What's new

Pakistan's Service Rifle (G-3, Type-56) Replacement Competition 2016.

Which rifle should win the competition?

  • FN-SCAR-H

    Votes: 228 43.8%
  • Beretta ARX-200

    Votes: 59 11.3%
  • CZ-806 Bren2

    Votes: 110 21.2%
  • Kalashnikov AK-103

    Votes: 111 21.3%
  • Zavasta M21

    Votes: 13 2.5%

  • Total voters
    520

Zarvan

ELITE MEMBER
Apr 28, 2011
51,838
84
58,722
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
10k apx AK103 order for FC and Rangers on request of interior ministry , will be imported as it is. ToT for aimed forces negotiations still continue.. etc
@PanzerKiel told us about 10000 Rifles arriving on this very same thread but I didn't read anything about TOT. Still I am hoping some miracle happens and Pakistan goes for two Rifle series with TOT.
 

PakFactor

SENIOR MEMBER
Sep 30, 2019
4,472
3
7,957
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
I don't think the Army would allow another major army to form out of the Ministry of Interior.

The correct approach would be to re-organize FC, Rangers, etc, into a 'National Guard' and then place said force under the control of Army GHQ. In turn, Army GHQ gives the National Guard one mandate: manage the internal security affairs of Pakistan. The advantage of this approach is that the National Guard won't be seen as a threat to the Army, but at the same time, could get its own attack helicopters, transport helicopters, etc.

BTW, this wouldn't be unprecedented in Pakistan. The PN already runs the Maritime Security Agency.
Thus this national guard might also have scale to buy equipment on a greater level and have more commonality of equipment. Instead of FC and Rangers operating different hardware.
@Bilal Khan (Quwa) it would almost be the same model as the US National Guard, with US Military Officers commanding, except being under the Governor's control under your proposal the military will act as the governor.

This approach is very sound and good, it'll relieve the military itself to focus on other things along the IB and have FC focus on the less hostile border.
 

The Terminator

FULL MEMBER
May 2, 2015
189
1
147
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Don't know how the members of a 3rd world country here hope to have FN-SCAR as their military's standard issue rifle whereas the US military decided against it, as it would be cost prohibitive for them and offers a little more improvement on what they already have. So they ditched that idea and instead bought a few of the Scars for their SF guys. It costed them around 3 times more than the price Tag of Colt M4 already in their service.

Pakistan would get an expensive guccied up 7.62x51 rifle to replace current 7.62x51. it would take decades to replace them all and maybe by then we would realize that 7.62x51 isn't relevant anymore and start dumping the newly acquired costly rifle with another costlier rifle!
 
Last edited:

The Terminator

FULL MEMBER
May 2, 2015
189
1
147
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Why don't we keep improving upon the G3 rifle, it's ergonomics and maybe introduce a M4 like recoil buffer embedded into the buttstock. A few variations here and there so it could get another 10 or 15 years of life in the future. And truly focus on what the world is heading towards, like 6.8mm Creedmoor sort of thing as our next standard issue battle rifle.

The rapid proliferation of advanced body armor around the globe demands a better round and compatible rifle which is future proof and could serve well for another 3 to 5 decades. Producing millions of rifles for the military and maintaining them isn't a child's play.
 

The Terminator

FULL MEMBER
May 2, 2015
189
1
147
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
I don't think the Army would allow another major army to form out of the Ministry of Interior.

The correct approach would be to re-organize FC, Rangers, etc, into a 'National Guard' and then place said force under the control of Army GHQ. In turn, Army GHQ gives the National Guard one mandate: manage the internal security affairs of Pakistan. The advantage of this approach is that the National Guard won't be seen as a threat to the Army, but at the same time, could get its own attack helicopters, transport helicopters, etc.

BTW, this wouldn't be unprecedented in Pakistan. The PN already runs the Maritime Security Agency.
Totally agreed. Let's have a deal, why don't have a 2 way transaction between the GHQ and Civilian Govt?

