Page 4 of 17 FirstFirst 12345678910111213 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 252

Thread: INSAS vs AK47 vs M16?

  1. #46
    A Self Important Senior Contributor troung's Avatar
    Join Date
    03 Aug 03
    Posts
    7,222
    http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20050812/...m/india_212505

    Nepal says Indian guns let it down in rebel battle

    By Gopal Sharma 2 hours, 7 minutes ago

    KATHMANDU (Reuters) - The Nepali army said on Friday faulty Indian assault rifles were partly responsible for its heavy death toll in a gun battle with Maoist rebels as troops hunted for 75 soldiers still missing after the fighting.
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Forty-three soldiers and a civilian were killed when hundreds of rebels attacked an army base in the remote Kalikot district, 600 km from the capital, Kathmandu, late on Sunday.

    The Maoists, fighting to topple Nepal's monarchy and establish communist rule, say they captured 52 soldiers after the raid, a claim rejected by the army.

    Army spokesman Brigadier-General Dipak Gurung said the Indian-manufactured INSAS rifles malfunctioned during the fighting which continued for about 10 hours.

    "Soldiers complained that the INSAS rifles did not function properly during the fighting which lasted for a long time," Gurung told a news conference when asked why the army death toll was high.

    "May be the weapons we were using were not designed for a long fight. They malfunctioned," he said.

    There were also fewer troops at the base as it was a road construction project and not a fighting base, he added.

    The army casualties were the heaviest since Maoist violence escalated after King Gyanendra seized direct power in February by sacking the multiparty government.

    "There were stoppages during the firing ... the rifles got hot and soldiers had to wait for them to cool," another officer told Reuters.

    India is a key military supplier to the poorly equipped Nepali army. But New Delhi suspended arms supplies six months ago after the king's power grab to press the monarch to restore multi-party democracy and civil liberties.

    Nepali troops have complained in the past about technical problems with the Indian designed and built INSAS or Indian Small Arms System assault rifle.

    Indian troops using the rifle are also known to have faced difficulties using it, Indian defence experts say. Indian defence officials declined to react to the Nepali comments.

    The nine-year Maoist revolt has scared away investors in the desperately cash-strapped nation and wrecked the economy that is heavily dependent on international aid and tourism.

    More than 12,500 people have died in the conflict and tens of thousands of people have fled their homes to towns or to neighbouring India to escape the conflict.

  2. #47
    Patron
    Join Date
    29 Jul 05
    Location
    India
    Posts
    156
    Quote Originally Posted by troung
    http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20050812/...m/india_212505

    Nepal says Indian guns let it down in rebel battle

    By Gopal Sharma 2 hours, 7 minutes ago

    KATHMANDU (Reuters) - The Nepali army said on Friday faulty Indian assault rifles were partly responsible for its heavy death toll in a gun battle with Maoist rebels as troops hunted for 75 soldiers still missing after the fighting.
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Forty-three soldiers and a civilian were killed when hundreds of rebels attacked an army base in the remote Kalikot district, 600 km from the capital, Kathmandu, late on Sunday.

    The Maoists, fighting to topple Nepal's monarchy and establish communist rule, say they captured 52 soldiers after the raid, a claim rejected by the army.

    Army spokesman Brigadier-General Dipak Gurung said the Indian-manufactured INSAS rifles malfunctioned during the fighting which continued for about 10 hours.

    "Soldiers complained that the INSAS rifles did not function properly during the fighting which lasted for a long time," Gurung told a news conference when asked why the army death toll was high.

    "May be the weapons we were using were not designed for a long fight. They malfunctioned," he said.

    There were also fewer troops at the base as it was a road construction project and not a fighting base, he added.

    The army casualties were the heaviest since Maoist violence escalated after King Gyanendra seized direct power in February by sacking the multiparty government.

    "There were stoppages during the firing ... the rifles got hot and soldiers had to wait for them to cool," another officer told Reuters.

