Small arms of India

Bleh

Laughing member
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2017
Messages
2,686
Likes
7,335
Country flag
OFB is not a PSU at all. It's a Board that encompasses a large number of individually run & managed Ordnance Factories, none of which are PSUs either. They're all simply Govt-owned units that answer directly to Dept of Defence Production (MoD).

The whole reason why OF employees were on strike recently is because of the ongoing proposal to TURN them into a PSU.
My bad... although it is probably best if instead of converting them into a single PSU, the different OFB factories like Kanpur & Ishapur be turned into separate competing enterprises under public-private partnership.
UNKNOWN AR15/G3 HYBRID (POF - PAKISTAN)
Slick!!!
Why don't Pakis use these indigenous guns? They have China to partner up with & make a decent copy...
 
Last edited:

vampyrbladez

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2018
Messages
5,283
Likes
12,045
Country flag
My bad... although it is probably best if instead of converting them into a single PSU, the different OFB factories like Kanpur & Ishapur be turned into separate competing enterprises under public-private partnership.
Slick!!!
Why don't Pakis use these indigenous guns? They have China to partner up with & make a decent copy...
ARDE can make guns 100x better then OFB. Look at the degree of refinement in the JVPC as compared to the MSMC.



MSMC - OFB/DRDO





JVPC - ARDE/OFB
 

Bleh

Laughing member
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2017
Messages
2,686
Likes
7,335
Country flag
ARDE can make guns 100x better then OFB. Look at the degree of refinement in the JVPC as compared to the MSMC.



MSMC - OFB/DRDO





JVPC - ARDE/OFB
No shit! ARDE/DRDO combo is a credible R&D organisation.
OFB factories on the other hand are just manufacturing units and are better off not being government-run, otherwise they will keep making shabby crap like Insas.

They have no competiton, as the forces kept accepting their shabby crap without even asking for basic upgrades like p-rails, ergonomic grip, adjustable buttstock. Thus they will keep producing shabby crap in absence of any motivation to push their tech out standards ahead... However split & sold amongst public-private ventures to compete for the right to manufacture the products developed by ARDE, with the winner chosen on the basis of speed and quality of production, that might work very well.
The development of indigenous AKM version was one such with Ghatak, Trichy etc. competing against each other. Today the winner Ghatak is used by almost all the paramilitaries.
 
Last edited:

vampyrbladez

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2018
Messages
5,283
Likes
12,045
Country flag
No shit! ARDE/DRDO combo is a credible R&D organisation.
OFB factories on the other hand are just manufacturing units and are better off not being government-run, otherwise they will keep shabby crap like Insas.

They have no competiton, as the forces kept accepting their shabby crap without even asking for basic upgrades like p-rails, ergonomic grip, adjustable buttstock. Thus they will keep producing shabby crap in absence of any motivation to push their tech out standards ahead... However split & sold amongst public-private ventures to compete for the right to manufacture the products developed by ARDE, with the winner chosen on the basis of speed and quality of production, that might work very well.
Let it become a PSU with a serving Military officer as it's CEO/head. Caracal has done the same thing with amazing results.

http://www.sadefensejournal.com/wp/the-caracal-car816-the-new-desert-assault-rifle/
 

Bleh

Laughing member
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2017
Messages
2,686
Likes
7,335
Country flag
Let it become a PSU with a serving Military officer as it's CEO. Caracal has done the same thing with amazing results.

http://www.sadefensejournal.com/wp/the-caracal-car816-the-new-desert-assault-rifle/
That might actually result in some biased R&D, influenced by the personal preferences of said military officer.

Working alongside multiple attaches and liaisons from multiple forces, with everyone sending their own suggestions & demands, while the final product gets tested by multiple forces... that's the way to go.
 

uoftotaku

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2015
Messages
937
Likes
3,510
Country flag
Let it become a PSU with a serving Military officer as it's CEO/head. Caracal has done the same thing with amazing results.

http://www.sadefensejournal.com/wp/the-caracal-car816-the-new-desert-assault-rifle/
Caracal also paid big bucks to bring 2 former H&K designers into the fold.

We haven't followed that type of model since Kurt Tank was brought in to design the Marut.

I wonder why nobody has ever tried to do the same in other instances like Arjun for eg which desperately needed some help in early days.

Seems like a missed opportunity all around.
 

vampyrbladez

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2018
Messages
5,283
Likes
12,045
Country flag
Too many cooks spoil the broth. You're describing exactly what happened with INSAS and LCA programmes...look at what happened there. We have a deep rooted problem with both corruption and ego driven turf wars in our system.