Make a National Guard and give their command to the GHQ officially, as paramilitary forces already practically follow the Army's command anyway. And in return let the Civilian Govt have its own Special Security force like the US Secret Service or Indian Special Security Group, which would be responsible for the protection of key Government personalities along with their families including Judges and Chief Justices too. And GHQ should also pledge to refrain from day to day tasks of the Civil Govt and focus solely on the protection of geographical boundaries of the country.

It would be mistakenly viewed as anti military comment but in reality it's for the greater good of our nation as a whole.

Why US, China and Corrupt elite of Pakistan head towards GHQ whenever they really badly wanna get something done ASAP or have a backdoor deal with the real power wielders of this country. It has to be stopped at sometime in near future as it's the matter of existence and security of the Pakistan.
 
Last edited:

The Terminator

FULL MEMBER
May 2, 2015
189
1
147
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
As for the rifle indigenization program. Can't we hire a mixture of highly skilled, emerging talent, well experienced in design and metallurgy professionals from around the globe like retired H&K people etc. Provide them all the facilities and materials they need, and let them design and build a state of the art rifle here at our POF factory. I know ToT is almost impossible these days especially in the field of metallurgy and polymers.

Also preferably privitize all of our defense manufacturering companies except PAC Kamra and appoint proper professional management and scientisits there to run the show under Govt oversight ofcourse

I think PAC under the command of PAF is doing a decent job as compared to other government run defense industries. There is a lot of stagnation and lack of passion and innovation there in other industries.
 

Zarvan

ELITE MEMBER
Apr 28, 2011
51,838
84
58,722
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Why don't we keep improving upon the G3 rifle, it's ergonomics and maybe introduce a M4 like recoil buffer embedded into the buttstock. A few variations here and there so it could get another 10 or 15 years of life in the future. And truly focus on what the world is heading towards, like 6.8mm Creedmoor sort of thing as our next standard issue battle rifle.

The rapid proliferation of advanced body armor around the globe demands a better round and compatible rifle which is future proof and could serve well for another 3 to 5 decades. Producing millions of rifles for the military and maintaining them isn't a child's play.
G3 is 60 year old design and has serious limits. You think we haven't tried to improve G3. We have and every attempt has failed. G3 design has limitations. It was always too big of a Gun for a soldier. It has to go. It has several issues. Starting from jamming regularly to lower rate of fire to weight and size.
 

Bilal Khan (Quwa)

SENIOR MEMBER
Aug 22, 2016
5,724
72
21,978
Country
Pakistan
Location
Canada
Totally agreed. Let's have a deal, why don't have a 2 way transaction between the GHQ and Civilian Govt?

Make a National Guard and give their command to the GHQ officially, as paramilitary forces already practically follow the Army's command anyway. And in return let the Civilian Govt have its own Special Security force like the US Secret Service or Indian Special Security Group, which would be responsible for the protection of key Government personalities along with their families including Judges and Chief Justices too. And GHQ should also pledge to refrain from day to day tasks of the Civil Govt and focus solely on the protection of geographical boundaries of the country.

It would be mistakenly viewed as anti military comment but in reality it's for the greater good of our nation as a whole.

Why US, China and Corrupt elite of Pakistan head towards GHQ whenever they really badly wanna get something done ASAP or have a backdoor deal with the real power wielders of this country. It has to be stopped at sometime in near future as it's the matter of existence and security of the Pakistan.
The truth is that the corrupt political elite and specific military leaders are colluding together to maintain the status-quo. It's really just that. There's no true opposition until another group of political and military elites rise up and demand real change. You need politicians who'll call out bad actors (like the PPP), and you need generals who'll stop other generals from assuming authority on foreign relations and other matters.
 

The Terminator

FULL MEMBER
May 2, 2015
189
1
147
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
The truth is that the corrupt political elite and specific military leaders are colluding together to maintain the status-quo. It's really just that. There's no true opposition until another group of political and military elites rise up and demand real change. You need politicians who'll call out bad actors (like the PPP), and you need generals who'll stop other generals from assuming authority on foreign relations and other matters.
Do you really think it's gonna happen in our country?

When you call out bad actors in politics then the "jamhooriat" gets insecure and feels threatened. And when you even dare to talk about the misadventures of our military elite in politics and foreign affairs etc, and about the ongoing corruption within the military elite you are instantly tagged as traitor and a severe threat to "National Security".

The status quo hides behind "Jamhooriat" and "National Security". And any daring patriotic whistle-blower would instantly be tagged as traitor or agent of Israel, India, US or whatever not.
 

The Terminator

FULL MEMBER
May 2, 2015
189
1
147
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
G3 is 60 year old design and has serious limits. You think we haven't tried to improve G3. We have and every attempt has failed. G3 design has limitations. It was always too big of a Gun for a soldier. It has to go. It has several issues. Starting from jamming regularly to lower rate of fire to weight and size.
As per your comments our military is producing and utilizing G3 for 60 years. So why we shouldn't wait for another decade to closely observe the pattern which the global powers are shifting towards and after that decide upon the future standard issued rifle for our military.

The battle between the bullet and body armor has got fierce in recent years. There is already an experimental lightweight soft body armor prototype in the market which is capable of stopping 50 bmg round. That's antimaterial. 50 cal round which cannot penetrate through a soft body armor light enough to be worn by a man! Can you imagine this technological leap! Yeah I know the impact and blunt force, kinetic energy of the round is enough to convert the internals of the body into jelly and incapacitating the soldier.

So I fear by the time we accomplish the task of equipping our soldiers with whatever rifle from the list, it would already be an obsolete rifle and an obsolete round by then and a poor country having weak economy can't afford to keep changing the millions of service rifles for its armed forces at an interval of 10 to 12 years. Bulk of our air force still use 60,70 years old designed F7s and mirages, Soviet Era tanks, and similar condition with the navy too.

Yes G3 still fires a bullet, 7.62x51 still packs a punch, capable enough to injure and kill modern enemy soldiers, terrorists but this round is certainly not future proof that's for sure.

We don't have a penny to spend on R&D so why not simply follow the tracks of our beloved America, or Russia, Europe and China. They have big $$$ to throw into R&D and they are the ones who shape the future of the combat and according to them the life span of existing 5.56 and 7.62 ammo is going to expire soon.

But by then the bullet fired from an old rusty G3 and a brand new expensive desert tanned beauty of SCAR-H would have the similar impact upon whoever is on the receiving end.

The real question is would the rifles under consideration and rounds they are chambered in as of now, be relevant and as effective after 20-30 years from now or not?


That was the real theme of my previous comment too which you cleverly finesse through.
 

Zarvan

ELITE MEMBER
Apr 28, 2011
51,838
84
58,722
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
As per your comments our military is producing and utilizing G3 for 60 years. So why we shouldn't wait for another decade to closely observe the pattern which the global powers are shifting towards and after that decide upon the future standard issued rifle for our military.

The battle between the bullet and body armor has got fierce in recent years. There is already an experimental lightweight soft body armor prototype in the market which is capable of stopping 50 bmg round. That's antimaterial. 50 cal round which cannot penetrate through a soft body armor light enough to be worn by a man! Can you imagine this technological leap! Yeah I know the impact and blunt force, kinetic energy of the round is enough to convert the internals of the body into jelly and incapacitating the soldier.

So I fear by the time we accomplish the task of equipping our soldiers with whatever rifle from the list, it would already be an obsolete rifle and an obsolete round by then and a poor country having weak economy can't afford to keep changing the millions of service rifles for its armed forces at an interval of 10 to 12 years. Bulk of our air force still use 60,70 years old designed F7s and mirages, Soviet Era tanks, and similar condition with the navy too.

Yes G3 still fires a bullet, 7.62x51 still packs a punch, capable enough to injure and kill modern enemy soldiers, terrorists but this round is certainly not future proof that's for sure.

We don't have a penny to spend on R&D so why not simply follow the tracks of our beloved America, or55 Russia, Europe and China. They have big $$$ to throw into R&D and they are the ones who shape the future of the combat and according to them the life span of existing 5.56 and 7.62 ammo is going to expire soon.

But by then the bullet fired from an old rusty G3 and a brand new expensive desert tanned beauty of SCAR-H would have the similar impact upon whoever is on the receiving end.

The real question is would the rifles under consideration and rounds they are chambered in as of now, be relevant and as effective after 20-30 years from now or not?


That was the real theme of my previous comment too which you cleverly finesse through.
Ammo is not the issue Rifle is. We are more the satisfied with the caliber. That is not the problem for us. The Rifle is. The Rifle is big and has jamming issues. Plus has lower rate of fire along with weight. It has to go. That is we were testing Rifles. That is why we need to replace our old Rifles. Trends by other countries have already been set. If you didn't notice in last 15 years around 30 major countries have changed their assault rifles. Hardly any of them has changed the caliber they were using but all of them have shifted to new Assault Rifle.
Belgium FN SCAR
France HK 416
India SIG 716 and AK 203
Italy ARX 100/160
China QBZ 19
Portugal HK 416
Australian Army EF 88
New Zealand LMT MRL S
Chile FN SCAR
Germany most likely HK 416
Czech Republic CZ 805/ CZ 806 BREN
Serbia M19 Assault Rifle
Qatar AK 12 and also ARX 100/160
Saudi Arabia locally producing AK 103
Norway HK 416.
Poland FB MSBS GROT
Finland RK 62M
Indonesia also went for new local one.
Taiwan XT 107
Thailand NARAC556 5.56mm
UAE Carmel 816


And I am pretty sure I am forgetting few countries. We on the other hand tested the Rifles and didn't went for any.
 

The Terminator

FULL MEMBER
May 2, 2015
189
1
147
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
And where is US of
Ammo is not the issue Rifle is. We are more the satisfied with the caliber. That is not the problem for us. The Rifle is. The Rifle is big and has jamming issues. Plus has lower rate of fire along with weight. It has to go. That is we were testing Rifles. That is why we need to replace our old Rifles. Trends by other countries have already been set. If you didn't notice in last 15 years around 30 major countries have changed their assault rifles. Hardly any of them has changed the caliber they were using but all of them have shifted to new Assault Rifle.
Belgium FN SCAR
France HK 416
India SIG 716 and AK 203
Italy ARX 100/160
China QBZ 19
Portugal HK 416
Australian Army EF 88
New Zealand LMT MRL S
Chile FN SCAR
Germany most likely HK 416
Czech Republic CZ 805/ CZ 806 BREN
Serbia M19 Assault Rifle
Qatar AK 12 and also ARX 100/160
Saudi Arabia locally producing AK 103
Norway HK 416.
Poland FB MSBS GROT
Finland RK 62M
Indonesia also went for new local one.
Taiwan XT 107
Thailand NARAC556 5.56mm
UAE Carmel 816


And I am pretty sure I am forgetting few countries. We on the other hand tested the Rifles and didn't went for any.
And where is US of America in this list! They are seriously considering next gen rounds and working prototypes have already been built and marketed by the competing companies. Russia and China is doing the same behind the closely knit curtains as usual. Everyone else would have to eventually follow their footsteps.

If you think Pakistan has the economy strong enough to induct and mass produce SCAR-H now and after one and a half decade later when next Gen rifles would flood the market, go for another shopping spree for upto date rifles and their associated calibers? I don't think so!

IMHO if we induct our standard issue rifle now, we wouldn't be able to induct a new standard issue rifle at least before 2060 or maybe beyond that. And in 2060s maybe the rounds we use now would have no more effect on the armored soldiers of that time than the Palestinian kids launching stones against the occupying forces today! That should be a huge concern for all of us.

And the list you have provided are those countries who produce rifles by themselves, or 1st world economies or oil rich spoiled nations, with an exception of a few. That truly makes sense for them. Now consider the current and foreseeable future of Pakistan and you would get a clearer picture then.
 
Last edited:

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom