The orange colour was Indian invention as earlier Fals came with brown furniture and i had seen almost black Fals mostly the wooden ones. Orange colour came only in 90s.Most of the Fals we see in the bright orange colour are repainted ones as i had personally hold some of them and could see the brown colour beneath it as the top layer was worning out.
It was clearly RSS ki saazish. How many times will you guys discuss about thtat orange furniture colour?
Noice.. Is it integrally suppressed or can the suppressor be detached?
how did you know?
The recoil on this gun bro is almost none. Perfect alternative for those armies who want a no nonsense extreme condition proven bullpups. Infact, had we not inducted so many expensive TAR 21s, I'd suggest this as alternative for our forces.
Babaji, I would request you to shed some light on such a recoil free and flawless shooting of the VHS2. Does it incorporate Ruski's AK-107 tech for recoil reduction??
Nope just regular short stroke gas piston system, stoner pattern multi-lug bolt and bolt carrier (AR-18 inspired) that can be rotated 180 degree around for ejection on either side.
Integral.
Please don’t give them this idea, for god’s sake
Dude. It's 2021. INSAS were built in 1990s when there was next to none CNCs and 3D printers. Now OFB has them all. With minimal hand tooling and mostly machine tooling, if correctly overhauled, INSAS family can be a brutally accurate and lethal weapon. It already proved itself at battles even when it was made by incompetent douchebags at OFB, imagine what our IA could've gotten had INSAS been fully machine manufactured.Please don’t give them this idea, for god’s sake
AR-15s nothing else
One of the primary reasons for wanting an INSAS replacement is the terrible QC standards of OFB-made examples of 1A and (less so) 1B, 1B1. Taking existing INSAS and modifying it into a bullpup would be putting lipstick on a pig. Without fixing the underlying problems with mass production.
The problem with INSAS was never design - its a good design that takes all the right lessons from AK receiver & gas system design, and abandons the bad parts of AK design (like fire selector) by adopting Western-style alternatives in their place. Design-wise, it's pretty good.
INSAS production has undergone several improvements since early 90s. 1Bs are made far more efficiently than 1As. However OFB's overhead problems have only compounded in recent times, not gotten better. So it's unlikely to translate into efficient procurement CAPEX-wise.
At that point you're pretty much making a new rifle.
By this point you must know that IA gives a rat's a$$ about such efficiency aspects wrt training & ergonomics. They proved that when they went for supplying an AK, an AR-10 and what might very well be a completely different action (like Carmel) to infantry for fulfilling role of service-issue assault weapon.
Look dude I understand that MoD is not able to satisfy IA in terms of local CAPEX items(especially small arms) but all I wanted to do here was to give our indeginous weapons a chance. I havw already debated over the CQB carbine issue in my previous posts here.One of the primary reasons for wanting an INSAS replacement is the terrible QC standards of OFB-made examples of 1A and (less so) 1B, 1B1. Taking existing INSAS and modifying it into a bullpup would be putting lipstick on a pig. Without fixing the underlying problems with mass production.
If the same modification were done to a INSAS 1C milled receiver, then perhaps it could be something to look at - and CME could potentially offer it in the tender, and actually hope for a fair chance. Unfortunately, given the exorbitantly high prices quoted by OFB even for stamped-receiver 1Bs, I can only imagine how much a milled 1C-based rifle would cost. Can't be under $1100-1500 per piece.
That said, if an indigenously-designed offering in 5.56x45 is what you want, there's a much better option:
The problem with INSAS was never design - its a good design that takes all the right lessons from AK receiver & gas system design, and abandons the bad parts of AK design (like fire selector) by adopting Western-style alternatives in their place. Design-wise, it's pretty good.
Problem was always production.
INSAS production has undergone several improvements since early 90s. 1Bs are made far more efficiently than 1As. However OFB's overhead problems have only compounded in recent times, not gotten better. So it's unlikely to translate into efficient procurement CAPEX-wise.
At that point you're pretty much making a new rifle.
By this point you must know that IA gives a rat's a$$ about such efficiency aspects wrt training & ergonomics. They proved that when they went for supplying an AK, an AR-10 and what might very well be a completely different action (like Carmel) to infantry for fulfilling role of service-issue assault weapon.
Fvck you reminded me of something, that our soldiers still use that old Soviet Stance of firing, which is useless.
As far as i know,INSAS' buttstock is not a problem per se, rather it was appreciated for being comfirtable for all different creed-race-locality of soldiers in the whole army,reason why i think it should've been continued on future variants of INSAS, at least the shape,i mean look at what SoKoreans are doing on their upgraded K-2 rifles,K-2C carbines etc
The fire selector of Ak is shit. Its nowhere smoother when compared with that of Insas. And kalashnikov lose their opportunity to modify it when they discarded western style seldctor from Ak-12.One of the primary reasons for wanting an INSAS replacement is the terrible QC standards of OFB-made examples of 1A and (less so) 1B, 1B1. Taking existing INSAS and modifying it into a bullpup would be putting lipstick on a pig. Without fixing the underlying problems with mass production.
If the same modification were done to a INSAS 1C milled receiver, then perhaps it could be something to look at - and CME could potentially offer it in the tender, and actually hope for a fair chance. Unfortunately, given the exorbitantly high prices quoted by OFB even for stamped-receiver 1Bs, I can only imagine how much a milled 1C-based rifle would cost. Can't be under $1100-1500 per piece.
That said, if an indigenously-designed offering in 5.56x45 is what you want, there's a much better option:
The problem with INSAS was never design - its a good design that takes all the right lessons from AK receiver & gas system design, and abandons the bad parts of AK design (like fire selector) by adopting Western-style alternatives in their place. Design-wise, it's pretty good.
Problem was always production.
| Thread starter | Similar threads | Forum | Replies | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| W | Russia to supply air defence system and small arms to Pakistan | Pakistan | 3 | |
|
Gun memes | General Multimedia | 83 | |
|
Israeli-Indian JV to make small arms in private sector | Defence & Strategy | 15 | |
|
India identifying requirement for small arms fire detection system | Indian Army | 6 |