Rather than allowing a free for all where every tom, dick and harry adds their opinion we need more streamlining and definitely less interference from the forces who have made it a habit both to demand unreasonable performance standards and constantly changing those standards whenever a product is close to completion
We may be trying this Caracal model with AK 203 production.

Major General Sanjeev Sengar has been appointed as CEO of the Korwa factory for a four-year period, and will head a team which will feature a few other serving officers.

The Army has been concerned over low quality and delivery problems when it comes to ordnance factories’ products, so if this new model for the AK-203 factory is successful, it might just pave the way for a new set-up to oversee such factories.
https://theprint.in/defence/army-ch...ceo-of-ak-203-rifle-factory-in-amethi/259019/
 

Bleh

Laughing member
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2017
Messages
2,686
Likes
7,335
Country flag
Caracal also paid big bucks to bring 2 former H&K designers into the fold.

We haven't followed that type of model since Kurt Tank was brought in to design the Marut.

I wonder why nobody has ever tried to do the same in other instances like Arjun for eg which desperately needed some help in early days.

Seems like a missed opportunity all around.
Yeah, that too.

We can design our own... but it speeds up the process to go into a joint venture, especially when we are lagging techwise & and have potential partners in allies like Israel.
Too many cooks spoil the broth. You're describing exactly what happened with INSAS and LCA programmes...look at what happened there. We have a deep rooted problem with both corruption and ego driven turf wars in our system.

Rather than allowing a free for all where every tom, dick and harry adds their opinion we need more streamlining and definitely less interference from the forces who have made it a habit both to demand unreasonable performance standards and constantly changing those standards whenever a product is close to completion
But it's better to have a taster instead of just cook... You are giving example of Insas, but even after 2010 Insas rifles were being manufactured without even p-rails & adjustable buttstock, forget upgradation to machined bodies and free-floating barrel.
Getting the two parties to work together will actually smoothen the process & make the development more efficient... Shifting goal-posts can also be attributed to absence of any coordination between developer and user.

I am not supporting allowing them to ask for whatever the impossible f*** they want, but letting the father of Tom, Dick, Harry analyse all the requirements and pick out the feasible ones, with constant connection and negotiation about the progress. That way both parties would know which tech to be expected in which version along the development timeline... See what I am trying to say?
If we actually did that with the LCA programme, Mark 1a would have already been planned from the beginning instead of ADA suggesting it as a stop gap out of the blue in 2015.
 

vampyrbladez

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2018
Messages
5,283
Likes
12,045
Country flag
Yeah, that too.

We can design our own... but it speeds up the process to go into a joint venture, especially when we are lagging techwise & and have potential partners in allies like Israel.

But it's better to have a taster instead of just cook... You are giving example of Insas, but even after 2010 Insas rifles were being manufactured without even p-rails & adjustable buttstock, forget upgradation to machined bodies and free-floating barrel.
Getting the two parties to work together will actually smoothen the process & make the development more efficient... Shifting goal-posts can also be attributed to absence of any coordination between developer and user.

I am not supporting allowing them to ask for whatever the impossible f*** they want, but letting the father of Tom, Dick, Harry analyse all the requirements and pick out the feasible ones, with constant connection and negotiation about the progress. That we both parties should know which text to be expected in which version along the development timeline... See what I am trying to say?
If we actually did that with the LCA programme, Mark 1 a would have already been planned from the beginning instead of ADA suggesting it as a stop gap.

INSAS is a clusterfuck because the Army can't or deliberately messes up it's GSQR(s) , Navy and Airforce trust the Army with the design and OFB makes a badly optimised design to justify excessive overhead, labor and material cost.
 

ezsasa

Mod
Joined
Jul 12, 2014
Messages
14,129
Likes
40,821
Country flag
Too many cooks spoil the broth. You're describing exactly what happened with INSAS and LCA programmes...look at what happened there. We have a deep rooted problem with both corruption and ego driven turf wars in our system.

Rather than allowing a free for all where every tom, dick and harry adds their opinion we need more streamlining and definitely less interference from the forces who have made it a habit both to demand unreasonable performance standards and constantly changing those standards whenever a product is close to completion
Given the circumstances, there is a way to solve this without ruffling too many feathers..

I say create a SPV(special purpose vehicle) comprising of engineers&gunsmiths of ARDE, OFB& IA from rifle programs along with govt representation.

1) give them 100-200 crore corpus
2) give a timeframe of 4/5 years for the SPV from the beginning
3) 80% of team should be Hands on with machining.
4) give them exemption from tendering process
5) keep their working premises away from OFB factories, also closer to a military airport.
6) except for barrel forging they should be able to procure from outside or make it in-house.
7) give them a attached gun range for testing.
8) a team for 100 people should be sufficient..
 

Bleh

Laughing member
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2017
Messages
2,686
Likes
7,335
Country flag
INSAS is a clusterfuck because the Army can't or deliberately messes up it's GSQR(s) , Navy and Airforce trust the Army with the design and OFB makes a badly optimised design to justify excessive overhead, labor and material cost.
Many first attempts start as clusterfuck... Merkava Mark 1 was a piece of shit. But instead of the issues getting ironed out time, crappy INSAS rifles being built in 2010 still didn't have even p-rails or adjustable buttstock.
Why?...
Because there no competition for the right to manufacture on basis of quality, nor anyone from the Army attached with the program to act as a bridge between user & manufacturer/developer. If it were then maybe the GSQR could have been negotiated to more realistic one!


Same with Arjun project... No road to future upgradation was planned & every time the Army asked for a technological upgrade at par with modern standards, it sounded like shifting goalposts.
Their demands like Thermobaric munition or Active Protection System weren't unjust at all, but there was no vision! They should have been inducting Mark 1A/B/C right from 2005, with clear planning of updating technological standards of older platforms in future. Installing APS would take a few days in the shop, new rounds could be fired by old guns... but they didn't buy unless everything was available & ready, while using 40-year-old Tincans whose an unupgraded ones would be of next to no use in war.

Maybe some Tom, Dick or Harry could have suggested installation of T-90 tech on Arjun like the RCWS as a stopgap measure... right back in 2000.
 
Last edited:

vampyrbladez

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2018
Messages
5,283
Likes
12,045
Country flag
Look at what these jokers are up to now!

The letter to Modi said if the government wanted to strengthen the OFB, it can change the structure, management set-up and decision-making process of the Ordnance Factories on par with the Railway Board, ISRO and Department of Atomic Energy. For achieving this purpose, there is no need to corporatise the organisation, the letter said.

The letter has also blamed the top management of the Ordnance Factories for its lack of efficiency and pointed out that senior officials hardly visited the manufacturing units as they are confined to their respective headquarters.

“The OFB as a corporation will not be able to compete with the private sector players for getting the workload from the Army since private sector keeps limited workforce and 90 percent the work they get done through contract workers,” the employees association's letter dated 3 September addressing the prime minister said.
https://www.firstpost.com/business/...inst-proposal-to-corporatise-psu-7290281.html
 

Shaitan

Zandu Balm all day
Mod
Joined
Aug 3, 2010
Messages
4,418
Likes
7,132
Country flag
At least, they have guts to experiment with muzzle brake of AK. Even, the Kalashanikov Concern has abandoned their legacy muzzle brakes for AK 203 and opted for newer honey comb M-brake/flash hider. But here, we are continuing the same old ones in Ghataks/TARs.
It would be interesting to know about performance of AR style M-brakes on AK for the mitigation of muzzle climb. It seems they have also changed the original muzzle brake of SVD. Interesting !! Please update if such a comparison gets available.
Shit, I give them guts to get into the small arms in India, period. They're trying to control the small arms, it's ammo, and optics. I really hope the trials turn good and they get rewarded with health orders.

Really, India has some small, but specialized private firms that are very ambitious. We're looking at a start of something big with several of these companies, I believe.

Hi, Can you post the source link of these documents? Thx in advance
Just found the images only.
 

Raj Malhotra

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
722
Likes
1,113
Country flag
Shit, I give them guts to get into the small arms in India, period. They're trying to control the small arms, it's ammo, and optics. I really hope the trials turn good and they get rewarded with health orders.

Really, India has some small, but specialized private firms that are very ambitious. We're looking at a start of something big with several of these companies, I believe.



Just found the images only.
Anyway thx for pics. It shows we have developed 3 type of 5.56*45 rifles


MCIWS based on HK416
DRDO CQB Carbine based on SIG
INSAS IC based on AK/Galil
apart from less known bullpup INSAS, Kalantak, 2 trigger carbine etc

but Army only interested in imports.

Wonder what else we are developing in 7.62*51 Apart from upsized INSAS IC?
 

binayak95

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2011
Messages
1,337
Likes
2,586
Anyway thx for pics. It shows we have developed 3 type of 5.56*45 rifles


MCIWS based on HK416
DRDO CQB Carbine based on SIG
INSAS IC based on AK/Galil
apart from less known bullpup INSAS, Kalantak, 2 trigger carbine etc

but Army only interested in imports.

