

Irrelevant and obvious to anyone with even the most rudimentary understandings of how modern firearms work.

The higher rate and volume of fire create an arc of suppression which makes the enemy get pinned down in one spot.

Complete garbage based upon CoD logic and stupid hollywood war movie tropes.
In reality, a 6-9 round burst is only good at suppression if rounds land within 1-3 meters of a target. Between British Ministry of Defence studies, Canadians, US Marines, and even the US Army, they've all pretty much agreed at this point after conducting extensive studies that a regular bullet, regardless of volume of fire, that doesn't land inside that range has no ability to suppression. That's the issue.

When it comes to machine guns, the problem is that a proper 6-9 round burst takes under about a second to fire (850 rpm/60 s=14 rps). If its all aimed at the same place, not purposely traversing or searching, then the burst pattern generally walks upwards. What that means in terms of effects on target, is only the first, maybe the second round actually comes near a target location, and the rest decorate the sky. So the answer is repeated single shots, or very short bursts from a weapon that barely recoils.

However, just spraying in the general direction of the enemy with a machine gun, which is what most consider suppression, is not. Its just a mix of posturing, noise, and wasting ammo.

Meanwhile your units flank and neutralize the enemy. Basic Infantry Tactics 101.

No shit Captain Obvious, what would we do without you endowing us with this top secret inside information about advanced squad tactics.

2. The 5.56 mm aka .223 Cal is ideal for automatic fire due to it's lighter weight and decent muzzle velocity.

What a load of garbage!!Again, this is based not in reality but long running stupid war movie tropes!!In reality, no soldier can hold an M-16 (or any other rifle regardless of the caliber) on the target for any meaningful amount of time, even while firing from a prone position and would waste a lot of ammunition, which could end up costing you dearly if you get involved in a long, drawn out fire fight. An M-16 has a cyclical rate of fire of over 800 rounds per minute, and you could empty a 30 round clip in a mere2 seconds!!
After the Vietnam war, an US Army study found out that all but 3 of the rounds within a burst were wasted, since the barrel would drift up and to the left.That's the sole reason why the M16A1 was replaced by the A2 variant you bloody mong!!

US troops frequently used to damage their M4A1s during firefights and had to get heavier barrels to compensate for the heat generation due to sustained automatic fire.

More bullshit!!While it's true that the barrels (along with trigger assembly, extractor spring, recoil buffer, barrel chamber, magazine, and bolt as well as some ergonomic modifications) were changed to better maintain accuracy and zero while withstanding high volumes of fire that simply doesn't translate to US Army soldiers spraying their carbines in full auto mode all the time like a bunch of rabbles!!For the nth time, you don't need to fire in auto to achieve a sustained high volume of fire!!The world doesn't work like in FPS video games, kid.
In reality, the US Army and USMC grunts are not only not trained to fire their personal rifles in full auto mode in the ranges, it's in fact, actively discouraged and for very good reasons which I've mentioned already.
Get out with this steaming pile of horse shit and stop misleading the readers.

 

[ArgonPrime]

M16A4 is burst fire and M4A1 is fully automatic. The .223 round is designed for sustained automatic fire.

He already said that you moron!!

INSAS is burst fire but has a barrel slightly longer than an M4A1 but nowhere near the length of an M16A4. This makes it doubly underpowered.

The barrel length of the standard INSAS 1B1 is about 18.6 inches which is almost identical to the 20 inches of M16 and significantly longer than the 14 inches of M4A1 you ignorant imbecile!!A standard INSAS would be significantly more lethal at longer ranges than an M4 which isn't even a proper rifle to be perfectly honest!!

Now, you're clearly biased towards automatic rifles and there is nothing wrong with it, everyone has their preferences, no matter how much stupid that may be.But at least don't twist the facts or even outright rely on half truths and pure fiction just to suit your narrative!!
In reality, automatic settings for standard issue infantry rifles is completely unnecessary and wasteful even.

MMGs are good for fixed emplacements. You need an FN MAG type weapon (2 per platoon) to properly utilize maneuver warfare. INSAS LMG is the laziest and most bullshit (as well as inefficient) way to implement that by turning an automatic carbine into an LMG like the Chauchat.

Great, you don't even know the proper terminology!!

 

[binayak95]

M16A4 is burst fire and M4A1 is fully automatic. The .223 round is designed for sustained automatic fire.

INSAS is burst fire but has a barrel slightly longer than an M4A1 but nowhere near the length of an M16A4. This makes it doubly underpowered.

MMGs are good for fixed emplacements. You need an FN MAG type weapon (2 per platoon) to properly utilize maneuver warfare. INSAS LMG is the laziest and most bullshit (as well as inefficient) way to implement that by turning an automatic carbine into an LMG like the Chauchat.

You go into wars never knowing how you'd emerge!

Wrong on several counts. M16A4 have all three modes. Semi, TRB, and full auto. And no professional soldier worth his salt ever goes full auto unless he's suppressing someone.

Indian 5.56 is amongst the hottest in the world. It's way overgassed, rather under powered as you claim.
And we bloody well have FN Mags!

 

[binayak95]

Irrelevant and obvious to anyone with even the most rudimentary understandings of how modern firearms work.


Complete garbage based upon CoD logic and stupid hollywood war movie tropes.
In reality, a 6-9 round burst is only good at suppression if rounds land within 1-3 meters of a target. Between British Ministry of Defence studies, Canadians, US Marines, and even the US Army, they've all pretty much agreed at this point after conducting extensive studies that a regular bullet, regardless of volume of fire, that doesn't land inside that range has no ability to suppression. That's the issue.

When it comes to machine guns, the problem is that a proper 6-9 round burst takes under about a second to fire (850 rpm/60 s=14 rps). If its all aimed at the same place, not purposely traversing or searching, then the burst pattern generally walks upwards. What that means in terms of effects on target, is only the first, maybe the second round actually comes near a target location, and the rest decorate the sky. So the answer is repeated single shots, or very short bursts from a weapon that barely recoils.

However, just spraying in the general direction of the enemy with a machine gun, which is what most consider suppression, is not. Its just a mix of posturing, noise, and wasting ammo.


No shit Captain Obvious, what would we do without you endowing us with this top secret inside information about advanced squad tactics.


What a load of garbage!!Again, this is based not in reality but long running stupid war movie tropes!!In reality, no soldier can hold an M-16 (or any other rifle regardless of the caliber) on the target for any meaningful amount of time, even while firing from a prone position and would waste a lot of ammunition, which could end up costing you dearly if you get involved in a long, drawn out fire fight. An M-16 has a cyclical rate of fire of over 800 rounds per minute, and you could empty a 30 round clip in a mere2 seconds!!
After the Vietnam war, an US Army study found out that all but 3 of the rounds within a burst were wasted, since the barrel would drift up and to the left.That's the sole reason why the M16A1 was replaced by the A2 variant you bloody mong!!





More bullshit!!While it's true that the barrels (along with trigger assembly, extractor spring, recoil buffer, barrel chamber, magazine, and bolt as well as some ergonomic modifications) were changed to better maintain accuracy and zero while withstanding high volumes of fire that simply doesn't translate to US Army soldiers spraying their carbines in full auto mode all the time like a bunch of rabbles!!For the nth time, you don't need to fire in auto to achieve a sustained high volume of fire!!The world doesn't work like in FPS video games, kid.
In reality, the US Army and USMC grunts are not only not trained to fire their personal rifles in full auto mode in the ranges, it's in fact, actively discouraged and for very good reasons which I've mentioned already.
Get out with this steaming pile of horse shit and stop misleading the readers.

Decorating the sky! Good one!

The ONLY reason full auto fire is done in training is to teach men how to be aggressive in their grip and shouldering.
That it.

 

[ArgonPrime]

Wrong on several counts. M16A4 have all three modes. Semi, TRB, and full auto. And no professional soldier worth his salt ever goes full auto unless he's suppressing someone.

Too many PUBG commandos these days.

Indian 5.56 is amongst the hottest in the world.It's way overgassed, rather under powered as you claim.

Good one, had forgot to mention this in my reply.

And we bloody well have FN Mags!

Yep.

By the way, I've been meaning to ask this from a long time now, what'd be the standard combat load out of a rifleman in the Indian Army during an active war situation??Like how many 5.56 rounds of ammo he would be issued with??Any idea??