here come our resident einstein !DRDO is not a PSU you Moron
This is what happens when Retards think they are not stupid
so true ! India is india only because of the DRDO .Dude,there is simply no point wasting your time arguing with that swine!!He's just angry because some DRDO guy had *** fucked him in his childhood days!!Let him blow off his steams,even he needs a place to take out his frustration!!
And in any case,all the foreign rifles competing for that contract,including the BREN CZ and the IWI Galil ACE suffered from repeated failures including bolt carrier malfunctions and double feeds for multiple times and were pronounced unsuitable for Indian conditions!!Does that mean those are worse than INSAS 1B1??As per the OP's logic,that's the very case it would seem!!
And according to making a tank like T 90 - please,let the Russians continue to make that junk!!Even after more than a decade of their induction in the service,the Army still hasn't been able to make them fighting fit for the deserts - where most of the potential tank engagements are expected to take place!!And now they are again crying in front of the DRDO to fix those white elephants you call T 90!!Enough said!!
so u are not even indian!Why are you apologizing to me ?
Grow a spine and stop calling me sir. Indian's apologize TOO MUCH.
Really !!!!!! the DRDO cant make anything like the T-90 !!!! do you have any idea on arjun and t-90 specifications,technology??? even after making an improved version of MK2 the army is insisting on missile firing ability which is non existent in m1a2,leopard,leclerc etc and the lahat as proved during the trials performs sub optimally when compared even to the Invar.
Do you know anything about small arms??? I am not saying that the INSAS is better than the tavor, but to clear things here.
1.Your comment that INSAS weighs 4 kg, check how much a m-16a4 weighs.
2.The INSAS also comes with 30 magazine(which is used in the LMG and excalibur) so there is no fault on the part of the DRDO.
3.When it comes to the lack of suppressive fire, I am not sure what you are talking about, if it is the 3 round burst you are talking about you need to know that it was requested so in the ARMY SQR. Again not the DRDO's fault.BTW all m-16a4 and most m-4 still have 3 round burst capability.
4.It was the ARMY's trial directorate which trialed the INSAS in all environments and cleared it so if problems still exist then it means the trials were not properly conducted or the OFBs workmanship is very poor.
5.Many of the problems like failure to extract,oil spraying into the eyes,jamming have been related to production quality issues and not the actual design.
The army instead of scouting for a new rifle endlessly, that time and money could have been utilised to
1. Iron out quality control issues with OFB.
2. Reconfigure existing rifles to fire in full auto mode and test it.
3. Issue metal insert plastic magazines(developed for MCIWS) and also eliminating extraction problems caused by the magazine if any.
4. Add rails(which are being made by private sector such as MKU),adjustable stocks,grips(developed for MCIWS),sights,laser designators.
5. If possible use a floating barrel as in snipers and hk-416, but this should be a nice to have desired feature and not a necessary one.
With this army would have a cheap, reliable and effective firearm for conventional warfare which would relevant for years to come which would buy time for the army to select a good replacement.In the meantime the special forces can use tavors,M-4 and the counter insurgency forces can use the now under production Ghaatak 7.62x39 rifles of RFI.
not even Paprlmilitary will like to touch Insas .. the reverse cycled junk created by DRDO !