Wonder what else we are developing in 7.62*51 Apart from upsized INSAS IC?
*Army only interested in bullpups*
Neglects to mention that bullpup INSAS made the British LA85 look good.
Failed trials consistently and then Para SF chose the Tavor.
Tavors had hiccups in the initial use, were sent back, fixed by IWI and now I wonder how many porkies have been halaled to date by operators with Tavors. Hundreds, if not thousand +. Try and say that about the INSAS.
 

piKacHHu

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2015
Messages
235
Likes
668
Country flag
Anyway thx for pics. It shows we have developed 3 type of 5.56*45 rifles


MCIWS based on HK416
DRDO CQB Carbine based on SIG
INSAS IC based on AK/Galil
apart from less known bullpup INSAS, Kalantak, 2 trigger carbine etc

but Army only interested in imports.

Wonder what else we are developing in 7.62*51 Apart from upsized INSAS IC?
Would like to add my observation:

MCIWS is a kind of long stoke gas piston rifle in AR-15 mold. M-brakes are retained as in INSAS. It's large silhouette comparable to SCAR-H; plus it offers barrel change based on the caliber,

DRDO CQB Carbine: It is more like short barrel Galil than Sig 550. However, it has same M-brake and charging handle as in INSAS/SLR.

INSAS 1C: The design is more influenced by FN- FAL/SLR than AK/Galil (rather the gas system of AK). Otherwise, it shouldn't have lacked fully auto operation mode.

I had a lot of expectation when IA announced INSAS replacement program almost a decade back; but nothing good came out of it. Domestic solutions offered are hardly encouraging given the piecemeal changes they were offering over the INSAS which they intend to replace. In the mean time, the last decade has witnessed advent of tactical SF operations (like OBL compound raid, Iraq etc.) in which performance of rifles are tested to its extreme.

So, it's a bit harsh to blame the IA for interested in import. There is simply no decent product on offer! The contract for 7 lakhs AK-203 will be the end of any alternate indigenous development under DPSUs. May be it's a blessing in disguise. We may get improved AKs in shorter period of time rather than getting some nth iteration of overpriced INSAS with picattiny patches in decades. Because look at the pictures/videos of Joint military exercises (e.g. recent one going on with the US) and you will see a huge gap in terms of tactical equipment in our side. Ironically, these gaps can be filled easily because these tactical equipment don't cost much. I wish luck to the initiatives from private sector to provide some good local solutions for small firearms in future; till then you have to live & fight with the imported guns.
 

Flying Dagger

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 26, 2019
Messages
745
Likes
1,540
Country flag
Shit, I give them guts to get into the small arms in India, period. They're trying to control the small arms, it's ammo, and optics. I really hope the trials turn good and they get rewarded with health orders.

Really, India has some small, but specialized private firms that are very ambitious. We're looking at a start of something big with several of these companies, I believe.



Just found the images only.
True I think they need to be rewarded for this . If their products meet the requirements let them build one for army else give them contract to manufacture Sig and caracal instead of giving contracts to ofb and ruining the rifles.
 

Bleh

Laughing member
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2017
Messages
2,686
Likes
7,335
Country flag
MCIWS latest iteration..
www.censusindia.gov.in.2011census.C-01.html - Copy.png

So a new trend is emerging where MHA is the primary customer of OFB. Four things can be gathered from new thus far :

1) Trichy Assault Rifle to be used in place of AK 203 for the Armed Forces.

2) JVPC for CQB Carbine role in place of the CAR 816 Carbine for the Armed Forces.

3) Excalibur INSAS variants to have some orders in the near term to replace all INSAS 1B1 rifles.

4) 7.62 Ishapore Assault Rifle to be used in place of SIG 716 G2 Patrol for the Armed Forces.

This looks like a very well designed and excellent procurement plan. Hats off to MoD and MHA for using their brains for the first time in decades!
Nah... Where are you getting all these!?

1. With Ak-203 factory coming in, there's ZERO chance for Trichy with the Army. Already third-degree are in service in paramilitaries mostly.

2&3. Carbine's status is vague... ARDE carbine or JVPC both are options. Excalibur much less likely.

4. It'll still have to beat the Sig-716 in price. That was one cheap deal.
 
Last edited:

vampyrbladez

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2018
Messages
5,283
Likes
12,045
Country flag
That armed Force isn't Indian Army . Under MHA we may see CRPF etc at most going for these.

Indian Army is going for Sig and Ak 203 only carbine is still in question May be there OFB could score but their poor quality control issue may work against them.

I hope BSF also gets Sig and Ak 203 instead of relying on OFB rifles.
I was referring to MHA aka paramilitary acquisitions not Armed Forces ones.
 

Global Defence

Articles

Top