Nepal says Indian INSAS riffles let it down in rebel battle

**asdf** · 15 Aug 05,, 12:57

Nepal says Indian guns let it down in rebel battle
By Gopal Sharma

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.

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.

Related link: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20050812/...NlYwMlJVRPUCUl

**asdf** · 15 Aug 05,, 13:00

Nepal government joins row over Indian rifles
By Sudeshna Sarkar, Indo-Asian News Service

Kathmandu, Aug 15 (IANS) The Nepalese government Monday joined a bitter row over the efficacy of assault rifles supplied by India, calling them outdated and not designed for long battles.

Nepal's state-run media, used extensively since February to defend the royal coup and the new policies of the regime headed by King Gyanendra, Monday cited reports from Indian media, going back to 2001, to prove the Nepalese army's contention that the INSAS rifles were "problem-prone".

"A soldier is only as good as the weapon he carries," the government-owned Rising Nepal daily said in a front-page report. "For soldiers on foot, it is primarily the rifles they carry."

The daily quoted reports in the Times of India, The Asian Age and websites Rediff and defenceindia.com that said Indian troops had faced problems with INSAS rifles, resulting in India deciding to buy 100,000 AK-47 assault rifles from Romania.

The salvo was fired as India celebrated its 59th independence day, with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh saying his country was committed to work with Nepal for promoting development, prosperity and peace in the region.

King Gyanendra's regime has thrown its weight behind the Royal Nepalese Army's allegation that malfunctioning INSAS rifles cost it dearly during a recent battle with Maoist insurgents.

On Friday, army spokesman Brig. Gen. Dipak Gurung had said the army lost 43 soldiers in Kalikot district because they were using INSAS rifles that heated after a couple of hours and had to be allowed to cool before they could be fired again.

"If we had better weapons, the results would have been better," Gurung had said. His statement, widely reported by the media in Nepal and India, stung Indian authorities into issuing a rebuttal.

The Indian embassy here said Saturday that the INSAS rifles had been used by Indian security forces "without any complaint in the most extreme conditions of weather and combat".

Since 2003, India has provided the Royal Nepalese Army with its indigenously manufactured INSAS rifles at a 70 percent subsidy. However, military aid was stopped after the royal coup in February.

--Indo-Asian News Service

http://www.eians.com/stories/2005/08/15/15nep.shtml

**killer** · 15 Aug 05,, 15:28

There Is No Problem With The Gun.

It Is The Users Who Are At Fault. There Was Problem In The Earlier Models But It Was Corrected. And Now It Is Very Good Rifle. Indian Army Is Useing It In Siachin, Rajesthan Desert , Himalyas, In Jungle Of Northeast Without Any Problem.

So Basically As The Nepali Army Lost The Battle They Have To Blame Somebody So Blame The Gun.

**hammer** · 15 Aug 05,, 16:47

The Nepali maoists also use the same rifle, captured from the Nepalese army. They don't seem to complain. This picture shows the maoists with their INSAS rifles captured from Nepalese army.

**sniperdude411** · 15 Aug 05,, 18:59

I've never fired a new or old one, so I'll let the experts go in at this first...

**cottage cheese** · 16 Aug 05,, 05:28

Originally Posted by asdf

Nepal government joins row over Indian rifles
By Sudeshna Sarkar, Indo-Asian News Service

INSAS rifles that heated after a couple of hours and had to be allowed to cool before they could be fired again.

The Indian embassy here said Saturday that the INSAS rifles had been used by Indian security forces "without any complaint in the most extreme conditions of weather and combat".

Ok I can confidently admit that the INSAS does have its quirks (particularly with quality) In fact I even felt a tinge of guilt over India dumping turkeys on the Valiant Nepalis. I bow my head to those who've died.

But as I study the allegations on the news, I get the impression that the INSAS isn't entirely to blame. It all looks like lack of fire discipline to me. The INSAS is a rifle- not a Machine gun. Any rifle will overheat and malfunction if you fire chronically long bursts. Maybe they ran out of ammo this way and resulted in the fatalities?

But again I must disagree with the lame statement by our embassy. There have been problems and there have been complaints and no transparent statements on correction measures. There still are some issues, but this does not render the weapon a useless club. For that matter look at the SA80, though it is considered an abomination, it's still a viable rifle.

**lemontree** · 16 Aug 05,, 08:08

Does it mean that the Nepal army does not carry out extensive tests before buying weapons?...poor excuse for poor military performance.

-{SpoonmaN}- · 16 Aug 05,, 09:10

Originally Posted by hammer

The Nepali maoists also use the same rifle, captured from the Nepalese army. They don't seem to complain. This picture shows the maoists with their INSAS rifles captured from Nepalese army.

The rebels are probably just glad to have whatever they can get. I saw a report on the BBC about the Maoists and it showed some of them carrying flintlocks.

**cottage cheese** · 16 Aug 05,, 09:57

Originally Posted by lemontree

Does it mean that the Nepal army does not carry out extensive tests before buying weapons?...poor excuse for poor military performance.

We meet again lemontree!

I wonder if they do? Generally they'd be dependent on our testing (I'm assuming). Other than free hand outs of M16 by the US and small numbers of Israeli stuff, the hardware in use is generally Indian. So if stuff is considered suitable for our Gorkha Regiments it should be for them as well (My humble logic)
What's your take on this mess?

On Friday, army spokesman Brig. Gen. Dipak Gurung had said the army lost 43 soldiers in Kalikot district because they were using INSAS rifles that heated after a couple of hours and had to be allowed to cool before they could be fired again.

Couple of hours? Those are not Vickers Machine Guns for heavens sake. Besides how much ammo is each soldier issued? I don't think it will enough to sustain 'hours' of heat inducing volumes of fire. Unless of course the Nepal consignments have very lowgrade metallurgy.

**Jay** · 16 Aug 05,, 10:01

Thats interesting, may be they were shooting at the ghosts for hours, or they watched too many holywood movies

**lemontree** · 16 Aug 05,, 10:10

Originally Posted by cottage cheese

We meet again lemontree!

I wonder if they do? Generally they'd be dependent on our testing (I'm assuming). Other than free hand outs of M16 by the US and small numbers of Israeli stuff, the hardware in use is generally Indian. So if stuff is considered suitable for our Gorkha Regiments it should be for them as well (My humble logic)
What's your take on this mess?

You may be right about that. But testing new equipment is basic drill. Looks like they got overwhelmed by the guerillas, its happened to us so many times in the jungles of the north-east.

Couple of hours? Those are not Vickers Machine Guns for heavens sake. Besides how much ammo is each soldier issued? I don't think it will enough to sustain 'hours' of heat inducing volumes of fire.

They must have panicked and fired off all their ammo.

Unless of course the Nepal consignments have very lowgrade metallurgy.

I doubt it. If you convert the L1A1 SLR into automatic and fire rapid bursts, it too will get over heated in a matter or minutes.
And no one can dare call a L1A1 "sub-standard"

**cottage cheese** · 16 Aug 05,, 12:07

Originally Posted by lemontree

You may be right about that. But testing new equipment is basic drill. Looks like they got overwhelmed by the guerillas, its happened to us so many times in the jungles of the north-east.

They must have panicked and fired off all their ammo.

I doubt it. If you convert the L1A1 SLR into automatic and fire rapid bursts, it too will get over heated in a matter or minutes.
And no one can dare call a L1A1 "sub-standard"

Yup, I did modify one of our SLRs to full auto for a test. Since the state police force is switching to SLR, we were toying around with the idea of having one full auto SLR per section (in normal patrolling) rather than hump the .303 Bren (we hadn't received 7.62 Brens then - we do now) and mess around with a different set of ammo. The SLR was one of the newer ones. Whew! the muzzle blast and rise was considerable... Not to mention the recoil which I perceived to be more than a .303 rifle. Needless to say though the weapon was of a very sturdy build, the barrel, chamber area, and magazine housing area got blisteringly hot not in minutes but seconds. I fired a full 20 round magazine spacing out 4-5 round bursts over 15 seconds - I estimated the rate of fire to be close to 800RPM.
Of course, I hit nothing at 50 yards and most shots in a burst ended up about 6 ft above the figure 11!! BTW I'm a hopless shot

Tamping saliva with your fingers over the barrel immediately converted the wet spot to steam with a violent hiss. That's how hot it got with just 20 rounds. I decided to cool it coz I thought it would get hot enough to cook off rounds in the magazine.... or the barrel would blow up!

Well this is just to support your point that even high-quality weapons will overheat in a short time if firing bursts.

I haven't handled the SLR1C as yet. I assume it has a heavier barrel to act as a heat sink. You must have used this - tell me about it.

As for the Nepal thing, it's becoming clearer to me that this was more of a fire discipline issue than anything else.

You'd mentioned NE insurgency, and from what I've studied of many punch ups, our army never fielded effective counter ambush procedures. Perhaps now we are better trained and equipped, but as recent as just a few years ago we depended more on quantitative strength than on good field craft. We also didn't bother to induct ideal weapons - I think we still are hesitating on the usage of direct fire explosive weapons like UBGLs. We still have guys humping 2" mortars and SLRs with GF cups- not the kind of thing you can use effectively in viscious close range ambushes and firefights. And also there was the over dependency on motor transport rather than well spaced foot patrols even for short haul road coverage. Most successful ambushes have been against vehicle borne forces.

You'll probably know better and perhaps I'm entirely wrong... any insights on the change in battle procedure?

**indianguy4u** · 16 Aug 05,, 12:43

Talking of counter insurgenscies, what i have come across through live broadcast by TV news channels, our para military forces donot have adequate training & we dont have a proper plan (comprehensive) for tackling the same.

**lemontree** · 16 Aug 05,, 12:51

Originally Posted by cottage cheese

I haven't handled the SLR1C as yet. I assume it has a heavier barrel to act as a heat sink. You must have used this - tell me about it.

Its just a heavier barrel version and shorter in length. But not much fun to fire. The original Belgian auto SLRs are much better (the BSF is issued with these, 1 per section).

You'd mentioned NE insurgency, and from what I've studied of many punch ups, our army never fielded effective counter ambush procedures.

In contrast the army perfected their counter-ambush drills through those experiences. The reason for their efficacy was that these ambushes were based on the communist concept of guerilla warfare - heavy volume of fire on an inferior enemy with large number of troops. Nothing much can be done in such cases. The original classic ambushes were layed by the MNF (Mizo National Front) and the (Naga) PLA, by 300+ guerillas ambushing columns of 100 or 200 troops.
In the army we say that if you get stuck in an ambush in J&K you can escape but in the NE even God can't save you.

We also didn't bother to induct ideal weapons - I think we still are hesitating on the usage of direct fire explosive weapons like UBGLs. We still have guys humping 2" mortars and SLRs with GF cups- not the kind of thing you can use effectively in viscious close range ambushes and firefights.

The UBL or GL is a section weapon, while a 2" mor is a platoon weapon. The GL seems to be on its way out and the UBL may get inducted, till then one has to use the GL at the rifle section level.

And also there was the over dependency on motor transport rather than well spaced foot patrols even for short haul road coverage. Most successful ambushes have been against vehicle borne forces.

That is because of the predictability factor. It will always happen, troops going cross country rarely get ambushed.

**lemontree** · 16 Aug 05,, 12:53

Originally Posted by indianguy4u

Talking of counter insurgenscies, what i have come across through live broadcast by TV news channels, our para military forces donot have adequate training & we dont have a proper plan (comprehensive) for tackling the same.

Then ask them why has Op Topac (Zia's plan for Kashmir) failed in phase II?...