    India is a key military supplier to the poorly equipped Nepali army. But New Delhi suspended arms supplies six months ago after the king's power grab to press the monarch to restore multi-party democracy and civil liberties.

    Nepali troops have complained in the past about technical problems with the Indian designed and built INSAS or Indian Small Arms System assault rifle.

    Indian troops using the rifle are also known to have faced difficulties using it, Indian defence experts say. Indian defence officials declined to react to the Nepali comments.

    The nine-year Maoist revolt has scared away investors in the desperately cash-strapped nation and wrecked the economy that is heavily dependent on international aid and tourism.

    More than 12,500 people have died in the conflict and tens of thousands of people have fled their homes to towns or to neighbouring India to escape the conflict.

    This is kinda embarassing for me ... not to talk of the lives of the folks we let down in the sharp end . As I mentioned in my earlier posts, it's the poor quality control thing, being just another mammoth government department, there is no incentive or accountability to put in that extra step.
    I'm curious to know what is the nature of the malfunctions. Heat related, I suppose, from the talk of sustained fire fights. Parts breakage less likely but still possible, the magazine also could be a source of problems- I'm told the synthetic material isn't the best.
    If our Ordnance set up and Government are professional and sensitive enough (unlikely), they'll have to stop passing the buck (typically) and set about making amends. That's going to be a long one since the bureaucracy here is formidable. These slugs in their cozy offices with no clue as to what a battle field is like, actually make all the critical decisions with a simple stroke of the pen. There was an article about the CAG(Audits Department) giving the Ordnance Factory Board a hiding for its ineffeciency and inordinate delays in getting minor things done. I'll post the URL when I find it- Its pathetic.

  3. #48
    New Member ArjunMK1's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Jun 05
    Location
    India
    Posts
    17
    Is Excalibur the squad Automatic rifle with full auto mode ???

    Currently issued Insas are field rifles with 3 round burst and single shot capabilities. Though ,I heard that some of these can fire in full auto.

  4. #49
    hammer's Avatar
    Join Date
    21 Jul 04
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    299
    Quote Originally Posted by ArjunMK1
    Is Excalibur the squad Automatic rifle with full auto mode ???
    Yes , Excalibur has full auto mode but it hasn't been issued to any army or SOF units, atleast AFAIK.

    Quote Originally Posted by ArjunMK1
    Currently issued Insas are field rifles with 3 round burst and single shot capabilities. Though ,I heard that some of these can fire in full auto.
    I read somewhere that during Kargil, the 3 round mode malfunctioned in a lot of INSAS rifles and instead fired in full auto mode.
    Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie!'...till you can find a rock. ;)

  5. #50
    Thats me with my precious Senior Contributor sniperdude411's Avatar
    Join Date
    07 Feb 05
    Location
    Lancaster PA, (Crystal Lake IL).
    Posts
    1,189
    Quote Originally Posted by ArjunMK1
    Is Excalibur the squad Automatic rifle with full auto mode ???

    Currently issued Insas are field rifles with 3 round burst and single shot capabilities. Though ,I heard that some of these can fire in full auto.
    Isn't there an excalibur gps-guided atrillery shell being developed?

  6. #51
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    17 Jan 05
    Posts
    862
    Quote Originally Posted by hammer
    I read somewhere that during Kargil, the 3 round mode malfunctioned in a lot of INSAS rifles and instead fired in full auto mode.
    Well that still OK.Imagine they put it in auto modeand it fires on semi mode..that will be quite frustrating
    What's the difference between people who pray in church and those who pray in casinos?
    The ones in the casinos are serious.

  7. #52
    Thats me with my precious Senior Contributor sniperdude411's Avatar
    Join Date
    07 Feb 05
    Location
    Lancaster PA, (Crystal Lake IL).
    Posts
    1,189
    I almost got a Henry AR-7 just beacuse I've heard a lot that the trigger malfunctions and it fires full-auto sometimes.

  8. #53
    New Member
    Join Date
    09 Oct 05
    Location
    New Jersey USA
    Posts
    7

    INSAS vs the rest

    Quote Originally Posted by lemontree
    Guys here is a small essay I have written on the origins of the INSAS concept. Do correct me if I have made any errors. I posted this on another forum some months back to remove many misconceptions about the rifle.
    INSAS
    Information about the INSAS available in the media is a mix of pessimism and optimism, and none can be blamed for developing a bias either good or bad. I am attempting to dispel a few myths and inform readers about the Indian Small Arms Systems (INSAS).
    Development of the INSAS concept
    In the mid 80s the Indian Army had decided to switch over from the 7.62 mm NATO calibre to 5.56 mm NATO. It was also decided to switch over from the L1A1 to a more modern and lighter infantry rifle. In 1985, after the trials, the Aug Styr and the H&Ks G41 were short listed for final selection. Both these rifles are excellent weapons in their respective class and both the manufacturers offered transfer of technology and licenses production. But the Indian Army had the following observations for Aug Styr and G41:
    Aug Styr
    Pros:-
    - Inter-changeable barrels for rifle, carbine and LMG.
    - Common parts reduced logistics and simplified training of troops.
    Cons:-
    - Not an ideal infantry battle rifle (but suitable for SOF units).
    The term “battle rifle” fits a weapon that has suitable stand off distance for bayonet fighting and the Aug Styr does not allow that due to its compact size. The butt end has to be strong enough to withstand punishment in hand-to-hand combat. The Aug Styr lacked these two quality requirements (QR).
    G41
    Pros:-
    - The weapon fitted all the QRs for a battle rifle.
    Cons:-
    - The G41 did not offer anything new apart for 5.56 mm calibre. This role could be achieved in the L1A1s by conversion of these rifles from 7.62mm to 5.56mm.
    - The G41 did not offer the inter-changeable components as offered by the Aug Styr.
    Army HQ asked DRDO if the Aug Styrs’ capabilities could be achieved in a battle rifles design like the G41. It was a challenging task, as DRDO had no experience in development of small arms. Till then the organisation had only made copies of the L1A1 and L4, and a modified L1A1 (heavy barrelled auto) called 1C (for Mech units). It was not a matter of national pride but the development of a concept.
    Due to lack of prior experience in rifle design and development, DRDO chose the simplest and proven design for the operating system. Hence, the AK-74 operating system was chosen, giving rise to statements that it is an AK74 copy. The commonality in major components had to be maintained for the rifle, LMG and carbine. The primary feature had be quick change of barrels in all three versions of the weapon system. Features of most successful rifles were incorporated to achieve the desired results. Design features of the M16, G3 and FN were used towards that effect.
    After initial trails and errors DRDO produced prototypes of the rifle, LMG and carbine, these were tested and the Army kept pointing out deficiencies and recommended improvements. DRDO however, could not provide quick barrel change facility in the 3 weapon types. This was also one of the reasons for the delay in induction. Each type of weapon had some deficiencies that had to be cleared before being inducted into the 3rd largest army in the world.
    INSAS 1B1 Rifle
    The INSAS 1B1 rifle looks like an FN FNC on observation. Maximum efforts were put to clear all deficiencies of this weapon since it was the most crucial of the 3 weapons. The delay in induction of the 1B1 rifle forced the army to purchase 100,000 Romanian AKs to equip the COIN units, the non-commando battalions of the Parachute Regiment, and J&K Police during the mid 90s. At the same time captured AKs/ T-56 from militants were recycled (after refurbishment), and issued to police and para-military units as per requirement.
    The INSAS rifle was under going user trials since 91-93 and ultimately was inducted in 1997 (13 yrs after initiation). The rifle saw active service in 1999 during the limited war in Kargil sector. The functioning was satisfactory and the users like the weapon. It fulfilled the requirements of a rugged and reliable infantry rifle. Minor complaints get referred to the Ordinance factory through the EME workshops and improvements are made.
    It is pertinent to mention that contrary to reports in articles written (by journalists with little or no understanding of small arms), frontline units are using the weapon in operational areas.
    INSAS LMG
    The highlight of the INSAS LMG is the absence of the spare barrel that is common in most LMGs/ SAWs. This aspect reduces the strength of crew served weapons, eliminates dual role and increases the bayonet strength of the rifle section/ squad. The barrel of the LMG was supposed to withstand continuous firing without the requirement of change of barrel. This problem could only be solved in 2000/01. Prior to that the barrels bulged/ or burst during tests, when the barrels were subjected to continuous firing of hundreds of rounds in a given time frame.
    The weapon was inducted 15 years after initiation of development. The problems have been rectified as far as the army is concerned. Improvements are being made, as it is an evolving process.
    INSAS carbine
    This has been to most trouble prone element of the INSAS family that has not yet reached an acceptable level for induction in the army. Presently IMI of Israel is assisting in its development.
    Its was thought that the A-7 the 5.56mm version of the AK that was being planned would fill the void of the carbine and assist in phasing out the Sterling 9 mm carbine. There is not much news about it hence it is only speculation.
    One major QR not fulfilled by the INSAS rifle and LMG is the quick change of barrel like the Aug Styr. However, all the criticism related to the delay in 20 years for the INSAS to get inducted is unfounded. The M16A1 had a miserable record due to regular jamming and its reputation suffered. By the time the M16A2 came it was a considerable 20 years till the faults were rectified.
    The AK 47 in its present avatar has been around for the past 55 years and still happens to be the most inaccurate rifle around (its ruggedness is unquestionable), and is the last choice for most armies. The PLA too kept is only as an SMG in its squads, and has developed the SKS into a decent T-81/87 battle rifle.
    :

    1. I say lemontree, you are pretty up and about on these things. I have dealt with this weapon system from the development stage, and I couln't have done a better job. Of course, if I sat down to answer the queries that the guys have posted about this weapon, it will end up in a thesis. So, I shall refrain. suffice it to say that the weapon system has evolved over the years and the current version 1B1 that you have reffered to is pretty rugged.

    2. Ruggedness (read manufacturing quality) has been the biggest bane of this weapon, and also the biggest lament of the users. The rifle was inducted around 1996-1997 as you have mentioned and was put through a very severe test during the Kargil war. Troops were unfamiliar with the rifle and I was touring the entire battle zone with a buch of guys from the DRDO, Ordnance Factory, DGQA etc to set things right. 1B1 is a direct result of the data collected during this tour. Later, in the aftermath of the war, I also went to Kargil and Drass and put some more issues in perspective.

    3. So, guys, take it easy. Indian Army is in good hands. INSAS is very accurate and has negligible recoil, the two qualities that are very popular with the troops. It is also easily maintained. AK-47 has never been a 'battle rifle' and hence should not be compared to INSAS. The imported AKs were used to arm our counter insurgency forces who are fighting a non-stop unconventional battle in J&K and North-East, and it fits the role.

    4. 'Leaf Brown' has always been the colour of Indian small arms. Try firing a black rifle at 55 deg C in the deserts of Rajasthan over a long period and you shall get the answer.

    5. Both the Rifle and LMG have successfully undergone repeated sustained firing test beyond the limit laid down for the life of barrels. They do not require a change of barrel. The barrels are Chrome plated like most modern small arms of the world and are easily maintained.

    6. The Carbine project has been shelved for technical reasons. It is not feasible to control the fire of a high powered ammunition like the 5.56 NATO when fired from a shortened barrel.

    7. I shall be glad to take on technical queries concerning this weapon system.

  9. #54
    New Member
    Join Date
    09 Oct 05
    Posts
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by INSASMAN
    :


    7. I shall be glad to take on technical queries concerning this weapon system.
    Actually I have dozens of questions about this weapon system, so here it goes:-


    1. Is the INSAS using NATO round or the Indian round is different and has a heavier bullet with more propellant in the case?

    2. Is the action of INSAS long stroke which means that the round length can be increased over a period of time?

    3. Is there any initiative to develop specialised sniper, subsonic and heavier bullets for close up firing, rounds?

    4. What is the number of rounds per minute which the INSAS rifle and LMG expected to fire in sustained fire rate over a long period of time, like one hour? What is the barrel life?

    5. What are the major changes in the rifle/LMG compared to pre-Kargill models?

    6. Is a specialised sniper variant of INSAS being developed?

    7. What other new developments one can expect with INSAS?

    8. Why is it so difficult so develop a carbine variant? Especially with M4, the carbine variants of M16 as also other western rifles have carbine variants!

    9. You are saying that carbine variants has been dropped but there was some news last few days ago that DRDO still hopes to put it out in next couple of days?

    10. Can you give some details about the grenade launcher to be mated with INSAS?

    11. Would carbine (length) become possible with the use of bull pup configuration or use of new US ammo like Mk262?

    12. Doesn’t putting the sights on pivoting dust cover inherently make the rifle prone to loosing its zero easily? Also as the rifle gets banged about, wears out etc, the pivot will have play and the situation will further aggravate?

  10. #55
    Bandaid Military Professional
    Join Date
    04 Oct 04
    Location
    India
    Posts
    4,593
    Quote Originally Posted by INSASMAN
    :
    1. I say lemontree, you are pretty up and about on these things. I have dealt with this weapon system from the development stage, and I couln't have done a better job.
    Thank you. I appriciate this compliment from a technical person.

    Even before the Kargil war, my unit had converted to the INSAS rifle in 1997, and I never found it wanting, at least on the firing ranges. I never had the oppertunity to use it in combat.
    5. Both the Rifle and LMG have successfully undergone repeated sustained firing test beyond the limit laid down for the life of barrels. They do not require a change of barrel. The barrels are Chrome plated like most modern small arms of the world and are easily maintained.
    The change of barrel requirement that I referred to is a QR in combat conditions, when due to any reason the barrel, breach clock, or breach block returning/piston spring get damaged, then due to comminatilty of parts these can be interchanged. For instance if due to enemy shelling the section LMG gets damaged then a rifle or carbine can use the LMG barrel and perform the LMG's role. Hence, the modular concept needs more R&D to make the INSAS more versatile. I wonder if the L4 LMG barrel change system can be incorporated in the INSAS family, since it is a time tested and reliable system.
    6. The Carbine project has been shelved for technical reasons. It is not feasible to control the fire of a high powered ammunition like the 5.56 NATO when fired from a shortened barrel.
    I have been disappointed for this very reason. When I first saw the INSAS carbine in 1994 at Infantry School, Mhow, I was quite amazed at the metamorphosis it's shape and design had undergone. It's earlier avatars (9mm versions) looked like the HK MP5.
    It is no excuse that the carbine is still in the factory as there are similar weapons in the market. As you are aware the AKS-74U is just as compact and fires the 5.45x39mm rounds, with a barrel length of 210 mm. The Aug Styr carbine barrel is 350 mm I am not aware of the INSAS carbine barrel length. The M4 (US) barrel length is 370 mm. There are certain deficiencies of using short barrelled carbines firing 5.56 mm rounds, like the shorter barrel results in lower bullet velocity, and this decreased the effective range of the 5.56mm bullet. Second, the short barrel and the forehand overheats. Third, the short barrel results in the shortened gas system, which works under greater pressures than in rifle. This increases the rate of fire and produces more stress on the moving parts thereby reducing the weapon life. Then why not just stick to the 9mm.

    7. I shall be glad to take on technical queries concerning this weapon system.
    Has DRDO tried using muzzel brakes on the INSAS carbine, when the muzzle flip compensator failed to control the upward jump?
    Last edited by lemontree; 10 Oct 05, at 08:27.

    Cheers!...on the rocks!!

  11. #56
    New Member
    Join Date
    09 Oct 05
    Posts
    21
    Lemontree

    the barrel length of the INSAS carbine was supposed to be 330 mm which is 13 inches

  12. #57
    Bandaid Military Professional
    Join Date
    04 Oct 04
    Location
    India
    Posts
    4,593
    Quote Originally Posted by alfa
    Lemontree

    the barrel length of the INSAS carbine was supposed to be 330 mm which is 13 inches
    Then its failure and non-induction is a shame, when weapons of the same class exist.

    Cheers!...on the rocks!!

  13. #58
    Thats me with my precious Senior Contributor sniperdude411's Avatar
    Join Date
    07 Feb 05
    Location
    Lancaster PA, (Crystal Lake IL).
    Posts
    1,189
    Quote Originally Posted by lemontree
    Then its failure and non-induction is a shame, when weapons of the same class exist.
    How hard is it to make a muzzle compensator/ brake/ flash hider???

  14. #59
    New Member
    Join Date
    09 Oct 05
    Posts
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by sniperdude411
    How hard is it to make a muzzle compensator/ brake/ flash hider???

    Well, I donot know that but Drdo is struggling with the INSAS carbine since atleast 1980 when the first drawings were make for it.

  15. #60
    New Member
    Join Date
    09 Oct 05
    Location
    New Jersey USA
    Posts
    7
    Hi guys,

    1. The problem with the carbine is that it fired the same high powered ammunition, with muzzle velocity in excess of 900 m/s, that was used in the rifle and the LMG. The 'pressure-velocity' curve of the ammunition was designed for rifle and LMG barrels. With the shortened Carbine barrel the 'All Burnt Point' went outside the barrel. As a result there was tremendous muzzle jump, unbearable sound and flash, and the weapon just could not be controlled in automatic mode which is what carbines are meant for.

    2. It had lots or other problems like the front pistol grip which interferred with a quick change of magazine, the side folding butt which was not comfortable in carriage, etc etc. But the main problem was the incompatability of the ammunition.

    2. For the sake of commonality of firing/moving parts with rifle and LMG, DRDO could not mess with the cartridge size, nor could they alter the packing density of the explosive. So they kept quite for a long time till such time there rifle and the LMG were well into acceptance phase of induction, and then raised the bogey of the carbine again last year. I had organized the last trial at the Raj Rif Centre in Delhi which was witnessed by the Deputy (or Vice, I dont remember) Chief, wherein the effort was summarily rejected.

    4. No, it is not hard to design a muzzle compensator, but how would that eliminate the sound and flash. Agreed, AK fires a high powered round too, but its 7.62x39mm amn had the mv of approx 700 m/s, which is why AK was so effective in close range, burst firing mode.

    5. All of us want to get rid of 9mm carbine, but there is no viable alternative yet. Let's see if DRDO spins some magic

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Nepal says Indian INSAS riffles let it down in rebel battle
    By asdf in forum Small Arms and Personal Weapons
    Replies: 125
    Last Post: 27 Jan 08,, 17:35
  2. M16 vs G36
    By Mt1 in forum Small Arms and Personal Weapons
    Replies: 114
    Last Post: 26 Oct 07,, 20:09
  3. ak47 vs m16
    By maersk in forum Small Arms and Personal Weapons
    Replies: 618
    Last Post: 05 Feb 07,, 19:43
  4. AUG vs. M-4 Carbine
    By troung in forum Small Arms and Personal Weapons
    Replies: 61
    Last Post: 16 Sep 05,, 05:23
  5. Xm8 Prototypes Surpass M16 ?
    By CenterFire in forum Small Arms and Personal Weapons
    Replies: 57
    Last Post: 21 Mar 05,, 22:05

Tags for this Thread

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •