Small Arms & Tactical Equipment

Do we know which LMGs are at play here ?

Possible contenders (only my opinion):

K12 from S&T Motiv (South Korea), already pictured in the tweet, though the pic is of a helicopter gunnery variant rather than the dedicated infantry one with a fixed stock:

1200px-S%26T_Motiv_K12.JPG


MG-M2 from Arsenal (Bulgaria), basically a PK converted to 7.62 Nato:

64c6949b493dc9a3e393ceab81973ee9.jpg


A couple of American companies are likely to be involved:

M240LW from Barrett Firearms, the lightest M240 variant so far:

DSC08471.jpg


M60E6 from US Ordnance, also pictured in tweet:

b34ae602c0eefe073f0e2bddda6c3d62.jpg


I'm surprised at Belgium & Israel not being mentioned, perhaps because they wish to check out the Belgian offers at their US plant itself...

Minimi 7.62 Mk.3 from FN Herstal, an older version already used by NSG for sustained-fire duties, which we don't see all that much:

94hlX3U.jpg


Negev NG-7 from IWI (my personal favourite among this lot), again not hard to check these out in the US itself (if not even locally in India via PLRS Pvt Ltd), besides we've already trialed this gun and found it to be the only qualifier in the previous tender for LMGs. Also, Special Forces units in the country already use the 5.56 variant of the Negev (Garuds, SG):

NG7_leftside.jpg


Couple points to note:

  • The NG7 (or the NG7-SF with shorter barrel) is the lightest one here. When we're looking to use a 7.62x51mm weapon as an LMG, I would think weight is most crucial factor to watch. Except for the NG7, I fail to see any of the other guns here as LMGs....every last one of them was meant to be a GPMG/MMG, and it shows in their respective weights*.
  • Two of the possible contenders in my book (K12 and M240) are FN MAG-based designs. The same MAG from which OFB's own 7.62 LMG is derived from.
*
K12 Infantry variant -- 10.1 kg
MG-M2 -- 8.6 kg
M240LW -- 9.2 kg
M60E6 -- 9.3 kg
Minimi 7.62 -- 8.8 kg
Negev NG7 -- 7.9 kg (7.8 kg for SF variant)

(all weights are weapon-only. A 100-round box of belt-fed .308 would weigh an additional 4 kgs approx. So a typical squad-level MG gunner with a " 7.62 LMG" would need to carry about 13 kgs in hand, assuming a 9kg gun, and at least another 4 kgs of ammo on his person. 17 kgs total for an effective sustained-fire duty, and that's only for the weapon & ammo. That's going to be a huge step-up in weight from the INSAS LMG fed by 30-round magazines of the much lighter 5.56 ammo...I wonder how the infantrymen will take to it).

++++

What's surprising to me is that the claimed weight of the OFB LMG is only a little heavier than the M240LW! The LW, as one can see, has undergone quite a lot of re-design and re-engineering by Barrett in order to shave off weight, and it shows in the design.

Da-dWWMW0AA4AiA.jpg


^^ The indented lines on the receiver indicate they did trim away a lot of material (similar to the technique used on LW). OFB brings this LMG in at 9.5 kgs.

What happens to the OFB LMG ?

It's still in trials as far as I know. But anyway, this deal is only for a small batch of emergency orders (fast-track purchase). The OFB 7.62 LMG is still likely to fill the bulk of the requirement separate from this. Although, for the sake of the shooters involved, I'd personally prefer it if we give IWI-Punj Llyod an order to build NG7s for the rest of infantry as well. The OFB LMG is a great replacement for existing MAG 2A1s in the MMG role...but for heaven's sake, I can't picture that as a squad-level LMG.

This is not to say the soldiers can't carry it - they can and they will. But it adds to increasing their fatigue and reducing overall physical effectiveness. Lighter is always better. Less weight the weapon is, more weight they can carry in other things (like more ammo, more provisions etc.).

Would love your inputs @Falcon @Milspec
 
SIG sauer,Carl gustav,negev n7 would be a dream combo for our sections.I can't believe i am actually about to see such a possibility given our situation a few years back.Rooting for the Negev NG7,best LMG imo.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hellfire
You made a lot of excellent points. I will comment on only a few.
What's surprising to me is that the claimed weight of the OFB LMG is only a little heavier than the M240LW! The LW, as one can see, has undergone quite a lot of re-design and re-engineering by Barrett in order to shave off weight, and it shows in the design.
I would doubt accuracy, service life, overall ergonomics and quality of OFB made guns. But, I wouldn't doubt the weight. As was mentioned by Sandeep Uninathan in a youtube video, OFB did do a lot of work on the weight department of the gun.
I'll just leave it here in case you missed it.
It's still in trials as far as I know. But anyway, this deal is only for a small batch of emergency orders (fast-track purchase). The OFB 7.62 LMG is still likely to fill the bulk of the requirement separate from this. Although, for the sake of the shooters involved, I'd personally prefer it if we give IWI-Punj Llyod an order to build NG7s for the rest of infantry as well. The OFB LMG is a great replacement for existing MAG 2A1s in the MMG role...but for heaven's sake, I can't picture that as a squad-level LMG.
Largely agree with that. NG7 is an excellent choice. I do however wounder about that barrel length, seems a bit too long for my taste.
This is not to say the soldiers can't carry it - they can and they will. But it adds to increasing their fatigue and reducing overall physical effectiveness. Lighter is always better. Less weight the weapon is, more weight they can carry in other things (like more ammo, more provisions etc.).
Agreed. I have however seen many different foreign military units use the FN Minimi 7.62 as SAW. As you pointed out, its heavier than the NG7 but lighter than the OFB LMG.
Not sure which way to go. Should I support a sub-optimal domestic product, or a optimal foreign product ? Dharmashankat:censored:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hellfire
Possible contenders (only my opinion):



It's still in trials as far as I know. But anyway, this deal is only for a small batch of emergency orders (fast-track purchase). The OFB 7.62 LMG is still likely to fill the bulk of the requirement separate from this. Although, for the sake of the shooters involved, I'd personally prefer it if we give IWI-Punj Llyod an order to build NG7s for the rest of infantry as well. The OFB LMG is a great replacement for existing MAG 2A1s in the MMG role...but for heaven's sake, I can't picture that as a squad-level LMG.

This is not to say the soldiers can't carry it - they can and they will. But it adds to increasing their fatigue and reducing overall physical effectiveness. Lighter is always better. Less weight the weapon is, more weight they can carry in other things (like more ammo, more provisions etc.).

Would love your inputs @Falcon @Milspec

I have a bit of mixed feelings about the LMG. Belt fed machine guns defeat the purpose of being light, with the chain link and ammo box, I would much rather prefer a LMG for mobile troops in intermediate cartridge as a real intermediate light machine gun with a rotary drum mag (90 rounds), that can be carried by a single soldier and still lay substantial suppression fire. The RPK concept of intermediate beefed up AK has been a revolutionary one, and has immense potential to be built upon.

While for Vehicle mounted or post MMG would rather prefer a beast gun, belt fed 50 cal M2 or 12.7x 108mm Kord, which can wreak havoc on soft skin targets and fortifications with penetrating as well as incendiary rounds.

To me Belt fed machine guns chambered in full size rifle cartridge like 7.62x51N and 7.62x54R are too cumbersome for infantry soldiers to carry and too weak for fixed mounted platforms (helis, Tanks, armored vehicles, Anti tank vehicles, etc. )
 
Largely agree with that. NG7 is an excellent choice. I do however wounder about that barrel length, seems a bit too long for my taste.

20" barrel on the standard variant isn't long at all - in fact its on the shorter side. M240 has above 24".

It just gives the impression of being long because the fore ironsight is set way back on the barrel than typical LMG/GPMGs.

Agreed. I have however seen many different foreign military units use the FN Minimi 7.62 as SAW.

What many countries use is the 5.56 Minimi/M249 SAW as a squad-level LMG. The 7.62 variant is relatively rare, and even where used, is used as a GPMG, not LMG. This is because most (if not all) Western militaries only use 5.56 as the infantry standard calibre. And the squad-level LMG/SAW needs to shoot the same rounds as the rest of the squad.

However, a growing trend among Western military units in recent times is the preference shown toward accuracy of fire rather than volumn of fire. To that effect, forces like US Marines (and more recently, British Army as well) are replacing their squad-level LMGs with specialized rifles instead. Such as the M27 IAR (HK416 modified with a longer & heavier barrel, and a 6x scope and bipod provided as standard equipment).

Island_Warriors_Destroy_Targets_150120-M-QH615-206.jpg


As you can see, these Infantry Automatic Rifles (IAR) are fitted with the same 30-round STANAG magazines as the rest of the infantry squad's M4A1s and/or M16A4s. Usage of 60-round PMAG D60 drum mags is also being considered/trialed last I heard. This is more in line with @Milspec 's concept of what makes for a good squad-level LMG.

@Parthu notice that wire running from the pouch of the guy on the right. What's that ? Radio headset wire ? I thought they didn't have integrated comms.

Yes they do have integrated comms, but they usually go with throat mics and in-ear headphones, instead of the arguably superior solution of a tactical headset (of the type I discussed about before).
 
As the things stand today regarding small arms procurement and development in our country,I am overcome with feeling of resentment,aversion,anger and astonishment on how things are unfolding .However keeping aside emotions let's discuss things objectively.


1 AK 103,203 /7.62X39mm


- Personally I admire both the AK platform and 7.62x39mm round.Both the rifle and round are much more accurate than what they are credited for.You should be aware of the trajectory of a 7.62x39mm round to exploit its potential to the fullest.An informed shot placement on target will land your round little above ,little below or right on point of aim depending upon the range of the target.It is a devastating round ,which will take a huge chunk of your flesh as it exist you body,leaving a big gaping hole which will drain out the blood from your body like a pump.All in all a good round for combat up to medium range .

- However the question arise how did those who are at helm of decision, came to the conclusion that AK 103 is the rifle for our need in 7.62x39mm,without any prolonged trials.

- Ak 103 now modernized into AK 203 is certainly a very capable weapon platform , but before taking such a big decision common sense dictate that comparative trials should have been done with all modern 7.62x39mm platforms .
AK comparison 2.jpg

AK comparison 3.jpg




- One thing which I appreciate in this deal is that ,hopefully we will be getting Russian metallurgy ,however with such a huge deal and in this day and age I don't think it is hard to get your hand on good metallurgy for small arms ,if you are willing to pay the price(Caracal).

- Some people might say it is a strategic decision keeping relation with Russia in mind,however we are already purchasing enough weapons from Russia,if it was meant to be strategic then galil ace 7.62x39mm from Israel was worth considering .

- In a discussion on RSTV regarding AK 203 ,our ex army men on the panel were all harping about it being lightweight and cheap:

At 4.1kg of empty weight it is not light by any means ,especially when we have Galil ace at 3.4kg and cz 807 at 3.15 kg.Please do keep in mind this is the weight of an unloaded rifle,this will further go up with installation of optics ,other accessory and fully loaded 7.62x39mm 30 round mag. Neither it is cheap ,as per open source information AK 203 cost $1000.

- When Army itself has decided to shift to 7.62x51mm then why no mass production of 7.62x51mm rifles.

- Why didn't the army went in for AK 15 which is the latest,and why the AK 203 which is not being considered by the Russian army themselves.

- with a mix of 7.62x39mm and 7.62x51mm assault rifles as standard issue in the same force ,what about the logistics,standardization and training.Remember that being a standard issue in army and being used by a specialized force like RR ,are two different things.

- The JV is expected to manufacture 70,000 units per year.Even if take a rough estimate of a requirement of 500000 from army alone it will take around seven plus years to equip the army ,what about the CAPF, Police forces and export .Will they have to wait for more than seven years to get a new rifle?

- At the present rate of production ,we will not be able to meet the domestic demand before 10 years ,then how will we cater to the demand for export.Do you think after 10 years people will still be interested in AK 203 when much more advance ak 15 and other rifles will be available in 7.62x39mm.I see Bhutan,Myanmar,Srilanka,Afghanistan and some African nations as potential customer for this rifle.

- I feel we should open another line of production to cater to Police and export demand.

- I would like to see OFB further develop the rifle,use milled receiver ,convert it into upper and lower like sig 550,free floating barrel,new m-lok hand guard, which is a bit longer than the present one,new set of improved iron sights,new stock design,something similar to ACR,CZ807,new improved barrel,nitride coating on the rifle etc and chamber the rifle in few other cartridges other than 7.62x39mm.

- In my opinion a JV with some american or European manufacturer would have been more beneficial for small arms development in our country.Kalashnikov is a good company, producing quality firearms but somehow US and European are way ahead in term of R&D and innovation.The AK 203 is nothing but Kalashnikov copying the ak modernization kit developed by the US firms.

I really like the concept of these two rifles based on AK

M10X
M 10 X.jpg




AREX AKB 15
AKB 15.jpg




- I can tell you for a fact that AK 103 had outperformed the cz bren 807 in Pakistani army trials ,both in term of accuracy and reliability, but the point to ponder is , it have been few years since that trial took place ,I expect CZ to have refined those shortcoming by now.CZ 807 is definitely a more modern platform than the AK 103 .A side by side trial of both the rifles were required before making the final decision.CZ 807 is more lighter,shorter,modular and ergonomic rifle than AK 203.

- The decision of going with AK 203 is in line with the absurd policy of the present government of purchasing a generation old stuff in name of modernization ,like milan over spike and IGLA S over Verba ,something is very wrong on how this government approach the weapon procurement.

- Interestingly this deal of AK 203 is similar to what Nigeria has done,they have signed a agreement with Poland for complete TOT transfer and licence production of modernized Beryl M762 (a modernized version of Polish beryl in 7.62x39mm) ,when Poland itself is transitioning from Beryl to MSBS.

nigeria beryl.jpg


Few important points about AK 203 :

-First of all,the modernized rifle is not called AK 74m ,AK 74m came into being in early 90s as an improved ak 74,with better manufacturing techniques,machined parts and use of polymer.The present version with rails etc which we call AK 74m was basically called kM-AK or KMC in Russia which means modernized Kalashnikov,these rifles were basically upgraded AK 74 with modernization kit,later on new rifle were produced with this modern furniture right from the factory which was designated AK 74M1.Now of course the official designation is AK 200 -5.56x39mm ,AK 203 -7.62x39mm.AK 200 has different top cover ,trunion for stock,hinged top cover and some other minor difference from the KM-AK .As I have said KM-AK is modernization kit for AK 74m ,whereas AK 200 is new rifle manufactured based on the the KM-AK kit and some other minor improvements.

RUSSIAN ak 74 DEVELOPMENT.jpg




- Now you may wonder when AK 200 was good enough,what was the need of AK 15 for Russian army,why didn't they went for the modernized kit.Now I don't claim to have the definitive answer for that ,but what I have realized from my research is that just like in India there is a strong OFB lobby ,there is a certain arm lobby in Russia,which pushed for the development and adoption of new series of small arms by the Russian army,so that they get the opportunity to mint money.Instead of installing the modernized kits on the rifles they wanted a new rifle under RATNIK.


-If you compare the AK 15 with AK 203 they may look pretty similar ,but still are very different.Few important difference are:

AK 15 vs ak 203.jpg




- AK 15 has got a new redesigned and most probably heavier barrel .

- AK 15 has new redesigned receiver.

-The placement of iron sight is changed in ak 15,with front iron sight on the gas block and rear sight on the top cover.The rear iron sight has also been changed to rpk type with aperture .RPK iron sights have always been considered superior to AK iron sights,the rear sight has ability for windage adjustment.Also the aperture type rear sight in AK 15 is considered better than open notch rear sight present on ak 203 for medium to long ranges.The rear sight on the ak 15 can also be removed unlike the rear sight present on AK 203 .I am quite certain that iron sight of AK 15 is superior to AK 203 ,however the AK 203 notch sight is better for quick target acquisition in shorter ranges and one thing where I feel AK 203 sight have advantage over AK 15 is there placement.The rear sight of AK 15 occupy too much space at the rear end of the railed dust cover,in case shooter want to place optic ,close to him he will have to remove the rear sight.However there is no such problem with AK 203 ,where the rear sight is place ahead of top cover rail and is fixed,so you can mount your optic as per your wish and in case your optic is damaged ,you can immediately and easily shift to your iron sight.The rear sight base of AK 203 is also redesigned.

AK iron sight.jpg



I feel that type of iron sights should not matter much,as iron sights should be treated as backup sights,optics should become the mainstay.A good optic will make the difference in the iron sights of Ak 203 irrelevant. I cannot stress enough on the need for good optics,this is something which cannot be compromised or overlooked ,we need local copy of aim point micro,acog and elcan.I wonder why no startup has invested in it ,there is a huge market for it .Wish TONBO was involved in making day optics and reflex sights.A good rifle is only half work done,good optics and specialized training will be required for enhanced combat shooting .

- AK 15 has new hand guard with free float barrel,which simply means that the hand guard will not have any contact with the barrel,instead the hand guard is attached to the receiver and gas tube.This is better than the AK 203 in which the hand guard is attached to the barrel,because in free floating hand guard any movement ,or load on the hand guard will not affect the harmonics of the barrel.The AK 15 hand guard is definitely superior to the one in AK 203,both in design and stability of the hand guard mounted rail.From what I have heard the accuracy of AK 15 has increased significantly due to this.
ak handguard.jpg



continued.............................
 

Attachments

  • AK comparison 1.jpg
    AK comparison 1.jpg
    933.4 KB · Views: 402
Talking about hand guard,the short hand guard of ak has always been pointed out as one of its ergonomic issue.I am unable to understand why they have not tinkered with it,maybe a bit longer m-lok type hand guard would have been better.
ak mlok 1.jpg



- AK 15 has a fixed gas tube instead of a removable gas tube of AK 203,now I don't know how much is a fixed gas tube beneficial in real world over a removable one,but the fixed gas tube allow use of free floated barrel,and will definitely result in a more stable hand guard rail.There is a removable plug in front of gas tube,you can clean the gas tube by removing it.In AK 203 it is the same removable gas tube as found in AK 103.
AK  GAS TUBE.jpg






- Coming to muzzle device ,the AK 15 sport a muzzle brake/compensator which is quite similar to the one used on AK 103 and previous prototype of AK 12,the only difference from AK 103 muzzle brake is that they have incorporated a crown shape at the fore end of the muzzle brake.This design feature is copied from the various after market muzzle brake available from private companies.Though I don't have knowledge about the performance of this muzzle brake,but can tell you that among those people who have experienced various type of AK muzzle brake,the one found on AK 74m/AK 103 is rated as most effective of all,now with addition of this popular crown design I am pretty sure that the effectiveness would have only increased.When it comes to ak 203 they have replaced the muzzle brake with a hybrid birdcage flash hider/compensator,which is quite similar to the SVD flash hider and the one found in bulgarian ak.This flash hider also work as a compensator similar to the functioning of the slant compensator found on AKM.The Bulgarian AK birdcage flash hider is quite popular and is said to be very effective in reducing flash,so I have no doubt that the similar design found on AK 203 would be equally effective,the compensator will reduce the muzzle rise .



Let me explain these muzzle device in simple manner:



Muzzle brake(meant for reducing felt recoil) (AK 15) - The recoil is basic physics(as the energy from propellant(gases) drive the bullet forward,the same energy is applied in the reverse direction-every action has an equal and opposite reaction) which is called recoil and which cannot be alterd. However we can lower felt recoil with the help of muzzle brake(felt recoil as the name suggest is simply the recoil energy which is felt by the shooter body.)An effective muzzle brake can reduce the felt recoil ,by effectively diverting the expanding gases backwards at an angle,which in turn generate a forward force(every action has an equal and opposite reaction) ,this forward force counter the backward force of recoil and thereby reduce the felt recoil.



Flash hider(reduce flash ) - When the expanding gas of propellant behind the bullet are released into the atmosphere through the end of the barrel,they burn due to high temperature and pressure,as they burn they produce a visible fire/flash.A flash hider disrupt the release of these gases into several small particles ,which burn independently and cool down faster ,thereby reducing the visible flash from the rifle.A good flash hider will reduce your rifle signature as well as will not blind your view,while firing the rifle.



Compensator(reduce muzzle rise/flip) - As the expanding gases leave the barrel ,beside creating a backward force , they also create a pressure upwards as they travel downward(every action has an equal and opposite reaction) ,this upward pressure cause the muzzle of the barrel to jump,which is called muzzle flip.A compensator by its design block the gases from escaping downward,and divert them upward,thereby creating a force which act on the muzzle downward.This force counter the upward force on the muzzle,thereby reducing the muzzle rise .Enabling easier and faster second shot placement.



Now as I have already said AK 15 has a muzzle brake/compensator.As far as I know this was done because the AK 15 does not have too much flash,whereas due to its lighter weight the muzzle brake would aid in reducing the felt recoil ,and controlling the muzzle flip.On AK 203 we have a flash hider/compensator .There are multiple slots on the muzzle device ,this design is known as bird cage flash hider,since night fighting has become a norm,they wanted to reduce the rifle signature and avoid any disturbance to shooter vision.Flash hider allow you to shoot effectively with nods on.The slot at lower side of the muzzle device is closed,this allow it to act as a compensator ,by directing the gases upwards thus generating a downward force on the rifle.

ak muzzle device.jpg






- An interesting point about the AK 203 muzzle device is that earlier variant of KM-AK (modernized AK 74m) were seen with a different muzzle brake/flash hider ,which was a completely new design.Rifles with such muzzle brake were issued to soliders,which can be seen in the photos of victory day parade 2015,but later on this muzzle device was abandoned by the Kalashnikov and was replaced with the bird cage flash hider.
km-ak.jpg

km ak 2.jpg




- The top cover on AK 15 is completely removable and is attached to the receiver with cross pin at the front and is spring loaded at the rear to ensure the stability. Whereas on AK 203 the top cover is hinged to the rear sight base and is locked with a latch/lever at the rear ,similar to the SVD.I found the hinged dust cover and locking mechanism on AK 203 more convenient and simple to use than the completely removable top cover on AK 15.It is also interesting to note that the earlier AK 12 prototype had hinged dust cover,which make me wonder why was it not incorporated on the present model of AK 12.The question which arise is why two different top cover retaining system on very similar rifles?Maybe it is because AK 12/15 was designed as per the compliance of Russian MOD which had enlisted the requirement. To me the top cover retaining system of AK 203 appear to be more convenient for disassembly and return to zero ,the only issue in my mind is how secure the rear locking latch and the hinge would be on AK 203 after many years of use ,after usual wear and tear? I believe with passage of time and high usage ,there will be some effect on top cover stability after repeated use ,many years down the line.The best mode to ensure repeated zero was to go for upper and lower,than a railed dust cover,but then I am not sure how it would have affected the famed reliability of original AK design,the issues with AK 12 has shown that there is no room to play around the original design without compromising the reliability.However this has been tried on AKB 15 which is an AK essentially from inside ,but the exterior is completely redesigned,incorporating monolithic upper and separate lower.

ak top cover.jpg



- AK 203 had to comply with these requirements regarding the railed dust cover before it was given green light by Russian ministry of defence :

- The design of the dust cover should eliminate the need to bring the weapon to a normal battle zero after repeatedly removing and installing it (opening and closing) at least 20 times and should not interfere with the moving parts of the rifle.

- The decoupling of the aiming line of the set sights when shooting in the amount of 3000 shots and 20 times re-installation on the weapon should not exceed the parameters provided by the tactical and technical characteristics of these sights, at the same time should not exceed 0.5.

- Bayonet and UGBL can be mounted on both AK 15 and AK 203.I would also like to clear this misconception that it cannot mount any UGBL except Russian GL series without removing the hand guard. I feel it would be able to mount OFB 40mm UGBL after some modification ,I draw this conclusion based on the photos of ugbl mounted on Vietnamese akm copy.Both AK 15 and AK 203 are compatible with suppressor.

ak ugbl 2.jpg








AK 203 and AK 15 will not have cleaning rod beneath the barrel ,instead they will have a folding rod tucked inside the stock.At the bottom of the stock there is a lever, releasing the butt plate. The back plate moves to access the cabinet with a cleaning rod.The stock has adjustable length with four positions and folds to the left.The stock is strong enough for firing UGBL and for melee attack.

ak stock.jpg




-Both AK 203 and AK 15 have new more ergonomic pistol grip ,with provision to store oil bottle and other parts inside the pistol grip.

ak pistol grip.jpg


Continued................
 
-The 30 round magazine is made up of polymer with transparent windows to view the remaining rounds.Numbers are marked along the window,showing the number of rounds left.These magazine were extensively tested and it offers reliability similar to a Bakelite magazine,the transparent plastic strip covering mag window is heat proof and is removable, enabling to clean it for maintenance.

ak magazine.jpg






Beside these the AK 15 have new redesigned receiver,two round burst mode,new gas block,trigger group.


-I don't buy in the theory of AK 15 being an unproven platform ,it has gone under extensive trials within Kalashnikov ,then field trials by Russian troops for more than a year.All reports were excellent,without any complain or reliability issue.


AK 12 in use with FSB

ak 12 4.jpg




My opinion is that AK 15 seem to have better accuracy and lighter weight going for it .Whereas the AK 203 has the advantage of not deviating from the basic AK design, maintaining the reliability and simplicity of the platform.The increased weight of AK 203 is a downer but this will certainly result in a more controllable rifle.The least we could have expected from our defence planners was to test both these rifles side by side and then make a informed decision.It seem to me that one fine day our PM asked one of the army officer ,which type of rifle they like ,and he got AK 47 in answer. Realizing that AK 47 comes from Russia,on his visit to Russia ,he requested Putin for licence manufacturing of ak 47.On direction of Modi and Putin both side decided on AK 103 as it was the "ak 47" Russia was producing at that time.



- Despite the botched up procurement process ,you can find solace in the possibility that we might end up with a pretty decent 7.62x39mm rifle ,infact AK 103 was the winner in 7.62x39mm category in Pakistan army trials.It outperformed various rifles from all around the world of different make including modern design such as CZ 807 and Beretta arx 160.

Here is the result of the accuracy test from Pakistan rifle trials of CZ 807 and AK 103 :
accuracy 1.jpg

accuracy 2.jpg





- Regarding AK 107 it was never produced in numbers,due to lack of any order from the military.AK 107 does not make sense because balance recoil management is not effective in 7.62mm ,in 5.56 there is no substantial advantage over medium to long ranges in burst,automatic mode.It is only effective in 5.56 firing accurate single shot ,repeatedly to target at short to medium distance.However the ability to make repeated accurate shot in single mode, is not a big leap from a modern rifle,nor is it much relevant in combat reflex shooting.The added complexity and high pricing without any substantial gain made no sense to the Russian military.This rifle is only suited for bench and sports shooting,that's why they have come out with a civilian version called SR-1.



- If you watch the earlier prototype of AK 308 ,you will notice that it was based on AK 203/200 platform,however later Kalashnikov moved to AK 15 platform for the 308.This shows that Kalashnikov consider the AK 15 platform more superior ,better designed and engineered than the AK 203.

ak 308 3.jpg



- It is now clear that UAE,Russia, will be going for AK 15 while we in India which had a requirement of a much larger numbers than these three combined will be going for a less evolved ak 203.With a requirement of such number,we had a great opportunity to lure any manufacturer around the world with a deal of our choice,but we have botched this,with our bad decisions.


- I would also like to mention earlier prototype of AK 12 here,it seemed to be a revolutionary design ,was more controllable,accurate,lighter than the AK 74.The reliability problems that occurred during field testing does not seem to be too serious,only some time and money was required to fine tune the rifle.However Russians decided to ditch it instead of investing more time and money on it.The supposed requirement for new manufacturing process and higher production cost was also responsible for the decision to abandon this design and its designer.The new AK 12 was developed keeping in mind the already established manufacturing process,they took the good bits from AK 74m,modernized AK 74m-KM-ak and AK 12 and developed the rifle which was called Ak 400 initially as prototype and now AK 12.

I feel we could have hired the designer of the earlier prototype of AK 12 for further development of that rifle for us.We could have bought the metallurgy required from Finland,which is known for its excellent small arms.
ak 12 2.jpg

ak 12 3.jpg





CAR 816 /5.56x45mm



- It would have made a lot more sense ,if we had conducted complete trials within 8 months,and then selected a winner for complete TOT and manufacturing by an Indian private company.We could have circumvent the bureaucracy by making it government to government deal,or the government should have refined the process ,so that the deal could be signed after declaration of the result without any further delay.


-Purchasing 95000 rifles and then again inviting manufacturers for a similar tender in much large numbers is either a sham or complete stupidity on government part.

- I am fine with the selection of CAR 816 rifle ,however sig 516 is also a very fine rifle and in use with various special forces world over ,it would have been a rational decision to go for sig 516 along with SIG 716.We could have easily bargained a much better deal in a package ,including TOT.


- I believe we don't need 5.56x45mm in large numbers .A direct purchase of around 200000 rifles from OEM would have suffice,no need for TOT or license manufacturing.Further requirement of carbine could have been easily met by AK 204 in 7.62x39mm ,and for room clearing Kalashnikov AM 17 and JVPC would have suffice.


- With selection ,TOT and mass manufacturing of a modern 7.62x51mm rifle,we could have applied the technology and production process to a reverse engineer a 5.56x45mm derivative of that rifle .

- AK 200/12 can also be chambered in 5.56x45mm ,although I consider ar platform the best for 5.56x45mm but since we have already entered JV with Kalashnikov,a 5.56x45mm AK 12k in 5.56x45mm would have been more economical,and easy to produce in numbers.

- Instead of 5.56x45mm we could have gone with 6.5 grendal.


-Here is Caracal 816 from idex 2019

carcal 816 1.jpg




-Carcal 816a2 for US market.

caracal 816 3.jpg


continued........
 
SIG 716/7.62x51mm

- It is a grave mistake to not make a 7.62x51mm rifle a standard issue across whole army,navy,airforce.It is one rifle whose TOT and large scale manufacturing should be done.Even ITBP,BSF should have adopted a 7.62x51mm rifle,considering the terrain they usually operate in.


- If we compare the figure and statistics on hand then there is not much difference between AK 203 and a modern 7.62x51mm rifle.The SIG 716 which I consider a bit on heavier side weigh 4.3kg ,as compared to an AK 203 weighing 4.1kg .If we compare the Galil ace 7.62x51mm ,weight -3.9kg ,length -914mm to AK 203 7.62x39mm ,weight -4.1kg,length -940mm ,then the 7.62x51mm rifle turned out to be more lighter as well as shorter .Even the recoil of galil ace is much softer than an AK,if we take the opinion of the people that have used it in consideration.

- Again it is a failure of government ,for not refining the system and making one time deal for complete TOT and manufacturing.

- I don't believe the argument that a 7.62x51mm rifle would have turned out to be too expensive,all the fact and figure point to that SIG 716 at $990 is much cheaper than the 5.56 car 816 and AK 203 at $1000.

Here is a photo of sig 716g2 patrol with m-lok hand guard.It is when SIG was experimenting with m-lok hand guard on patrol 716,the hand guard is similar to the one found in Sig 6.5 DMR ,however for final version of patrol g2 ,the hand guard was trimmed and modified.

SIG 1.jpg

sig 3.jpg

sig 2.jpg








Here is how SIG deliver SIG 716g2 patrol to customer in US :

sig 4.jpg



Caliber :

Regarding caliber choices I would like to admit that I have not explored too deep into this,hence my knowledge is very limited,however some point to ponder are :

1 Despite of all the hype around 300 blackout ,GIGN chose to go with 7.62x39mm.

2 British decided to go with 7.62x51mm for their l129A1, even Estonia as well as New Zealand chose 7.62x51mm for their DMR. US army seriously considered it before opting for a modified 6.8.

3 Pakistan,Vietnam,Egypt and Finland are few among many countries which are acquiring modern 7.62x39mm platform in large numbers.(Finland has decided to continue with their 7.62X39mm rifles in modified form)



The 5.56x45mm is superior to 7.62x39mm on paper but the real world combat experience shows that people prefer 7.62x39mm over 5.56x45mm (Iraq,Afganishtan,Kashmir).The 7.62x39mm and 7.62x51mm are combat proven rounds with a assortment of platforms based on them.They are known to remain effective with a 16 inch barrel,assault rifle platform.New round may turn out good in combat or may not be,it remain to be seen.However the 7.62x39mm and 7.62x51mm are known to work for their intended range and purpose,you can't go wrong with them in combat.Please do note that beside ballistics,reliability, wear and tear of barrel,knock down power,cost,real world performance are few other factors which need to be kept in mind.



There is no easy solution when it comes to selecting a standard caliber for military use,all have to compromise on something.



5.56x45mm is a good with low recoil,low weight but it does not have enough knock down power at medium to long range ,personally I am very happy that army dumped this caliber as standard issue.Don't get me wrong, I have heard many end users praising it,but then I have heard other way also,so my informed opinion is no major army will continue with it in near future.US has already shown its intention to move away from it,once it does rest assure other NATO nations to follow,I predict even Russia moving away from 5.56x39mm in future,as well as the Chinese.



7.62x39mm - Excellent caliber for combat up to medium range,not so good at long range.Excellent round for fighting in buildup areas and heavy vegetation,a compromise between 5.56x45mm and 7.62x51mm.



7.62x51mm - Excellent caliber for medium to long range knock down power,a bit problematic for CQB in confined places due to huge muzzle blast.More recoil and weight are the downside.However modern platform have mitigated it,to a large extent.



6.5 cm - This was a round worth considering,a more flatter shooting round than the 7.62x51mm .More knock down power than a 5.56x45mm,however lower recoil than a 7.62x51mm .It is a good compromise between 5.56 and 7.62x51mm .

6.5.jpg






So all said and done, I would have love to see the 6.5cm tested extensively before finalizing on caliber, having said that I am fine with the current choice of 7.62x39mm and 7.62x51mm as they are combat proven and known to work,only problem for me is that I would have loved to see 7.62x51mm in much larger numbers.


Please do note all of the above is my informed opinion ,so please do take it with a pinch of salt,I am not claiming to be the final authority on this but I have very strong reasons for what I have said and believe.

LMG /7.62X51MM



Excellent caliber for LMG ,it provide both range and knock down power.The tender is yet to be accomplished.I feel we should go for two type of LMG ,one a lightweight and compact like Negev NG-7 SF or Kalashnikov RPK 16 chambered in 7.62x51mm apt for CQB and compliment it with a bit larger,and heavier LMG like OFB MAG copy/FN mag or the PKP (chambered in 7.62x51mm) with longer barrel and ability to sustain volume of fire at distance.I feel we need both type in a section.A bullpup PKP should also be considered.


lmg choice.jpg


Sniper rifles



Caliber .50 BMG - Barrett M95

.338 Lapua Magnum - Scorpio TcT



Great choice both in caliber and rifles,among all the small arms procurement it is the best and most sensible weapon selection,it had to be since the Army was the final authority in this(commander fund).

However the down side to it is that a very small number of rifles have been purchased ,rest will come through a tender,where we will have to compromise due to L1 over quality.





======================================================================================================================================================

Pakistan Army rifle selection :



Since Pakistan army is our arch rival and they are also looking for new rifles,let me post my observation regarding it :



As I have said in my previous post ,they had already selected rifles but due to financial problems the decision was postponed.Now with India going ahead with its purchase,I am sure that Pakistan army by either hook or crook ,will get someone to bankroll this purchase,rest assured they will make a announcement soon.



Scar-H was the winner in 7.62x51mm and AK 103 in 7.62x39mm.

In 7.62x51mm AK 308 was specifically developed for Pakistan,I am sure it is undergoing trial in Pakistan right now.If it is able to pass,then there are high chances of AK 308 for Pakistan.

scar-H despite of being expensive cannot be written off,there is still chances of this deal going through.

If not AK 308 or SCAR H then I am convinced that CZ bren 2 will be the rifle chosen.

So, in 7.62x51mm my predictions are AK 308,scar H ,Cz bren 2 with Berreta 200 as a last minute surprise .

In 7.62x39mm ,since India has gone with AK 203 ,I don't see Pakistan buying AK 103 now.Most probably they will purchase AK 15.

If not AK 15 then they will go with either CZ 807 or Beretta arx 160.As I have said earlier CZ 807 had performed very poorly in trials ,however since CZ might have made improvements since then and CZ was going out of its way to offer concession and best deal to Pakistan ,there are high chances of CZ bagging the deal.


For 7.62x39mm my predictions are AK 15,CZ 807,Berreta arx 160 with SCAR 7.62x39mm as surprise if they decided to go with SCAR H as primary rifle.

pakistan rifle.jpg






I would also like to applaud Pakistan army for their professionalism ,despite Turkey being their blood brother and China being their love,they did not let it influence their weapon procurement .The Turkish and Chinese rifles were rejected based on their performance in the trials,it would have made a great strategic and economic sense to go with the rifle of any of these two countries but Pakistan army did not let its relations influence the quality of the rifle selection.

=================================================================================================================================================

Now,if I had to be in charge of the small arms development in India, will do this -

1 I will hire at least a dozen small arms expert from around the world ,will request,purchase,steal ,bribe- whatever it takes to get top class metallurgy from Finland ,Russia or anywhere else in the world offering the best metallurgy. Will scrap all the rifle factories .Will establish a new small arms manufacturing unit which will be called ARKA - which means sunbeam,fire and flash of lightning in Sanskrit,will have a cool brand logo for it :
kisspng-black-sun-solar-symbol-inca-empire-sun-ray-5ac897ae47a3d9.3953701015230954702934 (1) (1).jpg


ARKA will have state of the art factories for small arms manufacturing ,a R&D division including facilities for various test,A university where two set of people will be selected through entrance exam ,here one set will be prepared and trained as future small arm engineers -they will be taught by the foreign and Indian small arms expert of ARKA.After two year of theoretical knowledge ,from third year they will join the on going small arms development project as intern for 6 month,and for the next six month they will have to develop a working prototype of a small arms of their own.On completion of their course they will render their service to ARKA as small arms development engineer. These very set of engineers will work with top engineers from around the world ,after sometime when these engineer will mature in their field they will take over the role of lead small arms engineer and faculty of the AKRA university .This will create a cycle of trained small arm engineer,and faculty in ARKA.

The second set of people will be trained as factory workers involved in the manufacturing units- they will be trained for discipline,efficiency,workmanship and to prioritize the quality.All of the students of this university will be instilled with the fact that ARKA is them and they are the ARKA .ARKA will be their pride their identity.

Good working conditions will be ensured for workers,provision of rewards and bonus will be there to keep workers motivated and encourage healthy work culture.Medical,housing and other facility will be provided to employees family.However any type of union,strike will be completely banned,non performing workers will be terminated. Discipline will be maintained at highest priority.

Beside these ,few ex special forces soldiers will also be hired to be part of R&D team,who will be involved in the development of the prototypes from the beginning ,by giving their feedback and requirements based on their real world combat experience.They will carry out extensive test of the prototypes and suggest the necessary improvements based on these.

There will be a marketing division -which will promote the products throughout the world through online promotions,you tubers,print and electronic marketing.All the major def expo will be covered by it ,as well as their will be aggressive marketing campaign for the forces all over the world right from private security guards to special forces .



There will be a top notch customer service department which will ensure that everyone right from a individual to a big military force ,whoever invest in a ARKA product is not only satisfied but also overwhelmed by his whole experience .All the problems will be addressed on priority basis ,regular feedback will be taken from all the customers.And customer will be rewarded through free ammo,range day,free accessories ,free ARKA clothing from time to time so that owning a ARKA product is a pleasant and memorable experience for them.

Basically work on Brand ARKA from day one ,people should relate it with coolness,quality,workmanship,engineering and trust.

Now coming to rifles ,I would have taken either one of these approach towards it.

1 Will direct the newly formed team of expert to work on MCIWS ,if they see some merit and scope in it.They will be directed to spawn out two version of it a 7.62x51mm and 7.62x39mm .The 7.62 nato will cover the long range while 7.62x39mm for the cqb,I believe instead of a 5.56x45mm carbine a 7.62x39mm carbine will be more apt,as a carbine is meant for CQB and 7.62x39mm is good enough upto 300m .

The other approach could be to design and develop a new 7.62x51mm and 7.62x39mm rifle from ground up within 6 month and sent those for field trials to various special forces and army units .After the end of six month of trials ,as per the feedback improvement will be made on those rifles,and these will be send for further six month of trials to the field units.These rifles will be send all across the country for field use right from siachen ,to dessert of Rajasthan , plains of Punjab , jungles of northeast ,to humid region of kerala.Once it will get a green signal from those using it in the field, only then it will enter into mass production and adopted as the new rifle for the army.


2 If somehow we are not ready to invest time in developing new weapon platform or refining the MCIWS ,then we will go for rifle procurement from international market including TOT.The good thing with newly acquired pool of small arm engineers and faculty of ACRA will be that they will not only able to absorb the TOT for these rifles ,but work on it, to further improve them as per feedback from our forces.


ARKA R&D division will indulge in development of all type of small arms,right from rifles,pistol,grenades,RCL to motar etc.Instead of waiting for the GSQR from the army,they will develop products on their own,keeping in mind the needs of the user and their own vision of future.

================================================================================================================================================================

Regarding deal with US government for Special forces rifles :



This deal is under Foreign military sales ,which is a US government program to circumvent various logistics,bureaucratic and other security procedure for weapons sales to the friendly nations.Here the US department of defence make the purchase on behalf of other country.This is done either from money provided by the other country(like India) or by the fund provided by the US government itself ,when it has to donate weapons to friendly nations.For example US government has provided Nepal army with m4 and m16a4 rifles on their own expense,though this route as a friendly gesture.The much touted sig716g2 DMR deal of the US army was also through this route meant for some foreign country ,not the US army.

The mention of Belgium manufacturer(FN),rifles used by SPG(can't be FN 2000),a recent requirement of 7.62x51mm rifles by the special forces, all of it point towards the rifle being SCAR-H most probably.
 

Attachments

  • sig 2.jpg
    sig 2.jpg
    80.7 KB · Views: 328
Brilliant write-ups @Maximus !

Regarding the grenade launcher, the OFB-made UBGL as it exists requires removal of the lower handguard on all rifles that it seats on (whether its INSAS or AK) -

25038513_1928274247213131_8892890413849903104_n.jpg


As you said, it's not impossible for OFB to come up with an AK-focused UBGL that has a similar interface system as the GP-25/34 series (as the Vietnamese have done). So far the OFB UBGL has only been INSAS-focused, but with AK-203 coming in as replacement infantry rifle, I'd wager OFB will definitely come up with a launcher designed with it in mind, preferably one that mainly relies on Picatinny rails for seating, instead of latching onto the barrel/receiver** That way, we can also use the same UBGL on AK-203/CAR 816/SIG 716 - all without any handguard removal on any of them.

** Like the HK M320:

646005-F-MES86-460.jpg
 
The red tape and delay in procuring specialised firepower from the United States

Screenshot_2019-03-25 The red tape and delay in procuring specialised firepower from the Unite...png


The Indian Army is miffed by delays in Rs 1,000-crore equipment proposal to buy urgently required equipment for its nine Para-Special Forces (Para-SF) battalions from the US. Disagreements within the ministry saw the proposals to acquire new assault rifles, night vision devices and machine guns being dropped from the agenda of a March 20 meeting of the Defence Acquisition Committee.

Top Ministry of Defence (MoD) officials want the equipment to be purchased through the Foreign Military Sales (FMS) route from the US, to be broken up into smaller procurements of Rs 300 crores and acquired by the Army under its own financial powers. This process, sources say, could further delay acquisitions by another six months.
The shopping list includes 715 Mk 48 Light Machine Guns (LMGs), 1,050 FN Scar (H) 7.62x51 assault rifles, 1,400 FN Scar (L) or HK-416 assault rifles, 110 .50 Cal Browning heavy machine guns (HMG), 400 helmet-mounted night vision systems, 600 combat free fall parachutes, 100 Barret M107 A1 heavy sniping rifles and 20 million rounds of ammunition for all of these small arms. The proposals are part of fast-tracking of Para-SF buys initiated after September 29, 2016, cross-border raids on terrorist launch pads in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK). It is the most comprehensive re-equipping of the Para-SF in over two decades.

Indian Army’s SF units drew the list based on evaluations done after joint exercises with the US Special Operations Command (SOCOM). Each acquisition fulfils a critical void. The .50/ 12.7 mm HMGs are meant to be fitted on the Light Strike Vehicle (LSVs) being procured from Pune-based Force Motors over the next three months.
The 7.62 x 51 mm FN Scar, made by a US unit of Belgium’s FN Herstal, is required to upgrade the firepower of SF operators in dense jungles of the Northeast and Myanmar. The case for a new lightweight belt-fed 7.62 x 51 machine gun to replace 50-year old OFBmade ‘1B’ LMGs, has been pending since 2005. The LMGs are critical squad support weapons giving the small six-unit teams of the Para-SF units heavy firepower.

In their absence, SF units resorted to stripping machine guns from de-commissioned battle tanks or using weapons recovered from militants. This procurement is part of a larger upgrade which includes Finnish Sako sniper rifles, Carl Gustaf Mark-4 rocket launchers and Beretta pistols and LSVs.
The last major acquisitions for the Para-SF a decade ago were also FMS procurements from the US.
(Courtesy of Mail Today)
 
The red tape and delay in procuring specialised firepower from the United States

View attachment 5452

The Indian Army is miffed by delays in Rs 1,000-crore equipment proposal to buy urgently required equipment for its nine Para-Special Forces (Para-SF) battalions from the US. Disagreements within the ministry saw the proposals to acquire new assault rifles, night vision devices and machine guns being dropped from the agenda of a March 20 meeting of the Defence Acquisition Committee.

Top Ministry of Defence (MoD) officials want the equipment to be purchased through the Foreign Military Sales (FMS) route from the US, to be broken up into smaller procurements of Rs 300 crores and acquired by the Army under its own financial powers. This process, sources say, could further delay acquisitions by another six months.
The shopping list includes 715 Mk 48 Light Machine Guns (LMGs), 1,050 FN Scar (H) 7.62x51 assault rifles, 1,400 FN Scar (L) or HK-416 assault rifles, 110 .50 Cal Browning heavy machine guns (HMG), 400 helmet-mounted night vision systems, 600 combat free fall parachutes, 100 Barret M107 A1 heavy sniping rifles and 20 million rounds of ammunition for all of these small arms. The proposals are part of fast-tracking of Para-SF buys initiated after September 29, 2016, cross-border raids on terrorist launch pads in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK). It is the most comprehensive re-equipping of the Para-SF in over two decades.

Indian Army’s SF units drew the list based on evaluations done after joint exercises with the US Special Operations Command (SOCOM). Each acquisition fulfils a critical void. The .50/ 12.7 mm HMGs are meant to be fitted on the Light Strike Vehicle (LSVs) being procured from Pune-based Force Motors over the next three months.
The case for a new lightweight belt-fed 7.62 x 51 machine gun to replace 50-year old OFBmade ‘1B’ LMGs, has been pending since 2005. The LMGs are critical squad support weapons giving the small six-unit teams of the Para-SF units heavy firepower.

In their absence, SF units resorted to stripping machine guns from de-commissioned battle tanks or using weapons recovered from militants. This procurement is part of a larger upgrade which includes Finnish Sako sniper rifles, Carl Gustaf Mark-4 rocket launchers and Beretta pistols and LSVs.
The last major acquisitions for the Para-SF a decade ago were also FMS procurements from the US.
(Courtesy of Mail Today)

Appreciate this report for bringing the list out, unlike the previous totally lacklustre reports which couldn't bring the specifics to the fore regarding anything, and resorted to extremely vague terminologies. However, this isn't without bad news, as always, unneeded bureaucratic nonsense & red-tape screwing up procurement yet again.

The 7.62 x 51 mm FN Scar, made by a US unit of Belgium’s FN Herstal, is required to upgrade the firepower of SF operators in dense jungles of the Northeast and Myanmar.

Understandable....heavy brush environments (i.e. wooded area/heavy foliage etc.) more often than not favours heavier calibre rounds over the smaller ones, owing to their superior ability to penetrate without losing too much of their ballistic properties while going through leaves, branches & stumps.

And in that calibre, the SCAR H makes about as much sense as the best of them.

6196404875_51eb170102_b.jpg


The case for a new lightweight belt-fed 7.62 x 51 machine gun to replace 50-year old OFBmade ‘1B’ LMGs, has been pending since 2005. The LMGs are critical squad support weapons giving the small six-unit teams of the Para-SF units heavy firepower.

In their absence, SF units resorted to stripping machine guns from de-commissioned battle tanks or using weapons recovered from militants.

...the ad-hoc MGs they're talking about here are the PKM/PKTs taken from retired T-55 MBTs and/or captured from slain terrorists (they also include the Chinese copies of the same). Without discounting the merit of the weapon (PK is an excellent gun), it's quite appalling that the top SF units of a $3 trillion economy have to scavenge weapons from the field because they're not provided what they want. It's frustrating just to know, to be honest - however this bit itself about the PKs is not new to me or to many here.

The Mk.48 Mod 0/Mod 1 would make for an excellent squad-level MG in 7.62 Nato, the particular variant (Mk.48) was developed out of the FN Minimi (aka M249 SAW) keeping requirements of the US SOCOM in mind, I'd think it would serve the Indian SFs very well:

7243535692_340348a18a_h.jpg


1,400 FN Scar (L) or HK-416 assault rifles,

The SCAR L is a very real possibility as a replacement for the 5.56 M4A1s (I said as much in this thread a while ago), however, I have doubts regarding the buy of HK416. Now, it's not impossible to imagine HK416s making their way to India as in an FMS deal, it's the US DoD which places the orders and Heckler & Koch has no ban on selling to the US DoD, however, the Germans have very clear rules regarding end-users...

...for example, I put forth what happened with SIG Sauer in Germany very recently:

" German officials allege Sig Sauer manufactured at least 38,000 pistols in the company's facility in the town of Eckernforde between 2009 and 2011, before shipping the weapons to its U.S. entity's headquarters in New Hampshire, which then completed the transaction with Colombia. Sig Sauer is alleged to have covered up the shipment's final destination by submitting false paperwork, known as end-use certificates, to German export officials, stating that the weapons were bound solely for the United States. "

CEO Of U.S. Gun-Maker Faces Jail In Germany

(because export of weapons to Colombia was banned)

It is unclear to me personally what are the rules regarding end-user transfers of firearms manufactured within US however (as H&K has several production facilities in the US and more than likely these supposed HK416s will be produced there), however, H&K remains a German-owned and German-headquartered company answerable to German govt and laws. I'm skeptical of the 416s coming through.

That doesn't say anything regarding my personal preference however. I would definitely pick the HK416A5 over the SCAR L any day of the week. The Para (SF) operators, coming from the M4A1, would also find it easier to work with the AR-15 based HK design over the SCAR. End of the day, both are great guns - despite the SCAR L not having won particular praise among the US SOF community (owing to certain operating problems in extreme environments or so I've heard, don't know if they have been fixed).....pretty much everyone prefers the HK416 over it.

If for whatever reason the HK416s cannot come through to India, I'd still prefer a gas piston AR-15 from a reputed manufacturer (Barrett, LWRC, SIG etc.) over the SCAR-L. But that's just me.

pic02.jpg


In their absence, SF units resorted to stripping machine guns from de-commissioned battle tanks or using weapons recovered from militants. This procurement is part of a larger upgrade which includes Finnish Sako sniper rifles, Carl Gustaf Mark-4 rocket launchers and Beretta pistols and LSVs.

The Sako sniper rifles I believe are actually the Tikka T3x TAC-A1, which are already ordered by MARCOS as far as I know. The Tikka brand is owned by Sako. Like how everyone reported the Army was buying Beretta sniper rifles for the LoC, whereas the rifles were actually from Victrix Armaments who is the designer/manufacturer, the Victrix brand however had Beretta as their parent company.

Of course, the possibility of an actual Sako rifle, like the TRG-42, is not to be ruled out either, but I personally think it is the Tikka:

Tikka-TX3-Tactical-1.jpg


They do not specify which is the Beretta handgun being bought...I would think, there are 3 options from the company:

Px4 Storm

85d5bc63d578be2a1bfdb75589f159e5.jpg


M9A3 (latest iteration of the 92FS which some Paras use, the "M9" designation was originally only for the US military-issued 92FS, but later on, Beretta started naming its 92FS successor model as M9A3 internationally...or at least that will be the case as the model was specifically developed for the MHS competition. It's not to be ruled out that it will acquire a different name for the international market now that SIG won that competition. But till then, we have no name to refer to it other than as M9A3:

p2619407848-5.jpg


APX (my personal favourite, don't ask why...it's also the only striker-fired pistol among these three)

Picture-11-LEAD.jpg


By the way, @Maximus was spot-on in expecting the rifles mentioned in the deal to be SCARs. :cool:
 
Last edited:
I'm not exactly an expert on the firearms,so if you guys @Parthu and @Maximus could explain in layman terms.My primary concern is regarding reducing our casualities in the COIN warfare we are now waging in kashmir.How can we do this best?

1.I believe Rashtriya rifles will get ak-203s?How much of an upgrade would it be over our current AKs,and what practical advantages would they have over militants weapons?

2.The new bulletproof jackets coming this year.How much can they impact our casuality rates?Particularly against ak-47 bullets?

3.Para sf is the tip of the spear for COIN and also the surgical strike specialists.Its good to see them getting a deserved upgrade.How much is SCAR better than current M4A1.Why do para prefer M4A1 over tavor-21/x-95?

4.What kind of weapons will the ghatak platoons likely use in army battalions?Sig sauer or ak-203?

5.I see lots of pics of ak-47s with FAB accessories in use,will an ak-203 be better ?

6.What kind LMGs do we use in COIN?INSAS LMG ,which probably sucks?Does the army not have a machine gun(even MMG) in COIN which can penetrate building walls?

7.What exactly is the role of the Caracal for COIN,we know its to be issued to tank crews and officers and rear echelon maybe.Other than that?

Finally ,if you could do a comparison between the sig sauer 716 and qbz-1 and g3upgraded for the mountain combat expected on the LAC and LOC?Does small arms fire actually have any impact during cross firing at LOC due to fortified enemy,terrain and ranges involved?

Thanks.
 
Well, I am no expert Sir. But I will try to answer some of that.
1.I believe Rashtriya rifles will get ak-203s?How much of an upgrade would it be over our current AKs,and what practical advantages would they have over militants weapons?
The AK rifles that the RR has are either very old rifles or they were picked off from dead militants. In either case the design of those rifles are basically rip-offs from the old soviet AK-47 and don't get me started on the quality of construction. Those rifles have all the problems of the older AKs like : Poor quality rails on top that can't retain zero and sometimes no rails at all, no rails for fore grip, butt-stocks are non-adjustable for length, there are side folding versions but then you can't shoulder the gun when folded. AK-47 was never built for precision and accuracy but to only spray down bullets down range. This is the reason for adoption of FAB defence AK mods in large scale as these things solve most of the problems satisfactorily.
AK-203 also solves most of these problems and its Russian built. The quality of construction is far better then the current guns in use. As to why we are going for the AK-203 when we could have just upgraded all our AK with FAB is beyond me. Perhaps @Parthu can explain better.
2.The new bulletproof jackets coming this year.How much can they impact our casuality rates?Particularly against ak-47 bullets?
Casualty figures are a subject to a lot of things. Weapons, training, tactics, quality of the enemy combatants and sometimes just luck. Bulletproof jackets are not directly proportional to decreasing casualties. I believe we are all very hopeful about the ballistic armour plates for our BPJs. The design of the BPJ are ofcourse a different matter altogether. Go to page no : 22 on this thread posts no: #425 & #426.
I remember back in 2016-17 most of our casualties came from room breaching operations in Kashmir. And then ballistic shields were adopted and a focus was put on room intervention drills, training the average soldier on the lines of a Para. Soon enough casualty figures dropped like a stone.
How much is SCAR better than current M4A1.Why do para prefer M4A1 over tavor-21/x-95?
Assuming you are talking about SCAR-H and not SCAR-L, everything I could say has already been said in post #477.
4.What kind of weapons will the ghatak platoons likely use in army battalions?Sig sauer or ak-203?
Hard to say at this stage. But I think it will be a mix of both. That's just me, I have my reasons.
5.I see lots of pics of ak-47s with FAB accessories in use,will an ak-203 be better ?
@Parthu you deal with this.
6.What kind LMGs do we use in COIN?INSAS LMG ,which probably sucks?Does the army not have a machine gun(even MMG) in COIN which can penetrate building walls?
Usage of LMGs in COIN largely depends on the terrain of the warfare.
If its a semi-urban environment with brick walls, lots of corners, doors, windows etc I would recommend not using LMGs at all. These environment demands mobility and LMGs would kill mobility. Maybe you could use a NG7 but anything heavier is best avoided.
If its a jungle mountainous terrain then something like a PK GPMG will do just fine. We do use those.
Penetrating walls depends on the type of walls, obviously. For an average house walls something like a PK GMPG can rip it to shreds. Whereas those bunker walls across the LoC would need something like a Carl-Gustav.
7.What exactly is the role of the Caracal for COIN
If it is chosen it will be the standard issue carbine for all COIN operations. Complementing the Tavor TAR-21.
we know its to be issued to tank crews and officers and rear echelon maybe.Other than that?
This is a new piece of information. I didn't know of this.
Finally ,if you could do a comparison between the sig sauer 716 and qbz-1 and g3upgraded for the mountain combat expected on the LAC and LOC?
They are all good guns I suppose. But if it were me I would bet my money on the sig 716. @Parthu
Does small arms fire actually have any impact during cross firing at LOC due to fortified enemy,terrain and ranges involved?
Ofcourse it does. For example, the two new snipers brought recently has been put to good use in LoC.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Austerlitz
- AK 15 has new hand guard with free float barrel,which simply means that the hand guard will not have any contact with the barrel,instead the hand guard is attached to the receiver and gas tube.This is better than the AK 203 in which the hand guard is attached to the barrel,because in free floating hand guard any movement ,or load on the hand guard will not affect the harmonics of the barrel.The AK 15 hand guard is definitely superior to the one in AK 203,both in design and stability of the hand guard mounted rail.From what I have heard the accuracy of AK 15 has increased significantly due to this.
View attachment 5341


continued.............................


couple of things to address here.

Free Floating: refers to not having contact which can serve as simple supports/constrains to the Barrel. A gas piston rifle cannot be free floated. A rigid Gas tube already has two rigid supports. Automatic rifles other than simple blow-back cannot be free floated. DI guns like AR platform is refered to as free floated with a free float hand guard owing to it;s push fit gas tube which is not fully rigid. Technically that too is not a true free float. Free floating for improving accuracy was traditionally done to bolt action rifles. Gas Piston guns, being supported with rigid support to the barrel and the other end constrained to the gas cannot be termed free floated.

Harmonics: of a barrel refers to magnitude of the barrel displacement that occurs at certain operating frequencies caused due to operation of the mechanism, acceleration of bullet, counteracting piton etc. which is extremely difficult to determine at steady state. With Frequency response function using hit tests, even after determining the natural frequency of the barrel, there still can be resonance as it is almost impossible to test a system at all different rates of intermittent fire, and even if established to a reasonable confidence interval, like any other mechanical pipe system, you cannot add line weights at the displacement nodes to mitigate it's effects. Thus best practice is to intentionally keep the rate of fire lower to ensure it doesn't approach resonant frequencies. Free floating, instead of arresting the vibrations or reducing the vibrations rather, let the barrel vibrate naturally by ensuring the barrel does not touch the stock/handguard at any point along its length. A hand guard impinging this natural vibration can result in inconsistent groupings. Free floating is preffered for heavy barrels, a trait usually absent in assault rifle systems.

For thinner profile barrels in accurate rifle system for arresting barrel flex due to harmonics - especially precision rifles, does the exact opposite of free floating - Bedding, where the barrel is supported across the length of the barrel to provide uniform upward support.